X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com From: "Charlie England" Received: from mail-pa0-f44.google.com ([209.85.220.44] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.10) with ESMTPS id 7253873 for flyrotary@lancaironline.net; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 12:47:56 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.85.220.44; envelope-from=ceengland7@gmail.com Received: by mail-pa0-f44.google.com with SMTP id bj1so14984573pad.3 for ; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:47:23 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=cK6rHjjDgMpF5valZhjDItPi3p4CPpb7TIA0JQwgT9o=; b=wZoBrGUVUxFhLBKASEO7GmY0avK6OBQzf2O2S8FpOQd7XCfELKk0T97cVeOlhl02Qj TYkeIoIOmpdJ0ttCRydWuH4TqRF4GqGj1bk2AkJeLrACCmehbQlOz18iHlQyrKtd8Pke V/nAC8sNTXh4VX64IO9AbaurEG5FmU3xFm6BQlwTUHG8S9i+/64rav/6zgb/2MPkZ9tr GLJQq5kdxlh7VoBAhcHiFjbPb5dP1wxY0MjTnn3M1UqtdOiUnclNzvCYpwaq52jc03M4 VIGD+V5b49R8B6yZ44XzD0SvVhg//tM3V40388xoCAZNxMmI5/L085u59zGSGyXf5G8i sVnA== X-Received: by 10.66.222.100 with SMTP id ql4mr69185pac.123.1415123242995; Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:47:22 -0800 (PST) Return-Path: Received: from ?IPv6:2602:306:25fb:99:44fe:a0e0:8dd0:4d4e? ([2602:306:25fb:99:44fe:a0e0:8dd0:4d4e]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id yt3sm972091pbc.34.2014.11.04.09.47.20 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 04 Nov 2014 09:47:21 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <545911AC.6030903@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 04 Nov 2014 11:49:32 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rotary motors in aircraft Subject: Re: [FlyRotary] Re: SPAM-LOW: [FlyRotary] Re: Fw: Rotary Engine & Fuel Valves References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------020404090300060705070606" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------020404090300060705070606 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit On 11/4/2014 10:29 AM, Thomas Mann wrote: > >…… and all the homebuilt kit makers that I'm aware of specifically > say to never operate the plane with a fuel selector on 'both'. > ________________________________________________________________________________________________________ > > Then you have never looked closely at a Velocity. > More specifically, you have never seen my Velocity which was something > of a worst case scenario when I started picking it apart and reviewing > how it was built and the many failure modes that needed to be > corrected before I would fly it. > > This system had a feed from both wing tanks to a common sump that had > no valve at all. It was plumbed straight to the electric fuel pump and > them off to the engine. > > It now has a split sump with a left/right/both selector (Andair). The > electric boost pump is low enough that “un-porting” should never be an > issue. > > My purpose as far as offering another viewpoint was spawned by talk > of “T” connections between two tanks. > It was a somewhat lengthy and diplomatic way of saying “Bad Idea.” > > T Mann > > Sent from Windows Mail > > Was the 'both tanks feeding a sump, with no valve' setup the way that the Velocity factory said to plumb the system, or something concocted by the builder? --------------020404090300060705070606 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
On 11/4/2014 10:29 AM, Thomas Mann wrote:
>…… and all the homebuilt kit makers that I'm aware of specifically say to never operate the plane with a fuel selector on 'both'.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Then you have never looked closely at a Velocity.
More specifically, you have never seen my Velocity which was something of a worst case scenario when I started picking it apart and reviewing how it was built and the many failure modes that needed to be corrected before I would fly it.

This system had a feed from both wing tanks to a common sump that had no valve at all. It was plumbed straight to the electric fuel pump and them off to the engine.

It now has a split sump with a left/right/both selector (Andair). The electric boost pump is low enough that “un-porting” should never be an issue.

My purpose as far as offering another viewpoint was spawned by talk of “T” connections between two tanks.
It was a somewhat lengthy and diplomatic way of saying “Bad Idea.”

T Mann

Sent from Windows Mail


Was the 'both tanks feeding a sump, with no valve' setup the way that the Velocity factory said to plumb the system, or something concocted by the builder?


--------------020404090300060705070606--