|
[Disclaimer: What follows is my considered
opinion, worth about what you've paid for it.]
The Airstream shell is a 'monocoque' and not
designed to flex. It has not one, but two shells riveted to common 'ribs'.
Unless/until the rivets come loose, it should be considered a single unit . The extreme torsional flexing along the longitudinal
axis of the 'pipe-frame' design is what makes the pipe-frame such a
supremely BAD design, and undoubtedly why Byam and Co. changed to the
ladder-frame from the early 50's onward. The ladder-frame side rails need not
extend all the way to the edges of the sub-floor.. only enough to provide an
adequate substrate for the trailer floor. The monocoque double-shell needs to be
fastened to the floor, only. 'Wrapping' the belly skin to the floor,- under or
over the outer skin - also 'pulls' the monocoque onto the floor, and the
floor onto the frame.
Further, I've always wondered about the decision to
install a flat window on the front of the trailer, and the broad flat surface
beneath it. This is about as un-aerodynamic as it can get. Clearly, a design-change demanded by economics, and one of the
reasons i opted for the Trailwind (i think the curved, oval window looks cooler,
too).
The convenience of having a wooden (plywood)
subfloor has tremendous advantages, too: one can apply 'cleats' for cabinetry
anywhere at all. The principal disadvantage is the possiblity of delamination,
when wetted and flexed.
The most economical substitute would be 'OSB', or
oriented-strand-board... almost universal, now, and eliminates virtually
all the problems associated with plywood.
Still, if lightweight honeycomb laminate floors are
good enough for the aircraft industy, i think their use in Airstream
renovation would be perfectly consonant.
Anyway, that's my story, and i'm stickin' to
it.
Tuna
'48 Trailwind
'50 Jeepster
WBCCI#8862, VAC
Reno, NV
|