Received-SPF: pass
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=66.133.182.165; envelope-from=canarder@frontiernet.net
Message-ID: <4296A6CA.3010601@frontiernet.net>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2005 23:49:14 -0500
From: Jim Sower <canarder@frontiernet.net>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7) Gecko/20040514
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Rotary motors in aircraft <flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: No fuel return for RX-8 six port
References: <list-964820@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-964820@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I think that makes the sump tank way too "busy".  Submerged pumps are 
nice but not pivotal.  Returning fuel from the rail to the sump is what 
got Paul Connor in trouble.
Gravity feed main(s) to sump, return to main(s) ... Jim S.

Echo Lake Fishing Resort (Georges Boucher) wrote:

>  My plan was to have 2 pimps in the sump tank with fuel return to the 
> sump tank. Iplan ning to run the engine on the test stand with a 
> duplicate of the A/C fuel system. Any input?
> Georges B.
>  
>  
> /-------Original Message-------/
>  
> /*From:*/ Rotary motors in aircraft <mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> /*Date:*/ 05/26/05 10:30:58
> /*To:*/ Rotary motors in aircraft <mailto:flyrotary@lancaironline.net>
> /*Subject:*/ [FlyRotary] Re: No fuel return for RX-8 six port
>  
> Having the pump in a 'sump tank'  is a completely different scenario 
> than pump in main tank.  Don't do this thinking that it is a tried & 
> true solution.  Might be OK if all other factors are considered but 
> there are a LOT of them.
>  
> Tracy (still hate sump/header tanks)
> ----- *Subject:* [FlyRotary] Re: No fuel return for RX-8 six port
>
> This would not prevent a return system from being developed and
> installed. Unless you intend to put an RX 8 pump inside your sump
> tank...it might not be a bad idea to plan for one.
>  
> Speaking of.. Anyone actually DOING in-tank fuel pumps. As popular as PL
> is around here, I gleaned from his list that having an in tank pump can
> help prevent vaporlock by not having to "SUCK" fuel. As long as the tank
> remains wet (or the fuel air mix too rich) it should be safe.. right?
>
> Something to consider...
>
> Dave
>
>  
>
> 	
> 	
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
>Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.15 - Release Date: 5/22/2005
>  
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  
>
>>> Homepage:  http://www.flyrotary.com/
>>> Archive:   http://lancaironline.net/lists/flyrotary/List.html
>>>      
>>>