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 11:35:32 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from mtai05.charter.net ([209.225.8.185] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.1.8) with ESMTP id 1968893 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 11:22:49 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.225.8.185; envelope-from=troneill@charter.net Received: from aa04.charter.net ([10.20.200.156]) by mtai05.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.00 201-2186-121-20061213) with ESMTP id <20070405152155.YDVJ1417.mtai05.charter.net@aa04.charter.net> for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 11:21:55 -0400 Received: from axs ([75.132.198.100]) by aa04.charter.net with SMTP id <20070405152155.GOKY10594.aa04.charter.net@axs> for ; Thu, 5 Apr 2007 11:21:55 -0400 X-Original-Message-ID: <000401c77796$27b26170$6501a8c0@axs> From: "terrence o'neill" X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Testing for fuel leaks and fuel probes to use X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 10:21:55 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0001_01C7776C.3C748130" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028 X-Chzlrs: 0 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C7776C.3C748130 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Bryan and Marv, Same problem here. Couldn't a pressure sensor in the wing tank outlet = line sense fuel pressure/level? Who is using this method? Also, the original builder ran the wing tank vents form the filler area = inboard to the wing root. Any suggestions as to where to position this = vent -- higher than the wingtips' level? Terrence O'Neill LNC2 235/320 N211AL ----- Original Message -----=20 From: marv@lancair.net=20 To: Lancair Mailing List=20 Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 09:43 AM Subject: [LML] Re: Testing for fuel leaks and fuel probes to use Bryan, 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.) back in the 21st century Bryan Wullner wrote: I am building a Lancair 360. The previous builder already closed out = the=20 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=20 install probes? Thank You, Bryan -- For archives and unsub = http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C7776C.3C748130 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Bryan and = Marv,
 
Same problem = here. =20 Couldn't a pressure sensor in the wing tank outlet line sense fuel=20 pressure/level?  Who is using this method?
Also, the original = builder ran=20 the wing tank vents form the filler area inboard to the wing root.  = Any=20 suggestions as to where to position this vent -- higher than the = wingtips'=20 level?
 
Terrence = O'Neill
LNC2 235/320=20 N211AL
----- Original Message -----
From:=20 marv@lancair.net=20
Sent: Thursday, April 05, 2007 = 09:43=20 AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Testing for = fuel leaks=20 and fuel probes to use

Bryan,

Re my = earlier=20 reply attached to your original post... while the measure and time = approach to=20 determine fuel level might have worked for Lindy he probably didn't = have FAR=20 91.205 to deal with.  The minimum equipment required for VFR = flight under=20 that regulation includes a fuel level gauge for each tank, so you will = still=20 need to deal with some sort of sensors for the required gauges.  = Someone=20 suggested a pressure sensor as an alternative, and I'm sure there are = others=20 that are easier to retrofit in closed wings than your typical = capacitance-type=20 fuel probes, which would be a real challenge (if even possible without = major=20 surgery.)

   <Marv>
back in the 21st=20 century


Bryan Wullner <SBEJ@verizon.net> = wrote:

I am=20 building a Lancair 360. The previous builder already closed out the =
wings.=20 He used the 1/4" lines to feed to the Header Tank as the manual =
suggests.=20 And He never installed the fuel probes.
Can anyone suggest a way = for me to=20 test for leaks in the wings?
What can I do to get a fuel level = reading=20 without cutting into my tanks to
install probes?

Thank=20 You,
Bryan


--

For archives and unsub =
http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
------=_NextPart_000_0001_01C7776C.3C748130--