Page 2 of 3

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 2:09 am
by JPXman
can't we all just get along?

before you slam Mylar, read some of Chappy's posts about his 25 year old covering job that still looks like its brand new. Hangered, Mylar is the equal of Tedlar, maybe even better in some respects (price, clarity, ability to hold adhesive, etc etc)

There is more than one way to skin a cat, so they say, and apparently more than one way to skin a lazair ;)


PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 1:43 pm
by Guest
Mylar sucks ! Sure it will last a long time if a plane stays in a dark trailer 20 years.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 5:49 pm
by ozzie
i have used both and i prefer mylar end of story. like i said before here in australia we have the highest uv exposer in the world ( have the highest skin cancer rates as well) mylar covered lazairs with original covering still going strong after 20 yrs. never had a tape problem with mylar.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 6:38 pm
by PowerCoatKing
I find this statement is mis leading. "ozzie Posted on Jul 1 2005, 05:49 PM
i have used both and i prefer mylar end of story. like i said before here in australia we have the highest uv exposer in the world ( have the highest skin cancer rates as well) mylar covered lazairs with original covering still going strong after 20 yrs. never had a tape problem with mylar

Well please show use some documentation that that , becasue Dupont would like to find a better answer. Mylar is great for party ballons.
But TEDLAR is far stronger and more adaptable to many conditions depending on the Specs.

Tedlar Tape is far superior to all those tapes everyone has tried. Some have been ok and some failed.

Ask a Pt.Colbourne native that has tried them all and remains silent but humored with all the "new solutions" that were tried 25 years ago with failure.

And MYLAR for 20 years? only with a steel roof over top and UV protected.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:16 pm
by Chappy
OK, Shorty, lets see if we have this straight?

Only Tedlar (and only one type of Tedlar) should ever be used on a Lazair, as everything else is crap.

Because Tedlar will last forever, we should just go ahead and leave our planes out in the weather. It will be OK.

The correct Tedlar is unavailable.

It's all John Nagy's fault.

Only you know this, and you will keep reminding the rest of us for eternity because we're all too stupid to remember your advice.


Come on, Shorty, all this has been discussed over and over and over, and you never have anything new to add. Most of us that have advocated Mylar have done so as a very economical and attractive alternative to Tedlar, especially when Tedlar is not available. Anyone really interested can take the time to go back and read the posts, and I hope they would.

You probably think you are being a big help going on and on about Tedlar this and Tedlar that, but I suspect you are just driving people away from the Lazair sites instead, and that would be a shame.

As usual, JMHO (just my humble opinion)


Fact: (As told to me by Dale himself) The original covering material used by Dale Kramer on his Super Floater, that was the basis for the Lazair's design, was his mother's shower curtains attached with duct tape.

The first couple Lazairs then used Dacron cloth. Then they used Mylar, then Tedlar. If Ultraflight had stayed in business, who knows what we could be covering Lazair's with now - Aluminum, Tyvec, virgin vinyl, Dacron socks??? Personally, I hope some young engineer, with experience in today's newest materials, will become interested in Lazair's and realize one of them could possibly be better than any of the previous covering materials used to date, and we would gain another Choice of material that we could use to cover our Lazairs. That would be cool.

PostPosted: Fri Jul 01, 2005 11:35 pm
by Guest
If Mylar is superior and lasts 20 years then why did Lazair quit using it ? Also why do some guys paint their Mylar completely to keep the sun off of it while Tedlar guys only take measures to protect tapes from UV where the tapes lay on the sun exposed structure ? Seems to be a difference of opinion as well as a difference in apparent facts ?

Also the specific Tedlar used on Lazairs has been posted as TUT20BG3. Apparently this type of Tedlar has good UV properties. To date I've never read of any specific code number for original Mylar. If anyone knows the exact grade of Mylar used please post this information so UV screening properties can be examined ?

According to one member the Mylar itself is affected by UV exposure along with the attachment tapes. Failure of Mylar was mentioned as rather dramatic whereas failure of Tedlar is a more of a long term progressive "loosening" as the non UV screening attachment tape looses its grip.

Reading a bit further the co-designer of the Lazair Peter Corley used Mylar on his "Toucan" twin engine design. On this plane he only used Mylar on the bottom surfaces of the wings. Apparently this was to keep the Mylar protected from UV as much as possible (UV bounces up from the ground).

Lots of questions and opinions about Mylar and Tedlar. Tedlar however seems to be the better of the lot and more widely used + proven ?

PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:33 am
by JPXman
that's a good point chappy, that the tedlar spec was the top of the line 20 years ago (circa 1985). I'm pretty sure plastics and polymer research have come a few steps forward since those days.

It would be like saying "you need quarter panels on your 2005 Honda? Well 20 years ago they used steel, so that should be what you use today - its proven and was recommended by the manufacturer then" (smile)

seriously, tedlar is tedlar because it has better UV protection, this is a fact. Mylar is the SAME basic material, with tedlar having a teflon polymer woven into its plastic molecule to give said molecule a better resistance to UV.

Store your plane out of the sun and you have levelled the playing field.

(people sign your posts! even a nickname would suffice, i'd like to know who the voice is in my head when i read people's posts... for anyone else, have shorty's posts lately reminded you of the teacher on charlie brown?)

PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 12:42 am
by Guest
Tyler what is your direct firsthand experience with Mylar ?? None prolly ? You about as qualified as the people who have flown a Lazair grand total of 1 hour since Mylar was sent with kits ! Mylar sucks !

Mylar hater

PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:54 am
by JPXman
should we get "web" to open a rant forum? i really think the negativity implied from some of the anonymous posters is detremental to the health of these boards. I am not implying moderation, however perhaps you should not be allowed to post unless you are signed in like most other net boards. it really isn't that difficult. if you sign in, go to the forums, then bookmark that page, every time you return to click your bookmark you return to this site already signed in.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 02, 2005 11:57 pm
by Chappy

I feel the same, and generally won't replay to unsigned, antagonistic posts. I know it's hard to check if you're signed in each time you pop in here, and that's one reason I sign my posts every time I post. Why waste your time discussing/debating important aspects of our planes if you have no idea who we are communicating with? I'm sure that some of these posts are from people who know absolutely nothing about building and owning Lazairs, and in some cases are probably adolescents parading as adults. I've experienced this on all the Ultralight groups I've ever had any experience on. This site, and the Lazair Yahoo sites, have been by far the least affected, which has sure been nice.

Shorty can be very antagonistic at times, but I respect him for at least having the gumption to sign his posts.