3934V

Tom-D said:
I got the Hennings humor. But the question is, why would I slosh the tank when I don't know where it is leaking?
Click to expand...
I don't know about you... but I don't know that I would ever slosh a tank to begin with. Of course I don't know how the tanks on your bird are constructed, but the only ones I have direct experience with have been riveted sheet aluminum. Proseal is the route to go. No idea what the factors are in a certified plane, though.
 
DaleB said:
I don't know about you... but I don't know that I would ever slosh a tank to begin with. Of course I don't know how the tanks on your bird are constructed, but the only ones I have direct experience with have been riveted sheet aluminum. Proseal is the route to go. No idea what the factors are in a certified plane, though.
Click to expand...

I've never used the "sloshing" method. On the planes (and helicopters) I've restored I always cleaned the tanks, pressure checked them then made any necessary repairs before installing them.
 
RotorAndWing said:
I've never used the "sloshing" method. On the planes (and helicopters) I've restored I always cleaned the tanks, pressure checked them then made any necessary repairs before installing them.
Click to expand...

I agree 100% that fuel tanks need to be tested a couple of times before installing them......

Having to cut through new fabric to repair a leaking tank is poor planning at best.......

With that said.......

On my experimental I purposely sloshed my tanks for several reasons.. Mainly, the turbulance here in the mountians can get brutal and I don't want a seam opening up during a flight and not have a extra layer of protection to stop any leaks...

As a recovering racer I understand the hurdles of dealing with alternative fuels and I used a alcohol resistant sloshing compound / Randolph 912...
Since we cannot predict the future of any fuel sources, my plane is built to run straight gas, or 10% Ethanol or 80% Ethanol or straight Methanol.

I did abraid the inner surfaces of my tank before any fuel was put in them. That course surface is ideal for adhesion of the compound and in 12 years and a few thousand gallons run through them I have not had a hint of problems.. The main reason sloshing gets a bad name is when someone trying to be cheap tries to seal up a leaking tank that has had fuel in it for years and the varnish coating from years of gasoline has build up on the surface and prevents a good bond and the sloshing compound delaminates and plugs up the fuel line/filter etc.... IMHO..
 
All three of these tanks were cleaned, etched and pressure tested prior to being installed.

I pulled it today, and it has a cracked seam, from over tightening the hold down strap.

The seam was rewelded and now is half full of 100LL and setting over night to see if it is OK prior to replacing it.

It pretty easy to criticize others on the inter net, show us what your accomplishments are.
 
RotorAndWing said:
I've never used the "sloshing" method. On the planes (and helicopters) I've restored I always cleaned the tanks, pressure checked them then made any necessary repairs before installing them.
Click to expand...

At least I have something to show I did some thing. You?
 
N801BH said:
I agree 100% that fuel tanks need to be tested a couple of times before installing them......

Having to cut through new fabric to repair a leaking tank is poor planning at best.......

With that said.......

On my experimental I purposely sloshed my tanks for several reasons.. Mainly, the turbulance here in the mountians can get brutal and I don't want a seam opening up during a flight and not have a extra layer of protection to stop any leaks...

As a recovering racer I understand the hurdles of dealing with alternative fuels and I used a alcohol resistant sloshing compound / Randolph 912...
Since we cannot predict the future of any fuel sources, my plane is built to run straight gas, or 10% Ethanol or 80% Ethanol or straight Methanol.

I did abraid the inner surfaces of my tank before any fuel was put in them. That course surface is ideal for adhesion of the compound and in 12 years and a few thousand gallons run through them I have not had a hint of problems.. The main reason sloshing gets a bad name is when someone trying to be cheap tries to seal up a leaking tank that has had fuel in it for years and the varnish coating from years of gasoline has build up on the surface and prevents a good bond and the sloshing compound delaminates and plugs up the fuel line/filter etc.... IMHO..
Click to expand...
I rather weld and be done with it and not worry about anything.
 
N801BH said:
I agree 100% that fuel tanks need to be tested a couple of times before installing them......

Having to cut through new fabric to repair a leaking tank is poor planning at best.......
Click to expand...

You act as if I didn't do the proper procedures prior to installing the tank.

I've probably done a hundred tank repair over the years and have never cracked one prior to this.

It will get installed again and you will never see where the fabric was off.
 
RotorAndWing said:
I've never used the "sloshing" method. On the planes (and helicopters) I've restored I always cleaned the tanks, pressure checked them then made any necessary repairs before installing them.
Click to expand...

show us.
 
Tom-D said:
The seam was rewelded and now is half full of 100LL and setting over night to see if it is OK prior to replacing it.
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear about this little setback. The airplane looks fantastic, can't wait to hear about the first flights.
 
3393RP said:
Sorry to hear about this little setback. The airplane looks fantastic, can't wait to hear about the first flights.
Click to expand...

That will happen in a couple weeks, I'm glad some one enjoys the thread rather than, well you know. :)
 
better than Sloshing, not bad for an old guy with a cataract..
 

Attachments

  • 20140221_222332.jpg
    20140221_222332.jpg
    511.1 KB · Views: 65
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
better than Sloshing, not bad for an old guy with a cataract..
Click to expand...

I don't understand the pic Tom...

I see an old aluminum tank with a aluminum bung on it with a brass plug installed.. It looks like the plug was sand blasted... Do you not remove, replace and reseal all plugs during your restoration process??:dunno:
 
Tom-D said:
All three of these tanks were cleaned, etched and pressure tested prior to being installed.

I pulled it today, and it has a cracked seam, from over tightening the hold down strap.

The seam was rewelded and now is half full of 100LL and setting over night to see if it is OK prior to replacing it.
Click to expand...
Seems to be that time of year or something. I found an unexpectedly empty tank about a week ago - split seam. No problem finding the leak...
 
N801BH said:
I don't understand the pic Tom...

I see an old aluminum tank with a aluminum bung on it with a brass plug installed.. It looks like the plug was sand blasted... Do you not remove, replace and reseal all plugs during your restoration process??:dunno:
Click to expand...

That plug was just a temporary for pressure checking the tank, that is where we put the bottom drain when installed.

We have re-thought the over tightening the strap caused this, we may have damaged the bottom drain while handling the wing.
 
Tom-D said:
That plug was just a temporary for pressure checking the tank, that is where we put the bottom drain when installed.

We have re-thought the over tightening the strap caused this, we may have damaged the bottom drain while handling the wing.
Click to expand...

If that stub was sticking out of the bottom of the wing, then I agree on the potential of damage by handling by sitting it on a hard surface...

The reason I mentioned the plug was it looked to be sand blasted and it is a straight slotted plug and I didn't see any bright spots on it a screwdriver would have made when tightening it...
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
It that stub was sticking out or the bottom of the wing then I agree on the potential of damage by handling sitting it on a hard surface...

The reason I mentioned the plug was it looked to be sand blasted and it is a straight slotted plug and I didn't see any bright spots on it a screwdriver would have made when tightening it...
Click to expand...
Just like all the Cessnas it does stick out the bottom of the wing, we used saw horses to support the wing when we put the fabric on, That's a lesson we won't soon forget. normally we don't put the bottom drain in until the wing is mounted, this time we installed them prior to pressure checking the tank, then we installed the tank, and recovered the wing.
 
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
 
Tom-D said:
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
Click to expand...
Congrats! Must be quite a feeling. I hope to do something similar one of these days.
 
Tom-D said:
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
Click to expand...

Nice! All things considered, the rework was done in an impressively short time period.

It looks great...congratulations on the first flight. :yesnod:
 
3393RP said:
Nice! All things considered, the rework was done in an impressively short time period.

It looks great...congratulations on the first flight. :yesnod:
Click to expand...

17 months.

thanks. !
 
Congratulations. Quite an accomplishment to bring a machine back to life.

Quite an accomplishment to create a thing of beauty.

Amazing to be able to do both.

I am jealous.
 
Tom-D said:
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
Click to expand...

Pics or it didn't happen.
 
Tom-D said:
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
Click to expand...

that's awesome. I love hearing about planes getting a second chance.
 
It's a beauty. You should be very proud of it tom. The paint job really sets it off. Many will inspect it wherever it lands. People able to restore older aircraft amaze me as I can barely figure out a cresent wrench.
 
It needs the prop polished, illegal but I had two and never had problems until two years ago when the AI refused to pass it. The spinner would be good if you hit a Canada goose head on. Why are Hamilton standard props ok as they are polished.
 
Last edited:
Tom-D said:
Flew the aircraft today, first time it has been airborne since 1992. It flys better than it looks.

All that is left to do is some nit picking cosmetic stuff.
Click to expand...

Then it must fly like a dream. The pictures look great.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
It needs the prop polished, illegal but I had two and never had problems until two years ago when the AI refused to pass it. The spinner would be good if you hit a Canada goose head on. Why are Hamilton standard props ok as they are polished.
Click to expand...

Why is a prop unairworthy when you polish it?
 
If you call a prop shop they will explain it. Microscopic pitting and so forth. The only ones excluded apparently are Hamilton standards.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
If you call a prop shop they will explain it. Microscopic pitting and so forth. The only ones excluded apparently are Hamilton standards.
Click to expand...

Prop shops must comply to different set of instructions than the A&P in the field.

So they will tell you their rules that come from the overhaul manual.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top