Jump to content

wetwingologists


721lp

Recommended Posts

I have to admit that I chuckle a little every time I hear folks talk about how great it was to get leak after leak repaired (usually after a reseal).  I'm not sure why anyone would go through the pain, expense and hassle of a reseal when a product as great as the O&N Bladders is on the market.  To each-his-own, I suppose.


http://www.onaircraft.com/Mooney.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: GeorgePerry

I have to admit that I chuckle a little every time I hear folks talk about how great it was to get leak after leak repaired (usually after a reseal).  I'm not sure why anyone would go through the pain, expense and hassle of a reseal when a product as great as the O&N Bladders is on the market.  To each-his-own, I suppose.

http://www.onaircraft.com/Mooney.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: Piloto

1. Bladders have leak problems too like the wet tanks.

2. Some of the bladders drawbacks are less fuel capacity per volume, added weight,

3.  bladder/metal moisture trapping (corrosion) and replacement availability. 

4. None of the new manufactured planes use bladders anymore. With 

5. This gives you an idea of fleet maintenance headaches if bladder were used.

6. Not to mention that on D checks they need to be removed for corrosion check risking tearing them on removal. 

Jose, lets be careful throwing around opinions and implying they are facts...Others who are not as familiar with the issue read these posts, so lets make sure we present opinion as such and keep the facts straight.

1. I don’t believe this is true.  To my knowledge there’s never been a survey performed, but based on years of experience with Mooney’s its my opinion that if a reliability comparison where performed to measure O&N installations against reseals, the O&N bladders would win hands down.  Oh, and bladders come with a five year warranty. 

Logic behind my assumptions:  If newly installed bladders are going to leak, they do it soon after the install.  A reseal, on the other hand, is just the opposite.  Leaks occur over time and landing cycle abuse.  Typically reseal leaks occur (a year or more) after the reseal was performed.  Often times the leaks happen after the warranty has run out.  Now the owner has to pay twice for the same repair. 

I personally have over 15 years on my bladders with not one drip.  Every other “bladder” Mooney owner I have spoken with has similar feedback wrt the mod.  Mooney owners who have paid for multiple, unsuccessful reseals, are well documented.  Worst of all is that - Not all reseal shops are the same.  Quality matters.  Some shops do an excellent job, some do not.  Bladders remove the guess work. 

2.  Not necessarily true.  O&N offers a 64 Gal option, and yes if you go with that option, the plane will loose about 34 lbs of full fuel useful load.  If you go with the 54 gallon kit you actually gain useful load since your total full fuel load weight is redueced by 65 lbs.  Even with the added wt of the 54 gal O&N bladders you still INCREASE fuel fuel useful load by 30lbs.  With over 4 and ½ hours plus reserves with the 54 gal option, it’s my opinion that you don’t loose that much utility.  I can’t think of a time when I wanted to sit in the Mooney for more than 4 hours at a stretch, without an “El baño.” break.

3. Possible but very unlikely.  Yes there is a chance that moisture can condense in the space between the bladders and the skin of the airplane.  However if the area is prepped correctly, the aircraft is hangered and the inspection panels are opened at annual, the chances of a problem developing are minimal.

4. Not true.  A few aircraft that use bladders are: F-18, F-16, F-22, F-35.  All new aircraft still being built with bladders.   The only explanation for this (IMO) is that GA aircraft typically don’t use bladders because manufactorers marketing departments values useful load #'s more than long term reliability.

5. Not true...sounds like your opinion more than anything else.  If you can substantiate this claim with facts I’m open to convincing.

6. Not true.  Once bladders are installed there is no requirement to ever remove them for inspection or maintenance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I've got no dog in this hunt. but one man's facts are usually another man's opinions. Like George, I get a chuckle, but when some pilots put forth their opinions, or individual experience, as fact, while patting themselves on the back for being so smart.


I'v known several Mooney people who have had recurring problems with bladders, many have lost useful load, and some are trouble prone. No, I'n NOT getting into an argument on re-seals.


It's just that the "I'm right" aviation dogma is a bit of a sore point for me. Sorry and YMMV.


Glad you made a "smart" choice, George, and have had a good experience with them, but that doesn't make them the only best alternative.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote: fantom

I'v known several Mooney people who have had recurring problems with bladders, many have lost useful load, and some are trouble prone. No, I'n NOT getting into an argument on re-seals. 

I know a guy, A friend told me, I heard from a buddy...

None of these claims are helpful.  If you don't have first hand knowledge and experience with one or the other (O&N’s or Reseal) I would ask that you not weigh in with conjecture, because it’s doesn't add anything to the discussion.

I'd like to hear from owners on both sides of the debate.  If someone out there has personally had trouble with O&N bladders or a reseal, please speak up.  The only way to generate merit in a debate such as this, is it to look at the problem analytically.  If there are Mooney owners with direct, knowledge and personal experience (ie you wrote a check to pay for one or the other), with either a Reseal or O&N bladders, please click on the link below.  It’ll take you to a poll.  Its anonymous and you don’t even have to post in the thread to participate.

http://www.mooneyspace.com/index.cfm?mainaction=posts&forumid=1&threadid=388#post3604

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I admit having no experience with O&N bladders in particular. My experience with bladders has been at Boeing and United Airlines MRO in San Francisco.


Combat aircraft employs self sealing type bladders to keep the tanks from leaking when under fire. Are the O&N bullet proof? Maybe some Mooneys are getting shot by discontent wives and thats why the leak. Wink


If the concept of bladders was that good how come Mooney or any of the A/C manufacturers would not use them?


Bladder moisture trapping was an annoying problem on the 707 due to condensation from high altitude. We had to drill additional drain holes to bleed the water out. Some confused the water drain for fuel leaks.


One can of stock sealant will fix a leak on a wide range of aircraft but one stock bladder will only fix one section of the wing on that particular aircraft. This is a very important issue for the parts stockings at the MROs.


On the other hand if you do not want to mess with MEK, sealant, brushes, gloves and rags then bladders are for you.


José    


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 


I did not want to start the bladders vs reseal all over again, I only intended to point out that Edison at WW was true to his committment.  The leak occurred at the rivet which secures the fuel sump.  This area was not stripped, nor resealed and from what I understand about bladders, could still have occurred.  The internal portion of the fuel sump is held in place with 2 rivets.  My leak occurred in the front rivet that allows the fuel drain to screw into place.  It took 3 hours of my time (one hour each way plus about 1 hour in KFXE) to have the work done.  If this had leaked from a point that had actually been stripped or resealed, I would have been much more upset.  But even with bladders, the fuel drain has to screw in and that inner piece has to be secured somehow.  The bottom line for me is that the leak is fixed and that WW has held true to their warranty.


 


Also, to answer the other WW question about 2-3 weeks to do the full strip/reseal.


 


Aaron

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

After reading this review I had Edison at Wet Winologist East seal my tanks. My experience was terrible.

 

My plane was returned with parts; broken, missing and installed incorrectly. (seat belt retractor upside down, Bose headset jack snapped in two, wires broken, etc)

 

After agreeing to store my plane in a hanger, I returned 3 days latter to discover it had been left out in 3 thunderstorms and August FL weather without tie-downs, cockpit cover, securing control services, etc.

 

After agreeing on a price of $10,000 to include all work including 4 new tank sender gaskets and wing walk, on day of pick up I was asked to pay $700 more for wing walk and $200 more for interior re-install.

 

It looks to me like they have few assets, the interior reinstall was hired out to someone else, the A&P who signed the work off was out of house too. I stopped by to check on progress several times in the little over a month the plane was in his care, and only once saw anyone there. On that occasion I saw a lone worker running a power sander in a Mooney tank. I tried to ask him a question but he didn't speak any english.

 

And that 7 year warranty, if he doesn't do the work it good for 4 hours labor and a quart of sealant only.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After reading this review I had Edison at Wet Winologist East seal my tanks. My experience was terrible.

 

My plane was returned with parts; broken, missing and installed incorrectly. (seat belt retractor upside down, Bose headset jack snapped in two, wires broken, etc)

 

After agreeing to store my plane in a hanger, I returned 3 days latter to discover it had been left out in 3 thunderstorms and August FL weather without tie-downs, cockpit cover, securing control services, etc.

 

After agreeing on a price of $10,000 to include all work including 4 new tank sender gaskets and wing walk, on day of pick up I was asked to pay $700 more for wing walk and $200 more for interior re-install.

 

It looks to me like they have few assets, the interior reinstall was hired out to someone else, the A&P who signed the work off was out of house too. I stopped by to check on progress several times in the little over a month the plane was in his care, and only once saw anyone there. On that occasion I saw a lone worker running a power sander in a Mooney tank. I tried to ask him a question but he didn't speak any english.

 

And that 7 year warranty, if he doesn't do the work it good for 4 hours labor and a quart of sealant only.  

 

I used Wetwingologist last year.  I had no troubles.  The work was done well.  I was however charged for new drains and I was not expecting that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic has been beaten to death. I would just make one comment as a businessman. You should put zero value on a warranty issued by an entity whose viability is dependent upon a single individual. The technical terminology for the risk is "what happens if he get run over by a beer truck?"

 

An operation which has no website, sign on the building, etc. and who only does business with certified money should not be considered a "business". It well might be someone who is a skilled mechanic, an artist, and an all around good fellow but not a substantial business whose continuation is assured. Any warranty issued by such is only as good as his heath and his capacity to make good. In the real world we have to do business with a lot of operations who fail the beer truck test. It's caveat emptor out there guys and gals, don't kid yourself.

 

Oh, my O&Ns are 17 years old and counting. :rolleyes:  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Edison Gomez (Wet Wingologists) did a great job for me. One time, Jose Monroy (as in Monroy LR tank STC, which my '69 E has) picked me up from the airport when Edison was out of town. Edison used to work for Jose and thus Edison really knows the LR tank STC very well.

No bladders for LR tanks (88 gallon) so you have to get a reseal. Was like $6k per side for a complete reseal. I then got my plane painted by Jim Russell at D74 (Chorman, Delaware) and he said he'd never seen a Mooney without some modicum of a leak, and mine had none.  He was impressed. Edison does good work.

 

I tried to talk Edison to move his shop to somewhere more centrally located, but he swears that the warm weather really helps him be able to work year-round. 

 

FYI, Jose flies his J-model up to Nova Scotia then across to Santa Maria and on to Spain for vacation. Not sure I'd try that!

 

John

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had my J revealed by Edison about 4 years ago. The works was done one time and I have no leaks.

I can confirm the frugal nature of the business. Pretty bare bones, but it works for him.

I can also confirm that I received some additional charges too. The cages for the screws on the access panels had some corrosion and several were replaced. It wasn't worth a fuss so I paid and left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My Comanche has bladders but the plane was designed with them from the outset. From my experience bladders last as long as well done factory sealant, but are easier and cheaper the replace. O and N bladders are as expensive as a proper reseal. O and N bladders are very small and have a lot of connections and potential leaks. No system is perfect.

Clarence

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the kind words, but I am just an old guy.

 

Edison is a great hard working guy. He does his work like an artist will do a painting, very clean, neat and proud of it. It is rare to find someone that enjoys this kind of work. Strongly recommend him.

 

José

Edison did exquisite work on my C, even the wing walk was nicely redone. Everything holding up well since 2010 reseal. He even gave me a MAPA discount. :-)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

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.