X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Received: from elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net ([209.86.89.62] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.5) with ESMTP id 6365300 for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:07:04 -0400 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=209.86.89.62; envelope-from=colyncase@earthlink.net DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net; b=m2RRd21LinbjRI2IWG+wwWdPx3HTr4vwJILet1aEnpLQeHQVkLC2yVrTdvyKz4QE; h=Received:Content-Type:Mime-Version:Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Message-Id:References:To:X-Mailer:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP; Received: from [71.241.140.49] (helo=[192.168.1.24]) by elasmtp-dupuy.atl.sa.earthlink.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1UwMNw-0003Zd-VR for lml@lancaironline.net; Mon, 08 Jul 2013 21:06:29 -0400 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1085) Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Header Tank in the 360 From: Colyn Case In-Reply-To: Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2013 21:06:27 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: "Lancair Mailing List" X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1085) X-ELNK-Trace: 63d5d3452847f8b1d6dd28457998182d7e972de0d01da94028b38e18aac71adda7f501a33b21147c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c X-Originating-IP: 71.241.140.49 Hey, if you were really good you could write a DCL script and run it on = a micro-vax underneath the header tank to tell the pump when to turn on = and off. On Jul 7, 2013, at 10:50 AM, Jeff Peterson wrote: Hey Rob, If you scan the archive you will find this issue vigorously debated = several times. Reminds me of the Mac vs PC debate (or Unix vs VMS for us old fogeys) = (or Python vs C for younger guys). =20 Most of us just keep repeating whatever argument validates the = particular choice we selected. As you know, I put the fuel in the outer wing bays and use the header = space for avionics. I have 42 gal usable. I put in slosh gates. I am very happy. reasons for my choice: -There are, oh maybe a million, airplanes configured this way....most = aircraft designers make this choice. -Lancair switched to this system with the Legacy. -If I have an off-airport landing and break things, I would rather not = get doused with fuel. -In the header system, if you leave a facet pump on too long you pump = fuel overboard. -In the header system if you forget to turn on the facet pump every 20 = min. the engine dies. -Yes, these last two problems can be fixed by automating transfers...but = that adds a system with its own failure modes. -The headers space is really useful for ahrs, rf splitters, pitot-static = manifolds, misc. circuits, regulators etc. To each his own....but the fuel-in-the-wings system is in fact a very = reasonable choice. --=20 Jeff Peterson 99.8%=20