kris_adams Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 (edited) Hi Everyone, I wanted to drop a few lines to let everyone know my positive experience at O&N Aircraft Modifications in Factoryville, PA. My goal is not to ignite the bladders vs reseal controversy but instead pass along a great experience for anyone considering bladders. I purchased 79H a little over 6 years ago. Since then I've had 2 tank repairs done (1 by an MSC and 1 by my local mechanic). In general my tanks were in fairly good shape but in preparation for painting next summer I needed to solve the minor leak problems I've been having. I still had a minor leak on the left tank and a "weap" on both tanks on the top inspection plates when full. Sure wish I hadn't messed with patch attempts and just put that $$$ toward the bladders or a reseal. I worked with Michelle at O&N to schedule the plane in. My goal was to drop it off on Sunday and pick it up on Friday afternoon. I had to book approximately a month out to get availability which I thought was very reasonable. I flew into 9N3 on 10/18. Michelle met me at the airport, checked me in, and took me to Scranton to pick up a rental car. This was approximately 30 minutes away. They finished the plane late on Thursday and did additional testing Friday morning. Later that afternoon (10/23) Michelle met me at Scranton again and returned me to 9N3. 79H was fuelled up and ready to go upon our arrival--no more fuel stains on the top or bottom of the wing! I was able talk to the lead mechanic that did the majority of the work and then did a thorough preflight. I had an amazing flight back to Atlanta and enjoyed looking out at the wing and seeing the new fuel caps (wing jewelry as my wife called it). Overall, it took about 4.5 days to do the upgrade. The downside is -39lbs useful load, losing the "tabs", and the expense (they now charge ~$14k, which was similar to a local MSC). I'm very satisfied and would definitely do it again. Tailwinds! Kris Edited October 27, 2015 by Kris_Adams 3 Quote
INA201 Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 Just a note for this thread. I'm new to Mooney ownership and have O&N bladders that were installed in 1991. No issues with the tanks that I am aware of for 24 years. I don't have enough experience to make a judgement for which way would be best but the bladders have worked for this plane. 2 Quote
Mooneymite Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 My goal is not to ignite the bladders vs reseal controversy but instead pass along a great experience for anyone considering bladders. Welcome to the "glad to have bladders" club! It's nice to have more members when the fights break out. 2 Quote
steingar Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 I was also told by the Mooney expert at one of the MSCs that the bladders are permanent. If they go bad they can be pulled and reconditioned in situ for around 1 AMU. Resealed tanks will leak eventually. Quote
DrBill Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 I had similar experience in 2012 with O&N and I'm still friends with the guy to took me to/from Scranton, I arranged a commercial flight from/to there while the work was done. I dropped off on Sat and picked up on Sat. Bill . 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 27, 2015 Author Report Posted October 27, 2015 One other thing, if you go there you get to see some seriously cool turbine 210s ("Silver Eagles"). I bet they had 8 or more there, most in for annuals. 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 27, 2015 Author Report Posted October 27, 2015 Glad to hear that you had a positive experience with O&N as well. My 64 gallon bladder installation with them in August of 2008 was practically identical, except that I dropped the plane off on a Sunday and picked it up four days later on Thursday, as had been previously agreed. The price was only $8900 then, too, including their Oshkosh discount that I didn't even know about until after-the-fact. They are a first-rate shop and honorable people to do business with. +1 on your positive O&N PIREP. Wow, that's quite an amazing price. I think their price was around $11k last year. They said they looked at how many hours they were actually spending on the install and had to increase their price. Oh well, I'm still really glad to have them. Quote
rbridges Posted October 27, 2015 Report Posted October 27, 2015 I had a local MSC do my install. I knew O&N were a little cheaper, but it was basically a wash since I didn't have to fly commercial. 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 28, 2015 Author Report Posted October 28, 2015 I had a local MSC do my install. I knew O&N were a little cheaper, but it was basically a wash since I didn't have to fly commercial. I had my bird there at Joey's when you were getting your tanks done. You have a really nice looking plane! 1 Quote
Piloto Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 I had some minor leaks on the top covers 20 years ago. Unscrewed the cover screws on the leak area, put sealant on them and screwed them back. No leaks since then. Sealant $15 José 1 Quote
jetdriven Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Just a note for this thread. I'm new to Mooney ownership and have O&N bladders that were installed in 1991. No issues with the tanks that I am aware of for 24 years. I don't have enough experience to make a judgement for which way would be best but the bladders have worked for this plane. I also have 1991 bladders with no issues. It truly fixes fuel leaks permanently 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 28, 2015 Author Report Posted October 28, 2015 I also have 1991 bladders with no issues. It truly fixes fuel leaks permanently This is great news. Hearing everyone talk about the long-term success of their bladders was certainly a huge part of my decision. Quote
Bob_Belville Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 This is great news. Hearing everyone talk about the long-term success of their bladders was certainly a huge part of my decision. Mine were installed in 1997. Love 'em. 1 Quote
PTK Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 (edited) That sure does sound like a lot of money and a lot of pounds gained! But I guess if you're wrestling with leaks it may be worth it. Disclosure: I have no experience with leaks thank goodness, or bladders! Edited October 28, 2015 by PTK 1 Quote
Marauder Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Mine are 1991 versions as well and no issues. I think the installed price back then was around $5k ouch. Will look up the receipt in Quicken. That is quite a price increase, even if they are 64 gallons version. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Quote
Alan Fox Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Had great experience with them 10 years ago.. 1 Quote
M20F Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Not not to start controversy but would be curious on why you chose bladders versus a reseal? Interested in Kris's opinion here and not the whole bladder versus wet wing debat. Quote
Marauder Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Not not to start controversy but would be curious on why you chose bladders versus a reseal? Interested in Kris's opinion here and not the whole bladder versus wet wing debat. For me it was the uncertainty of the repair. In 1991, the MSCs were the only ones I knew that would attempt it and I kept hearing horror stories of leaks after resealing. And until recently, I had never heard of a bladder leaking. And that plane was one of the first ones done. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk 1 Quote
rbridges Posted October 28, 2015 Report Posted October 28, 2015 Not not to start controversy but would be curious on why you chose bladders versus a reseal? Interested in Kris's opinion here and not the whole bladder versus wet wing debat. Like Marauder said, the strip/reseal people seem to have it down to a science, and their warranties have been extended. As I mentioned, mine was logistics. It was so much simpler as a VFR pilot to go to Joey Cole vs Minnesota or south Florida. 1 Quote
rbridges Posted October 29, 2015 Report Posted October 29, 2015 I had my bird there at Joey's when you were getting your tanks done. You have a really nice looking plane! good memory. You mentioned that before, but I forgot about it. I had a good experience with Joey. 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 29, 2015 Author Report Posted October 29, 2015 Not not to start controversy but would be curious on why you chose bladders versus a reseal? Interested in Kris's opinion here and not the whole bladder versus wet wing debat. Oh dear, here we go 1) Weight penalty is not really a factor for my passenger load-1 child, wife's weight is significantly below FAA standard pax weight, and I'm slightly above. 2) Price premium-1 time expense that I saved up to fund so this didn't (majorly) factor in. 3) Losing the tabs was a bummer, but for me I mainly used the tabs as a mark to buy less fuel at a remote FBO that has high fuel costs. I can almost always fly with full fuel and my pax load (even with bladders) 4) I'd patched my tanks only to have an issue pop up again on another panel which didn't endear me to a sealant solution 5) I fly to a handful of grass strips. Could be an old wives tale but I've heard that this is hard on wet wings. Maybe this only applies to old seal jobs like I had. 6) 2 reseal stories scared me: 1) reseal only 2 years ago was having problems and 2) quality reseal followed up by painting at a shop that incorrectly stripped the wings which resulted in leaks 6 months later. Obviously the reseal wasn't the cause but I'm not sure I'd keep my sanity if this happened to me (planning to paint in the next year or so) Probably the biggest reason: 7) I couldn't find even 1 person that had bladders that wasn't happy with them. It seemed that the people most unhappy with bladders didn't have them (point that Jetdriven made many, many times). This seems to be the most "permanent" fix for a problem I've seen for the plane. Hope this doesn't start a war. I know people can pick apart each of my reasons and that's ok. These were my reasons -Kris 3 Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 29, 2015 Report Posted October 29, 2015 (edited) I was also told by the Mooney expert at one of the MSCs that the bladders are permanent. If they go bad they can be pulled and reconditioned in situ for around 1 AMU. Resealed tanks will leak eventually. Yes, but resealing a leaking tank isn't a very difficult job. Every 5 years take a few hours to paint some more on at $0.1AMU vs $14AMU. That's my equation at least. The need to strip it down and start over again is uncommon. -Robert Edited October 29, 2015 by RobertGary1 1 Quote
kris_adams Posted October 29, 2015 Author Report Posted October 29, 2015 Yes, but resealing a leaking tank isn't a very difficult job. Every 5 years take a few hours to paint some more on at $0.1AMU vs $14AMU. That's my equation at least. The need to strip it down and start over again is uncommon. -Robert If I could have permanently fixed mine for $100 I would have been all in, trust me. After 2 attempts for more like 2AMU total, I was done with patches. It was either a full reseal or bladders. I'm guessing for $100 you had the ability to do this yourself. I wish I was more handy Quote
RobertGary1 Posted October 29, 2015 Report Posted October 29, 2015 (edited) You mentioned losing the tabs but you can still stick the tanks to measure them, correct? In 15+ years of ownership I can easily count how many times I've taken off with full fuel. -Robert Edited October 29, 2015 by RobertGary1 Quote
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.