Fuel bladder values

[kellym]

  On 10/31/2018 at 12:43 PM, mooniac15u said:

It seems to me that bladders and Monroy tanks are competing products...

Expand  

They really are not. Monroy STC adds capacity over and above existing capacity by sealing an additional bay the same way the original tanks are constructed. For example, one E I know of has around 80 gal capacity. You can't get that capacity from bladders, AFAIK from the current O&N STCs.

[Mooneymite]

  On 10/30/2018 at 7:23 PM, Piloto said:

Since the days of the B707 new transport planes no longer use bladders but wet wing tanks. So for an airplane that holds 10,000 gallons and a fleet over 10,000 planes leaks on integral tanks can not be that bad.  José 

Expand  

Jose, generally jet transports do have well sealed tanks, but you are obviously not aware of how often there are leaks in jet transports.  The B-737 went through a terrible time with leaking "dry bays" where fuel would leak from the wet-wing tanks into the area surrounding the engine pylons (NOT GOOD!).  As jets age, they DO have issues with leaking fuel tanks....but many of our Mooneys are well beyond the years that jet transports still fly.  Jets are retired before their tank seals get to be as old as our Mooneys.

[Guest]

I snapped this picture of an early 1980’s Cessna 172RG wet wing.  It has a small leak at the trailing edge we are fixing.  The first time the tank has been opened.

Clarence

[bonal]

I would not have picked ours if it did not have the bladders. I strongly believe they add a level of protection from fuel spilling in the event of an off field landing. I would love to have a sample of the material used to see how tough it is. And as for wet wings well I can't count the number of threads on MS  about this leak or that seep or I am getting a fuel stain. And I can't think of a single post about a leaking bladder. 54 gallons gives us all the range we need as we like to get out and stretch on the 3 hour legs. Take a break get some coffee fuel up look around at other airplanes just not in any kind of hurry. As for the added weight we are still at 1015 pounds useful load which isn't too bad.

[carusoam]

An M20D/C with a UL over 1kLBs...

How does it get any better than that!

-a-

[mooniac15u]

  On 10/31/2018 at 2:12 PM, kellym said:

They really are not. Monroy STC adds capacity over and above existing capacity by sealing an additional bay the same way the original tanks are constructed. For example, one E I know of has around 80 gal capacity. You can't get that capacity from bladders, AFAIK from the current O&N STCs.

Expand  

Once a Mooney has been modified with bladders it is no longer a candidate for the Monroy tank modification.  Since the number of Mooneys available to be modified is limited it makes the two products competitors in terms of market share.  Someone with a financial stake in Monroy might not be entirely unbiased in recommending against bladders.

[mooniac15u]

  On 11/2/2018 at 5:07 AM, carusoam said:

An M20D/C with a UL over 1kLBs...

How does it get any better than that!

-a-

Expand  

My M20D had bladders and a UL over 1,000 lbs.  The weight of the bladders is probably a bigger concern for the mid-body Mooneys.

[RobertGary1]

  On 10/31/2018 at 10:07 PM, M20Doc said:

I snapped this picture of an early 1980’s Cessna 172RG wet wing.  It has a small leak at the trailing edge we are fixing.  The first time the tank has been opened.

Clarence

Expand  

We have a number of 70’s era Mooney’s here and none needed the tanks resealed. Just minor patches. All fly well. 

-Robert 

[kris_adams]

  On 10/31/2018 at 1:05 AM, steingar said:

Joey Cole told me on the phone that if the bladders leak they can be refurbished in situ for about an AMU. That makes them at most a minor squawk. 

Expand  

Yeah Joey's a good dude...

I spent a couple AMU patching my old tanks for a few years before finally giving up and getting bladders...as far as the original question...as I buyer, I would put no value in a 10 year old reseal-even from the best known shops-too many stories of leaking after reseal (which are covered by warranty for a number of years I get it).  Now 10 year old bladders...I'm excited to see that.  Now how to quantify...that's the difficult thing...it would definitely tip the scale in favor of 2 equal planes (with and w/o bladders).  Throw a # out there...probably worth $5k to me if the bladders are 10-15 years old or less.  Remember these are $14k installed now.  Same thing I paid in 2014

[kris_adams]

  On 11/2/2018 at 7:35 PM, RobertGary1 said:

We have a number of 70’s era Mooney’s here and none needed the tanks resealed. Just minor patches. All fly well. 

-Robert 

Expand  

My '79 was patched many times and finally ended up with bladders...installed at O&N...one of the few upgrades I've done that was 100% right from the very beginning (seems like I always have to go back for at least something minor).

[Bob_Belville]

  On 11/2/2018 at 7:53 PM, Kris_Adams said:

Yeah Joey's a good dude...

I spent a couple AMU patching my old tanks for a few years before finally giving up and getting bladders...as far as the original question...as I buyer, I would put no value in a 10 year old reseal-even from the best known shops-too many stories of leaking after reseal (which are covered by warranty for a number of years I get it).  Now 10 year old bladders...I'm excited to see that.  Now how to quantify...that's the difficult thing...it would definitely tip the scale in favor of 2 equal planes (with and w/o bladders).  Throw a # out there...probably worth $5k to me if the bladders are 10-15 years old or less.  Remember these are $14k installed now.  Same thing I paid in 2014

Expand  

 

  On 11/2/2018 at 7:55 PM, Kris_Adams said:

My '79 was patched many times and finally ended up with bladders...installed at O&N...one of the few upgrades I've done that was 100% right from the very beginning (seems like I always have to go back for at least something minor).

Expand  

 

  On 11/2/2018 at 8:16 PM, bluehighwayflyer said:

My experience and sentiments exactly. I'm glad there are Mooneys out there whose wet wings have been relatively maintenance free over the long term, but that has not been our experience with two Mooneys we have cumulatively owned for a total of 48 years. Both of their wet wings were a constant pain in the empennage, so to speak, until their bladders were installed, and then no more issues ever, except for a one-time AD compliance on the first set, for their last 34 years, cumulatively, with bladders. I do believe there are a handful of resealers I would trust with the job nowadays, but that is a question for another thread. 

Jim

Expand  

I'm pretty sure we've asked this question before... does anyone here know of any O&N bladder failures in Mooneys? I do not... but I don't get around much...

ISTM it might be legitimate to balk at the cost of bladders or to be concerned about the reduction to useful load but I don't think it is logical to claim that wet wings are as trouble free as bladders. And... if you're buying a Mooney with bladders it means that there's one less potential gotchas to be worried about.