Jump to content

Monroy tanks


peevee

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

So... I'm wondering what the whole point of this thread is?  You're not a Mooney owner much less a Mooney owner of a plane that's a candidate for @Piloto STC? So what's the point in the negativity on this upgrade?

I couldn't agree any more Paul 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Monroy tanks drain into the main tanks.  I don't notice my fuel gauges draining until my aux tanks are emptyish.  When my fuel gauges start  depleting I still have something like 64 GALs left.  I have never cared about the tanks being accurate above 10 GAL per side.  I don't really want to fly with less fuel than that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 About the only downside to the long-range tanks is I really feel that I cannot have a lineman top me off because it takes time for the fuel to settle in properly so that the tanks are full. Linemen  will rarely get that right. Just another reason why I will always fuel my own aircraft or supervise fueling with my own eyes. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Bravoman said:

 About the only downside to the long-range tanks is I really feel that I cannot have a lineman top me off because it takes time for the fuel to settle in properly so that the tanks are full. Linemen  will rarely get that right. Just another reason why I will always fuel my own aircraft or supervise fueling with my own eyes. 

I have the same issue with my 252 and stock tanks. Just a quick and sloppy fill from a typical line guy will get 33 to 35 gal per side. If I do it myself and carefully, I can get 38.5 gal per side.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Monroy Technology is what gives a Mooney pilot the ability to go from NJ to Florida non-stop...

1) The challenge.... these tanks are long and go uphill following the wing's dihedral.

2) A one float fuel level gauge may run out of travel, before the tanks are full.

3) Modern Mooneys get a two float system and electro-mechanically do the math to cover the uphill challenge...

4) Full tanks are not the droids you are looking for....:)

5) Even the 'approved' wing mounted mechanical gauges are used for partial filling. The equivalent of having a droid walk out on the wing to stick the tank while flying... the stick would need to be calibrated for inflight measurement...

6) The mechanical gauges max out with a reading of 35 gallons in the 50gal tank.

7) The solution to traveling non-stop, long distances, is using the Monroy technology...

8) The solution to not running out of fuel, is to scan the fuel gauges, backed up with knowing the fuel used from the totalizer...

9) Some improvements can be made to this system for some cost and complexity... Ceis digital fuel gauges can be used to compare FF from the totalizer and FF from the digital float system.

10) It would really take stirring the pot to call out the guy who provided the technology of ultra long range fuel tanks.

  • Long range tanks don't cause fuel exhaustion.
  • Having a proper fuel level system to meet PV's requirement is available. It cost some extra that an owner may not want to afford.

11) If upgrading to long range tanks, consider adding a two float digital system, with a digital readout like on a JPI or equivalent....

12) Also know, There is a 'Land Now' feature provided by a pair of lights on the annunciator panel.  

  • The first light comes on to let you know, Landing soon may be a good idea.
  • When the second light comes on, you have a few minutes to get to the next Airport.  
  • Don't pass on any good opportunities with two lights ablaze.

13) Or just pull the red handle when the fuel runs out... (humor for PV, Mooney pilots don't have this red handle)  :)

14) Flying long distances?  Go Monroy technologies!

PP thoughts only, my plane came with really big tanks from the factory, with really imprecise analog fuel gauges...

Best regards,

-a-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Bravoman said:

 About the only downside to the long-range tanks is I really feel that I cannot have a lineman top me off because it takes time for the fuel to settle in properly so that the tanks are full. Linemen  will rarely get that right. Just another reason why I will always fuel my own aircraft or supervise fueling with my own eyes. 

Although I agree about preferring to self-fuel, I disagree about the tanks not filling properly. As far as I can tell, they are certified to reach rated capacity at a normal fueling rate. Waiting for the fuel to settle and adding more actually puts you beyond rated capacity. An easy way to validate this is to have the tanks filled normally, fly and run a tank dry, read the pump how many gallons you put back in at a normal fuel rate. You should notice it to be the same or more than rated capacity.

Mine are rated to hold 98 total or 49 a side but I've noticed that in reality it's more like 51 a side. In either case, I'm not relying on those last 4 gallons over rated capacity to be there or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have the Monroy tanks, but just stock tanks. And there's no way I can get the rated capacity from a normal fueling rate. If the line guy carefully fills each tank at a normal rate right to the top, I'll be between 10 and 12 gal short across both tanks.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, steingar said:

I would think the only down side is you would really have to think about your useful load for a change.  I have trouble filling my Mooney overweight, it just doesn't fit all that much.  Had I long range tanks that would change.

My little 52 gal tanks already take me 4:30+ with over an hour's fuel left [last time was 4:40 with 11 gal or 1:13 remaining]. I really don't want to fly any longer than that . . . . . For those who like it or need it, go for it!  That's you, Mike @201er.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

I don't have the Monroy tanks, but just stock tanks. And there's no way I can get the rated capacity from a normal fueling rate. If the line guy carefully fills each tank at a normal rate right to the top, I'll be between 10 and 12 gal short across both tanks.

I was filling the Rocket the other day. I told the fuel guy to top off the tanks. I needed them topped off to make the trip. When I got back the tanks were about two inches from the top. I made him fill them up and we put in 13 more gallons. That was my planned reserve.

The planes with the flapper valve in the fill neck are a lot harder to fill to the top then the old ones without it. 

  • Like 3
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Hank said:

My little 52 gal tanks already take me 4:30+ with over an hour's fuel left [last time was 4:40 with 11 gal or 1:13 remaining]. I really don't want to fly any longer than that . . . . . For those who like it or need it, go for it!  That's you, Mike @201er.

I probably will at some point.  I never fill up at my home drome, too expensive.  I go to a neighboring strip for gas.  Reduces my gas runs.  More importantly it will allow me to fly my aircraft to Europe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I was filling the Rocket the other day. I told the fuel guy to top off the tanks. I needed them topped off to make the trip. When I got back the tanks were about two inches from the top. I made him fill them up and we put in 13 more gallons. That was my planned reserve.

The planes with the flapper valve in the fill neck are a lot harder to fill to the top then the old ones without it. 

 

2 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

I don't have the Monroy tanks, but just stock tanks. And there's no way I can get the rated capacity from a normal fueling rate. If the line guy carefully fills each tank at a normal rate right to the top, I'll be between 10 and 12 gal short across both tanks.

I cannot get rated capacity on my Rocket with the flapper valves (I call them Dumb sxxt valves, for dumb sxxt's that would actually take off with their fuel caps off).  BEFORE I installed my Monroy long range tanks (well, Edison did) I was picking my Rocket up in Salina, KS after the TKS installation and had called in a fuel order for a top off by the local FBO (CAV Aerospace does not have fuel).  I explicitly told them how to get the last 4 gallons in each tank, noting I needed that fuel to fly non-stop to the U.P.  When I arrived, I lost another hour getting going because I had to have them bring the truck back and install the last 8 gallons.  With the paddle valves, to fill past the bottom of the neck you need the air to bleed out the tank vent, it can't bleed out the filler.  And yes, this was how the plane was delivered by Mooney, and yes, I actually measured my usable fuel to verify the last 4 gallons on each tank were part of the "certified usable".

It's actually easier to top off now with the extended tanks, as the outboard tank tends to help with the venting and back filling of the inboards.  It's still a bit of a trick to get every gallon on and few lineman can get it right.  As far as earlier comments about not being able to know for sure your tank level as you burn down the extended, I have two thoughts.  First, the gauge DOES accurately when full and empty (it just doesn't come off "full" as soon), and secondly I only believe the gas gauge when it tells me something worse than I already know from my fuel flow computer.  Compared to the experimental gauges in my Lancair, the Mooney gauges came over on the boat (the Santa Maria).  As another eluded to, I think the external surface mount fuel gauges are more accurate than the dash gauges.

Tom

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are always several reasons

Technically no in a single tank you need to provide fuel measurement from full to empty - where empty is the demonstrated zero usable fuel level.

However several Aircraft fail to meet that criteria from new - Beech 23 series come to mind and there are several other mods like the Malibu fuel tank extension where 

mo additional sender is provided.

There are some that meet an addendum like nacelle tanks in a Cessna twin  but that is a clear auxiliary  tank that pumps to a main tank 

Advisory Circular 23.17C specifically addresses using the totalizer as a fuel gauge and issues arising from changes.  It is not to be utilized  - excerpts from 23.17 

Digital fuel flow computer systems have a fuel flow transducer that directly measures the fuel being fed to the engine. The fuel flow transducer may be a small paddle wheel, an impeller, or spring-loaded movable vanes. Digital displays with a fuel computer also allow these instruments to display total fuel consumed, total fuel remaining, and time remaining at the present fuel flow rate for fuel management. Overall accuracy for fuel remaining and time remaining readings depends on the transducer processing unit and display. The largest possible error is the initial fuel supply, which is entered by the pilot at the start of each flight. Errors in the initial fuel supply may be caused by an uneven ramp, unusual loading, volume changes of the fuel because of temperature variations, malfunctions in the fuel system such as leaks, siphoning actions, collapsed bladders, and other factors. So, total fuel remaining should be verified with the fuel quantity indicator.

Changes to total fuel quantity by incorporation of a fuel tank filler connection
(§ 23.973) outboard of the existing connection will require changing the fuel quantity indicator to indicate the new quantity of fuel.
The new indicator should meet the accuracy as specified in TSO-C55a, “Fuel and Oil Quality Instruments,” or MIL-G-9798.

Fuel quantity indicators are also governed by § 23.1301, as are all 14 CFR, part 23 Subpart F appliances. This regulation requires the installed indicators function as designed and not create a hazard in their operation. This precludes indicators that read higher than the actual fuel level since this would constitute a hazard. 14 CFR, part 23, does not require an applicant to install a TSO fuel quantity indicator. However, when installed in a reciprocating engine airplane and produced under TSO­ C55a authorization, the allowable error of the indicator is no more than three percent of full scale.

All said - it is a matter of local ACO FAA interpretation that renders a system or component to meet or not meet the requirements - as the title is ADVISORY CIRCULAR.   They the FAA is  trying to standardize response.   I got my licks in on the new regulation 

23.2430  (4) Provide the flightcrew with a means to determine the total useable fuel available and provide uninterrupted supply of that fuel when the system is correctly operated, accounting for likely fuel fluctuations;

However - how the above is determined can be accomplished in any manner.  

Best to let sleepy dogs lie 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/31/2017 at 10:34 AM, Piloto said:

For full enjoyment of your long range trips get the pilot relief tube. No need to find a place or container to relief yourself. And for even greater enjoyment add a cup holder.

José

is that part of the Deluxe Long range kit Monroy sells now?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, LANCECASPER said:

I think Mooney calls it "Extended Range" which means they shortened the filler neck I believe to fit 102 gallons instead of 89. The Monroy Tanks gives an Acclaim or Ovation 130 gallons.

But how many hours of nonstop flight does Jose's piss tube give you? Especially if you rainx your wings?

Edited by 201er
  • Like 2
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think Mooney calls it "Extended Range" which means they shortened the filler neck I believe to fit 102 gallons instead of 89. The Monroy Tanks gives an Acclaim or Ovation 130 gallons.
I'm talking about the relief tube option

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@LANCECASPER @Piloto can Edison do the long range tank mod? I’m starting a new position with Lockheed Martin and moving to Orlando.  My current Virginia Beach to Boston trip to visit my son just became Orlando to Boston so looking at options.  One of which was moving to a Bravo/faster/factory 89+ gal Mooney.....my wife’s suggestion God bless her......but I still like my 185kts Trophy...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.