On Fri, 03 Dec 1999 12:39:24 -0600, Bob U. wrote: >Bob, so you do not have to waist your valuable time searching for the answer to the approval of a header tank in a NEW CERTIFIED aircraft, my source is FAA flight saftey, Tom Lehman (ret) and Fred Goodwin, aeronauticl engineer, formerly with Piper and now with the aerospace program designing space suits here in Dover, DE. Both of these people have spent their lives in this business and I accept their statement as factual. I will be more than happy to send their adress to you and anyone else out ther who wish to contact them. I DO NOT make comments of this nature in public by made up to antagonize people. If you, or anyone else wish to retain your header tanks in their airplane, THEY ARE CERTIFIED to stay in the airplane. You can also remove them and repair them in various forms (some legal and some questionable). I tried (in vain it seems) to get across the undeniable fact that these tanks are anywhere from 30 to 50 years-old. As one couper said (without getting emotionally bent out of shape) "I like my 3-tank system, I also thing there are some real positive points to the 30-gal system. I really wish someone would go back and build NEW 3-tank systems at a reasonable cost. I would rather go that way." He is right on the mark. What really should be done (instead of bitching) is to get on this site and see if you can get enough orders together to remanufacture a reasonable lot of the 3-tank system. We are doing that with the extended baggage for our Alons---and it is working! Presently we have are doing a mailing to all Alon owners to increase the quantity. When I removed the three tanks forom my Alon, all three were sweating fuel somewhere. It was MY DECISION that I did not wish to repair a 30 year-old set of tanks that just may spring a leak again. I am fortunate in that I have a partner in my Alon and we split the costs. That helped a lot. I NEVER told anyone that the 30 gal. tank installation was the cheaper way to go. On the contrary, I have said it is expensive! Not everyone can afford the change and I understand that too. However, there are some people out there who CAN afford the change and we should not leave them out. To those who have solid 3-tank systems in your airplanes, I would not change them mysely, just for the sake of change. To those who are having PROBLEMS with their system, You might want to look at an ALTERNATIVE. You do NOT have to change to the 30-gal system, just understand that there is another choice! George Frebert
> [Chuckle] > > Why was I thinking the long silence 'til now was indicative that I > scared everybody off? <grin> > > CRAZY and as BOLD as I may be, the RV-3 I am building, may well sport > an Ercoupe type fuel system. > > At the moment, I only have a header tank, but there are wing tanks for > the RV-3, too. Normally, one chooses one or the other style. > But, given the high horsepower to weight ratio, if your mission is fast > long x/countries, that picture can change dramatically. > My mission is 1000 miles non-stop in 5 hours or less. > Quite do-able with wing and header tanks. > > Header tanks were the norm in many certified planes through the 40's. > Fuel pumps, mechanical/electrical, were/are just something else to fail. > Yes, there are different strokes for different folks... then and now. > However, I have yet to see anything from the FAA MANDATING that header > tanks can no longer be legal in new aircraft. > BUT... maybe there is. > > Since I am NOT MAKING THAT CLAIM, it is not my requirement to prove such > a position. If I can find a definitive source, I will be only too glad > to post it - for better or worse. > > I'm not exactly 'comfy' with the header tank, but neither am I thrilled > with the fact that many of my fellow ag pilots burned to death when > their Super Cub wing tanks ruptured.... drenching them while trapped or > untrapped in the wreckage. One crummy spark... and they became human > torches before they vanished agonizingly into historic oblivion! > Surely, other wing tank airplane drivers have suffered similar fates. > > BTW.... > One of my good friends was raised in Rantoul. > Many of his clan still resides there. > Bryce Vermilion of the Illinois Central Railroad. > Master Mechanic and up and coming executive type. > Perhaps you knew/remember him? > I attended his funeral some years ago. > It was a very sad and tragic loss. > > Thanks for the reply, Skypops. > You have brightened this day. > > Bob Urban > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > Well said Bob :-) > > May all your landings be silky smooth and right side up! > > Best regards, > > Rob Talbot-Jones, 3040H, Rantoul IL ________________________________________________________________ Get FREE voicemail, fax and email at http://voicemail.excite.com Talk online at http://voicechat.excite.com
<<attachment: winmail.dat>>
