X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com X-SpamCatcher-Score: 30 [X] Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:37:04 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.62] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with ESMTP id 1968891 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:33:36 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.62; envelope-from=matt.hapgood@alumni.duke.edu Received: from [65.40.217.234] (helo=bmw.hapgoods.com) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with asmtp (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.34) id 1HZTx7-0005kY-3g for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:32:45 -0400 Received: from Dell690 (Dell690.hapgoods.com [192.168.2.123]) (authenticated bits=0) by bmw.hapgoods.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l35FWfKg029559 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 11:32:43 -0400 From: "Matt Hapgood" X-Original-To: "'Lancair Mailing List'" References: In-Reply-To: Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Testing for fuel leaks and fuel probes to use X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 11:33:03 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <004a01c77797$b4586f10$1d094d30$@hapgood@alumni.duke.edu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_004B_01C77776.2D46CF10" X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 12.0 Thread-Index: Acd3k+1j7oALPaXFTn+7fcZlm6FsUwAA2Kuw Content-Language: en-us X-ELNK-Trace: b48a86202a850ddb74bf435c0eb9d4784f4018508cc36aa83472f38bdd4a4772e7068b5cdbdba1e8350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 65.40.217.234 This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C77776.2D46CF10 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It is my understanding that the wings, in a header tank 360, don=92t = NEED a fuel level system (aux tanks). I know mine doesn=92t have a level system in the wings, and I know of = others too. =20 =20 My wings feed to the header with =BC=94 lines. All works beautifully, = and I wouldn=92t change a thing. I know my burn rate, and if the transfer = pumps quit transferring, then I=92d know what emergency fuel I have in the = header. That=92s plenty for me. Matt =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of marv@lancair.net Re my earlier reply attached to your original post... while the measure = and time approach to determine fuel level might have worked for Lindy he probably didn't have FAR 91.205 to deal with. The minimum equipment required for VFR flight under that regulation includes a fuel level = gauge for each tank, so you will still need to deal with some sort of sensors = for the required gauges. Someone suggested a pressure sensor as an = alternative, and I'm sure there are others that are easier to retrofit in closed = wings than your typical capacitance-type fuel probes, which would be a real challenge (if even possible without major surgery.) Bryan Wullner wrote: I am building a Lancair 360. The previous builder already closed out the = wings. He used the 1/4" lines to feed to the Header Tank as the manual=20 suggests. And He never installed the fuel probes. Can anyone suggest a way for me to test for leaks in the wings? What can I do to get a fuel level reading without cutting into my tanks = to=20 install probes? ------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C77776.2D46CF10 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

It is my understanding that the wings, in a header tank = 360, don’t NEED a fuel level system (aux tanks).

I know mine doesn’t have a level system in the wings, and I know = of others too.=A0

My wings feed to the header with =BC” lines.=A0 All = works beautifully, and I wouldn’t change a thing.=A0 I know my burn = rate, and if the transfer pumps quit transferring, then I’d know what emergency fuel I have = in the header.=A0 That’s plenty for me.

Matt

From:= Lancair = Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of = marv@lancair.net

Re my earlier reply attached to your original post... while the measure = and time approach to determine fuel level might have worked for Lindy he = probably didn't have FAR 91.205 to deal with. The minimum equipment = required for VFR flight under that regulation includes a fuel level gauge for each = tank, so you will still need to deal with some sort of sensors for the required gauges. Someone suggested a pressure sensor as an alternative, and = I'm sure there are others that are easier to retrofit in closed wings than = your typical capacitance-type fuel probes, which would be a real challenge = (if even possible without major surgery.)

Bryan Wullner <SBEJ@verizon.net> wrote:

I am building a Lancair 360. The previous builder already closed out the =
wings. He used the 1/4" lines to feed to the Header Tank as the = manual
suggests. And He never installed the fuel probes.
Can anyone suggest a way for me to test for leaks in the wings?
What can I do to get a fuel level reading without cutting into my tanks = to
install probes?

------=_NextPart_000_004B_01C77776.2D46CF10--