As a mechanic who just finished up 337's on my coupe, catching up to many years of undocumented work, I was alerted to your statement that the mechanic refused to work on it unless there was documentation. Sounds like you need a new mechanic with a "can do" attitude. Are you relying on just the logbooks for documentation, or have you the FAA file?
--- In [email protected], "new2coupes" <tcro...@...> wrote: > > Help! I recently aqcuired an interest in a great Ercoupe, but I think it has > a major problem with the fuel system. At some point in its history the nose > tank was removed and the fuel lines replaced. An electric fuel pump was > added, so the plane has two pumps; the mechanical pump and the newer > electrical pump. The wing tanks were not replaced; they are 8 gallons each, > so the plane only has a max useable of about 15 or so gallons of fuel. > > On its most recent flight, (starting with full tanks), the left wing tank was > found to be nearly empty (added 7.4 gal) while the right wing tank was only > down 2 gallons. (Plane lost power in flight and I had to make an emergency > landing. All went well and the plane was safely landed). > > I suspected a blocked vent cap, and sure enough the right ring tank cap vent > was blocked. I cleaned it out and verified that it was clear. I reinstalled > the caps and taxied the plane for about 10 minutes. The fuel pressure guage > was reading a little low, and the fuel pressure warning light was flashing, > indicating low pressure. > > I grounded the plane and called a mechanic and this is when I discovered the > REAL problem. Apparently, the nose tank removal was undocumented. No STC > anywhere in the plane's otherwise excellent documentation and no mention of > the modification in any of the logs. The mechanic declined to work on the > fuel system unless there was documentation of the modification. > > I did find reference to an STC to replace the wing tanks with 15 gallon > tanks, but nothing specifically addressing the removal of the nose tank. > (The plane has had upgraded avionics installed and I'm guessing the nose tank > was removed to make room for the avionics). The plane has an STC to replace > the instrument panel and, again, I'm guessing that was when the nose tank was > removed. > > One of the major maintence items that was performed on this plane about 3 > months ago was the complete replacement of all the fuel lines in conjunction > with the annual inspection. > > I have a couple of questions: > > 1. Is the plane technically not airworthy because of the undocumented removal > of the nose tank? > > 2. Is there an STC that covers the removal of the nose tank? > > 3. If #1 is true, what are my options? > > Thanks for the help. >
