Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 02:22 AM - 2012/2013 Europa Insurance hike going on .... (Bob Harrison)
2. 06:50 AM - starter battery - LiFePO4 (Klaus Dietrich)
3. 07:37 AM - Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 (Julio Salazar)
4. 08:10 AM - Anyone interested in a 9lb battery/jumpstart kit? (rparigoris)
5. 10:45 AM - Re: Talking of Fuel Vent Lines... (Raimo Toivio)
6. 10:47 AM - Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 (Philip Levi)
7. 11:12 AM - Fuel Return Line (Raimo Toivio)
8. 11:46 AM - Re: Fuel Return Line (GRAHAM SINGLETON)
9. 04:16 PM - Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 (Frans Veldman)
10. 04:26 PM - Re: Fuel Return Line (Frans Veldman)
11. 07:58 PM - Re: Fuel Return Line (klinefelter.kevin@gmail.com)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | 2012/2013 Europa Insurance hike going on .... |
Hi! All,
I thought it fit to copy you in on a message I have just received from my
brokers which seems to indicate that one of the insurers is rocking the boat
by withdrawing from the market so I very much believe we need to do our
shopping well in advance of being compromised by last minute quotes or
offers.
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG
", unfortunately the present Underwriters have increased their rates quite
dramatically and have now advised that they are withdrawing from the market.
In the circumstances we are having to re-broke all policies with them and
this is affecting the rest of the market in that they are taking up to
fortnight to come back to us with alternative quotes. As this is a
relatively new occurrence, we are getting a bit behind with everything.
Also new Underwriters are not keen on Europa Monowheels and are therefore
quoting higher."
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | starter battery - LiFePO4 |
I'm just back from the AERO in Friedrichshafen and besides the Rotax 912is, I was
impressed by the new LiFePO4 starter batteries on offer; the weight of those
new batteries are below 1kg and they should perform as well or better than the
normal lead/GEL batteries which are 6-7kg!
Does anybody have actual live experience with those new batteries in their Europa?
Could be a good way to save some kilos;-)
http://www.shoraipower.com/
http://www.a123systems.com/
http://www.accu-24.de/de/LiFePO4-Akkus
http://shop.strato.de/epages/61333079.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61333079/Categories/motorradbatterie--
Thanks,
Klaus (OE-CKD)
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 |
Unsubscribe=0A=0A=0AJulio Salazar Cerda=0ANO TEMAS; SOLAMENTE TEN FE=0ASan
Lucas 8, 50=0A=9COnly when the last tree has died, the last river has
been poisoned, and the last fish has been caught will =0Awe realize we can
not eat money."=0A=0A=0A>________________________________=0A> De: Klaus Die
trich <klaus.dietrich@me.com>=0A>Para: Europa-List Digest Server <europa-li
st@matronics.com> =0A>Enviado: Jueves, 26 de abril, 2012 8:47 A.M.=0A>Asunt
o: Europa-List: starter battery - LiFePO4=0A> =0A>--> Europa-List message
posted by: Klaus Dietrich <klaus.dietrich@me.com>=0A>=0A>I'm just back from
the AERO in Friedrichshafen and besides the Rotax 912is, I was impressed b
y the new LiFePO4 starter batteries on offer; the weight of those new batte
ries are below 1kg and they should perform as well or better than the norma
l lead/GEL batteries which are 6-7kg!=0A>=0A>Does anybody have actual live
experience with those new batteries in their Europa?=0A>Could be a good way
to save some kilos;-)=0A>=0A>http://www.shoraipower.com/=0A>http://www.a12
3systems.com/=0A>http://www.accu-24.de/de/LiFePO4-Akkus=0A>http://shop.stra
to.de/epages/61333079.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61333079/Categories/mot
=C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- =C2- -Matt Dralle, List Admin.
========0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Anyone interested in a 9lb battery/jumpstart kit? |
Hi Group
I have quite a few brand new sets of components from a Jump Start Battery:
https://skydrive.live.com/redir.aspx?cid=550fc20dbddb521d&resid=550FC20DBDDB521D!413&parid=550FC20DBDDB521D!408&authkey=!ADA-L-1AURQ0PJU
We gutted the brand new jump start packs because we needed the case, volt meter,
flashlight and receptacles.
The set consists of one 9lb AGM sealed Lead Acid Battery, a 500mA constant current
charger with line cord (UL approved), 1 set of jumper cables a little shy
of 2 feet long, the charger control board that turns charging off at ~ 14.1 volts,
also a DC cord that you can charge from a 12 VDC source (Red LED turns off
when charging is complete) and a 15 amp resettable fuse that was attached to
a cigarette adapter.
I'm looking for $10 each plus shipping. They work great as a bench 12 volt source
or turning your 12 volt cordless drill into a corded version that you can use
the entire day. The local Battery Plus will give me 7$ each for just the battery
as scrap but it kills me to do that, all this stuff is brand new.
A little ingenuity will give you a nice jump start pack. Or buy a few hundred and
make packs and sell them.
I need to move them by the end of next month.
Ron Parigoris
9lb battery/jumpstart kit shipping cost update.
Hi Group
I received a request for cost of shipping 3 kits:
USPS Large Flat Rate Box fits 3 kits, cost $15.45 anywhere in the continental US,
so total for 3 kits $45.45
USPS Medium Flat Rate Box fits 2 kits, cost $11.35, so total for 2 kits $$31.35
For sure 1 kit will fit in a Medium Flat Rate Box for $11.35, so total cost for
1 kit $$21.35, but if close to New York 11754 it may be worth it to go Parcel
Post. I gave weight and dimensions of the battery, add some bulk and another
2 pounds for the other stuff, you can look up on USPS site and figure which way
you would want one to ship.
BTW They were all top off charged as of 2 weeks ago (not a trivial job!). Also
I will provide a schematic for hooking up the charge control circuit, not very
difficult, but it has three outputs, one for charging the battery and two more,
one went to the 15 amp cigarette receptacle and the other to the volt meter.
This is really a great deal, I just don't have the time to put together into a
fully assembled pack that could be sold pretty easy for 30 or 35$. There are 500
kits at the moment, in a few weeks I will actively look for a new home for
them so if you are on the fence, speak now.
Here's where the rest of the jump start packs went:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YaKOkcDM_s
Ron Parigoris
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371858#371858
Message 5
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Talking of Fuel Vent Lines... |
Bud and others,
one more thing: what would be a good way to retrofit a more fuctional
fuel breathing system?
I have a Mono and I built its fuel breathing system as per a building
manual. I have no difficulties to fill it up (some Mono owners need to
lift the tail to get air out before filling totally full). But, when
filling very last few litres, I have to do it very slowly. And listen
carefully that sound like an elephant is sleeping when the system is
breathing. Otherwise it will spill /burble some fuel out and that is
uncomfortable and maybe a risk for blames in some circumstances.
Cheers, Raimo
OH-XRT
Finland
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
From: Bud Yerly <budyerly@msn.com>
Sent: Monday, 23 April 2012, 1:50
Subject: Re: Europa-List: Talking of Fuel Vent Lines...
Steve,
As Fred said, point it forward. I too drill holes in the aft end in
case of a bug hit, dirt from muddy ground etc. I set mine glassed to
the aft bulkhead on the trigear or on one of the outboard floor supports
in the mono on the starboard side. It is not wise to place the vent on
the centerline for contaminates from the nose or main wheel and be clear
of the exhaust. 1/4 inch tube will work OK.
The object is that the vent will positively vent and the holes in the
rear keep it from clogging or building too much pressure.
Regards,
Bud Yerly
Tech support.
----- Original Message -----
From: stephen vestuti
To: europa-list@matronics.com
Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2012 1:19 PM
Subject: Europa-List: Talking of Fuel Vent Lines...
<s.vestuti@gmail.com>
Hi,
I intend to exit the filler neck vent under the fuselage, does it need
to
face forward to airflow ( using 90 Deg. bend ), straight down or
turned aft ? Or does it make no difference ?
Steve.
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=371498#371498
http://www.matronnbsp; via the Web
title=http://forums.matronics.com/
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
_p; generous bsp;
title=http://www.matronics.com/contribution
href="http://www.matronics.com/contribution">http://www.matronics.com/c
================
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Eurank"
href="http://forums.matronics.com">http://forums.matronics.com
rel="nofollow" target="_blank"
href="http://www.matronics.com/contri==
Message 6
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 |
Klaus,
I purchased a similar battery at the Microlight Fair at Popham in May 2011
(cost was GBP 200.00). I, like you, thought it would be a great weight
saver as it was just under 1 kg.
However, when I showed it to my engineer, Pete Jeffers, I was horrified
when he did the arithmetic on the weight and balance schedule and told me
that it reduced my Europa to a single-seat aircraft and there was
absolutely no way it could be installed as a simple replacement for the
existing battery. So, I suggest you check the weight and balance before
purchasing - and if you need one, then mine is available second-hand unused!
Incidentally I have a LiFePO4 (Lithium Ferrous- (or Iron-) Phosphate)
battery in my folding electric bicycle and they are excellent, lightweight
and extremely powerful compared to the older Lithium Ion batteries, but
they also have the advantage of being less likely to catch fire when
transported in aircraft. See the British Airways Dangerous Goods List at
http://www.britishairways.com/cms/global/pdfs/Forbidden_Items_List.pdf . You
will see that Lithium Ion batteries are only permitted in Cabin Luggage,
not in the hold, so that in the event of a fire they can be put out quickly
by cabin crew and also they are only permitted up to 160 Wh which is not
very much.
My LiFePO4 bike battery by comparison is 370 Wh and was permitted for
carriage on BA flights between LHR and Cape Town (I took it with hand
baggage in the cabin) as LiFePO4 batteries are not considered a fire risk
like their Lithium Ion predecessors and can be carried without a power
restriction. However, for the Europa, I think you will find that the
weight and balance unfortunately becomes prohibitive unless you alter the
location of the battery. I am sure Pete Jeffers will be happy to give you
more technical advice than I can offer, but it would need to be cleared
with Ian Rickard and the LAA as a new mod.
*Philip Levi.*
*
*
*G-BWWB Europa Monowheel Classic, Compton Abbas.*
*
*
*E-mail: pjlevi@gmail.com *
*
*
*
*
On 26 April 2012 14:47, Klaus Dietrich <klaus.dietrich@me.com> wrote:
>
> I'm just back from the AERO in Friedrichshafen and besides the Rotax
> 912is, I was impressed by the new LiFePO4 starter batteries on offer; the
> weight of those new batteries are below 1kg and they should perform as well
> or better than the normal lead/GEL batteries which are 6-7kg!
>
> Does anybody have actual live experience with those new batteries in their
> Europa?
> Could be a good way to save some kilos;-)
>
> http://www.shoraipower.com/
> http://www.a123systems.com/
> http://www.accu-24.de/de/**LiFePO4-Akkus<http://www.accu-24.de/de/LiFePO4-Akkus>
> http://shop.strato.de/epages/**61333079.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=**
> /Shops/61333079/Categories/**motorradbatterie--<http://shop.strato.de/epages/61333079.sf/de_DE/?ObjectPath=/Shops/61333079/Categories/motorradbatterie-->
>
> Thanks,
> Klaus (OE-CKD)
>
>
Message 7
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Fuel Return Line |
All,
We have a fuel selector valve in fuel line. We try to remember to close
it before a possible emergency landing. Some pilots close it always when
not flying and some people close it only during a long storage time.
There is also a fuel return line. That is connected to the tank bottom
(starboard side /reserve side) if built as per a BM (issue 6, page 6-3).
I have two guestions:
1) would it be wise to have a 2nd fuel valve in a fuel return line also
to get an ability to close it or one-way-valve in the case of emergency?
2) why this line is connected to the fuel outlet which locates in the
bottom of the tank? Why not to the upper corner of the (reserve side)
tank?
BTW: During this winter I changed all the rubber parts under the cowling
(oh boy there are really many of them!). I noticed the fuel restrictor
(FS02) was totally blocked. It was quite hard to open it. I assume it
has maybe been blocked since almost new because I had during those days
(2007) an issue with a fuel contamination and suffered a scary engine
stoppage because of a totally blocked filter during a flight # 7. It was
good to have a 2nd filter and way to use it by selecting
=9CRES=9D.
So, I have noticed no problems to use my engine with return line which
is off-line. There are also many Rotax aplications with no plans for
return lines in use. What is a main reason we should have a fuel return
line? To get more fresh cool fuel or what?
Cheers, Raimo
OH-XRT
Finland
Message 8
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Return Line |
Raimo=0Athe top of the tank is the right place for the return line, as you
suggested. That way hot fuel gets mixed with the whole tank content instead
=C2-of=C2-being drawn straight back to the tank.=0AGraham=0A=0A=0A_____
___________________________=0A From: Raimo Toivio <raimo.toivio@rwm.fi>=0AT
o: europa-list@matronics.com =0ASent: Thursday, 26 April 2012, 19:11=0ASubj
ect: Europa-List: Fuel Return Line=0A =0A=0AAll,=0A=C2-=0AWe have a fuel
selector valve in fuel line. We try to remember =0Ato close it before a pos
sible emergency landing. Some pilots close it always =0Awhen not flying and
some people close it only during a long storage =0Atime.=0A=C2-=0AThere
is also a fuel return line. That is connected to the =0Atank bottom (starbo
ard side /reserve side) if built as per a BM (issue 6, page =0A6-3). =0A=C2
-=0AI have two guestions:=0A1) would it be wise to have a 2nd fuel valve
in a fuel return =0Aline also to get an ability to close it or one-way-valv
e in the case of =0Aemergency?=0A2) why this line is connected to the fuel
outlet which locates =0Ain the bottom of the tank? Why not to the upper cor
ner of the (reserve side) =0Atank?=0A=C2-=0A=C2-=0ABTW: During this win
ter I changed all the =0Arubber parts under the cowling (oh boy there are r
eally many of them!). I =0Anoticed the fuel restrictor (FS02) was totally b
locked. It was quite hard to =0Aopen it. I assume it has maybe been blocked
since almost new because I had =0Aduring those days (2007) an issue with a
fuel contamination and suffered a scary =0Aengine stoppage because of a to
tally blocked filter during a flight # 7. It was =0Agood to have a 2nd filt
er and way to use it by selecting =0A=9CRES=9D.=0A=C2-=0ASo,
I have noticed no problems to use my engine with return =0Aline which is of
f-line. There are also many Rotax aplications with no plans for =0Areturn l
ines in use. What is a main reason we should have a fuel return line? To
=0Aget more fresh cool fuel or what?=0A=C2-=0A=C2-=0ACheers, Raimo=0AOH
==================
Message 9
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: starter battery - LiFePO4 |
On 04/26/2012 03:47 PM, Klaus Dietrich wrote:
> I'm just back from the AERO in Friedrichshafen and besides the Rotax
> 912is, I was impressed by the new LiFePO4 starter batteries on offer;
The main problem with these batteries is that they require a totally
different way of charging. A lead-acid battery can be connected in
parallel with the alternator, and the lead-acid battery will just take
enough current to get recharged, and stops automatically. It won't get
any simpeler than that.
A LiFePO4 needs an overvoltage to initiate charging, strategically
tapered off to stop charging, and each individual cell needs to be
carefully monitored and balanced. It takes a lot of complicated
electronics, something we tend to avoid in aircraft. (You might look on
some wiki's on this subject to see what is needed to recharge these
babies properly).
The implication of all this is that you can not just connect the battery
in parallel to the alternator. In real life this means that you need to
run the ship entirely off the alternator, and the battery is connected
to the bus, not parallel, but via its complicated charger. If the
alternator momentarily needs some support from the battery it won't be
able to get it. Sure you can switch over to battery power, but you can't
use the alternator and the battery at the same time. Also, if I remember
correctly, the cell voltage of a LiFePO4 is 3.2 Volts. So you need to
operate at 12.8, which is quite low, or at 16 Volts which is a tad too
high. Normal lead-acid batteries parallel to the alternator operate at
13.7 to 14.5 Volts, and this is, not coincidentally, the voltage your
avionics is designed for.
LiFePO4 might become an interesting alternative once aircraft rated
chargers are developed, and when avionics is adapted to operate on the
new voltages. This is just not the time to do it, unless you want to be
the guinea pig.
Just my 2 cents.
Frans
Message 10
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Return Line |
On 04/26/2012 08:11 PM, Raimo Toivio wrote:
> I have two guestions:
> 1) would it be wise to have a 2nd fuel valve in a fuel return line also
> to get an ability to close it or one-way-valve in the case of emergency?
I have a one-way valve in the return line for exactly this reason.
> 2) why this line is connected to the fuel outlet which locates in the
> bottom of the tank? Why not to the upper corner of the (reserve side) tank?
This fuel might be quite warm. Imagine when your tank is half empty. The
hot fuel will have to make a free fall before it reaches the pool of
fuel, and it will probably evaporate before it even gets there. No big
deal as the tank will vent it away, but you might find that your fuel
consumption is a tad high. It is better that the return fuel immediately
enters the cold fuel in the tank, so even when some fuel has already
evaporated and produced bubbles, it will condensate back into useful
fuel when it contacts the cold fuel. So the bottom of the tank is the
correct position, and so it is depicted in the build manual anyway.
> So, I have noticed no problems to use my engine with return line which
> is off-line. There are also many Rotax aplications with no plans for
> return lines in use. What is a main reason we should have a fuel return
> line? To get more fresh cool fuel or what?
I can't say this for the 912, but for the 914 it is to avoid vapor lock,
so yes, to get cold fuel all the time and to avoid keeping it longer
than necessarily in the hot engine compartment.
Frans
Message 11
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: Fuel Return Line |
If the return fuel enters the top of the tank (under a little pressure) and expands
while falling to the level of fuel in the tank, would that not cool and therefor
not evaporate?
This also does away with any need for a second fuel valve and it's weight and complexity
in an emergency.
Kevin
On Apr 26, 2012, at 5:20 PM, Frans Veldman <frans@privatepilots.nl> wrote:
>
> On 04/26/2012 08:11 PM, Raimo Toivio wrote:
>> I have two guestions:
>> 1) would it be wise to have a 2nd fuel valve in a fuel return line also
>> to get an ability to close it or one-way-valve in the case of emergency?
>
> I have a one-way valve in the return line for exactly this reason.
>
>> 2) why this line is connected to the fuel outlet which locates in the
>> bottom of the tank? Why not to the upper corner of the (reserve side) tank?
>
> This fuel might be quite warm. Imagine when your tank is half empty. The
> hot fuel will have to make a free fall before it reaches the pool of
> fuel, and it will probably evaporate before it even gets there. No big
> deal as the tank will vent it away, but you might find that your fuel
> consumption is a tad high. It is better that the return fuel immediately
> enters the cold fuel in the tank, so even when some fuel has already
> evaporated and produced bubbles, it will condensate back into useful
> fuel when it contacts the cold fuel. So the bottom of the tank is the
> correct position, and so it is depicted in the build manual anyway.
>
>> So, I have noticed no problems to use my engine with return line which
>> is off-line. There are also many Rotax aplications with no plans for
>> return lines in use. What is a main reason we should have a fuel return
>> line? To get more fresh cool fuel or what?
>
> I can't say this for the 912, but for the 914 it is to avoid vapor lock,
> so yes, to get cold fuel all the time and to avoid keeping it longer
> than necessarily in the hot engine compartment.
>
> Frans
>
>
>
>
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|