Building a Jabiru J400 from a first-time builder's perspective

Research Topics

1. Should I paint the aircraft myself or contract out? If myself, with what?
2. Should I have the instrument panel made for me or make it myself?

1. Should I paint the aircraft myself or contract out?
   • Keep in mind that the kit hasn't arrived at this point, so in a way it's a bit premature to be thinking about painting, but there's a good reason to bring it up now.
     
     Firstly, the reason it even came up is because a sales rep at the kit dealer recommended that I get it contracted out since painting with auto/aircraft paints is such a messy/nasty job. From my research online, this seems to be true especially since conventional paint guns create paint clouds that are extremely harmful to your health (they waste 50% of the paint in the cloud). The other good point is that the paint is the first thing people see and one of the top indicators of the quality of your aircraft (especially if you're going to sell it)
     
     However, there is a very good point on the flip side. Why would you want to go pay for a non-critical (non-life threating) part of building the aircraft when you've already done all the 'hard' work yourself in the actual building? Furthermore, if cost is the major reason you are building, why would you want to spend lots of $$ ($3000-$5000) on the paint job instead of using this cash for better instruments or such? Coincidentally, I found this same reasoning in an article online that encouraged the builder to do the painting and also encouraged the use of a turbine HVLP (high volume low pressure) painting system that goes for $550-$900. I'm planning on painting the aircraft myself, but I'm not using the turbine HVLP system... here's why:
     • turbine HVLP - this was the article's recommendation but I've read many reviews online and it seems that the turbine systems are costly and don't necessarily produce an equivalent quality paint job to the conventional gun... in fact, it 'sounds' like it may be best suited for non-automotive/aircraft use... i've read certain issues about 'orange peel' which results in the paint drying before it hits the surface... these systems can cause this problem when they run hot... the price of $550 is hard to justify if the quality isn't equivalent as it would be rarely used after the aircraft is complete.. this system wastes the least amount of paint...very little bounce-back since the pressure is about 10PSI or less... i guess the bottom line is that there's other more practical methods that produce quality results
     • conventional high pressure paint gun - most common type... the major reason to stay away from this one is because it wastes 50% of the paint into a cloud, which is why it's such a nasty job... this cloud will get everywhere.. this is still the most widely used system in auto-body shops apparently unless you live in a state that has banned it... a paint booth is definately required with this system but it is highly recommended for all systems with auto/aircraft paints anyway
     • non-turbine HVLP - this is the method i'll most likely go with... this is a combination of the conventional gun (because it uses a conventional air compressor) and the HVLP (because it uses a larger volume of air at a lower pressure like the turbine HVLP)... the drawbacks to this method is that you need a relatively large air compressor... air compressors are designed for pressure and not volume... therefore, in the turbine HVLP they use a turbine to produce 50 CFM or more ... it's unlikely you'd even find a 50CFM air compressor for anything less than $3-4k (guesstimating here)... so in a non-turbine HVLP, you'll need a compressor that can produce at least 7-8 CFM @ 40PSI... this is actually tough to find on 120 v (hangar doesn't have 240v) but I did manage to find a 6hp 120v Porter Cable capable of producing 8.6CFM @ 40PSI at about $370.... the cost of non-turbine HVLP guns and conventional guns is about the same (Astro Pneumatics for <$100 i hear is equivelant to the high end $300 SATA brands)... the biggest difference between the two is that the air compressor needs to produce a larger volume of air so it'll cost a bit more for the air compressor... but it's easier to justify the cost of the air compressor as it has many uses unlike a turbine HVLP... with a large CFM compressor i'll be able to sandblast too and I do wonder if this will come in handy in the construction... i may have read that sandblasting the edges of the windows is convenient in order to bond them to the fuselage... sandlblasting might produce better results on a curved surface compared to a flat sander but only if the rest of the window can be shielded from the blast.
2. Should I have the instrument panel made for me or make it myself?
   • Next to the aircraft paint, the instrument panel is probably the next aesthetic priority. Instrument panels cost about $500 to have custom made. I presume that a blank instrument panel comes with the kit so the $500 goes to the labor and paint (or powder). At first, I intended going with having it done for me. But keeping with the principle that we're on a budget and it is experimental, I'm reconsidering it with the discovery of the 'circle cutter'. The circle cutter is size variable hole making devide that can be used with a drill. Apparently the product description mentions use with a Drill Press in which is very probable that it is required as it seems to be an unbalanced tool to me. Presuming this little $20 device works well, I'll be making the panel myself and then painting it or coating it with some other solution. It will most likely be black for practical purposes (night flying glare, better contrast with instruments, etc.)