Message-ID: <000201bee596$99fb7040$2bc295cf@bill>
From: "William T Bartlett" <wtbart@olympus.net>
To: <lancair.list@olsusa.com>
References: <19990813040825.AAA16685@truman.olsusa.com>
Subject: Subject: : Transfer to header tank
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 1999 23:27:04 -0700
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
All those reasons are good reasons to have header tank and for keeping
it full; I practice them, but I still can't the reason for transferring
fuel to header tank. It is a lot easier to just fly the wing tanks out and
use the fuel in the header last. You don't risk pumping fuel overboard.
Bill N7WB

>
> To: Bill N7WB
>
> The only real reason I can think of for transferring fuel to the header tank
> is to keep the engine running. If that's a bit of extra pilot work-load, I
> guess I'll pay the price -- considering the alternative!

Use header tank last
.
> One, and probably the most compelling, is the fact that should you lose all
> pumping capability (mechanical AND electrical - an admittedly low
> probability) AND  your engine is normally aspirated, the head from a full
> header could probably keep the fires burning,

Use header tank last and that is the only way you will have a full header
tank at all times for that emergency.

>. Second, I like the
> resultant CG with a full header - which continues to get more 'n more
> forward as the wings empty whilst the header is kept full.

Use header tank last

>Third, I can get
> more fuel in the plane than if I had wing tanks only; it's on the
> center-line .

Good Idea install header tank
>


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
LML homepage:   http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html