Plaprad Posted July 28, 2011 Share Posted July 28, 2011 I was reading through the External Tank overhaul book last night and it had a note that external tanks from UARRSI and non-UARRSI aircraft are not interchangeable. I didn't see a reason stated (I was however skimming) and I can't think of anything that would prevent them from working. Does anyone have any idea why you can't swap them around? I've asked around work, but no one even knew that was in the book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bischoffm Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 They are the same part number tanks! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
agarrett Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 Refill valves are not the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skip Davenport Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 When the Talons were UARRSI modified we kept the same external tanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Herk Posted August 4, 2011 Share Posted August 4, 2011 I know we got a second set of shutoff valves in the outboard tanks...but no clue about external tank differences Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Plaprad Posted August 4, 2011 Author Share Posted August 4, 2011 I asked a few guys at work and one mentioned he thinks that the UARRSI birds have different plumbing in the pylon. It's not really the tank itself that's not interchangeable, just the pylon. Haven't had a chance to go through the books a research it yet, but it sounds like a plausible reason to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 When the Talons were UARRSI modified we kept the same external tanks The Combat Talons all had the segmented American Electric external tanks, not the welded Lockheed external tanks. They are both specified to be 1360-gallon tanks, but from the early days the Talons had all tanks stuffed with the polyurethane foam, for anti-slosh and for fire suppresion. It seems the type of foam changed every few years for deterioration, static build-up, etc. The different types of foam had different colors to make it obvious what was in the tanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Monty FE Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Interesting, never heard that. I have seen an UARSSI aircraft with a Lockheed external tank under one wing and an American Electric under the other. I'm guessing they are the same part number though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 8, 2011 Share Posted August 8, 2011 Interesting, never heard that. I have seen an UARSSI aircraft with a Lockheed external tank under one wing and an American Electric under the other. I'm guessing they are the same part number though? The dash 4 indicates that the pylon (box beam) is the same, but the tank part numbers for the Lockheed and American Electric are totally different. I don't know if they have normally been installed mixed or not; my guess would be not. The T.O. has different "useable on" codes for the American Electric tanks. John Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bischoffm Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 These tanks were mixed alot we got rid of the Lockheed tanks (solid) 388236-1 and sent them to the bone yard for ease of maintenance and installed100001-300. As you can see the tank T.O. 6J14-2-12-93 does say not to mix them; however, the 1C-130H-4-28-1 makes no distinction. This could be a good AFTO 22 for someone!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted September 20, 2011 Share Posted September 20, 2011 For the correct term, its the UARRSI birds have Duel Float control shutoff valves as opposed to the standard tank. As for interchange with normal tanks, they just have to change the internal pluming. The purpose of the dual float control is that it allows the tank to take fuel almost regardless of aircraft attitude, i.e. a nose up or nose down situation which would cause a normal shutoff valve to close; it still shuts off but the second valve should be in the airspace and still allow refueling. There is a physical location separation between the two valves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
US Herk Posted September 21, 2011 Share Posted September 21, 2011 The purpose of the dual float control is that it allows the tank to take fuel almost regardless of aircraft attitude, i.e. a nose up or nose down situation which would cause a normal shutoff valve to close; it still shuts off but the second valve should be in the airspace and still allow refueling. There is a physical location separation between the two valves. And any wing up-bending when you're styoopidly heavy... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Wilson Posted September 27, 2011 Share Posted September 27, 2011 Yeah, that there thingy what you said!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.