"This is what has prompted me/many to replace the glass filters
> under the seat for Andair in the fuselage away from the pilot"
Yes Bob, glass is very bad!
I broke one during towing the plane and one went later in the garage by
itself.
I was full off fuel bathing.
Local firearm people adviced me to make thinks beter.
Replaced them to the Original Rotax one-piece-plastic ones and have been
since happy.
Cheap, easy to check and maintain.
During possible emergency landing I am sure they (plastic fuel filters) will
be my smallest reason for worries.
Regards, Raimo
OH-XRT
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert C Harrison" <ptag.dev@tiscali.co.uk>
To: <europa-list@matronics.com>
Sent: Wednesday, September 03, 2008 9:26 PM
Subject: RE: Jos Okhuisen
> <ptag.dev@tiscali.co.uk>
>
> Hi! Frans/all
> As a novice I agree with your suggestion on the "check valve" in the
> return line and your impact theory for rubber pipes but the latter item
> would be marginal either way IMHO. The main thing is to apply the
> maximum delay of fuel spreading to the likely fire source at the front
> or under you and an element of chance would apply to either type of
> pipe. This is what has prompted me/many to replace the glass filters
> under the seat for Andair in the fuselage away from the pilot and /or
> have a different sight gauge to one encircling the pilot.
> All such things have to be weight considered otherwise an automatic
> extinguisher system with heavy tankage to supply but I'm sure you don't
> need me to remark on that.
> 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: 03 September 2008 16:52
> To: europa-list@matronics.com
> Subject: Re: Jos Okhuisen
>
> <frans@paardnatuurlijk.nl>
>
> Hi Jos and all,
>
>> Hi Frans and all, The silence is the normal waiting for the
>> investigation to come to a conclusion.
>
> Ok, I understand that. It is just that a few days ago you wrote that you
> were going to post more detailed information the next day, but I never
> saw it, so I wondered what happened. Glad that you are still ok.
>
>> Now a thick branch wiped the right side of the cockpit off, breaking
>> the fuel return alu tube.
>
> Ok, two toughts about that:
>
> 1) The fuel return line is obviously a risk, as it can not be closed
> with the fuel valve, and once broken it allows the tank to drain
> completely. I just realised that this risk can be minimised by putting a
> check-valve (one way valve) in the return line. So fuel can go TO the
> tank, but never FROM the tank. Has anyone ever considered this? I think
> I'm going to put this into my fuel system, unless someone can tell me
> why it is not a good idea to do so.
>
> 2) I have seen that many builders do away with the rubber hoses and use
> aluminium. Maybe the risk is higher with aluminium, since these tubes
> breaks easily, whereas rubber hoses just give way to impacts.
>
> Frans
>
>
>
