The term, "coatings system", includes coatings removal, aircraft surface preparation, the primers, undercoatings, final topcoats, and the equipment used in all phases of the paint/depaint process.  This effort specifically explores individual coating system problems and continues the Coatings Technology Integration Office’s efforts in the problem definition, solution development, and solution implementation for Air Force aircraft coatings systems and subsystems.

Following are brief descriptions of some of the Coatings Technology Integration Office (CTIO) engineering success stories. Many are parts or phases of currently ongoing projects.

1.   Plastic Media Testing: The Air Force is taking over responsibility for the plastic media specification MIL-P-85891 from the Navy. Due to materials changes, the reagents identified in the current version of the specification were no longer effective. New reagents were developed. The source of inconsistencies in the solubility performance and raw material specification for type V acrylic media was identified. This work allowed the Air Force to begin first article testing of candidate materials.

2.   Polysulfide Primer Testing: The Air Force is attempting to replace the High VOC version of polysulfide primer, used on large aircraft, with a low VOC version. CTIO has determined the acceptable range of application conditions for the new material. A potential deficiency in weathering when polysulfide primer is used in conjunction with APC topcoat has been identified. This phenomenon is being studied further in the laboratory. In addition, CTIO is also monitoring the field performance of a C-130 painted with polysulfide primer to determine if this laboratory data translates to field performance problems.

3.   Advanced Performance Coating: The Air Force wishes to adopt this material in place of standard MIL-PRF-85285 as the topcoat of choice to provide improved durability. This material is currently being used by the OEM on the C-17. CTIO has been investigating the engineering issues involved with this material. Laboratory testing with various leading edge treatments has identified slight differences in adhesion to APC and MIL-PRF-85285, but none which appear to have an engineering significance. No differences of any engineering significance were seen in their reaction to chemical strippers or to various aircraft fluids. Based on the testing conducted, the government side of CTIO has begun drafting of a specification document covering APC. CTIO has also been monitoring field performance of APC on fighter aircraft. Based on laboratory and field data, implementation of APC as the refinish system for fighter aircraft is expected.

4.   As a companion project to the APC project above, CTIO has evaluated APC in conjunction with non-chromated primers under consideration for adoption in both laboratory and field settings. This is in support of a JG-PP funded effort. Primer related differences in accelerated weathering performance and Skydrol resistance have been identified.

5.   A key function of CTIO is to provide technical support to ALC and field painting operations. Two examples of this support are as follows:

CTIO solved a topcoat drying at Columbus AFB MS by determining that the problem was due to improper mixing of base and catalyst.

CTIO identified engineering alternatives and identified potential vendors to Tinker AFB to assist them solving problems encountered in masking E-3 radomes.

CTIO supplied information on a fall protection device from ROTA Ltd. to MXS/LGMF Ellsworth AFB.