Return-Path: <marv@lancaironline.net>
Received: from [69.34.137.114] (account marv@lancaironline.net)
  by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro WebUser 4.3c1)
  with HTTP id 726200 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Sat, 12 Feb 2005 10:57:34 -0500
From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: Vapor lock in sump/header tank.
To: "Rotary motors in aircraft" <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
X-Mailer: CommuniGate Pro WebUser Interface v.4.3c1
Date: Sat, 12 Feb 2005 10:57:34 -0500
Message-ID: <web-726200@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-726171@logan.com>
References: <list-726171@logan.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

I think a part of the problem with this discussion is terminology... a header 
tank, by definition, is at the "head", or top of the fuel system.  It is above 
the level of the mains and needs to have its fuel pumped into it from them. 
 An auxiliary tank at or below the level of the mains that receives its fuel 
from them by gravity should be called a sump tank, or by some other name that 
differentiates it from a header and explains that it functions more or less as 
a sump for them.  The sump tank needs to be vented to (or through) the mains 
as its ultimate level is determined by its relation to them, as opposed to the 
header which must have fuel lifted to it from the mains and can be treated as 
a free standing 3rd fuel tank.  Just my 2c.

  <Marv>