This is for straight tails that seem to have 65 gal tanks but only 55 useable? That is crazy that you could have 60 pounds of fuel just carrying around.. Anyway. when you put in monarch tanks and outboard extended tanks, do you still have 10 unuseable? The monarchs are 36 gal + 65 gal(factory) =101, but 91 useable?

Ive been reading old posts and it seems like for the Monarchs there is now an option to purchase new bladders with the nipples then add the outboard tanks, however I was originally under the impression that the monarchs were a complete replacement for all of your tanks. Maybe it is both? Doing monarch mains would be great and require a lot more work but I wonder if you could regain some of that lost 10 gallons. Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Thank you!

Monarch tanks do not fit as "snug" as the bladders that fit the wing compartment perfectly and therefore the monarch's have less fuel capacity than the bladder. But the solid tanks don't wrinkle so may possibly have less unusable fuel than a bladder. Legal wise I doubt Monarch would state any different than the standard cessna numbers though. Monarch tanks are no longer available anyway. So unless you buy a plane with them already in - your not getting them. Hartwig sells the "monarch" caps and Hartwig sells standard rubber bladders - no solid tanks

Ah ok. Thanks for clearing that up. But you could get rubber bladders with the nipples and Hartwig/Monarch outboard tanks?

Mark Y. wrote:Monarch tanks do not fit as "snug" as the bladders that fit the wing compartment perfectly and therefore the monarch's have less fuel capacity than the bladder. But the solid tanks don't wrinkle so may possibly have less unusable fuel than a bladder. Legal wise I doubt Monarch would state any different than the standard cessna numbers though. Monarch tanks are no longer available anyway. So unless you buy a plane with them already in - your not getting them. Hartwig sells the "monarch" caps and Hartwig sells standard rubber bladders - no solid tanks

You can still buy monarch tanks from Hartwig Mark. Quoted a set for my 206 the other day. Brian has a thread here going about a new set he is installing on a 182 right now. Very much available. Not cheap, and yes they do end up with less gas, but if your wings are off and your bladders are bad then its probably not a bad upgrade.

A U206F I flew had Monarch main tanks. Useable fuel was 75 gallons, compared to 88 with 84 useable with stock bladders.

They do away with bladder issues, such as wrinkles in bottom of bladders holding water, but the plastic tanks occupy more space in the wing bay. And, they should outlast bladders.

By the same token, when Cessna went to wet wings in the U206G, capacity increased to.....92 with 88 useable.

MTV

A1Skinner wrote:

Mark Y. wrote:Monarch tanks do not fit as "snug" as the bladders that fit the wing compartment perfectly and therefore the monarch's have less fuel capacity than the bladder. But the solid tanks don't wrinkle so may possibly have less unusable fuel than a bladder. Legal wise I doubt Monarch would state any different than the standard cessna numbers though. Monarch tanks are no longer available anyway. So unless you buy a plane with them already in - your not getting them. Hartwig sells the "monarch" caps and Hartwig sells standard rubber bladders - no solid tanks

You can still buy monarch tanks from Hartwig Mark. Quoted a set for my 206 the other day. Brian has a thread here going about a new set he is installing on a 182 right now. Very much available. Not cheap, and yes they do end up with less gas, but if your wings are off and your bladders are bad then its probably not a bad upgrade.

Interesting to know. I imagine they own the STC's and will produce as required since they don't advertise. Still fiberglass?

Mark Y. wrote:

A1Skinner wrote:

Mark Y. wrote:Monarch tanks do not fit as "snug" as the bladders that fit the wing compartment perfectly and therefore the monarch's have less fuel capacity than the bladder. But the solid tanks don't wrinkle so may possibly have less unusable fuel than a bladder. Legal wise I doubt Monarch would state any different than the standard cessna numbers though. Monarch tanks are no longer available anyway. So unless you buy a plane with them already in - your not getting them. Hartwig sells the "monarch" caps and Hartwig sells standard rubber bladders - no solid tanks

You can still buy monarch tanks from Hartwig Mark. Quoted a set for my 206 the other day. Brian has a thread here going about a new set he is installing on a 182 right now. Very much available. Not cheap, and yes they do end up with less gas, but if your wings are off and your bladders are bad then its probably not a bad upgrade.

Interesting to know. I imagine they own the STC's and will produce as required since they don't advertise. Still fiberglass?

Yes they own the STC. It is interesting that they don't advertise them. Not fiberglass, I believe its a very similar plastic to a Jerry can. Brian would be able to answer that for sure.

My 58 180A went to 62 total and 52 useable when the Monarchs were installed (before I purchased it). It's a little on the low side, especially with the Pponk 520, but I rarely fly long cross countries.

Also I believe the early Straight tail 182 and the early 180 only had the single fuel line from each bladder/tank - and when they switched to two fuel lines per bladder/tank that also reduced that "unusable" fuel quantity

I love straight tails. But if you compare empty weights from early vs older models... they look great on paper but that 60lbs of dead weight fuel doesnt really get taken into account. That would make sense on the two lines though. thanks,

ington6 wrote:I love straight tails. But if you compare empty weights from early vs older models... they look great on paper but that 60lbs of dead weight fuel doesnt really get taken into account. That would make sense on the two lines though. thanks,

Most empty weights include that fuel.

In 1957, C180's went from 60 total, 55 usable to 65 total, 55 usable. This was due to certification requirements becoming more stringent where the unusable fuel is defined in a non-cruise flight attitude. Word on the street was that it was in reality still only 5 gallons unusable. To compensate for this, gross weight also increased 100lbs to 2650. I don't know if this also applies to C182's.

If you look in the owner’s manual you’ll see that of those 10 gallons unusable fuel, you can actually use some of it in level flight only.

1957 180A Owner’s Manual

The new Monarch tanks are molded plastic. Good quality, crappy fit and finish... The aux tanks are gravity feed with 1 inch hoses and a pair of I’ll fitting “flapper” valves that are more for anti slosh than for one way valve in between the tanks.. from another owner I know you can install the aux tanks with the bladders but you have to have the bladders modified by HartWig and you have to sign a letter to authorize them to modify the bladders that axes any liability for that modification... I know of an early 180 with bladder mains and plastic aux tanks..

The main tanks for this 58 are just over 30 gallons.. The aux tank is just over 18 gallons.. total is just over 97 gallons... the 10 gallon unusable fuel still applies BUT you have to understand that unusable fuel is calculated by having the nose of the airplane set to 15 degrees nose up attitude then pour fuel in until you get enough flow out of the carburetor to fly the airplane for one go around.. there is a big calculation for that but I think you all get the point especially considering the fuel pickup Is in the center of the tanks... put the aircraft in level flight and most of that fuel would get burned up...

I will be posting more on my thread about the installation and the little things that the manufacturer could do better on...

Brian


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk