Return-Path: Received: from ns1.thomasreed.com ([38.157.74.200]) by ns1.olsusa.com (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35) with ESMTP id com for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:28:48 -0400 Received: from rd0 (ns2.thomasreed.com [38.157.74.211]) by ns1.thomasreed.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id MAA22822 for ; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 12:33:25 -0400 Message-ID: <00b501bfb06f$35ebfda0$d34a9d26@Bay> From: "Thomas A. Reed" To: References: <20000427043902.AAA9774@ns1.olsusa.com> Subject: header tanks Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:37:07 -0400 X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com Mime-Version: 1.0 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> << Lancair Builders' Mail List >> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >> Fellow Lancair builders, My $ 0.02 worth, I don't see much distinction between managing the fuel in the header tank vs. switching between wing tanks, other than possibly doing it more often with the header. Everything I have ever flown, with the exception of high wing Cessna's, required some form of fuel management. I have decided to not use the header tank because; 1. the wing tanks (extended) will provide more than sufficient fuel for my purposes (3 hours with IFR reserve), 2. I don't like the idea of having the fuel in front of me, 3. this system is actually very simple (I obtained the design from Mark at Lancair), and 4. I am mounting the hydraulic pump, battery, and electrical distribution on the aft side of the firewall, which should provide a forward C.G. and has better access than the aft fuselage. Seems like this is a choice of builder preference and what one wants to do with the plane. Best regards, Thomas N361TR building slowly but surely >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> LML website: http://www.olsusa.com/Users/Mkaye/maillist.html Builders' Bookstore: http://www.buildersbooks.com/lancair Please send your photos and drawings to marvkaye@olsusa.com. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>