----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Ed Burkhead http://edburkhead.com/ ed -at- edburkheadQQQ.com (change -at- and remove the QQQ) I know you believe you understand what you think I said, but I am not sure if you realize that what you heard is not what I meant. (Jim, AKA Midnight Plowboy) -----Original Message----- From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 10:17 PM To: Ed Burkhead Subject: WRB Re: [COUPERS-TECH] Re: WRB Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Useful load RLYTECH (WRB via Ed Burkhead's computer-I can't post directly) Please send responses directly to the list or to me, Bill Bayne @ <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> On Mar 8, 2005, at 6:56 PM, Kevin Gassert wrote: > It is right in the TC. Item 108: two wing fuel tanks, Erco dwg > 415-48197L/R > (7.7 gal each) These tanks are eligible as field replacements for > standard 9 > gal tanks on S/N 813 and up. > > Kevin (WRB talking) Yes, I certainly agree with you as to what is in the TC. If you compare the above verbage with my "Original Message" below there is no conflict. These (Pt. No. 415-48197L/R) tanks are the ALUMINUM ones described in Ercoupe Service Memorandum No. 50 (and in my post below). YES, useable capacity is 7.7 gal., as I had speculated; but they are NOT the "terne or stainless" tanks described by Greg in his post. NO "authoritative source has yet been furnished "... as to the existence of 7.7 gal. tanks of terne OR stainless. If anything I have said seems unclear, I certainly apologize. Such was never my intent. It is also hoped that everyone understands that these exchanges are civilized debates of presumably defensible opinion...NOT arguments! (another follows further below) Regards, WRB -- > > -----Original Message----- > From: William R. Bayne [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2005 2:26 PM > (Via Ed Burkhead) To: [COUPERS-FLYIN] > Subject: WRB Re: [COUPERS-FLYIN] Useful load > > Hi Greg (WRB speaking), > > Per my posts of 10:33 and 11:32pm yesterday (to the TECH list), > ternplate wing tanks were ALL 9 gallons capacity. (See also Richard's > post today at 2pm). So, not "odd" at all. If you have any > authoritative source as to the existence of 7.7 gal. tanks of terne OR > stainless, please share it with us. > > You may be thinking of the usable fuel capacity for the aluminum wing > tanks, #48197L & Rs, for retrofitting Ercoupes Serials 813-2622. These > are the tanks referred to these days as the "eight" gallon tanks. > > Regards, > > William R. Bayne > <____|-(o)-|____> > (Copyright 2004) Let's also look at this again. On Mar 8, 2005, at 7:01 PM, Kevin Gassert wrote: > From the TC again. Original wings tanks were one right side 9 gallon > with an > optional left for S/N 46 and up. > At 12:56 PM 3/8/2005, Richard Wilkens wrote: >> Andrew, >> >> ... I have the FAA paper work for serial number 707 on my desk. It >> came with two nine gallon wing tanks and had an empty weight of 802 >> when it left the factory. > > Really? S/N 707 is pre-813 (the magic number) which means it should > have the > older-type landing gear, Correct > and the 7.7 gallon ternaplate (steel) tanks. Incorrect. There are/were no such tanks, ever. > Certainly the 9-gallon aluminum tanks weren't stock at that point. No, but the 9-gallon ternplate tanks (still) were. > The 8-gallon ternaplate tanks were standard well beyond 813. There were/are no 8-gallon ternplate or steel tanks, ever; nor were tanks of 8 gallon capacity ever "standard" (used as a production component) on any Ercoupe series. > > So I find this all a bit odd. > > Greg And, once again, it makes perfect sense to me. Regards, WRB ========================================================================== ==== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
