Why Repaint ???/Restoration Concepts

[Mike Souhrada]

Keith Heitzmann wrote:
>
> At 05:29 AM 6/17/99 -0700, Jim Berry wrote:
My $.02 on the subject and an interesting web site philosophy @ the
Smithsonian on the subject of restoration.

I believe the answer depends on your objective.
Do you want a museum piece or ham gear that simply works?
Then there is something called "pride of ownership"-
A few years ago I had a really nice SX 71 that a person attempted to
repaint -with extremely poor results. The lettering was badly masked
and the paint not feathered. I had no desire to look at it!
I wondered "what's underneath the mess?" Using MEK I removed the "new"
paint which was a cheap air dried paint and found the original was
not all that bad,in fact it was BETTER to look at than the repaint,
save some rust and wear on the radius of the front panel,and the top
lid.
BTW the original paint was baked on and not easily removed without a
remover. So I deftly sanded the rust out and spray painted only those
parts that needed it,blended imperceptably. Looked far better when done.

You might find this web site interesting on the subject of restoration.
I was just there on Saturday. Definitely worth your time if you have
a bent towards aircraft.
http://www.airspacemag.com/asm/web/special/garber/garber.html
If you've seen some of the aircraft restoration work on Discovery
channel this is where it's done. The text describes the museum
philosophy
of restoring these treasures. Much of which applies to our BA's. They
go to great lengths to retain EVERYTHING.

Mike
Le Claire, Ia

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --
To subscribe: listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: subscribe BOATANCHORS yourfirstname yourlastname
To unsubscribe:  listserv at listserv.tempe.gov
and in body: signoff BOATANCHORS
Archives for BOATANCHORS: http://www.tempe.gov/archives
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --