both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

[T.Taylor]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

Owl bet that mechanic has one of those real fancy Snap-On tools boxes with all the chrome and shinny wrenches and the bells and whistles, Oh My, t.

[jstall]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

I'll try that argument but I suspect he will argue that then I should hook up my left tank (also leaks and full of crusty crap inside). My fear is that he's going to have to rip the covering off the wing and replace a wing tank... probably to the tune of another $3,000.

Behold the $12,000 annual for a plane that I purchased for $21,000 just over a year ago. yeehaw.

I picture a boy at a catholic school that receives a paddling on his rear and then asks the nun, "Thank you. May I please have another?"

I 110% regret ever buying this damn airplane. I almost want to take a cutting torch to it.

I think Bill is pretty well on, and Forrest is going to think about this and give report, what I'm interested in is the 12,000.00 annual? If you spend another 3 grand and make it 12,000.00 then you are at 9000.00 now?? gezzzz, what in the heck did he do? I've just gone thru my 3rd annual, 1st one nothing but inspection, and it was 400.00, next had one cylinder to replace and it was 1200.00, this last one was 750.00 including NDT on struts, and they passed, Now, I am out 3600.00 for a set of bogus struts from Harry, but that was my own oversight to a degree, as I should have known better, that wasn't the A/C's fault, anyway, I'm surprised to a degree what the annual costs have been on the Cart, as it has run about as much or more than the Cessna 195 I also operate, but then too I've flown it more, "WAY MORE" like 80 hrs on Cart to about 20 hrs on 195 last year, Might want to shop for another I.A.

JS

[N74DV]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

his shop rate is $75/hr. He's up to about 110 hours now. That's about $8200.

I don't have the laundry list yet but I do know that the fuel tank removal and replacement took over 20 hours. There's $1500 right there. Why it took that f*ing long I have no idea.

This annual has been nothing but problems. Seems like every other week he's calling me to tell me something major is wrong with the plane.

and another damn thing... Remember a few weeks ago I was searching for a fuel shut off valve? Took me two weeks to get one to him. Two weeks that my plane was just sitting there. Well come to find out, the plumbing that I told him to remove from the wing tanks (before I knew I'd have to have the right tank operational) has two perfectly good valves! The SAME VALVE with a different handle. He had two of them all along and he didn't even notice. I noticed the instant I laid eyes on them.

Then when he was test running the engine on Tuesday the engine sticks at full throttle. He tells me he had a hell of a time holding the plane in place with the heel brakes for the duration of time it took the fuel to run out after he pulled the fuel valve. I'm thinking.... "dude, just turn the damn switch... it'll shut off in a nanosecond"

I dunno.... this is an annual you read about in the funny papers. I'm going to be into this plane for over $30K. For that money I'd have bought something else altogether.

At this point I seriously don't even want to look at my airplane anymore. If someone stole it today I'd celebrate tonight.

[Hank Jarrett]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

"At this point I seriously don't even want to look at my airplane anymore. If someone stole it today I'd celebrate tonight."

Let's see, Arizona to Virginia beach is LONG FLIGHT, BUT WOULD BE A BLAST! Got a hangar already and a buddy who is a test pilot for Eclipse out there. What airport did you say your baby was at? might be able to do you a favor.(;f
Hang tight on the plane, a little less tight on the mechanic. Sure wish you were closer to my IA. My annuals run around $400 and he is truly ANAL about the planes he looks at being safe.
When you are through this you will come to love your plane again. Don't hate the plane because of what someone did to her. Like blaming your wife because some jerk creamed her car in a mall parking lot. Not the car or the wifes fault, she is just the easiest one to blame.
We are ALL going to celebrate when this one sees sky again!
Hank

[Carl E. Carson]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

DJ, I'm in Gold Canyon now and am ready with sympathy and time any day you feel ready for an outsider to look at what is being done.

Carl Carson

[Carl Ellis]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

As I remember it ...

All the IA has to do is inspect and provide you with a list of discrepancies (not in the log book please!). Any A&P can correct (or not) the discrepancies and return the aircraft to service. You are not wedded to this guy as he does not have to be the individual to return the aircraft to service.

- Carl -

[jstall]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

his shop rate is $75/hr. He's up to about 110 hours now. That's about $8200.

I don't have the laundry list yet but I do know that the fuel tank removal and replacement took over 20 hours. There's $1500 right there. Why it took that f*ing long I have no idea.

This annual has been nothing but problems. Seems like every other week he's calling me to tell me something major is wrong with the plane.

and another damn thing... Remember a few weeks ago I was searching for a fuel shut off valve? Took me two weeks to get one to him. Two weeks that my plane was just sitting there. Well come to find out, the plumbing that I told him to remove from the wing tanks (before I knew I'd have to have the right tank operational) has two perfectly good valves! The SAME VALVE with a different handle. He had two of them all along and he didn't even notice. I noticed the instant I laid eyes on them.

Then when he was test running the engine on Tuesday the engine sticks at full throttle. He tells me he had a hell of a time holding the plane in place with the heel brakes for the duration of time it took the fuel to run out after he pulled the fuel valve. I'm thinking.... "dude, just turn the damn switch... it'll shut off in a nanosecond"

I dunno.... this is an annual you read about in the funny papers. I'm going to be into this plane for over $30K. For that money I'd have bought something else altogether.

At this point I seriously don't even want to look at my airplane anymore. If someone stole it today I'd celebrate tonight.

Well< I don't know, and I hate to point fingers, but it sounds to me like the mechanic/I.A. is a little weak, particularly in the deal where he didn't or couldn't figure what to do with a runaway engine, damm, Don't be to hard on the little plane yet, this situation might be unusual, kinda like my deal, I have to really talk to myself not to get the same feeling, cause of this strut deal, and how I blew my 3600.00 to harry, but again, that is my own fault on that, coupled with a couple of FAA guys of which I'm not going to mention, but ?????? very suspicious goings on, anyway, again really not the a/c fault, . Last week I was ready to cut mine up with a chain saw for scrap, I was so mad, but then I got down and really thought about this issue and saw, that I really couldn't blame the plane. What is a problem though is that parts are an issue for T-CARTS, and without that factory operating we are at a very serous disadvantage over others with simular size light antiques. That part is discouraging for sure

JS

[lfries]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

I've owned my Taylorcraft for 17 years. Most expensive annual was 1,200 when we did all four cylinders. $4500 if you consider repair of some damage I did as a part of the annual.4 Different IA"s have done them. Latest by an extra ANAL IA and the bill was $500 including an Engine Installation. I probably spent an extra 200 for parts. When it comes to parts
I have never been unable to get a part. Please don't think that it takes a factory to support a Taylorcraft. I Once needed Gear Legs. One add in trade o plane and I had more than I needed available all at reasonable prices. This forum wasn't up and running then.
I'm sorry your in the situation your in. Your situation shows how important it is to know the IA. Thanks to the LSA new prices your probably only a few years to being even. Enjoy flying the Taylorcraft until then.

[Guest]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

DJ,

Have you considered a model change to bc12d1 and a simultanious minor alteration by the addition of a door and parking brake?

That should be a log entry only and a registration change.

I think that would be my approach, if the other fellow is unsure have him call FSDO or whatever you have nearby.

Dave

[Pro from Dover]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

Folks, your sort of missing the main point here. Can a fuel tank be inoperative? If the tank was installed as standard equipment or as an STC really makes no difference, sort of.

If the tank is required per TCDS then it must work or function. Period. This is how the aircraft was certified. In order for the aircraft to conform to the TCDS the tank must work as advertised.

If the tank was installed per STC then you have the option to get the tank operational or remove the STC certified installation. Remember that the STC was certified with an operational tank. Think about it, how many STCs say it's ok to install stuff that doesn't work. Hmmm... I see where your IA is coming from.

I agree that $8K is an insane amount of money to spend on an annual for a B model. That being said it is incumbent for the owner to engage the inspector/mechanic and see where every hour was spent. I would encourage you to find an IA that will work with you if you are mechanically savvy. I perform several owner assist annuals every year. It is a good thing to search out one of these types of mechanics/IAs even if they are 50-70 mile drive. The more you work on something the less you shell out.

We finished an annual on a J-4 last year that we stopped logging time after the labor hours went over 200 hours. Good news - it was my brothers plane. Bad news was it was a pro bono job...

Talk to your IA and see if you can work something out to buy down the fee. Maybe you can help out in the hangar with some other aircraft and they'll take the charges off your bill. Can't hurt to ask.

Hope this helps.

[Buell Powell]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

I think haveing an inop wing tank is a bad idea even if were legal unless it was capped off from the main tank and a patch over the filler. I have known of some that just quit using the wing tank because they leaked or were getting particles of debris when using fuel from a wing tank.It could have condensation or debris and someone could open it and let it drain into the main tank.Or someone that didn't know it leaked could fill it and let it leak into the wing.I would just repair or replace it.I have a wing tank and wish I had installed both when I restored my 41.-they are really nice on a trip. If your IA will work with you and sign off and you have time to work on it. I have some experience and could help with information and bet there are plenty of others on the forum that can and would help also if your IA hasn't done much fabric work. Just wondering-what fabric and paint do you have? By the way Wag Aero does have new wing tanks-
Buell

[Guest]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

Folks, your sort of missing the main point here. Can a fuel tank be inoperative? If the tank was installed as standard equipment or as an STC really makes no difference, sort of.

If the tank is required per TCDS then it must work or function. Period. This is how the aircraft was certified. In order for the aircraft to conform to the TCDS the tank must work as advertised.

If the tank was installed per STC then you have the option to get the tank operational or remove the STC certified installation. Remember that the STC was certified with an operational tank. Think about it, how many STCs say it's ok to install stuff that doesn't work. Hmmm... I see where your IA is coming from.

I agree that $8K is an insane amount of money to spend on an annual for a B model. That being said it is incumbent for the owner to engage the inspector/mechanic and see where every hour was spent. I would encourage you to find an IA that will work with you if you are mechanically savvy. I perform several owner assist annuals every year. It is a good thing to search out one of these types of mechanics/IAs even if they are 50-70 mile drive. The more you work on something the less you shell out.

We finished an annual on a J-4 last year that we stopped logging time after the labor hours went over 200 hours. Good news - it was my brothers plane. Bad news was it was a pro bono job...

Talk to your IA and see if you can work something out to buy down the fee. Maybe you can help out in the hangar with some other aircraft and they'll take the charges off your bill. Can't hurt to ask.

Hope this helps.

Hi There,

I like your comments.

My thoughts on the blue text is sure I think so, why not, its a piece of equipment and it can be optional equipment in the TCDS depending on the model designation.

For example one model does not require a wing tank while another model does but all models require a fuselage tank.

How you permanetly seal off the filler cap is a mystery to me at this point but a clever fellow will figure it out.

Removing it for repair will be very expensive and suspect that most folks don't use it so converting to a wing tankless model designation might work out.

The FAA can help think that through.

The IA seems to be the first one inspecting the a/c with his eyes open but also seems to be a little slow and things take him longer to do.

Makes you wonder about the guy who signed it off last year.

Dave.

[Guest]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

I think haveing an inop wing tank is a bad idea even if were legal unless it was capped off from the main tank and a patch over the filler. I have known of some that just quite using the wing tank because they leaked or were getting particles of debris when using fuel from a wing tank.It could have condensation or debris and someone could open it and let it drain into the main tank.Or someone that didn't know it leaked could fill it and let it leak into the wing.I would just repair or replace it.I have a wing tank and wish I had installed both when I restored my 41.-they are really nice on a trip. If your IA will work with you and sign off and you have time to work on it. I have some experiance and could help with information and bet there are plenty of others on the forum that can and would help also if your IA hasn't done much fabric work. Just wondering-what fabric and paint do you have? By the way Wag Aero does have new wing tanks-
Buell

Hi Buell,

Yes, amen, I was thinking and assuming that was part of the definition of an inoperative tank but perhaps it needs to be stated.

Good point.

Dave

[Forrest Barber]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

ATC 696 lists a lot of ships, pre-war had only nose tank. BC12D1 too! convert it back or forward.
Bill I THINK you have a pre-war ; maybe: it does use 9090 cords right! The 696 BC12D does have the 18 gal requirement right in the TDS. Why not fix the installed tank. agree a $12,000 annual is a bit much but he made the deal not me.

[VictorBravo]

Re: both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

The 696 BC12D does have the 18 gal requirement right in the TDS.

So Forrest...do I understand this correctly, that all those thousands of 65 horsepower BC-12D airplanes that rolled off the production line in 1945 through 47 all had right side wing tanks as they were originally built?

(For the life of me, I always thought the wing tanks were an option up until the Model 19.)