both wing tanks inop - not legal to fly?

[N74DV]

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

guys, I find out tomorrow afternoon if my right wing tank truly leaks or not. My IA says he doesn't really care about the condition of the tank so long as it will not leak when he puts fuel in it. We think it was leaking previously due to plumbing. That's easy to fix. So... fingers are crossed for tomorrows leak test. For the left tank he removed the cap and put a fabric patch over the opening and will placard inside that left tank is inop.

I suspect this will be the most legal Tcraft this side of the Mississippi!

[Forrest Barber]

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

I can safely say that from Nov 23, 1945 thru Sept 10th, 1946 , all B models
( BC12D )had a right wing tank in addition to the main tank. I have never seen one without. A lot of them had the left hand aux tank too! Customers wanted this. I think the ship in question could be converted back
(or forward) to A BC12D1 , but then both tanks have to be out, while taking them out put another right one in and be done with it. thank you for asking

[pete]

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

FAR 91.217 paragraph (d) spells this one out pretty clearly. Deactivate and placard as inoperative. Part 43 says we can alter our airplanes. Part 23 says we need at least enough fuel capacity for 1/2 hour of operation at max continuous power. There are hundreds of airplanes altered from their TCDS. No need to reinvent an airplane because of a leaky fuel tank.
Pete

[Buell Powell]

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

[QUOTE= My IA says he doesn't really care about the condition of the tank so long as it will not leak when he puts fuel in it.
DJ
I hope your IA wasn't serious when he told you that.If it doesn't leak I would check(and clean the tank ,screen, and lines VERY carefully anyway and just install a new drain because the seal is probably bad anyway if it has been in a tank without fuel. This would be a good time to put one in. I'm not one to question your IA but you can't be to careful about this.
Buell

[dennispip]

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

This is now a $30,000 plane. Who would want to buy a plane that valuable that doesn't have at least one wing tank, preferably both? There are lots of choices out there and you will want your plane to be the best one on the market someday. Plus, you will be better able to enjoy it and be safer while you own it! Having a little extra fuel resource is always a good idea, and that is why they wanted at least 18 gallons as standard. You never need that much until the day you need it. Most engines "fail" because of fuel exhaustion.

Do like Forrest suggests and consider adding the left one as well.

[Chet Peek]

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

That's why I spent a few hundred bucks a while back and got my own IA ticket. Saves putting up with all that garbage. Chet

[jstall]

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

That a going Chet!!!

[N74DV]

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

IA just called to tell me the right wing tank does not leak. It appears that the reason it leaked before was a faulty plumbing connection. Now to determine if the inside of the tank is not cruddy and corroded.

Makes me wish now that maybe he could have just re-plumbed up the left side tank instead of covering over the filler cap.

oh well..... IF nothing else comes up this should be signed off by Thursday. He still needs to finish up the Cessna 180 throttle cable installation we had to do since a Tcraft throttle cable is nearly impossible to find.

[pete]

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

Placarding is legal but I agree its better to fix it.

[freightpilot27]

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

That's why I spent a few hundred bucks a while back and got my own IA ticket. Saves putting up with all that garbage. Chet

Few hundred bucks?!
my written test was only $80- 3 years ago
and a few bucks for gas driving the paperwork 4 miles to the FSDO.

What cost so much? i'm just curious.