Mailing List lml@lancaironline.net Message #28209
From: Matt Hapgood <hapgoodm94@alum.darden.edu>
Sender: Marvin Kaye <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: RE: [LML] Re: Super Legacy Progress
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2005 21:15:41 -0500
To: <lml@lancaironline.net>
So, if the idea is to use steel where the result of failure is catasrophic, then how do you explain rubber tubing on the drain lines??? Are you implying that losing oil pressure in 20 minutes (and NEVER SEEING any warning indicators on a gauge) is better than losing it in 30 seconds from an oil line failure (where it will likely be indicated on the oil pressure gauge) ???
 
Still confused.

Matt
-----Original Message-----
From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net]On Behalf Of Sky2high@aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2005 7:54 PM
To: Lancair Mailing List
Subject: [LML] Re: Super Legacy Progress

In a message dated 2/9/2005 2:12:33 P.M. Central Standard Time, hapgoodm94@alum.darden.edu writes:
but where is AL okay and where is it not okay?  Do the
engine manufacturers have any published comments on this?
Matt, Et Al,
 
Any pressurized fuel or pressurized oil fitting on an engine or engine mounted component should be steel since the consequences of a failure are catastrophic.  Any other fitting CAN be steel, depending on your anal orientation with respect to weight balanced by your affinity for risk. 
 
Let's see, the only aluminum fittings on my "engine" are: upper cylinder oil return lines (terminated in rubber tubing anyhow), manifold pressure tap (with restrictor), crankcase breather, "quick" oil drain (nothing is attached to it in flight) and hmmmmmmmm............... nothing else that I can think of....
 
Scott Krueger AKA Grayhawk
Lancair N92EX IO320 SB 89/96
Aurora, IL (KARR)

Fair and Balanced Opinions at No Charge!
There is an oxymoron in that, somewhere...

Subscribe (FEED) Subscribe (DIGEST) Subscribe (INDEX) Unsubscribe Mail to Listmaster