Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 01:12 AM - Play in rear sockets (andrew cullum)
2. 01:24 AM - Re: wing lift/drag pins (Bob Harrison)
3. 02:43 AM - Re: wing lift/drag pins (David Joyce)
4. 05:36 AM - tank vent and drain taps (Karl Heindl)
5. 06:48 AM - Re: tank vent and drain taps (Frans Veldman)
6. 07:03 AM - Re: wing lift/drag pins (Brian Davies)
7. 11:46 AM - Re: fuel return line restrictor (Bud Yerly)
8. 12:18 PM - Re: wing lift/drag pins (Bud Yerly)
9. 01:07 PM - Use of reserve tank (graeme bird)
10. 01:28 PM - Re: Use of reserve tank (David Joyce)
11. 01:42 PM - Fort William to Inverness (graeme bird)
12. 02:29 PM - SV: Use of reserve tank (Sidsel & Svein Johnsen)
13. 02:32 PM - SV: Fort William to Inverness (Sidsel & Svein Johnsen)
14. 04:00 PM - Re: tank vent and drain taps (Bob Harrison)
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: | Play in rear sockets |
Hi Sue,
Andy Cullum here G-CGDH.
I concur with David's reply,it sounds from your description
Of the play you describe is produced by ovalled holes fore/aft in the socket shoulders,so
it could be you may have
To re-new them,it would be interesting to know how many
hours your aircraft has flown.
Best regards
Andy Cullum.
Sent from my iPhone
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: | wing lift/drag pins |
Hi! Sue
I don't profess to be an authority ....however are there visual signs of any
wear in the drag pin and swivels? Is the play identical on both wings ? Are
the front lift pins visually worn (or the holes with which they engage ) Are
the main spar pins and bushes secure in both the seat backs and spars? Does
the spar assembly have a wrap round "cuff" and is it snug to both the spars
when assembled ? (best do a trial assembly of the spars and wings clear of
the aircraft to see this issue) Is there any free play between the four
faces of the ailerons control transfer pads ? Is the main spar pip pin
suitably packed out so the pip clamps the starboard spar tip to the aft of
port spar and seat back w
Get positive answers to all these items and you should be fit to fly.
Where do you fly out of?
Regards
Bob Harrison G=PTAG Kit 337 (1000 Hours)
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of sue hyde
Sent: 23 June 2013 07:54
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
Many thanks for the reply but I misled you with my description. The play I
am talking about can be felt on the tip of the main wings when manouvering
the aeroplane and appears to be on the rear drag pin/pip pin area. The
socket is secure to the fuselage and the drag pin is secure to the wing.
there is just a little play in the swivel of the socket
From: David Joyce <davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
Sent: Saturday, 22 June 2013, 19:06
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
Sue, the socket is able to pivot in a wing flapping mode, but otherwise
should be very tight in its fore Nd aft retaining shoulders and they should
be absolutely rigidly fixed to the underlying wood & composite mount. It
does not sound entirely healthy from your description and I would strongly
advise you get an inspector to look at it before you take to the air.
Regards, David Joyce, G- XSDJ
On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:15:15 +0100 (BST)
sue hyde <hyde.interiors@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I have recently purchased a Europa and there is a little for/aft movement
on the pip pin socket mount . Is this p; --> http://forums.matronics.com/
<http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List>
sp; bsp; -Matt Dralle, List Ad======
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: wing lift/drag pins |
Sue, Not quite able to picture exactly what you describe,
but if in doubt, and in any case with a newly purchased
homebuilt plane there is much to be said to having an LAA
inspector look it over. You will in any case need to
establish a relationship with one to get your maintenance
signed off. LAA engineering will give you a list of
inspectors or you could ask on this list for
recommendations if you give your home area. And while you
are at it if you haven't already joined I strongly
recommend joining the Europa Club (www.theeuropaclub.org),
which offers
wide reaching technical support and all sorts of other
support.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:54:12 +0100 (BST)
sue hyde <hyde.interiors@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Many thanks for the reply but I misled you with my
>description. The play I am talking about can be felt on
>the tip of the main wings when manouvering the aeroplane
>and appears to be on the rear drag pin/pip pin area. The
>socket is secure to the fuselage and the drag pin is
>secure to the wing. there is just a little play in the
>swivel of the socket
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>From: David Joyce <davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
> To: europa-list@matronics.com Sent: Saturday, 22 June
>2013, 19:06
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
>
>
><davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
>
>
> Sue, the socket is able to pivot in a wing flapping mode,
>but otherwise should be very tight in its fore Nd aft
>retaining shoulders and they should be absolutely rigidly
>fixed to the underlying wood & composite mount. It does
>not sound entirely healthy from your description and I
>would strongly advise you get an inspector to look at it
>before you take to the air.
> Regards, David Joyce, G- XSDJ
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:15:15 +0100 (BST)
> sue hyde <hyde.interiors@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> I have recently purchased a Europa and there is a little
>>for/aft movement on the pip pin socket mount . Is this
>>usual?===============
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: | tank vent and drain taps |
Having recently re-arranged/replaced all fuel lines=2C vent lines and sight
tube I am still at odds with two items:
1. What exactly is the reason again for having the tank vent in the airstre
am instead of a static position? Are we doing this because everybody else h
as always been doing it or is there a real safety aspect ? I have been give
n six reasons=2C but none of them make sense to me and there is no proof. A
static vent can handle any air flow in and out of the tank. I don't see th
e need for pressurization=2C especially since this must be miniscule=2C in
a pump driven system. Maybe in a gravity fed fuel system it might make sens
e=2C or where there are two fuel tanks. Some of you have moved the vent to
the bottom of the fuselage=2C where it could easily be clogged by mud or in
sects. It has happened twice to my pitot tube.
2. Why has no PFA/LAA or other inspector ever pointed out the fact that the
drain tap arrangement is completely useless ? There would have to be an aw
ful lot of water in the tank before any of it would show up in a drain cup.
But it could get to the engine in a steep descent. The obvious reason is th
e high point of the fuel exits and the high barb fitting on the taps themse
lves. This would be especially so in a mono. The only sensible installation
would be flush fitting taps in the tank itself. I am tempted to remove tha
t plumbing and use the tap on my mini-gascolator .
Karl
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: tank vent and drain taps |
On 06/23/2013 02:36 PM, Karl Heindl wrote:
> 1. What exactly is the reason again for having the tank vent in the
> airstream instead of a static position? Are we doing this because
> everybody else has always been doing it or is there a real safety aspect
> ?
I think it is the first. Especially when you have the tank vent
connected to the cobra, there is no risk of sucking the fuel out of the
tank even if there would be a negative pressure.
> I don't see the need for pressurization, especially since this
> must be miniscule, in a pump driven system.
In our soft tanks pressurization is even harmfull. It may cause the tank
to jam the aileron control, or abrasion of the tank when it repeatedly
expands, or other bad things. Best thing would be a neutral or slightly
negative pressure (the latter helping to keep fuel fumes out of the
cockpit). Like you said, we don't have gravity fuel feed like Cessna's
but we are dependant on a fuel pump anyway.
> 2. Why has no PFA/LAA or other inspector ever pointed out the fact that
> the drain tap arrangement is completely useless ? There would have to be
> an awful lot of water in the tank before any of it would show up in a
> drain cup.
I never got any drop of water out of these drains, and have never heard
of anyone else who got any water out of it.
(If anyone has, I would like to hear about it, and also whether this
water showed up in the gascolator as well).
Instead, I think the drains and associated plumbing are increasing the
risk of leaks, and are a hazard during an accident: if the gear is
ripped off the next thing to contact the ground and be ripped off are
the fuel drains, and together with the unavoidable sparks this will for
sure trigger a fire. And the drains can not be closed with the fuel
valve so there is nothing you can do about it.
The next time I will have maintenance on the fuel plumbing I will take
the drains out. It is just a matter of judging the safety advantages
against the safety disadvantages, and to my judgement the latter puts
more weight in the equation here.
The only things I found them useful for is for draining the entire tank
for maintenance and inspection (I have valves that can be locked in the
open position) and to fill the bottle of my camp stove. But all this can
also be accomplished by other methods.
Avoiding water in the tank can also be accomplished by refueling after
each flight so there is only little air left in the tank. Having said
that, I was surprised after the winter stop in an unheated barn with
only a little fuel in the tanks that despite all the temperature cycles
(and associated "breathing" of the tank) and our wet climate that no
water at all condensed in the tank, not a single drop!
Also, how is this arranged with cars? I have never seen a car with a
fuel drain, but yet water in the fuel seems to be unheard off (obvious
causes of forgetting to put the cap on the tank not counting). What's
the story here?
> The obvious reason is
> the high point of the fuel exits and the high barb fitting on the taps
> themselves.
I have copper tubes inside the tank running to a position lower than the
fuel outlet for the engine. So in theory it could work.
Frans
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: | wing lift/drag pins |
Sue,
David's advice regarding an LAA inspector is good, especially with a newly
acquired aircraft. Having said that, if you move the wing tip back and
forth, a few thousandths of an inch play at the rear wing pin will translate
to noticeable movement at the wing tip because of the geometry. There must
be some clearance or you would not be able to get the pins in or out. My
aircraft has been like this from new and I have been unable to find any
significant play in any of the fittings. It may not be a problem but it is
best to get it checked.
Regards
Brian Davies G-DDBD
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of David Joyce
Sent: 23 June 2013 10:43
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
--> <davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
Sue, Not quite able to picture exactly what you describe, but if in doubt,
and in any case with a newly purchased homebuilt plane there is much to be
said to having an LAA inspector look it over. You will in any case need to
establish a relationship with one to get your maintenance signed off. LAA
engineering will give you a list of inspectors or you could ask on this list
for recommendations if you give your home area. And while you are at it if
you haven't already joined I strongly recommend joining the Europa Club
(www.theeuropaclub.org), which offers wide reaching technical support and
all sorts of other support.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:54:12 +0100 (BST)
sue hyde <hyde.interiors@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Many thanks for the reply but I misled you with my description. The
>play I am talking about can be felt on the tip of the main wings when
>manouvering the aeroplane and appears to be on the rear drag pin/pip
>pin area. The socket is secure to the fuselage and the drag pin is
>secure to the wing. there is just a little play in the swivel of the
>socket
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>From: David Joyce <davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
> To: europa-list@matronics.com Sent: Saturday, 22 June 2013, 19:06
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
>
>
><davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
>
>
> Sue, the socket is able to pivot in a wing flapping mode, but
>otherwise should be very tight in its fore Nd aft retaining shoulders
>and they should be absolutely rigidly fixed to the underlying wood &
>composite mount. It does not sound entirely healthy from your
>description and I would strongly advise you get an inspector to look at
>it before you take to the air.
> Regards, David Joyce, G- XSDJ
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:15:15 +0100 (BST) sue hyde
> <hyde.interiors@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> I have recently purchased a Europa and there is a little for/aft
>>movement on the pip pin socket mount . Is this usual?===============
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
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: | Re: fuel return line restrictor |
Rowland,
I noticed the same thing a couple months ago installing Jeff Robert's
new engine. Rotax now uses the .35 mm and our FS02 is .025 inches or
.7mm.
My A&P researched the difference with Lockwood and I did it through
Rotech.
We asked if we needed to change. They didn't care. The fuel pump
(mechanical) has been changed slightly and as usual Rotax never bothered
to explain the difference in flow and performance. We were told to
expect slightly higher fuel pressures with the new restrictor mounted on
the fuel split fitting. Basically if the fuel pressure is between 2.2
min and 5.8 max fine. No optimum is set by Rotax at max power at sea
level that I have found.
As for flow you will see no difference since the carbs are using the
fuel based on the need of the engine, not the pressure in the fuel line.
The float needle cuts off the flow to the carb. The flow back through
the return line will be that volume of fuel which is unused. Regardless
of pressure (provided it is within limits.) Only if the float needle
sticks open will you see a significant difference in flow (and of course
engine performance).
Other detail:
We did a test using the supplied Rotax restrictor on the new 912S vs our
old FS02. Fuel pressure dropped a bit with the FS02 but did not get
anywhere near the 5.8 max of the fuel pressure with both pumps running
and was above the 2.2 min with just the engine pump and when pulling the
fuel line off the engine pump and putting only the electric pump into
action it was still above the min. We saw a bit of an increase with the
smaller fuel restrictor of .3 psi. on our old hand held pressure gauge.
We were still getting 3.2 psi with the FS02 and 3.5 with the Rotax (as
measured with my really old gauge which was calibrated three years ago
to 3 psi or 83 in. H2O) so not much difference (Jeff's electric gauge
was about 4 psi with the Rotax engine pump and a bit lower on the
electric pump.
The manufacturer of the aircraft is responsible for his setting up of
the fuel system. If the FS02 works within limits, why change it.
Kerry at Lockwood is ambivalent about the difference. He has found some
builders who weren't using restrictors at all and the 912S ran fine on
high wing aircraft (Rans S 6). No report on the low wing aircraft, they
all had restrictors supplied by the kit manufacturer or Rotax. If it is
within limits, at full power, it is within limits.
In the US we don't have to do fuel flow tests, but to check you just
need to put a clear tube inline on the return side and look at the flow
or collect it into a measuring cup. If the pressure in the line with the
FS02 is only .3 psi different, then the higher pressure of the Rotax
orifice will flow faster through the orifice but the flow will be the
same as with the FS02. Pump volume makes a huge difference in return
flow. Nice of Rotax to change the pump slightly without providing tests
and results. Note that the wrong auxiliary pump (such as the automotive
low pressure style, like the Facet or Purilator 4104/5) will make a
difference as they don't provide the volume. Years ago Europa did SB 04
specifying the Facet 40106. Only if one installs a restrictive fuel
supply system by using a small diameter fuel selector, fuel filter,
gascolator, etc. will there be a problem. Keep the fittings and fuel
selectors as specified and the Europa fuel system works well. The LAA
requirement for excess fuel flow check is a great idea on an untried
engine/fuel system, but on a tried and true design it is just scary as
hell and a bit noisy and tedious. We just empty the pax side of the
tank, and run the engine checks on the main and note that the fuel
returns to the tank and then fiddle with the fuel flow on the Dynon or
EIS until close to 7 GPH. After about 15 minutes of running, you will
see a small amount of fuel in the reserve or pax side and have a fuel
flow that is fairly close for initial cruise checks.
Pretty stupid and lazy and not very scientific of us, but that is all we
have ever needed.
At my shop we check that the fuel pressure is in the range with only one
pump and does not exceed the max with both on. We have never had a
problem with the min pressure. Our US DARs don't care as long as full
power runs have been made and the kit system is installed as per the
manufacturer of the kit. If the kit manufacturer does not specify a
fuel system, a good DAR will want evidence of a full power run only, but
no excess fuel flow requirement is set. We are at sea level so the fuel
flow should be at its max with the prop set to 5200-5600 RPM at full
throttle. My DAR and FSDO are happy with that.
Best Regards,
Bud Yerly
----- Original Message -----
From: Rowland Carson<mailto:rowlandcarson@gmail.com>
To: Europa e-mail list list<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 1:19 PM
Subject: Europa-List: fuel return line restrictor
<rowlandcarson@gmail.com<mailto:rowlandcarson@gmail.com>>
While delving into the various Rotax manuals in pursuit of information
about the fuel manifold, I noted the dimensions of the restrictor in the
fuel return line - 0.35mm ID.
I have been considering the most elegant way to incorporate the
restrictor supplied by Europa (FS02) into my home-brewed alternative to
the Rotax manifold and so checked its dimensions. I find that the
restrictor hole will easily pass a number 71 drill bit, but barely
accepts the shank of a number 70 drill bit. So I deduce that the orifice
is about 0.7mm ID, ie twice the diameter of the Rotax one.
Why should Europa have supplied a different size of restrictor from
that called out by Rotax?
Looks as though the Rotax orifice will (in any otherwise identical
circumstance) allow the fuel pressure to build up slightly higher, and
return less fuel to the tank, than the Europa one. It might just make
the difference between pass and fail in a fuel flow test.
Has anyone had any issues traceable to this difference between the
Europa-supplied restrictor and the Rotax one?
I might consider machining up my own manifold (obviously I'm heading
into deep water with LAA engineering here) and if so, which size of
orifice should I incorporate? Should it be removable, rather than
integral, to allow fine-tuning of fuel pressure?
in friendship
Rowland
| Rowland Carson ... that's Rowland with a 'w' ...
| <rowlandcarson@gmail.com<mailto:rowlandcarson@gmail.com>>
http://www.rowlandcarson.org.uk<http://www.rowlandcarson.org.uk/>
| Skype, Twitter: rowland_carson Facebook: Rowland Carson
| pictures:
http://picasaweb.google.com/rowlandcarson<http://picasaweb.google.com/row
landcarson>
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: wing lift/drag pins |
Sue,
I agree with the guys...
When in doubt, have the pin and socket measured and checked.
In some aircraft the builder would find that by reaming the hole, the
wings rigged easier. Of course, over time the pin could move a bit and
as a result the pin and socket can wear a bit more over time.
In a properly built Europa the wing will move fore and aft a bit at the
tip because the front pin is not up hard against its socket and the spar
does bend a bit. However, you should not be able to see the pin move in
the socket when an assistant moves the wing tip. If the pin moves
enough in the socket that you can see it, you may in fact have either a
worn wing pin hole, pip pin or socket hole.
I strongly recommend you remove the wings and use a micrometer and check
the wing pin hole, pip pin and socket hole for wear. I would think that
it should be no more than a 3-4 thousandths difference from 1/4 inch pin
and 1/4 inch holes (the mil spec pin diameter is .2485 inches and the
balls go out to .289 inches). So 7-8 thousandths total slop is about
your normal tolerance for a proper fit between the three items. Any
more and the pin starts getting pretty sloppy and the pin holes or the
balls on the pip pin could be compromised.
Just check it and be sure. It is not hard to change out the wing pin,
pip pin or socket hole.
Regards,
Bud Yerly
----- Original Message -----
From: David Joyce<mailto:davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>
To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Sunday, June 23, 2013 5:42 AM
Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
<davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk<mailto:davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>>
Sue, Not quite able to picture exactly what you describe,
but if in doubt, and in any case with a newly purchased
homebuilt plane there is much to be said to having an LAA
inspector look it over. You will in any case need to
establish a relationship with one to get your maintenance
signed off. LAA engineering will give you a list of
inspectors or you could ask on this list for
recommendations if you give your home area. And while you
are at it if you haven't already joined I strongly
recommend joining the Europa Club
(www.theeuropaclub.org<http://www.theeuropaclub.org/>),
which offers
wide reaching technical support and all sorts of other
support.
Regards, David Joyce, G-XSDJ
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 07:54:12 +0100 (BST)
sue hyde
<hyde.interiors@btinternet.com<mailto:hyde.interiors@btinternet.com>>
wrote:
> Many thanks for the reply but I misled you with my
>description. The play I am talking about can be felt on
>the tip of the main wings when manouvering the aeroplane
>and appears to be on the rear drag pin/pip pin area. The
>socket is secure to the fuselage and the drag pin is
>secure to the wing. there is just a little play in the
>swivel of the socket
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>From: David Joyce
<davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk<mailto:davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>>
> To: europa-list@matronics.com<mailto:europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Saturday, 22 June
>2013, 19:06
> Subject: Re: Europa-List: wing lift/drag pins
>
>
><davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk<mailto:davidjoyce@doctors.org.uk>>
>
>
> Sue, the socket is able to pivot in a wing flapping mode,
>but otherwise should be very tight in its fore Nd aft
>retaining shoulders and they should be absolutely rigidly
>fixed to the underlying wood & composite mount. It does
>not sound entirely healthy from your description and I
>would strongly advise you get an inspector to look at it
>before you take to the air.
> Regards, David Joyce, G- XSDJ
>
> On Sat, 22 Jun 2013 17:15:15 +0100 (BST)
> sue hyde
<hyde.interiors@btinternet.com<mailto:hyde.interiors@btinternet.com>>
wrote:
>> I have recently purchased a Europa and there is a little
>>for/aft movement on the pip pin socket mount . Is this
>>usual?===============
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Europa-List<http://www.matronics.com/N
avigator?Europa-List>
http://www.matronics.com/contribution<http://www.matronics.com/contributi
on>
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: | Use of reserve tank |
First sorry I didn't make it to the UK AGM - too windy for me.
I mentioned in my Gumpy Scotland post that I landed with 11 litres remaining. That
was the reading on my FP-5L and I was able to put in 57 litres of fuel and
so it was confirmed.
I was tempted to switch to reserve on approach for a sure 9 ltrs or so hopefully
there. I didn't but I was ready to switch. Opinions?
Also I wondered how much would be on the reserve side after a few (gentle)turns.
I guess you would actually have a bit longer on main and less than expected
in reserve.
Also I filled to the top, I cant recall if the 68ltrs included the neck etc (Mono
rubber style.
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono 912S/Woodcomp 3000/3W
Newby: 55 hours 1 year
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403228#403228
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: Use of reserve tank |
Graeme, I measured my reserve long ago as having 11 litres
useable in it, a comfortable 1/2 hr reserve. It shouldn't
make any difference if you do turns (or even a loop!) as
they should be balanced so that neither you nor the fuel
wants to slide off to one side, but on top of that while
you are on main the reserve is constantly being topped up
by the return line.
I have a low pressure warning light and on several
occasions I have flown until the main ran dry. This put my
light on, fairly soon followed by the engine running a bit
hesitantly! but with either the light or the hesitation
giving enough time to switch to reserve and carry on
normally. You would probably not want that to happen at a
critical stage of a demanding landing so switching to
reserve if you are close to running out makes excellent
sense if about to land. If you find yourself having to do
several go arounds and you cough on reserve, you can
always switch back to main!
regards, David Joyce, GXSDJ
On Sun, 23 Jun 2013 13:06:56 -0700
"graeme bird" <graeme@gdbmk.co.uk> wrote:
><graeme@gdbmk.co.uk>
>
>First sorry I didn't make it to the UK AGM - too windy
>for me.
>
> I mentioned in my Gumpy Scotland post that I landed with
>11 litres remaining. That was the reading on my FP-5L and
>I was able to put in 57 litres of fuel and so it was
>confirmed.
>
> I was tempted to switch to reserve on approach for a
>sure 9 ltrs or so hopefully there. I didn't but I was
>ready to switch. Opinions?
> Also I wondered how much would be on the reserve side
>after a few (gentle)turns. I guess you would actually
>have a bit longer on main and less than expected in
>reserve.
>
> Also I filled to the top, I cant recall if the 68ltrs
>included the neck etc (Mono rubber style.
>
> --------
> Graeme Bird
> G-UMPY
> Mono 912S/Woodcomp 3000/3W
> Newby: 55 hours 1 year
> g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403228#403228
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Un/Subscription,
>Forums!
>Admin.
>
>
>
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: | Fort William to Inverness |
It would seem a that flying up the valley between Fort William to Inverness from
the sea would seem a sensible route north through the Scottish Highlands. Is
this a familiar route to anyone?
--------
Graeme Bird
G-UMPY
Mono Classic/XS 912S/Woodcomp 3000/3W
Newby: 75 hours 18 months
g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=403233#403233
Message 12
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: | Use of reserve tank |
Graeme,
What we need to keep in mind is the following:
When we run off the main tank, about 28-30 liters of fuel goes out per hour
at cruise power (912ULS). Abt 10 of these liters return to the reserve tank
(i.e. abt 1/3 of the total flow out of the tank), and flow back over the
saddle into the main tank. This ensures that the reserve tank is always
full, even if we should fly a little uncoordinated once in while or
experience some bumpy turbulence, and the net drain from the main tank is
18-20 liters (or whatever the cruise consumption may be).
What we should NOT do is switching to the reserve tank before we have
decided that "OK, this is it for the main tank, from now on it's only the
reserve tank that will take me home." Take the following case: 9 liters
in the reserve, 11 liters in the main. If this were the case during the
last part of a flight, we have 20 liters total, i.e. one hour's flying time.
If due to uncertainty about actual volume remaining in the main tank, we
switch to the reserve tank (9 liters), then we have a little under half an
hour before the engine tells you something. If we now switch back to the
main tank, we suddenly do not have 11 liters consumable fuel there anymore!
Why not? Because about 1/3 of that fuel is returned to the reserve tank,
but the returned volume does not any more overflow into the main tank
because the reserve tank first needs to be filled to its top. 10-15
minutes' flying time is thus lost, which could be critical (unless we are
conscious about this, and switches back to reserve again).
What it all boils down to is knowing how much you have left in the main
tank, so we can confidently run this tank almost empty and switch to reserve
just in time before the engine tells you to, and then stay on the reserve
tank.
I completely trust my fuel totalizer (feed and return flow senders) and the
sight tube. By the way, I have connected the two vent tubes (the one from
the top of the sight tube and the one to the top of the filler neck) by a
crossover tube at their highest point. If one inlet should be blocked by an
insect or whatever, the other will provide equal pressure on top of the tank
and on top of the fuel in the sight tube. It is amazing how erroneous the
sight tube reading gets even with a very small pressure difference in the
standard tubing arrangement - just try it by blowing gently into one of the
outlets.
/////////
About return flow: I mentioned early this spring that I would re-wire the
fuel flow system so that I could get temporary direct reading of the return
flow only. I have the relay deck and the push button, but just have not had
the time to wire it in ........ Will do - will report!
Regards,
Svein
LN-SKJ
Message 13
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: | Fort William to Inverness |
Graeme,
I have done it - in both directions - with my sailboat on the Caledonian
Canal. I can only imagine how beautiful it may be from the air - do it!
Regards,
Svein
LN-SKJ
>
> It would seem a that flying up the valley between Fort William to
Inverness
> from the sea would seem a sensible route north through the Scottish
> Highlands. Is this a familiar route to anyone?
>
> --------
> Graeme Bird
> G-UMPY
> Mono Classic/XS 912S/Woodcomp 3000/3W
> Newby: 75 hours 18 months
> g(at)gdbmk.co.uk
>
Message 14
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: | tank vent and drain taps |
Hi! Franz/all.
I can confirm that Once in particular when parked overnight at ZelamZee in a
particularly violent down pour I emptied about half a litre of water from
one of my water drain taps .
Since then I have tried to ensure that the whole tank filler cap is blanked
off by tape especially the lock.
I do have a mop out access hole in the tank top and most winter grounding
periods I drain out and mop out to ensure both tanks are started with a
clean charge of fuel. I have also occasionally had small amounts of water
show depending on the level parking of the aircraft too.
Regards
Bob Harrison G-PTAG
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-europa-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frans Veldman
Sent: 23 June 2013 14:48
Subject: Re: Europa-List: tank vent and drain taps
--> <frans@privatepilots.nl>
On 06/23/2013 02:36 PM, Karl Heindl wrote:
> 1. What exactly is the reason again for having the tank vent in the
> airstream instead of a static position? Are we doing this because
> everybody else has always been doing it or is there a real safety
> aspect ?
I think it is the first. Especially when you have the tank vent connected to
the cobra, there is no risk of sucking the fuel out of the tank even if
there would be a negative pressure.
> I don't see the need for pressurization, especially since this must be
> miniscule, in a pump driven system.
In our soft tanks pressurization is even harmfull. It may cause the tank to
jam the aileron control, or abrasion of the tank when it repeatedly expands,
or other bad things. Best thing would be a neutral or slightly negative
pressure (the latter helping to keep fuel fumes out of the cockpit). Like
you said, we don't have gravity fuel feed like Cessna's but we are dependant
on a fuel pump anyway.
> 2. Why has no PFA/LAA or other inspector ever pointed out the fact
> that the drain tap arrangement is completely useless ? There would
> have to be an awful lot of water in the tank before any of it would
> show up in a drain cup.
I never got any drop of water out of these drains, and have never heard of
anyone else who got any water out of it.
(If anyone has, I would like to hear about it, and also whether this water
showed up in the gascolator as well).
Instead, I think the drains and associated plumbing are increasing the risk
of leaks, and are a hazard during an accident: if the gear is ripped off the
next thing to contact the ground and be ripped off are the fuel drains, and
together with the unavoidable sparks this will for sure trigger a fire. And
the drains can not be closed with the fuel valve so there is nothing you can
do about it.
The next time I will have maintenance on the fuel plumbing I will take the
drains out. It is just a matter of judging the safety advantages against the
safety disadvantages, and to my judgement the latter puts more weight in the
equation here.
The only things I found them useful for is for draining the entire tank for
maintenance and inspection (I have valves that can be locked in the open
position) and to fill the bottle of my camp stove. But all this can also be
accomplished by other methods.
Avoiding water in the tank can also be accomplished by refueling after each
flight so there is only little air left in the tank. Having said that, I was
surprised after the winter stop in an unheated barn with only a little fuel
in the tanks that despite all the temperature cycles (and associated
"breathing" of the tank) and our wet climate that no water at all condensed
in the tank, not a single drop!
Also, how is this arranged with cars? I have never seen a car with a fuel
drain, but yet water in the fuel seems to be unheard off (obvious causes of
forgetting to put the cap on the tank not counting). What's the story here?
> The obvious reason is
> the high point of the fuel exits and the high barb fitting on the taps
> themselves.
I have copper tubes inside the tank running to a position lower than the
fuel outlet for the engine. So in theory it could work.
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! --
|