(1.38.193.5/16.2) id AA25064; Sun, 5 Feb 1995 13:55:15 -0500 Date: Sun, 5 Feb 1995 13:55:15 -0500 From: Ewestland@aol.com Subject: Fuel Vent Icing Hey Guys, I saw this on the homebuilt newsgroup and wanted to pass it along. I had not heard of this "hole" before or given any thought to the fuel vent icing up (possibly ours our in a "safer position"), but I am going to make a note of it in my plans along with any of your thoughts, if any. Eric From: vanabr@delphi.com Newsgroups: rec.aviation.homebuilt Subject: Re: Varieze/Longeze icing Date: Sat, 4 Feb 95 20:15:32 -0500 Organization: Delphi (info@delphi.com email, 800-695-4005 voice) Lines: 21 NNTP-Posting-Host: bos1f.delphi.com Andrew Lowery writes: > I own a modified varieze, and would like to know if anybody >has any knowledge/experience/information on the effects of ice on this >type of aircraft. I am considering some instrument flights in my >varieze, and would know what to expect. I'm sure we would agree that inteneionally getting into ice in a Vari-EZE or Long-EZ would be foolish. But having said that (and having spelled it wrong) one important thing is to make sure that there is a small hole (approx 1/32") diameter drilled into the back (away from the airflow) side of your fuel tank vents. Burt Rutan has theorized that if you fly into sudden icing it could nearly immediately leave you iced up, IFR, with no engine very quickly. I have 350 hours or so in Long's and only some back seat time in a Vari-EZE and I have never flown my Long IFR, but my advice would be to stay away from anything heavier than climbs or decents through relatively thin layers. Fly safely Brent H. Van Arsdell. Date: Tue, 7 Mar 1995 12:34:10 -0500 From: SidLloyd@aol.com Subject: Re: sheet metal warning - Cha... Yes, I broke the first one also. I used a steel tube to bend the next one around. Now, I've gone to a common sump under the main spar and a remote shut-off valve cable actuated. I never did see the sense in having to switch right-left all the time. Vance has a system like this and it works fine. I have only one internal fuel fitting, the one that goes from the sump to the bulkhead pass-through fitting. All other internal fuel lines are potted into tanks. Sid Lloyd Date: Wed, 8 Mar 1995 08:44:04 -0500 From: SidLloyd@aol.com Subject: Re: sheet metal & common sump >Sid, if you wouldn't mind making your set-up available via a description, >plans, GIF files, DXF files, whatever, I'd sure appreciate it, and I'd >guess everyone else would also. If you have some info on the "arm-pit" >scoops vs. the NACA scoop, I'd appreciate that as well. Well, I didn't draw up any plans, I just jut & fit. What I did was run the fuel lines directly from the strakes, within the rear armrests, through the gear bulkheads, and then made a 90 degree turn against the rear firewall heading to the center of the airplane. It is all downhill. The sump (since I removed the NACA scoop) goes all the way to the bottom of the fuselage. I am keeping it the same width as the NACA scoop used to be in there in order to reach the rear main gear attachment bolts. The top is level with the top of the panel connecting the front and rear main gear bulkheads. There is a flush fitting drain in the bottom and a vent line with an in-line check-valve going back to the right wing tank. The fuel line then exits the sump laterally and connects to a 90 degree pass-through fitting which takes it through the bulkhead. I had a hard time finding a remote on-off valve and I think I ended up finding one at Alexander Aeroplane. The actuator was very cheesy and not airworthy (in my opinion) so I made a new one from aluminum and now it works very well. The sump will have close to 2 gal capacity and I will put a low fuel warning switch in it. Advantages- 1/ a common fuel supply without having to constantly switch from one tank to another 2/ another drain to catch debris 3/ no fuel lines running into the cabin, up through the valve by the front seat and back to the firewall (fewer points of failure) Disadvantages- 1/ if you get one bad tank of gas you now have two (but usually we fill both anyway, right?) and 2/ cable actuated remote on/off valve (potential point of failure) On the NACA scoop, if you read the plan corrections in the newsletters you know that the dimensions per-plans are not correct. The bottom (well, top actually) of the NACA scoop should go in a straight line from the front to the firewall but per-plans it actually follows the curve of the bottom fuselage. Then you have 2 inches of low density foam just forward of the front main gear bulkhead. Not a good design there. If I were making it over, I'd run the bottom fuselage straight back to the bottom of the front rear bulkhead, deepen the fuselage sides to match, and eliminate the scoop. What caused me to change from the scoop to arm-pit scoops were some articles I read in CSA newsletters. Arm-pit scoops apparently provide superior cooling with less drag (if designed correctly). I believe you have to keep the inner expansion angle between 7 and 12 degrees to keep the air attached, expanded, and cooled. Anyway, since I didn't like the NACA scoop anyway, I filled it in. Yes, now I have 2" of pour-foam and low-density foam all the way across, covered by bid layups. Oh well... I will be using the arm-pit scoops that AeroCad sells. Sid Date: Fri, 14 Jul 1995 20:31:19 -0500 From: Tom Barclay Subject: sloshing that tank Judd writes; <> ;->> Two methods suggest themselves. one involves an industrial-sized Xacto hot-knife and more layups and micro and sanding after re-assembly. *Or* we could go into the business of getting green cards for failed sumo contenders and renting them out. Might even be some "test to destruct" applications, there. From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: sloshing that tank (fwd) Date: Sat, 15 Jul 95 21:35:27 EDT Tom B. writes: >Judd writes; > ><of a >completed Cozy. This thing is huge and to get full coverage one would >have to >a) fill the tank to the brim (expensive) or b) put in a couple of >gallons and >rotate the plane through all axis's.>> >Two methods suggest themselves. one involves an industrial-sized >Xacto hot-knife and more layups and micro and sanding after re-assembly. >*Or* we could go into the business of getting green cards for failed >sumo contenders and renting them out. Might even be some "test to >destruct" applications, there. Sans the humor, the second suggestion may not be so stupid. In one of the Cozy Newsletters, there's a picture of Nat FLIPPING a COZY onto its back for filling and sanding the bottom. (He's got a few people helping). One might imagine doing something similar for sloshing the tank. They basically rotate it backwards onto the spar, and then lower it down. I don't know how much a COZY fuselage, spar, and strakes weighs, but maybe you could hang it from a sling from a rafter in the garage, and then vigorously move it back and forth to distribute the liquid. Or you could just use a gasoline proof epoxy, and forget all this :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin E-Mail: marcz@an.hp.com Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 00:03:17 -0400 From: NBalog@aol.com Subject: Re: Epoxy Fuel Compatibility The fill and slosh method presupposes that: 1) the epoxy will adhere to the previously laid up (and presumably unsanded) inner surface of the tank and 2) it will also get into the fittings (drain, sump, filler cap) to keep the fuel additives from eating into the non-soluble components of the previous epoxies. If conditions 1, and 2, are not met, then it seems like: 3) a waste of time and 4) a potentially hazardous thing to do. Any other ideas? Norm-00001 (estimating a 23 chapter - 16, now - lifetime input of around 99,999 messages into this user group ) Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 10:22:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Tech Support - Rick Subject: Re: Epoxy Fuel Compatibility The fill and sloshing of the tank is to clear out the dust, debris, other potentially line blocking particles out of the tanks so we don't get into the quiet zone(engine out). This is not a waste of time. If you want more info on sloshing the tank ask a Long-Ez builder about the importance of it. They will tell you to do in twice to be sure. Rick C Tue, 18 Jul 1995 09:23:12 +1000 Date: Tue, 18 Jul 1995 09:16:31 +0200 From: parkyn@citr.uq.oz.au (Nick Parkyn) Subject: Epoxy Fuel Compatability In my previous email I indicated a compound for coating fuel tanks (used on Lancair / Stallion). The product is PR 420-Part A/B primer and PR-1422A-2 Fuel Sealing Compound available from Courtaulds Aerospace, Burbank CA (818) 240-2060. Nick-00001 From: Marc J. Zeitlin Subject: Tips and info from Jack Wilhelmson Date: Wed, 4 Oct 95 15:06:29 EDT People; Jack Wilhelmson (a new member who's been flying his cozy for a LONG time) asked me to forward this information to you - I've broken it up into four messages categorized by subject matter: > 1. The gas caps sold by BROCK(FT18) Leak water in and gas > out in flight. DO NOT LEAVE YOUR AIRPLANE OUT IN THE RAIN > WITH THESE CAPS. > My solution: I developed a new cap that fits the original > neck and has been on my plane outside for three years with > no leaks. Email me for details. email Jack (not ME) :-). -- Marc J. Zeitlin Email: marcz@an.hp.com