John Pleisse Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I have kind of beat around the bush on a few other topics/threads, but I am about to pull the trigger on a bladder installation (M20J) and had a few remaining questions: 1) Other than a 36 lbs loss in useful load, what other draw backs are there? Some have mentioned linking pipes vibrating loose causing leaks. Others have mentioned the utility tape coming loose resulting in chafing leaks. Anything else? 2) I have the drawings, but not the full STC. What skin work is necessary for the new fuel caps? If, for some reason, I revert back to a wet wing some day, will I need to replace an entire skin? 3) For a 64 gallon mod, does the useable change? (61 gals) 4) Has anyone had any issues with the tank vent ice masts? 5) O&N estimated they sell 20 or more Mooney systems a year. I rarely see them (local, OSH, fly ins, Moonsyspace respondents). Who has them? How long have you had them? Any experiences? Please know I value and appreciate any information or experiences you could provide. Drawing attached. John O&N Bladders.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 John- I had them in my former 1967 F. Never worried about fuel leaks and never had any water in the tanks. They were intalled prior to me purchasing the bird, sometime in the early to mid 1990s. So 15 years later when I owned and flew my F, there were no issues. Useful load in the F was great - still greater 1037 lbs. I know you cannot get Monroy tanks with the bladders as the Monroy extended range tanks are a wet wing and thus in my currnet bird reseal at some point is the only way to go, For what is worth, I've mainly been happy with both the bladders I previously owned and the current wet wings. I do admit though that I am "scared" to see blue streaks under the wings again in my MIssile (only happnes when fully topped off sitting in the cold for a few days). After a few gallons are out of each tank - no issue. I'll take the MIssile to Weep No More when the time comes. -Seth 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rbridges Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I've had mine 2 years with no problems. They make major modifications to the inside of your wing, so it will never revert back to a wet wing configuration. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1964-M20E Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I have the 54 gallon version in mine. They came with the plane when I bought it. No complaints from me. Occasionally when planning a flight the extra 10 gallons would be nice but not nice enough to get the extra bladders installed. Yet?? My current range fits my mission profile. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marauder Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I have kind of beat around the bush on a few other topics/threads, but I am about to pull the trigger on a bladder installation (M20J) and had a few remaining questions: 1) Other than a 36 lbs loss in useful load, what other draw backs are there? Some have mentioned linking pipes vibrating loose causing leaks. Others have mentioned the utility tape coming loose resulting in chafing leaks. Anything else? John -- I have never heard of the leaking pipe or the utility tape problems mentioned. All I know is that I have owned the bladders for 23 years and they have been solid since day 1. 2) I have the drawings, but not the full STC. What skin work is necessary for the new fuel caps? If, for some reason, I revert back to a wet wing some day, will I need to replace an entire skin? There were two types of fuel caps. The original Shaw flush type and the raised ones. In 2005, the FAA issue an AD that required an anti-ice mast be installed in front of the tank vents (looks like a wedge) and to either modify the existing flush caps with the raised ones or to put an entry into the POH (there were a few other changes, like foam wedges but not the main purpose of the AD): (1) Place a suitable container under the fuel strainer drain outlet prior to operating the strainer drain control for at least 4 seconds. Check strainer to ensure drain is closed. (2) Inspect the fluid drained from the fuel strainer and each wing tank quick drain for evidence of fuel contamination in the form of water, rust, sludge, ice, or any other substance not compatible with fuel. Also check for proper fuel grade before the first flight of each day and after each refueling. If any contamination is detected, comply with paragraph (f)(4) of this AD. (3) Repeat steps in paragraph (f)(1) and (f)(2) of this AD on each wing tank quick drain. (4) If the airplane has been exposed to rain, sleet, or snow, or if the wing fuel tanks or fuel strainer drains produce water or other contamination, you must purge the airplane fuel system to the extent necessary to ensure that there is no water, ice, or other fuel contamination. In other words, do a normal pre-flight looking for water in the tanks... I was one of the commenters on this AD since as an early adopter I had 13 years of ownership with the bladders and did not experience any of the issues they indicated in the proposed rule making. The main concern with the Shaw caps is the cost of the O rings. The good news is they last forever. And as was also mentioned, once you go bladders, I don't think you can go back. Quite honestly, I would never go back. 3) For a 64 gallon mod, does the useable change? (61 gals) I would call O&N up and ask. One thing is that the connection points between cells is up a little and you do lose a little useable. Better yet -- I will call them since I am looking at the 10 gallon add-ons. 4) Has anyone had any issues with the tank vent ice vanes? No. 5) O&N estimated they sell 20 or Mooney systems a year. I rarely see them (local, OSH, fly ins, Moonsyspace respondents). Who has them? How long have you had them? Any experiences? The reason you probably not hearing much about them is because no one is having problems with them. For me, they have been great. When I bought my Mooney, within the first year I began seeing rubber worms in my fuel. According to a MSC, these were the remnants of a sealer placed over the original sealant to help protect it. Maybe I was a bit naive back then, but I made the decision to go bladders because the price of the bladder system was less than a reseal AND O&N offered a 5 year warranty while the resealers only offered a year to me. When I had them installed at Factoryville, I got to meet Richard & Myron. Nice guys and they showed me their newest project of sticking a PT-6 in a Cessna 210. As for the support of their product, even when the AD hit, O&N responded quickly and addressed the concerns immediately. They worked with my mechanic to get the parts and help talk him through the installation requirements. I know Byron and few others have them and I'm sure they will comment. Please know I value and appreciate any information or experiences you could provide. Drawing attached. John 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris_adams Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I think I'll be getting them this fall as well. I'm had my tanks worked on a couple of times and I'm no confident enough they won't leak again soon and I'd like to get somel paint work done. Good luck! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kris_adams Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I've had mine 2 years with no problems. They make major modifications to the inside of your wing, so it will never revert back to a wet wing configuration. I was there when yours were getting worked on. Glad they are working out well for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N601RX Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I think mine are around 16 years old. I had a minor leak around some of the cork gaskets. It looked like they had been overtightened in the past. I went ahead and replaced all the gaskets so not to be bothered with it again. The gasket set cost me a little under $100. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob - S50 Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I do admit though that I am "scared" to see blue streaks under the wings again in my MIssile (only happnes when fully topped off sitting in the cold for a few days). After a few gallons are out of each tank - no issue. I'll take the MIssile to Weep No More when the time comes. Seth, So don't fill them up after flight. The leak is probably near the top of the tank. As long as you have ... some ... fuel in the wings, put it away and if you need more fuel for the next flight, gas it up just before you go flying. That also leaves you the option of less fuel/more payload. You can spend time at the pumps before or after a flight. Lots cheaper than getting the tanks resealed. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 My O&N bladders were installed in 1997. 17 years and going strong. Every now and then I think I ought to add the extra 10 gallon capacity now available but I really don't want to fly much over 4 hour legs. There are other thread on this topic within the last year... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooneymite Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I have a C, not a 201. Mine were installed early in 1990. I had to comply with the AD, but other than that, there have been no issues. I am completely satisfied with them and were I to buy another Mooney, I would look for one that already had the bladders. I would consider paying $5000 more for a Mooney with than without. Obviously, at some point bladders have to be replaced, but after 24 years, mine show no signs of aging. After listening to Weep No More at the recent Mooney Summit, I am really happy I have never had to deal with leaking tanks with deteriorating insides. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetdriven Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 My experience is the same as the others. We have owned our plane for 3 years, and the bladders were installed in 1991. No record of any maintenance except the AD that required the foam pad under the bladders. We changed the fuel cap O-rings 2 years ago as a preventative measure, the O-rings for the Shaw caps are 100$/set, but Shaw raised the price fo that cap to 2500$ per cap. O&N modified their STC and now they have a different cap, so I imagine they use a standard O-ring. I highly recommend the 64 gallon version, 54.7 really is a bit short for a 201. So far not one person has come forward with any evidence that an O&N bladder has leaked or failed in a Mooney. Not in 23 years' time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seth Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 Seth, So don't fill them up after flight. The leak is probably near the top of the tank. As long as you have ... some ... fuel in the wings, put it away and if you need more fuel for the next flight, gas it up just before you go flying. That also leaves you the option of less fuel/more payload. You can spend time at the pumps before or after a flight. Lots cheaper than getting the tanks resealed. Bob Exactly - I don't plan to reseal until I get a leak from the mains or somewhere else than the top of the tips. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 I thought that the costs were the same for a re-seal or the bladder mod? If that is the case I would opt for the re-seal, you keep the original empty weight and original capacity. Clarence Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetdriven Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 The capacity is the same. The loss of 40lb of useful load is offset by the almost zero possibility of ever having to fool with leaky fuel tanks again. Never in the history of the world has anyone ever made such a big deal about 40 pounds on an aircraft before Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigTex Posted February 10, 2014 Report Share Posted February 10, 2014 The capacity is the same. The loss of 40lb of useful load is offset by the almost zero possibility of ever having to fool with leaky fuel tanks again. Never in the history of the world has anyone ever made such a big deal about 40 pounds on an aircraft before For the 54.8 gallon 6 bag version, the weight increase is only 30 lbs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantom Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 ....Obviously, at some point bladders have to be replaced, but after 24 years, mine show no signs of aging. After listening to Weep No More at the recent Mooney Summit, I am really happy I have never had to deal with leaking tanks with deteriorating insides. Bruce did give an impressive presentation. It was interesting that certain year Mooney's have unique leak issues. Even 99 to 01 Ovations. I was glad the '94 201 was never mentioned. If my time ever comes it's a reseal for me. Glad you many guys who inherited aftermarket bladders are doing well. We did BTW hear about both badder leaks, suspect residue in the fuel and screw tips puncturing them. Guess we all hear what we want to hear, and nothing is perfect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bob_Belville Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Glad you many guys who inherited aftermarket bladders are doing well. We did BTW hear about both badder leaks, suspect residue in the fuel and screw tips puncturing them. Guess we all hear what we want to hear, and nothing is perfect. Uh, you heard that gossip from a disinterested party of a fellow selling something? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bonal Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Our D had them installed in 06 and we have no issues. I don't know about fueling with the wet wing but with the bladders you have to give some time for the fuel to transfer to each bladder only adds a few min to the fueling time. I'm real glad we have them from all the info on re sealing the wings that I have read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantom Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Uh, you heard that gossip from a disinterested party of a fellow selling something? No, not at all, and no more so than from folks defending the bladders they already have, and not wanting to have potential buyers, some day, worried about their efficacy. I suggest Bob, that the most objective opinion is from an informed owner who has no leaks. I have been watching, listening and evaluating for years in anticipation of an event I hope never occurs. What i report is first hand accounts from Mooney owners, several of whom were at the Mooney Summit, A&P's over the years, and first hand from a buddy with a Bonanza who had ongoing rubber issues. Bruce was quite detailed and I think fair, with his presentation. There are many factors to evaluate, and an owner who has bladders with issues might be hesitant to broadcast it for fear of lowering the perceived value of his plane. When your bladders were installed it was a good choice. Truth be known, for a long time it was probably a push on which way you went. For ME, now, with the process Weep No More has perfected over the years, it's an easy choice, that I hope not to need to make. No condoms for me! Your leak protection may vary 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neilpilot Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 Had Maxwell install bladders in my 64E in 2001, and the only leak I had up until the insurance company bought her in 2012 was a stuck drain valve that I replaced. Only minor inconvenience was the slower transfer time during fueling. Now I'm back to stock tanks that aren't (yet) leaking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooneymite Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 I enjoyed Bruce's presentation. I learned a lot about Mooney fuel tanks. He is obviously completely immersed in the process and a master at his craft! However, I got a sense that the process he now uses has definitely evolved over the years. The process/procedures he uses today are not the ones he used when he got started. So, the question that came to mind is: Is the present process really all that well proven? Is the process still evolving? Is he "experimenting" on customers' planes? I do not question Bruce's integrity at all and I know that he and his partner will stand behind their work, but when I compare their "evolving" process against my 24 years (so far) of leak-free bladders, I wonder which is really going to provide the best overall service. I would have felt better had he said, "We've used this exact same process for 24 years and never had a leak." He didn't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fantom Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 I enjoyed Bruce's presentation. I learned a lot about Mooney fuel tanks. He is obviously completely immersed in the process and a master at his craft! However, I got a sense that the process he now uses has definitely evolved over the years. The process/procedures he uses today are not the ones he used when he got started...... ......my 24 years (so far) of leak-free bladders, I wonder which is really going to provide the best overall service. . In fact Bruce went to great lengths describing the improvements to his process, so the 'sense' you got is from what he said. If you don't think bladders haven't been improved over the same time period, you're living in a vacuum. Wnhy I'm defending Burce is beyond me. Were we in the same room???? This is silly and pointless. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DrBill Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 I've had mine for a year. Best decision I ever made. I'll never have to worry about fuel leaks again. I had mine done at the factory. They took me to Scranton after I dropped off the plane and picked me up a week later. I'm still friends and communicate with the guy that gave me the lifts (he's walking the Appalachian trail). BILL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marauder Posted February 11, 2014 Report Share Posted February 11, 2014 I never understood why these wet wing versus bladders discussions end up at the same place everytime. Just make a decision and live with it. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.