Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Bob Patterson · Post by **Bob Patterson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Thanks for the success story, Tim !

Just one small clarification ....

The group here has found the best results with a slightly different
sequence of metal prep -

Clean with MEK, wipe, THEN scuff with ScotchBrite, and immediately
apply ProSeal. You can use a blast of air, but DO NOT WIPE after scuffing,
as you want clean, bare metal for best adhesion, and there might be a tiny
bit of oil on the cloth ...

Another thought - use a separate set of clecoes for areas to be
ProSealed - these are to be stored in MEK or Metal-Sol. Oil on the clecoes
has been the source of some leaks around rivets !

I think most of the stories of leaky tanks date back to before the
factory changed to Brian Cross' method of finishing the tanks, and before
we started using lengths of drill rod to align the tank top when dropping
it into place on top of the ProSeal. There have been many successful
completions lately !

Certainly, the addition of oval inspection holes, either on top, or
on the bottom, is not a bad idea, 'just in case' you might want access
in the future. The factory can give advice on how to install doublers
to make this a safe & effective solution. More than a few Rebel builders
have done this ...

.......bobp

-----------------------------orig.---------------------------------------
At 11:21 PM 12/1/99 -0800, you wrote:

OK,

All...I need to give my .02...since this thread is going on for a while...

I did all these mental gymnastics too over the wet wing. I went with the
wet wing, suffered through all the proseal mess, and even got an approved
mod from MAM to cut inspection holes in each of the three bays on the
underside of the wing tank.

Since these inspection hole covers were the last to be sealed, with the wing
upside-down, I was able to paint the proseal around all of the top tank skin
feying surfaces and rivets as well after the top tank skin was installed.

I pressure tested the first wing to 2 psi with a manometer, and even put
freon gas in it and tested all joints with a freon tester, and no leaks.

Now, when the weather changes from cold to hot or vice-versa, and I can
still pull the flush Usher non-vented caps off, I get a satisfying whoosh of
air (the vent-pipe bosses are still sealed with plugs). No leaks. The
tanks are eventually to be vented with a cross-ships vent tube, and on the
RH wing there is is a vent from the outboard solid rib to a vent pipe that
exits behind the strut (a-la Cessna). I used SealPak polysulfide sealant B
grade (spatula consistency) for the feying surfaces, and A grade (paintable
consistency) for the topcoat of rivets, etc.

IMHO...do not mess around with the wing structure in order to put solid
tanks in. If you prepare the feying surfaces properly (and it is a LOT of
work...scuff, MEK, wipe, proseal) you will get a good finished product.

I kept having this dream of the wing collapsing and folding at the
root...and I have a six-year-old daughter...

Keep the structure sound.

Tim
#438R

-----
Original Message-----
From: Brian Cross [mailto:rebelair@idirect.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:13 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: RE: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Hi Bob

I also gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the wing
& like yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank
into each wing. However, after much thought, I redesigned how the fuel
tanks were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead with
wet wings. The factory has adopted some but not all of the recommendations.
I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as there are alot of
talented builders out there from whom I have learned a great deal, but, to
reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing is the best
option. When done properly, following the plans and doing some improvements
which will not compromise the original strength built into the wing, the wet
wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free performance from
the beginning.

There is no way that I would accept adding a total of 40 lbs. into the
aircraft just because I was uncertain about the integrity of the wet wing
design. That is one of the reasons that the popular Glastar is so heavy. I
have extra instruments etc. etc. which makes my airplane heavier than others
but, I can take them out when the all glass cockpit arrives, (in my dreams),
but you would be stuck with the manufactured fuel tanks stuffed into the
wing cavities. In my opinion, you could never take the wing apart and put
wet wing in later and not compromise on the original strength of the wing.
Nobody would ever do this. With an 0320 installed, you do not have the
option of adding 40 unnecessary pounds. Take the plunge, don't worry about
it and go ahead with it. If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as more
people are doing now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing
completely.

The completed job is worth the effort. If you want to have the most fun
in your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the
airplane light & close to the plans. Not that I have an opinion!

Best Regards

Brian #328R
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Johnson [mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:46 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Hi again-After listening to various builders experiencing tank sealing
problems, I would like opinions on the following. I have a source that could
manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They would fit in the (3) bay area
between the existing stringers (top & bottom) enabling use of the existing
wing skin arrangement. The only structural change would be the removal of
the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The tank would support the remaining rib
sections via riveted angles. The tanks would weigh approx. 20 lb each which
would only replace the fuel weight reduced due to the smaller tank capacity.
Has anyone gone this route or is everyone satisfied with the "pro-seal" tank
arrangement.-Comments appreciated soon as I am 70% along with the R. H.
wing. Note :I will be powered by an 0320-160 HP.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">

<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>OK,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>All...I need to give my .02...since this thread is
going on for a while...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>I

did

all these mental gymnastics too over the wet wing.  I went with the wet
wing, suffered through all the proseal mess, and even got an approved mod from
MAM to cut inspection holes in each of the three bays on the underside of the
wing tank.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=910000407-02121999>Since

these inspection hole covers were the last to be sealed, with the wing
upside-down, I was able to paint the proseal around all of the top tank skin
feying surfaces and rivets as well after the top tank skin was
installed.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>I
pressure tested the first wing to 2 psi with a manometer, and even put

freon gas

in it and tested all joints with a freon tester, and no
leaks.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>Now,
when the weather changes from cold to hot or vice-versa, and I can still pull
the flush Usher non-vented caps off, I get a satisfying whoosh of air

(the

vent-pipe bosses are still sealed with plugs).  No leaks.  The tanks
are eventually to be vented with a cross-ships vent tube, and on the RH wing
there is is a vent from the outboard solid rib to a vent pipe that exits

behind

the strut (a-la Cessna).  I used SealPak polysulfide sealant B grade
(spatula consistency) for the feying surfaces, and A grade (paintable
consistency) for the topcoat of rivets, etc.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>IMHO...do not mess around with the wing structure in
order to put solid tanks in.  If you prepare the feying surfaces properly
(and it is a LOT of work...scuff, MEK, wipe, proseal) you will get a good
finished product.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>I kept having this dream of the wing collapsing
and folding at the root...and I have a six-year-old
daughter...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>Keep
the structure sound.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>Tim</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>#438R </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999> </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=2>-----<SPAN class=910000407-02121999><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999> </SPAN>Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Brian Cross
[mailto:rebelair@idirect.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 01, 1999
7:13 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Murphy Rebel Builders List<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE:

Rebel

"652"-Wing tanks<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>Hi
Bob</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>I
also gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the wing

&

like yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank

into

each wing.   However, after much thought, I redesigned how the

fuel

tanks were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead with
wet wings.  The factory has adopted some but not all of the
recommendations.  I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as
there are alot of talented builders out there from whom I have learned a

great

deal, but, to reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing is
the best option.  When done properly, following the plans and doing

some

improvements which will not compromise the original strength built into the
wing, the wet wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free
performance from the beginning.  </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999>There is no way that I would accept adding a

total of

40 lbs. into the aircraft just because I was uncertain about the

integrity of

the wet wing design.  That is one of the reasons that the popular

Glastar

is so heavy.  I have extra instruments etc. etc. which makes my

airplane

heavier than others but, I can take them out when the all glass cockpit
arrives, (in my dreams), but you would be stuck with the manufactured fuel
tanks stuffed into the wing cavities.  In my opinion, you could never
take the wing apart and put wet wing in later and not compromise on the
original strength of the wing.  Nobody would ever do this. 

With an

0320 installed, you do not have the option of adding 40 unnecessary
pounds.  Take the plunge, don't worry about it and go ahead with
it.  If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as more people are

doing

now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing completely. 
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>The

completed job is worth the effort.  If you want to have the most fun in
your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the airplane
light & close to the plans.  Not that I have an
opinion!</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>Best

Regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999>Brian #328R</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Bob Johnson
[mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 30,
1999 12:46 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Murphy Rebel Builders List<BR><B>Subject:</B>
Rebel "652"-Wing tanks<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Hi again-After listening to various

builders

experiencing tank sealing problems, I would like opinions on the

following.

I have a source that could manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They would
fit in the (3) bay area between the existing stringers (top & bottom)
enabling use of the existing wing skin arrangement. The only structural
change would be the removal of the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The

tank

would support the remaining rib sections via riveted angles. The tanks

would

weigh approx. 20 lb each which would only replace the fuel weight reduced
due to the smaller tank capacity. Has anyone gone this route or is

everyone

satisfied with the "pro-seal" tank arrangement.-Comments appreciated

soon as

I am 70% along with the R. H. wing. Note :I will be powered by an 0320-160
HP.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Bob Patterson · Post by **Bob Patterson** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Brian is being too shy here, folks ! We ALL owe him a HUGE vote of
thanks for the time & effort he put into developing his improved wing & tank
construction methods, and the time to make detailed drawings and submit
them to the factory.

Before he went to all this trouble, you would have had to put your
whole wing together before finishing the tank !! NOW you can complete the
tank, test & re-seal all around, if needed, with complete access !!!

We all benefit from the efforts of those builders who take the time
to document their good ideas and send them along to the factory, to help
those who follow after ! Please don't hesitate to share your ideas !

Thank you again, Brian !!!

.....bobp

---------------------------------orig.-----------------------------------
At 10:13 PM 12/1/99 -0500, you wrote:

Hi Bob

I also gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the wing &
like yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank
into each wing. However, after much thought, I redesigned how the fuel
tanks were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead with
wet wings. The factory has adopted some but not all of the recommendations.
I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as there are alot of
talented builders out there from whom I have learned a great deal, but, to
reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing is the best
option. When done properly, following the plans and doing some improvements
which will not compromise the original strength built into the wing, the wet
wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free performance from
the beginning.

There is no way that I would accept adding a total of 40 lbs. into the
aircraft just because I was uncertain about the integrity of the wet wing
design. That is one of the reasons that the popular Glastar is so heavy. I
have extra instruments etc. etc. which makes my airplane heavier than others
but, I can take them out when the all glass cockpit arrives, (in my dreams),
but you would be stuck with the manufactured fuel tanks stuffed into the
wing cavities. In my opinion, you could never take the wing apart and put
wet wing in later and not compromise on the original strength of the wing.
Nobody would ever do this. With an 0320 installed, you do not have the
option of adding 40 unnecessary pounds. Take the plunge, don't worry about
it and go ahead with it. If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as more
people are doing now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing
completely.

The completed job is worth the effort. If you want to have the most fun in
your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the airplane
light & close to the plans. Not that I have an opinion!

Best Regards

Brian #328R
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Johnson [mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:46 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Hi again-After listening to various builders experiencing tank sealing
problems, I would like opinions on the following. I have a source that could
manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They would fit in the (3) bay area
between the existing stringers (top & bottom) enabling use of the existing
wing skin arrangement. The only structural change would be the removal of
the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The tank would support the remaining rib
sections via riveted angles. The tanks would weigh approx. 20 lb each which
would only replace the fuel weight reduced due to the smaller tank capacity.
Has anyone gone this route or is everyone satisfied with the "pro-seal" tank
arrangement.-Comments appreciated soon as I am 70% along with the R. H.
wing. Note :I will be powered by an 0320-160 HP.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>Hi
Bob</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>I

also

gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the wing & like
yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank into each
wing.   However, after much thought, I redesigned how the fuel tanks
were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead with wet
wings.  The factory has adopted some but not all of the
recommendations.  I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as

there

are alot of talented builders out there from whom I have learned a great deal,
but, to reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing is the

best

option.  When done properly, following the plans and doing some
improvements which will not compromise the original strength built into the
wing, the wet wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free
performance from the beginning.  </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>There

is no way that I would accept adding a total of 40 lbs. into the aircraft just
because I was uncertain about the integrity of the wet wing design.  That
is one of the reasons that the popular Glastar is so heavy.  I have extra
instruments etc. etc. which makes my airplane heavier than others but, I can
take them out when the all glass cockpit arrives, (in my dreams), but you

would

be stuck with the manufactured fuel tanks stuffed into the wing

cavities. 

In my opinion, you could never take the wing apart and put wet wing in

later and

not compromise on the original strength of the wing.  Nobody would

ever do

this.  With an 0320 installed, you do not have the option of adding 40
unnecessary pounds.  Take the plunge, don't worry about it and go ahead
with it.  If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as more people are
doing now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing completely. 
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>The
completed job is worth the effort.  If you want to have the most fun in
your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the airplane
light & close to the plans.  Not that I have an
opinion!</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=770565202-02121999>Best
Regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>Brian

#328R</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Bob Johnson
[mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November 30,
1999 12:46 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Murphy Rebel Builders List<BR><B>Subject:</B>
Rebel "652"-Wing tanks<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Hi again-After listening to various builders
experiencing tank sealing problems, I would like opinions on the

following. I

have a source that could manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They would fit
in the (3) bay area between the existing stringers (top & bottom)

enabling

use of the existing wing skin arrangement. The only structural change

would be

the removal of the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The tank would

support the

remaining rib sections via riveted angles. The tanks would weigh approx.

20 lb

each which would only replace the fuel weight reduced due to the smaller

tank

capacity. Has anyone gone this route or is everyone satisfied with the
"pro-seal" tank arrangement.-Comments appreciated soon as I am 70% along

with

the R. H. wing. Note :I will be powered by an 0320-160
HP.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Tim Carter · Post by **Tim Carter** » Fri Feb 17, 2012 5:39 pm

Bob:

You are right. It was late. I did the prep the way you said it...

Thanks for the clarification for the group.

Tim
#438R

-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Patterson [mailto:bob.patterson@canrem.com]
Sent: Friday, December 03, 1999 7:12 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: RE: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Thanks for the success story, Tim !

Just one small clarification ....

The group here has found the best results with a slightly different
sequence of metal prep -

Clean with MEK, wipe, THEN scuff with ScotchBrite, and immediately
apply ProSeal. You can use a blast of air, but DO NOT WIPE after scuffing,
as you want clean, bare metal for best adhesion, and there might be a tiny
bit of oil on the cloth ...

Another thought - use a separate set of clecoes for areas to be
ProSealed - these are to be stored in MEK or Metal-Sol. Oil on the clecoes
has been the source of some leaks around rivets !

I think most of the stories of leaky tanks date back to before the
factory changed to Brian Cross' method of finishing the tanks, and before
we started using lengths of drill rod to align the tank top when dropping
it into place on top of the ProSeal. There have been many successful
completions lately !

Certainly, the addition of oval inspection holes, either on top, or
on the bottom, is not a bad idea, 'just in case' you might want access
in the future. The factory can give advice on how to install doublers
to make this a safe & effective solution. More than a few Rebel builders
have done this ...

.......bobp

-----------------------------orig.---------------------------------------
At 11:21 PM 12/1/99 -0800, you wrote:

OK,

All...I need to give my .02...since this thread is going on for a while...

I did all these mental gymnastics too over the wet wing. I went with the
wet wing, suffered through all the proseal mess, and even got an approved
mod from MAM to cut inspection holes in each of the three bays on the
underside of the wing tank.

Since these inspection hole covers were the last to be sealed, with the

wing

upside-down, I was able to paint the proseal around all of the top tank

skin

feying surfaces and rivets as well after the top tank skin was installed.

I pressure tested the first wing to 2 psi with a manometer, and even put
freon gas in it and tested all joints with a freon tester, and no leaks.

Now, when the weather changes from cold to hot or vice-versa, and I can
still pull the flush Usher non-vented caps off, I get a satisfying whoosh

of

air (the vent-pipe bosses are still sealed with plugs). No leaks. The
tanks are eventually to be vented with a cross-ships vent tube, and on the
RH wing there is is a vent from the outboard solid rib to a vent pipe that
exits behind the strut (a-la Cessna). I used SealPak polysulfide sealant B
grade (spatula consistency) for the feying surfaces, and A grade (paintable
consistency) for the topcoat of rivets, etc.

IMHO...do not mess around with the wing structure in order to put solid
tanks in. If you prepare the feying surfaces properly (and it is a LOT of
work...scuff, MEK, wipe, proseal) you will get a good finished product.

I kept having this dream of the wing collapsing and folding at the
root...and I have a six-year-old daughter...

Keep the structure sound.

Tim
#438R

-----
Original Message-----
From: Brian Cross [mailto:rebelair@idirect.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 01, 1999 7:13 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: RE: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Hi Bob

I also gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the

wing

& like yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank
into each wing. However, after much thought, I redesigned how the fuel
tanks were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead

with

wet wings. The factory has adopted some but not all of the

recommendations.

I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as there are alot of
talented builders out there from whom I have learned a great deal, but, to
reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing is the best
option. When done properly, following the plans and doing some

improvements

which will not compromise the original strength built into the wing, the

wet

wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free performance from
the beginning.

There is no way that I would accept adding a total of 40 lbs. into the
aircraft just because I was uncertain about the integrity of the wet wing
design. That is one of the reasons that the popular Glastar is so heavy.

I

have extra instruments etc. etc. which makes my airplane heavier than

others

but, I can take them out when the all glass cockpit arrives, (in my

dreams),

but you would be stuck with the manufactured fuel tanks stuffed into the
wing cavities. In my opinion, you could never take the wing apart and put
wet wing in later and not compromise on the original strength of the wing.
Nobody would ever do this. With an 0320 installed, you do not have the
option of adding 40 unnecessary pounds. Take the plunge, don't worry about
it and go ahead with it. If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as

more

people are doing now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing
completely.

The completed job is worth the effort. If you want to have the most fun
in your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the
airplane light & close to the plans. Not that I have an opinion!

Best Regards

Brian #328R
-----Original Message-----
From: Bob Johnson [mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 1999 12:46 PM
To: Murphy Rebel Builders List
Subject: Rebel "652"-Wing tanks

Hi again-After listening to various builders experiencing tank sealing
problems, I would like opinions on the following. I have a source that

could

manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They would fit in the (3) bay area
between the existing stringers (top & bottom) enabling use of the existing
wing skin arrangement. The only structural change would be the removal of
the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The tank would support the remaining rib
sections via riveted angles. The tanks would weigh approx. 20 lb each which
would only replace the fuel weight reduced due to the smaller tank

capacity.

Has anyone gone this route or is everyone satisfied with the "pro-seal"

tank

arrangement.-Comments appreciated soon as I am 70% along with the R. H.
wing. Note :I will be powered by an 0320-160 HP.
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">

<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>OK,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>All...I need to give my .02...since this thread is
going on for a while...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>I

did

all these mental gymnastics too over the wet wing.  I went with the

wet

wing, suffered through all the proseal mess, and even got an approved mod

from

MAM to cut inspection holes in each of the three bays on the underside of

the

wing tank.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=910000407-02121999>Since

these inspection hole covers were the last to be sealed, with the wing
upside-down, I was able to paint the proseal around all of the top tank

skin

feying surfaces and rivets as well after the top tank skin was
installed.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999>I
pressure tested the first wing to 2 psi with a manometer, and even put

freon gas

in it and tested all joints with a freon tester, and no
leaks.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=910000407-02121999>Now,

when the weather changes from cold to hot or vice-versa, and I can still

pull

the flush Usher non-vented caps off, I get a satisfying whoosh of air

(the

vent-pipe bosses are still sealed with plugs).  No leaks.  The

tanks

are eventually to be vented with a cross-ships vent tube, and on the RH

wing

there is is a vent from the outboard solid rib to a vent pipe that exits

behind

the strut (a-la Cessna).  I used SealPak polysulfide sealant B grade
(spatula consistency) for the feying surfaces, and A grade (paintable
consistency) for the topcoat of rivets, etc.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>IMHO...do not mess around with the wing structure

in

order to put solid tanks in.  If you prepare the feying surfaces

properly

(and it is a LOT of work...scuff, MEK, wipe, proseal) you will get a good
finished product.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>I kept having this dream of the wing

collapsing

and folding at the root...and I have a six-year-old
daughter...</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=910000407-02121999>Keep

the structure sound.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>Tim</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999>#438R </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=910000407-02121999> </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=2>-----<SPAN class=910000407-02121999><FONT color=#0000ff
face=Arial> </FONT></SPAN></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"><FONT
size=2><SPAN class=910000407-02121999> </SPAN>Original
Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Brian Cross
[mailto:rebelair@idirect.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, December 01,

1999

7:13 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Murphy Rebel Builders List<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE:

Rebel

"652"-Wing tanks<BR><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>Hi

Bob</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>I

also gave the fuel tanks a great deal of thought while building the wing

&

like yourself, looked at a number of different ways to build a fuel tank

into

each wing.   However, after much thought, I redesigned how the

fuel

tanks were constructed, had it approved by MAM, and, finally went ahead

with

wet wings.  The factory has adopted some but not all of the
recommendations.  I am not saying this to pat myself on the back, as
there are alot of talented builders out there from whom I have learned a

great

deal, but, to reinforce the fact that in the final analysis, the wet wing

is

the best option.  When done properly, following the plans and doing

some

improvements which will not compromise the original strength built into

the

wing, the wet wings can be completed with no leaks and give trouble free
performance from the beginning.  </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999>There is no way that I would accept adding a

total of

40 lbs. into the aircraft just because I was uncertain about the

integrity of

the wet wing design.  That is one of the reasons that the popular

Glastar

is so heavy.  I have extra instruments etc. etc. which makes my

airplane

heavier than others but, I can take them out when the all glass cockpit
arrives, (in my dreams), but you would be stuck with the manufactured

fuel

tanks stuffed into the wing cavities.  In my opinion, you could

never

take the wing apart and put wet wing in later and not compromise on the
original strength of the wing.  Nobody would ever do this. 

With an

0320 installed, you do not have the option of adding 40 unnecessary
pounds.  Take the plunge, don't worry about it and go ahead with
it.  If you do the tanks as I did and I am sure as more people are

doing

now, you can test the tanks before closing the wing completely. 
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>The

completed job is worth the effort.  If you want to have the most fun

in

your Rebel and blow away all the SuperCubs at your strip, keep the

airplane

light & close to the plans.  Not that I have an
opinion!</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN

class=770565202-02121999>Best

Regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=770565202-02121999>Brian #328R</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV align=left class=OutlookMessageHeader dir=ltr><FONT face=Tahoma
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B> Bob Johnson
[mailto:bjohnson@wsd.wabco-rail.com]<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, November

30,

1999 12:46 PM<BR><B>To:</B> Murphy Rebel Builders

List<BR><B>Subject:</B>

Rebel "652"-Wing tanks<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Hi again-After listening to various

builders

experiencing tank sealing problems, I would like opinions on the

following.

I have a source that could manufacture welded .050 alum. tanks. They

would

fit in the (3) bay area between the existing stringers (top &

bottom)

enabling use of the existing wing skin arrangement. The only structural
change would be the removal of the center area of ribs # 2 & 3. The

tank

would support the remaining rib sections via riveted angles. The tanks

would

weigh approx. 20 lb each which would only replace the fuel weight

reduced

due to the smaller tank capacity. Has anyone gone this route or is

everyone

satisfied with the "pro-seal" tank arrangement.-Comments appreciated

soon as

I am 70% along with the R. H. wing. Note :I will be powered by an

0320-160

HP.</FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

*----------------------------------------------------*
The Murphy Rebel Builders List is for the discussion
between builders and owners of Murphy Rebel aircraft.
Archives located at:
http://www.dcsol.com/murphy-rebel/lists/default.htm
*----------------------------------------------------*

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------