Sender: <marv@lancaironline.net>
To:  lml@lancaironline.net
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2011 11:34:42 -0400
Message-ID: <redirect-5046926@logan.com>
Received-SPF: none
 receiver=logan.com; client-ip=206.130.116.53; envelope-from=hwasti@lm50.com
From: Hamid Wasti <hwasti@lm50.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Windows/20100228)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: another Lancair
References: <list-5045735@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <list-5045735@logan.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Mark Steitle wrote:
> Hypothetically, if these failures are due to some undetermined defect 
> in the fuel system design, it could be all our problem. 
Another potential common problem may be a defect in the procedures. I 
have seen pilots select the fuel tank in the before take-off checklist. 
That is a dangerous practice. Any fuel contamination or improperly 
selected valve may manifest itself late in the takeoff roll or shortly 
after takeoff. The before takeoff checklist should only be VERIFYING 
that the correct tank is selected. If changing the tanks is required, 
taxing back and doing another run-up may be in order.

My personal procedure is to select the tank before engine start and then 
not change it till I am at a safe altitude. This means the takeoff 
happens on the same tank that was used for taxi and run-up. Hopefully 
any problems like fuel contamination will become obvious long before the 
start of the takeoff roll.

Regards,

Hamid