Return-Path: <lancair.list-request@olsusa.com>
Received: from marvkaye.olsusa.com ([205.245.9.221]) by truman.olsusa.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.1.2 release (PO203-101c)
          ID# 0-44819U2500L250S0) with SMTP id AAA5386
          for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>; Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:34:28 -0400
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.19981019203238.00d74d5c@olsusa.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Oct 1998 20:32:38 -0400
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
From: Marvin Kaye <marvkaye@olsusa.com>
Subject: Fuel tank vents
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Seeing as how everyone seems pretty dialed into fuel system discussions at
the moment, perhaps now would be a good time to pose a question about tank
venting.  It seems that I remember a builder over on AVSIG talking about
venting his wing tanks from the outboard high point back into the fuselage
and then into a semi-circular loop up his seat backs... the actual vent
drain line was plumbed in via a tee fitting at the apex of the loop on the
seat backs and out the bottom of the fuselage.  It seems to me that this
arrangement would nicely address the issue of draining fuel overboard when
parked on a non-level ramp.  Other than the extensive distance from the
outboard end of the tanks back to the fuselage, what problems do any of you
see with this venting scheme?

Along a similar vein, rather than venting the header tank directly to the
outside, why can't you vent it back to the wing tanks?  There has to be a
way of marrying a pair of selector valves so the header vent is aimed at
the active tank...  this way if one happens to forget to shut off the
transfer pump the fuel is simply returned to the active tank rather than
being pumped overbaord.   Any thoughts?

    <Marv>