Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 07:52 AM - Re: Re: Loose Control Stick (Ben Westfall)
2. 08:03 AM - Re: Re: Loose Control Stick (Kearney)
3. 02:05 PM - Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity (Kent Ogden)
4. 02:49 PM - Re: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity (Carl Froehlich)
5. 02:50 PM - Re: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity (Carl Froehlich)
6. 05:45 PM - Re: (EXTERNAL) Re: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity (Kent Ogden)
7. 06:29 PM - Re: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity (Kelly McMullen)
8. 07:10 PM - Re: Loose Control Stick (kearney)
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: | Re: Loose Control Stick |
Ever flown a Cessna? ;)
-----Original Message-----
David
That is not a comforting thought! Controls are not something that should be
"sloppy". I'll post whatever info I get from Vans.
Cheers
Les
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=487905#487905
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: | Re: Loose Control Stick |
Ben
Yes I have. The rehab was extensive.
Cheers
Les
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 8:50 AM, Ben Westfall <rv10@sinkrate.com> wrote:
>
>
> Ever flown a Cessna? ;)
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
> David
>
> That is not a comforting thought! Controls are not something that should be
> "sloppy". I'll post whatever info I get from Vans.
>
> Cheers
>
> Les
>
>
>
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=487905#487905
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
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: | Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity |
All,
I would like to build in some fuel plumbing to allow for optional extra
capacity, perhaps using tanks like these:
https://www.turtlepac.com/products/collapsible-aircraft-ferry-tanks/
A 25 or 33 gallon tank would add significant range for the occasional long
distance flight or allow for improved range at high speed cruise.
I am trying to not design in a weak point in my fuel system though, as it
is so critical and there have been some accidents related to fuel system
issues.
One idea is to add a 'T' AN fitting to the fuel line under the copilot
seat, that would then have an aluminum line run along the right side of
the cockpit to the right rear seat, and would normally hide under the side
cover next to that seat. I would put a shutoff valve there that would
normally be closed, and on the other side of the valve put an appropriate
fitting that could attach to the ferry tank that could be strapped to the
seat. To use, take the side cover off, connect the ferry tank, bleed the
air out of the system, then during flight fuel could be pumped into the
right tank while running the engine on the left tank (or maybe the right
tank, might not matter). When the ferry tank is nearly empty, shut off
the pump and close the valve.
One concern is that the extension plumbing would have air in it until it
is used, and air bubbles could conceivably find their way into the main
line. The extension line could be filled with fuel too, but that would
sit there stagnant for possibly long periods of time (is that an issue?).
I had also considered adding a check valve to prevent fuel from flowing
from the main tank side back into the extension plumbing (in case of a
leak in the extension), but that would be generally uphill so gravity
would be on your side there.
Another possibility is to plumb directly to the tank, but the tank is
finished and I'm not sure I'd like to poke any more holes in it, which
would probably leave some aluminum bits inside to boot. I can't just
plumb into the vent line since there is no way to let the displaced air
out of the tank when pumping in fuel through that line.
I don't want to start a debate about the RV-10 range etc, just want to
hear thoughts on what's likely to work without adding too much extra
complexity and risk.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Kent Ogden
#40710
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: | Re: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity |
Interesting timing, I just discussed this with another RV-10 builder earlier
today. Some thoughts:
- There are commercial wingtip tanks that add 15 gallons or so of fuel, but I
ruled this option out as it added a lot of complexity, weight and has a hug
e price tag. Add to that the obvious =9CVan=99s did not conside
r this in the wing design=9D aspect.
- My neighbor at Dogwood is the guy that flew his specialty build Lancair IV
over both the North and South Poles. He had a total of seven fuel tanks ad
ded to the plane (380 or so gallons). Five of the tanks he custom made usin
g carbon fiber board to fit all the contours of the plane, the aft large one
strong enough to support the one large and one small badder tanks like that
you reference. He had a very straightforward approach to fuel plumbing to m
itigate risk of something going wrong - yielding a forced landing in the Arc
tic or Antarctic. He had a single, simple 90 degree isolation valve for eac
h tank going to a Facet pump. The transferred fuel only goes to the 10 gall
on header tank that has a clear sight glass for fuel level. He transferred f
uel every hour or so like Limburg did in the Sprit of St. Louis.
Stealing from the above and ruling out the header tank or extra wing tanks l
eads to a 20+ gallon ferry tank that gets mounted in place of one or both re
ar seats. The ferry tank being one of many composite racing tank options (I
would not consider the badder tank for this application). I have this set u
p for my new RV-8 project, the tank being fed into a T on the right tank fue
l line before it goes to the fuel valve. The T will be normally capped when
not being used for this connection. Ferry tank vent will go to the wing ro
ot area or aft to exit the bottom of the fuselage. Operation will be to bur
n 20 or so gallons out of the right tank, fly on the left tank, open the fer
ry tank isolation valve and turn on the Facet pump (with check valve) to tra
nsfer fuel to the right tank. My Lancair buddy tells me the change in noise
from the Facet pump when the ferry tank is dry is obvious - but you will al
so get the right tank fuel sender increasing as a positive indication.
My thinking is that 99+% of the time having more than the five hours of gas w
ill not be needed, so the ferry tank will spend most of it=99s life on
the shelf in the hangar. Make it easy to get in and out of the plane.
If you want to get fancy you can build a couple of tanks out of carbon that e
xactly fits the rear seat floor area, moving the ferry tank weigh a little m
ore forward toward the center of gravity.
No other changes to the standard fuel system other than this T is done. Whi
le I did build the right tank with an extra fuel fitting for this purpose I d
ecided a T on the inside of the fuselage line was more practical.
For the RV-10 you lose one or both back seats depending on ferry tank size, b
ut the added weight of the fuel translates to not carrying four people.
Carl
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Kent Ogden <ogdenk@upstate.edu> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I would like to build in some fuel plumbing to allow for optional extra ca
pacity, perhaps using tanks like these:
>
> https://www.turtlepac.com/products/collapsible-aircraft-ferry-tanks/
>
> A 25 or 33 gallon tank would add significant range for the occasional long
distance flight or allow for improved range at high speed cruise.
>
> I am trying to not design in a weak point in my fuel system though, as it i
s so critical and there have been some accidents related to fuel system issu
es.
>
> One idea is to add a 'T' AN fitting to the fuel line under the copilot sea
t, that would then have an aluminum line run along the right side of the coc
kpit to the right rear seat, and would normally hide under the side cover ne
xt to that seat. I would put a shutoff valve there that would normally be c
losed, and on the other side of the valve put an appropriate fitting that co
uld attach to the ferry tank that could be strapped to the seat. To use, ta
ke the side cover off, connect the ferry tank, bleed the air out of the syst
em, then during flight fuel could be pumped into the right tank while runnin
g the engine on the left tank (or maybe the right tank, might not matter). W
hen the ferry tank is nearly empty, shut off the pump and close the valve.
>
> One concern is that the extension plumbing would have air in it until it i
s used, and air bubbles could conceivably find their way into the main line.
The extension line could be filled with fuel too, but that would sit there
stagnant for possibly long periods of time (is that an issue?). I had also
considered adding a check valve to prevent fuel from flowing from the main t
ank side back into the extension plumbing (in case of a leak in the extensio
n), but that would be generally uphill so gravity would be on your side ther
e.
>
> Another possibility is to plumb directly to the tank, but the tank is fini
shed and I'm not sure I'd like to poke any more holes in it, which would pro
bably leave some aluminum bits inside to boot. I can't just plumb into the v
ent line since there is no way to let the displaced air out of the tank when
pumping in fuel through that line.
>
> I don't want to start a debate about the RV-10 range etc, just want to hea
r thoughts on what's likely to work without adding too much extra complexity
and risk.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts!
>
> Kent Ogden
> #40710
>
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: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity |
Interesting timing, I just discussed this with another RV-10 builder earlier
today. Some thoughts:
- There are commercial wingtip tanks that add 15 gallons or so of fuel, but I
ruled this option out as it added a lot of complexity, weight and has a hug
e price tag. Add to that the obvious =9CVan=99s did not conside
r this in the wing design=9D aspect.
- My neighbor at Dogwood is the guy that flew his specialty build Lancair IV
over both the North and South Poles. He had a total of seven fuel tanks ad
ded to the plane (380 or so gallons). Five of the tanks he custom made usin
g carbon fiber board to fit all the contours of the plane, the aft large one
strong enough to support the one large and one small badder tanks like that
you reference. He had a very straightforward approach to fuel plumbing to m
itigate risk of something going wrong - yielding a forced landing in the Arc
tic or Antarctic. He had a single, simple 90 degree isolation valve for eac
h tank going to a Facet pump. The transferred fuel only goes to the 10 gall
on header tank that has a clear sight glass for fuel level. He transferred f
uel every hour or so like Limburg did in the Sprit of St. Louis.
Stealing from the above and ruling out the header tank or extra wing tanks l
eads to a 20+ gallon ferry tank that gets mounted in place of one or both re
ar seats. The ferry tank being one of many composite racing tank options (I
would not consider the badder tank for this application). I have this set u
p for my new RV-8 project, the tank being fed into a T on the right tank fue
l line before it goes to the fuel valve. The T will be normally capped when
not being used for this connection. Ferry tank vent will go to the wing ro
ot area or aft to exit the bottom of the fuselage. Operation will be to bur
n 20 or so gallons out of the right tank, fly on the left tank, open the fer
ry tank isolation valve and turn on the Facet pump (with check valve) to tra
nsfer fuel to the right tank. My Lancair buddy tells me the change in noise
from the Facet pump when the ferry tank is dry is obvious - but you will al
so get the right tank fuel sender increasing as a positive indication.
My thinking is that 99+% of the time having more than the five hours of gas w
ill not be needed, so the ferry tank will spend most of it=99s life on
the shelf in the hangar. Make it easy to get in and out of the plane.
If you want to get fancy you can build a couple of tanks out of carbon that e
xactly fits the rear seat floor area, moving the ferry tank weigh a little m
ore forward toward the center of gravity.
No other changes to the standard fuel system other than this T is done. Whi
le I did build the right tank with an extra fuel fitting for this purpose I d
ecided a T on the inside of the fuselage line was more practical.
For the RV-10 you lose one or both back seats depending on ferry tank size, b
ut the added weight of the fuel translates to not carrying four people.
Carl
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Kent Ogden <ogdenk@upstate.edu> wrote:
>
> All,
>
> I would like to build in some fuel plumbing to allow for optional extra ca
pacity, perhaps using tanks like these:
>
> https://www.turtlepac.com/products/collapsible-aircraft-ferry-tanks/
>
> A 25 or 33 gallon tank would add significant range for the occasional long
distance flight or allow for improved range at high speed cruise.
>
> I am trying to not design in a weak point in my fuel system though, as it i
s so critical and there have been some accidents related to fuel system issu
es.
>
> One idea is to add a 'T' AN fitting to the fuel line under the copilot sea
t, that would then have an aluminum line run along the right side of the coc
kpit to the right rear seat, and would normally hide under the side cover ne
xt to that seat. I would put a shutoff valve there that would normally be c
losed, and on the other side of the valve put an appropriate fitting that co
uld attach to the ferry tank that could be strapped to the seat. To use, ta
ke the side cover off, connect the ferry tank, bleed the air out of the syst
em, then during flight fuel could be pumped into the right tank while runnin
g the engine on the left tank (or maybe the right tank, might not matter). W
hen the ferry tank is nearly empty, shut off the pump and close the valve.
>
> One concern is that the extension plumbing would have air in it until it i
s used, and air bubbles could conceivably find their way into the main line.
The extension line could be filled with fuel too, but that would sit there
stagnant for possibly long periods of time (is that an issue?). I had also
considered adding a check valve to prevent fuel from flowing from the main t
ank side back into the extension plumbing (in case of a leak in the extensio
n), but that would be generally uphill so gravity would be on your side ther
e.
>
> Another possibility is to plumb directly to the tank, but the tank is fini
shed and I'm not sure I'd like to poke any more holes in it, which would pro
bably leave some aluminum bits inside to boot. I can't just plumb into the v
ent line since there is no way to let the displaced air out of the tank when
pumping in fuel through that line.
>
> I don't want to start a debate about the RV-10 range etc, just want to hea
r thoughts on what's likely to work without adding too much extra complexity
and risk.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts!
>
> Kent Ogden
> #40710
>
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: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity |
Carl,
Thanks for your insights, I feel like I'm at least on the right track.
I did think about disconnecting the extension plumbing from the Tee and
capping when not in use, I would just have to get under the copilot seat
which will be a bit of a nuisance but that would cure the issues I
raised.
I did consider the commercial 'tip' tanks but I agree they don't add
much capacity for the cost/complexity plus the added weight will always
be in the plane. My plane will be heavy as it is since I have air
conditioning so I want to keep any more added weight to a minimum.
I do like the collapsible tanks as they can be stored in a sack, plus no
vent is needed. They look to be plenty durable but I suppose any
auxiliary tank could develop a leak so that's something to be wary of
since it's inside the cabin.
I have no plans to fly over the poles, it blows my mind that somebody
could put that much fuel in a Lancair to do that! I have some dreams
for some long distance flights but I'm uncomfortable flying over a big
lake let alone an ocean. Who knows though, Europe may be possible!
Kent
>>> Carl Froehlich <carl.froehlich@verizon.net> 03/04/19 5:58 PM >>>
Interesting timing, I just discussed this with another RV-10 builder
earlier today. Some thoughts:
- There are commercial wingtip tanks that add 15 gallons or so of fuel,
but I ruled this option out as it added a lot of complexity, weight and
has a huge price tag. Add to that the obvious Vans did not consider
this in the wing design aspect.
- My neighbor at Dogwood is the guy that flew his specialty build
Lancair IV over both the North and South Poles. He had a total of seven
fuel tanks added to the plane (380 or so gallons). Five of the tanks he
custom made using carbon fiber board to fit all the contours of the
plane, the aft large one strong enough to support the one large and one
small badder tanks like that you reference. He had a very
straightforward approach to fuel plumbing to mitigate risk of something
going wrong - yielding a forced landing in the Arctic or Antarctic. He
had a single, simple 90 degree isolation valve for each tank going to a
Facet pump. The transferred fuel only goes to the 10 gallon header tank
that has a clear sight glass for fuel level. He transferred fuel every
hour or so like Limburg did in the Sprit of St. Louis.
Stealing from the above and ruling out the header tank or extra wing
tanks leads to a 20+ gallon ferry tank that gets mounted in place of one
or both rear seats. The ferry tank being one of many composite racing
tank options (I would not consider the badder tank for this
application). I have this set up for my new RV-8 project, the tank
being fed into a T on the right tank fuel line before it goes to the
fuel valve. The T will be normally capped when not being used for this
connection. Ferry tank vent will go to the wing root area or aft to
exit the bottom of the fuselage. Operation will be to burn 20 or so
gallons out of the right tank, fly on the left tank, open the ferry tank
isolation valve and turn on the Facet pump (with check valve) to
transfer fuel to the right tank. My Lancair buddy tells me the change
in noise from the Facet pump when the ferry tank is dry is obvious - but
you will also get the right tank fuel sender increasing as a positive
indication.
My thinking is that 99+% of the time having more than the five hours of
gas will not be needed, so the ferry tank will spend most of its life
on the shelf in the hangar. Make it easy to get in and out of the
plane.
If you want to get fancy you can build a couple of tanks out of carbon
that exactly fits the rear seat floor area, moving the ferry tank weigh
a little more forward toward the center of gravity.
No other changes to the standard fuel system other than this T is done.
While I did build the right tank with an extra fuel fitting for this
purpose I decided a T on the inside of the fuselage line was more
practical.
For the RV-10 you lose onesize, but the added weight of the fuel translates to
not carrying four
people.
Carl
On Mar 4, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Kent Ogden <ogdenk@upstate.edu> wrote:
All,
I would like to build in some fuel plumbing to allow for optional extra
capacity, perhaps using tanks like these:
https://www.turtlepac.com/products/collapsible-aircraft-ferry-tanks/
A 25 or 33 gallon tank would add significant range for the occasional
long distance flight or allow for improved range at high speed cruise.
I am trying to not design in a weak point in my fuel system though, as
it is so critical and there have been some accidents related to fuel
system issues.
One idea is to add a 'T' AN fitting to the fuel line under the copilot
seat, that would then have an aluminum line run along the right side of
the cockpit to the right rear seat, and would normally hide under the
side cover next to that seat. I would put a shutoff valve there that
would normally be closed, and on the other side of the valve put an
appropriate fitting that could attach to the ferry tank that could be
strapped to the seat. To use, take the side cover off, connect the
ferry tank, bleed the air out of the system, then during flight fuel
could be pumped into the right tank while running the engine on the left
tank (or maybe the right tank, might not matter). When the ferry tank
is nearly empty, shut off the pump and close the valve.
One concern is that the extension plumbing would have air in it until it
is used, and air bubbles could conceivably find their way into the main
line. The extension line could be filled with fuel too, but that would
sit there stagnant for possibly long periods of time (is that an
issue?). I had also considered adding a check valve to prevent fuel
from flowing from the main tank side back into the extension plumbing
(in case of a leak in the extension), but that would be generally uphill
so gravity would be on your side there.
Another possibility is to plumb directly to the tank, but the tank is
finished and I'm not sure I'd like to poke any more holes in it, which
would probably leave some aluminum bits inside to boot. I can't just
plumb into the vent line since there is no way to let the displaced air
out of the tank when pumping in fuel through that line.
I don't want to start a debate about the RV-10 range etc, just want to
hear thoughts on what's likely to work without adding too much extra
complexity and risk.
Thanks for your thoughts!
Kent Ogden
#40710
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: Plumbing in some extra fuel capacity |
A few thoughts as to extra tankage. Traditional methods have been to
either add to the wing capacity, or put an additional tank in the
baggage compartment. One advantage of the baggage compartment is that
the weight can be determined with great accuracy, and it is a safer,
easier place to add the fuel. I know that for most loading up to 150 lbs
works for c.g. Apparently Vans later clarified that the limit was
supposed to be 100 lbs. Easy enough to do a tank for 100 lbs...allow
5-10 lbs for the tankage, with 90 lbs or 15 gal fuel. 20 gal baggage
compartment tanks are very common in other aircraft and allow adjusting
fuel for rearmost allowable cg for max speed. Much more than 20 gal is
going to suggest need for baffling and puncture resistance, as well as
cg issues. It may be possible to do a 15 gal in baggage and 15 gal in
rear seat area, if you want to be assured 6 hr plus minimal reserves.
Lets put a little reality into the range needs. You can do 170-175 kts
on 13 gph at any altitude that you can achieve that fuel flow while
LOP..generally it will be below 8500 and higher than normal cruise rpm.
You can do 160-165 on about 11 gph LOP, and 150-155 on 10 gph.
Take the later, which will get you 5 hours with one hour reserve, while
going 750 nm, on stock fuel. Go fast mode gets you 4 hrs with 8 gal
reserve..bare minimum in my book. That gets you 680 nm. An extra 15 gal
would get you 850 nm with 10 gal reserve, in 5 hours.
Now if you want to go a bit faster, you can operate ROP with about 1.5
gph more fuel flow, and may close to 180 kts. You would need the extra
15 gal tank to go 4 hours with 15 gal reserve, giving you a 720 nm range.
Oh, I would suggest you need relief tube or equivalent to consistently
go 4-5 hours non-stop without having issues with dehydration.
In summary, you can easily get 750 nm range with stock tanks by slowing
down a little. Sticking to LOP and adding 15 gal tank will get you up
to about 850 nm range without slowing noticeably, or over 950 by slowing
to 150kts. That would require sitting for 6.5 hours without relief.
You can do two comfortable legs of 3 to 3.5 hours at 160 for reasonable
speed and economy to cover 1000nm. With 30 min for refuel, relief,
snacks, that is 7 hours, vs 6.5 to do it non-stop with additional tank.
Not arguing that one answer is better for one method over the other,
just trying to quantify the alternatives. I think going beyond 6.5 hours
at one sitting is moving into the territory of long range ferry flights
that use special gear and techniques, where water leaves no options.
What ever you do, you want to consider failure analysis for your
plumbing. If the plan is to pump all the aux fuel into one tank, your
fuel selector becomes critical, with 60% or more of your fuel being
dependent on being able to switch to that tank. Which side of the plane
do you want that extra 100-200 lbs of fuel, for lateral trim?
What if transfer pump fails? You probably recall the Cirrus that had to
ditch about 100nm from Hawaii, because something in the transfer process
failed and wasn't detected until beyond turn back distance.
Going above a wide spread fog layer might as well be the same as over ocean.
Sure, I would like an extra 15 to 20 gal capacity, but I haven't found
not having it to be particularly limiting.
On 3/4/2019 3:48 PM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
> Interesting timing, I just discussed this with another RV-10 builder
> earlier today. Some thoughts:
> My thinking is that 99+% of the time having more than the five hours of
> gas will not be needed, so the ferry tank will spend most of its life
> on the shelf in the hangar. Make it easy to get in and out of the plane.
>
> For the RV-10 you lose one or both back seats depending on ferry tank
> size, but the added weight of the fuel translates to not carrying four
> people.
>
> Carl
>
> On Mar 4, 2019, at 4:03 PM, Kent Ogden <ogdenk@upstate.edu
> <mailto:ogdenk@upstate.edu>> wrote:
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: Loose Control Stick |
Hi
I spoke to Vans Tech Support today and they are sending me new sticks / sockets.
The ones on their shelf are very tight.
What really impressed me was that Mitch Lock, the president of Vans, was taking
tech support calls. He was most helpful!.
Cheers
Les
Read this topic online here:
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=487932#487932
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! --
|