Fuels smell in cabin

[N201MKTurbo]

26 minutes ago, FastTex said:

My mechanic replaced both lines too...I just think sealant it's too sensitive and soon or later it will brake down again...not happy about the huge expense but want to find a permanent solution. Not sure how many Mooneys are flying regularly with just sealant for long time...

That sealant is tough stuff. Your only other choice Is nitrile rubber impregnated fabric. The same stuff that ancient hose is made of.

You think a hose that got kind of hard after 50 years, is no good?

Edited August 13, 2018 by N201MKTurbo

[Prior owner]

I wasn’t questioning Mooney’s choice of rubber hose at the factory in 1964... or the great success they have had with it lasting 50+ years...I was simply wondering why they choose to use that older spec for a replacement fuel hose today.

H6000 wouldn’t be my first choice for a fuel hose. 

Anyhow, applying sealant to the outside of the tank seems an odd solution to me- when applied to the inside of the tank at least it has the benefit of being sealed over with 3600.  

 

[Igor_U]

As PilotCoyote said, sealant should be applied only on the INSIDE of the tank, not outside, like your picture shows. If that's what your mechanic did (with huge expense), I'd look for more experienced mechanic...

Do some research around here and you'll find the answers.

[FastTex]

2 hours ago, Igor_U said:

As PilotCoyote said, sealant should be applied only on the INSIDE of the tank, not outside, like your picture shows. If that's what your mechanic did (with huge expense), I'd look for more experienced mechanic...

Do some research around here and you'll find the answers.

I'm still trying to understand why I should spend my money to seal tanks when it will eventually fail (without warning...) and it will need constant baby-sitting and patching. That's why I was wondering how many MSs keep up with this...

[Marauder]

I'm still trying to understand why I should spend my money to seal tanks when it will eventually fail (without warning...) and it will need constant baby-sitting and patching. That's why I was wondering how many MSs keep up with this...

That’s why a number of us have gone with bladders. Working on year 28 since they were installed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[FastTex]

10 minutes ago, Marauder said:

 

That’s why a number of us have gone with bladders. Working on year 28 since they were installed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

That's what I was expecting. It's not a small expense and I wanted to validate with MSs experience. Is there only the Grigg stuff out there?

Thanks.

[Marauder]

1 hour ago, FastTex said:

That's what I was expecting. It's not a small expense and I wanted to validate with MSs experience. Is there only the Grigg stuff out there?
Thanks.

 

Grigg’s now owns the STC for the bladder system. It was was developed by O&N and upon their passing was sold to Grigg’s. I’ve dealt with them on a few things including new caps. Good people.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

Edited August 13, 2018 by Marauder

[Igor_U]

1 hour ago, FastTex said:

I'm still trying to understand why I should spend my money to seal tanks when it will eventually fail (without warning...) and it will need constant baby-sitting and patching. That's why I was wondering how many MSs keep up with this...

Because fix it by A&P knowing what he's doing is fraction of the cost of bladders (or full reseal). It is not necessary to patch them all the time either however, like everything, old sealant has a limited life and it depends of different factors. Putting bladders is one of the options...

For repair of tanks leak, see link below:

http://donmaxwell.com/fuel-tank-repairs-how-we-fix-them/

Good luck.

 

[kellym]

2 hours ago, Igor_U said:

Because fix it by A&P knowing what he's doing is fraction of the cost of bladders (or full reseal). It is not necessary to patch them all the time either however, like everything, old sealant has a limited life and it depends of different factors. Putting bladders is one of the options...

For repair of tanks leak, see link below:

http://donmaxwell.com/fuel-tank-repairs-how-we-fix-them/

Good luck.

 

This is very good advice. Bladders add 30 lbs to empty weight, require about the same labor as a full strip and reseal of a tank. You need a mechanic or MSC that has a good reputation for tank repairs.  I did a full strip and reseal of the right tank on mine in 2010. Not one drop since. Repaired the left tank about 3 years ago, and it took me two tries to get it leak free (I missed a leak at top of rear spar the first time). What you need to look for in the tank is whether the sealant under the reddish brown top coat is grey-dark grey, or is light pink. The latter is factory original from the 1960s and needs to be removed for any repair to last.  A good reseal should last 10 years minimum, and more likely 20-30 years. The sealants used (there are 4 different sealants called for) are vastly improved from the stuff used in the 1960s.  The old stuff dried out when not kept wet with fuel, and then cracked. The current stuff stays nice and flexible forever. I know of at least one MSC that at least in years past was not good at all with tank work. It takes patience and attention to detail, but is not hard to understand or do it correctly.

[mike_elliott]

On 7/24/2018 at 4:54 PM, RobertGary1 said:

Kind of strange that only a few little screws keep the content of the tank from gushing into the cockpit in flight. Of course the entire engine is attached to the airplane by a few very small bolts holding the mount to the firewall as well.

 

-Robert

I wouldnt worry about these items much, not (in the words of S&C Bob) when you have 2 itty bitty bolts holding on the tail that can break causing you to be UWOF.

[carusoam]

4 hours ago, FastTex said:

I'm still trying to understand why I should spend my money to seal tanks when it will eventually fail (without warning...) and it will need constant baby-sitting and patching. That's why I was wondering how many MSs keep up with this...

There are two good systems going forwards...

• Modern sealed tanks... modern process and modern materials...
• Modern fuel bladders...

There is no constant babysitting and patching...  unless you have ancient failing sealant...

The seal work I had done was to reseal the top inspection panels during the PPI... a quick project done by a reliable resource (DMax), paid for by the seller... it was a carpet bombing attack on what was probably a single panel problem... the prior owner wasn’t available to discuss the detail.

Take your pick.  Whatever works for you...

 

When my 65C tank’s decided to seriously leak... I took the opportunity to go Modern...

There is light at the end of this tunnel...

Best regards,

-a-

 

[Andy95W]

2 hours ago, mike_elliott said:

 causing you to be UWOF.

You dang kids with yer emojis and acronyms.

Please explain UWOF.  My knowledge doesn't go much beyond WTF.

[bob865]

31 minutes ago, Andy95W said:

You dang kids with yer emojis and acronyms.

Please explain UWOF.  My knowledge doesn't go much beyond WTF. 

I had to google it. Upsidedown in the Weeds On Fire.

[lamont337]

10 hours ago, FastTex said:

I'm still trying to understand why I should spend my money to seal tanks when it will eventually fail (without warning...) and it will need constant baby-sitting and patching. That's why I was wondering how many MSs keep up with this...

For the same reason you would overhaul your engine and hope to god you don’t have to do it again anytime soon. Or your alternator. Or vacuum pump... Everything wears out. What year is your plane? If you still have original sealant in there I’d say it had a good run. The youngest M20F is over 40 years old. 

Done properly it may last decades. Sealant inside the cabin is a very good indicator that it was not done properly. Some specialty shops that do this warrant their work for up to 7 years, a pretty good start. 

[FastTex]

Well...I have decided to suck it up and order the bladders! I want a permanent solution and I do not want to worry about fuel leakage when I travel especially when I'm with the family.

Great experience so far with @Ruthie. Nice people and business to deal with.

 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 minute ago, FastTex said:

Well...I have decided to suck it up and order the bladders! I want a permanent solution and I do not want to worry about fuel leakage when I travel especially when I'm with the family.

Great experience so far with @Ruthie. Nice people and business to deal with.

 

What makes you think bladders will last forever?

I spent 2 hours in a seminar recently about how to fix leaky bladders.

[FastTex]

3 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

 What makes you think bladders will last forever?

I spent 2 hours in a seminar recently about how to fix leaky bladders.

I didn't say they will last forever but between the 5yrs warranty, the feedback received, the success record reported by mechanics and pilots, the vibration "friendly", etc the probabilities of having issues with bladders are way lower than with sealant. Plus it appears to be a normal solution for bigger airplanes (twins, turbo prop, etc). There must be a reason...

Edited August 13, 2018 by FastTex

[Marauder]

You’ll get the cool looking new locking fuel caps.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[carusoam]

If you feel so confident with one system over the other...

Go with it...

The more quiet you are about it, the less harassment you will feel.

There are small pluses and minuses of each system.

The best system may probably be the one that is easiest for you to get installed and serviced.

That probably depends on where you live.

 

The more you debate this topic publicly, the sooner somebody with a Comanche will come in, talking about his awesome fuel tanks for his equally awesome O-8...  

Next logical steps... share your experience with pics... Please...

I have another 20 years to go before expecting to think about this topic. That will be after replacing the Garmin 500txi with the latest box they come out with...

Wait.... I don’t have a txi yet...  I still have a few fancy Swiss watches... I have to become a big G fan first...

What’s better for LOP, boxers, or briefs...?

Sense the 50/50 nature of some arguments... hmmm, could be 60/40....

PP thoughts only, not a clothing expert...

Did you order the Cies fuel gages to go with that?

Best regards,

-a-

[kellym]

On 8/13/2018 at 4:40 PM, FastTex said:

I didn't say they will last forever but between the 5yrs warranty, the feedback received, the success record reported by mechanics and pilots, the vibration "friendly", etc the probabilities of having issues with bladders are way lower than with sealant. Plus it appears to be a normal solution for bigger airplanes (twins, turbo prop, etc). There must be a reason...

Bladders are unlikely to last any longer than a good strip and reseal. You are wrong about bigger airplanes. All modern airliners use wet wings with the same ProSeal.

The sealant never fails catastrophically or suddenly. If you have any problem, it is likely to be a weep for years. All of the old wives tails have a little smidgeon of truth based on 1960s sealant. If you think you can ever get the wing spar to flex enough to cause a leak, you will have landed hard enough to do gear damage.

Bladders weigh a lot for a plane with limited useful load. They require a minimum of one extra bay to carry the same fuel. It requires cutting the wing skin for an extra inspection panel. They likely have more unusable fuel.

They cost significantly more by the time you include labor. They are not immune to leaks. Every bay has a connecting tube that requires very precise clamping force, because the originators of the STC did not bother to put a bead on the lip of the connecting tubes.

Certainly your choice. I would never buy or even look at a Mooney with bladders, but that is just my preference.

[Marauder]

Bladders are unlikely to last any longer than a good strip and reseal. You are wrong about bigger airplanes. All modern airliners use wet wings with the same ProSeal.
The sealant never fails catastrophically or suddenly. If you have any problem, it is likely to be a weep for years. All of the old wives tails have a little smidgeon of truth based on 1960s sealant. If you think you can ever get the wing spar to flex enough to cause a leak, you will have landed hard enough to do gear damage.
Bladders weigh a lot for a plane with limited useful load. They require a minimum of one extra bay to carry the same fuel. It requires cutting the wing skin for an extra inspection panel. They likely have more unusable fuel.
They cost significantly more by the time you include labor. They are not immune to leaks. Every bay has a connecting tube that requires very precise clamping force, because the originators of the STC did not bother to put a bead on the lip of the connecting tubes.
Certainly your choice. I would never buy or even look at a Mooney with bladders, but that is just my preference.

Glad to hear you say it is your preference. Many of us have had bladders systems in place for decades. Mine have been installed troublefree for 28 years. And there are others with more time on them.

As for the weight penalty. Really? Having gone to a number of Mooney fly ins, the first weight penalty I see are overweight pilots. Or those who carry the kitchen sink with them on every flight.

You are correct about the weeps and seeps of wet wings. See these weeps and seeps all the time. On the wing walk area, in the wheel wells, on the bottom inspection planes and various screws. Know one guy who orders a can of tank sealant every year to keep up with the new round of weeps and seeps.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[kellym]

Just now, Marauder said:

 

Glad to hear you say it is your preference. Many of us have had bladders systems in place for decades. Mine have been installed troublefree for 28 years. And there are others with more time on them.

As for the weight penalty. Really? Having gone to a number of Mooney fly ins, the first weight penalty I see are overweight pilots. Or those who carry the kitchen sink with them on every flight.

You are correct about the weeps and seeps of wet wings. See these weeps and seeps all the time. On the wing walk area, in the wheel wells, on the bottom inspection planes and various screws. Know one guy who orders a can of tank sealant every year to keep up with the new round of weeps and seeps.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

If he has to work on tanks annually, he doesn't know what he is doing or is cutting corners. If you ever had to install or remove a bladder, you wouldn't do it again. Most V-tails from the 60s and 70s are having to repair or replace their bladders these days, and sometimes it takes more than one try to get them in correct. also easy to damage a quick drain on them.

Whether a pilot or pax need to lose wt is immaterial. You can't remove the extra 30-40 lbs of the bladders. In a 4 place plane with less than 700lbs useful with full fuel, you no longer have a 4 place plane.

[kellym]

2 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

I always find it interesting when people who don't own Mooneys with bladders lead the charge against them, whereas their actual owners are universally very satisfied. 

As for 60s and 70s vintage Bonanzas now coming due for new bladders, I'll take that 50 year service history any day. 

Jim

Not all planes with bladders get anywhere near 50 years. Bonanzas are more likely to be hangared, which will extend life. I have watched a couple Mooneys get converted to bladders.

Labor was well above estimates, and one of them never did get rid of all leakage in the transfer tubes. It is no different than resealing, you need mechanic and shop very familiar with the conversion to get it done in near time estimates and get it done right.  Why lose useful load and spend a bunch more money, when a shop like Weep no More will get tanks resealed for longer than you will own the plane with no more issues and considerably less money? Have resealed tanks, and got them leak free for years. Just my experience working on my Mooney and others as A&P/IA.

[Marauder]

Agreed about the need for qualified people to work on all aircraft systems, and of course that there are never any guarantees.  I also agree that hangarage extends service life, both for bladders and for wet wings.  In 2008 O&N turned the 64 gallon bladder installation in my J around in the promised 3 business days.  No resealer can do that.  It took us along with our independent IA much longer to install the 54 gallon bladders in our C in 1994, though, as none of us had ever done one before.  Then we had to pull the C’s bladders out a few years later to install the pads and ice masts, per the one time AD, and then after that we decided to add the extra 10 gallons ourselves along with another independent IA.  A lot of work but pretty straight forward.  Several here have put them in themselves. We have since in 34 years of collective Mooney bladder service had no fuel leaks ever. 

I am 6’4 and work hard to stay at 171 pounds, and my J still has 970 pounds of useful load.  So that offers pretty good utility, although I usually fly alone.

I am not anti-reseal, and of course I like the simple elegance of that solution, but there are only a small cadre of specialists who I would pay to do it, and I would want the one I chose to live nearby. 

Jim

 

Damn boy! 171 lbs! I’d have to lose both arms or a leg to weigh 171 on my 6’4” frame. I fixed my “grossly” heavy bladder problem by dropping from 290 to 240. I guess I’ll need to drop to 220 to get those extra two bladder bags in.

[Marauder]

The first thing I noticed when I lost the 50 pounds was the talking scale stop saying “one at a time please”.

And then there was the silence in the closet. No longer did my pants see me coming and start yelling “not me, not me!”

There are a lot of other benefits. Less bathroom tiles to replace, toilet seats holding up longer and I’m not going through a recliner ever other year.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro