Return-Path: <lancair.list-request@olsusa.com>
Received: from marvkaye.olsusa.com ([205.245.9.93]) by truman.olsusa.com
          (Post.Office MTA v3.5.1 release 219 ID# 0-64832U3500L350S0V35)
          with SMTP id com for <lancair.list@olsusa.com>;
          Sat, 15 Jan 2000 11:42:59 -0500
Message-Id: <3.0.3.32.20000115114817.0394d180@olsusa.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2000 11:48:17 -0500
To: lancair.list@olsusa.com
From: Marvin Kaye <marvkaye@olsusa.com>
Subject: Fuel Bay & Slosh Door
X-Mailing-List: lancair.list@olsusa.com
Mime-Version: 1.0

          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
          <<  Lancair Builders' Mail List  >>
          <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<--->>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>
Posted for Tom Nalevanko <tom@mstay.com>:

I got a call from Martin Hollmann yesterday re the Stallion and its inboard
fuel bay and slosh door. As this design is similar to LIVs, I thought I'd
throw out the matter for discussion. 

Basically, Martin had to make a forced landing last year in the Stallion
due to fuel starvation. This event does not seem to be related to the fuel
bay and slosh door design but it definitely got him thinking, as only these
kind of events do<g>.

The theory of the design is that the slosh door will close in an
uncoordinated turn, thus keeping (say a minimal level of) fuel in the bay,
the fuel intake port submerged, and the engine running. Martin's current
thinking is that at high angles of attack, say as in slow flight in the
pattern prior to landing, and in an uncoordinated turn, the captive fuel in
the closed slosh door bay may be quickly exhausted and it would have been
better to simply have switched to the wing whose entire fuel is being
pushed up against the fuel intake port beforehand. This, being even more so
the case, as builders use larger and more thirsty engines.

So, to slosh door it or not to slosh door it, that is the question!

And say that you think you have an equal amount of fuel in each wing, do
you always switch to the upper tank prior to landing. That is, right
traffic pattern, fuel position on left tank. Perhaps you should plan for
this, keeping more fuel in the expected "up" wing?

It seems to me that introducing further operational considerations during
the landing phase is not a good idea. But then, if you can preclude that
"sputter, sputter" event, it just may be the thing to do.

It would be interesting to know if any other kitplanes or certified designs
have slosh bays and how these have worked out. 

Does anyone know of any books or articles on fuel system design? It seems
to me that this is one area for which there is very little info as concerns
experimental aircraft. 

All comments appreciated.

Tom Nalevanko
Ugly Duckling aka Stallion Builder

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>