skippydiesel

Thanks for that 1T - looks very nice - could just about stretch to the asking price however seems a bit high for a 1/2 life engine (probably the fancy panel) and a tad outside the performance  criteria- will make contact and see where it leads.

I think most of us can adapt to the digital read out - the questions for me are:

• Cost - high initial purchase cost followed by ultra high expectations (by vendor)at resale. As all the aircraft I look at are day FVR, the extra ability/capacity of a digital panel, is no more impressive than large shalalie.
• Reliability - most systems are dependent on ship power (single source) some have at, extra cost, a back up battery (weight & complexity)
• Redundancy (built in)- seem to have alarmingly short "life span" ie get superseded quickly - worries about service/repair/updates

47 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

I saw this a few days ago and thought it read alright. Know nothing about it. Need PPl.

 

 https://www.planesales.com.au/details/Listing/Single-Engine-Propeller/7530/2008-Liberty-XL2-Aircraft?utm_source=ListingID-7530&utm_medium=banner&utm_campaign=2008 Liberty XL2 Aircraft

Yeah! Saw that as well. Not far from me.  Got PPL. Europa derivative - very interesting. Price looks good. Operating costs (Continental) could be quite high, compared with a Rotax powered aircraft

16 minutes ago, pmccarthy said:

Skippy have you identified makes/models that might fit? The 120kts economy cruise might be a stretch with low stall. I don't have anything, but might be looking for something similar and am curious.

I  know of  three aircraft that have genuine, vicinity 30 knot  stall, with 120 knot plus econamy cruise. They are Sonerai II, ATEC Faeta and Pipistel SW - I would be pleased to hear about others.

There are very few Sonerai fitted with Rotax (most are VW) only two Faeta in Australia (non for sale) and its a very long time since I saw a Pipistrel SW for sale (I probably couldn't afford one anyhow)

I have recently focused in on Europa aircraft (all kits) fitted with Rotax engines however these have a comparatively high stall (vicinity of 45 knots) and high empty weight (average 370kg or so). Counteracting the high empty weight is a Max TO of 620 kg (in conforming airframes). Europa are pretty "tight" to get in/out of and in the Mono configuration "challenging" to maneuver on the ground (X wind landings being especially "Fun"). They have a reputation as high speed cruisers - 145 knots or so depending on engine/prop etc.

On the hunt for that special aircraft - must conform to as many of the following wants (list not prioritised) as possible:

• Privately owned 
• Private sale (ie not through a broker)
• Well used airframe/engine Log Books (not interested in the flight log per say) with comprehensive service record
• If kit  - Good Build Log 
• Where applicable - Detailed accident/incident record and repair
• All AD's, Mandatory Modifications up to date & documented as such 
• Rotax 912 ULS motivated (my apologies to Jab supporters)
• Would like to have a 120 knot econamy cruise (or better) Econamy in this context, is about 16 L/hr .
• It would be great to have a low stall, say 35 knots or better
• My preference would be for a composite airframe ,however all considered
• 80-120L fuel capacity (range)
• 300kg empty weight,  give or take
• 450 - 600kg TO weight - higher again would be a small advantage for when RAA gets the increase
• 1000 Hobb hrs or less - will consider new engine in well maintained airframe
• Will not pay extra for a fancy panel - I am a day VFR pilot

It does not have to be immaculate, just well cared for (loved).

On the hunt for that special aircraft - must conform to as many of the following wants (list not prioritised) as possible:

• Privately owned 
• Private sale (ie not through a broker)
• Well used airframe/engine Log Books (not interested in the flight log per say) with comprehensive service record
• If kit  - Good Build Log 
• Where applicable - Detailed accident/incident record and repair
• All AD's, Mandatory Modifications up to date & documented as such 
• Rotax 912 ULS motivated (my apologies to Jab supporters)
• Would like to have a 120 knot econamy cruise (or better) Econamy in this context, is about 16 L/hr .
• It would be great to have a low stall, say 35 knots or better
• My preference would be for a composite airframe ,however all considered
• 80-120L fuel capacity (range)
• 300kg empty weight,  give or take
• 450 - 600kg TO weight - higher again would be a small advantage for when RAA gets the increase
• 1000 Hobb hrs or less - will consider new engine in well maintained airframe
• Will not pay extra for a fancy panel - I am a day VFR pilot

It does not have to be immaculate, just well cared for (loved).

Unfortunately (for me) the future of internal combustion engines looks to be bleak. Limited by the rise of electric motors and battery technology.

KR - I suggested to my aircraft owners, that they dispensed with the brokers services - I guess he has filled their heads with suggestions that I am going to sue them for every defect that I find - they have not replied to my offers to continue the sale, directly with them, at the already agreed price and conditions.

There will be another aircraft jut around the corner and probably better too.

I am concerned about the possible effect of unnecessary transporting of a dog (any animal) in a small aircraft. 

We, humans, have the ability to rationalise our situation, load noise/vibration,  unpleasant smells (fumes), sudden change in air-pressure, turbulence and three dimensional maneuvers. Even with this ability, many people are very stressed by air transport (particularly small aircraft).

So try to imagine what this might be like for an animal that does not have the insights, that we may possess, coupled with much better(more sensitive) hearing, smell - in short why would you subject your animal companion to this experience - it can only be for your benefit.

In the absence of MoGas/ULP actually on the airfield, it would be useful to have information about the closest public service stations eg Armidale NSW, Caltex , New England Hwy, 25 m (that metres from the airfield security gate, easy walking distance even for the oldest pilot))

3 hours ago, walrus said:

Skip, yes you are correct - push lock. Example linked below. This stuff in my experience requires tools and a great deal of strength to fit. I use them on my Rotax oil lines.

 

‘’The Rotax inlet line is under light negative pressure on starting when cold and the return has no more than 6 psi.

 

https://speedflow.com.au/hose-ends/400-series/

 

 

 

Wow! I checked out the web site  you provided - they are selling Gates Barricade EFI hose for over X2 the price that I got mine from Repco

On 04/06/2021 at 8:01 PM, walrus said:

“Push on ‘’ fittings require push on hose - which is much stronger than ordinary hose circumferentially. Do not mix hose types and fittings.

You might like to be a little more precise in your commentary.

Push on is not the same as push lock - all low pressure hose systems that are pushed on, to whatever spigot design, are push on.

Push lock requires a different hose (stiffer plastic like construction) & sophisticated "joiner" system and in my limited experience (domestic water supply) have no application in fuel systems, that I am aware of . Also push lock are designed to be a one use application - that is they are either impossible or very difficult to reuse. Where push on are usually reusable, at least a few times.

Tank breather/vents can also be a source of contaminants (mainly dust and insects) - I fitted my breather with a gauze in line filter. I rarely get any material in my fuel filters. I guess my anal attention to fuel cleanliness and thousands of litres of fuel  flushing the system has has payed off.

1 minute ago, Thruster88 said:

The rotax 912 oil system's that I have seen have these fittings, they definitely have barbs. You could get away with no barbs because all external oil lines on a rotax 912 have no pressure in them, suction or atmospheric pressure only.

Man! I mentioned the raised collar, on some non barb, push fittings way back in this conversation and I complete dispute that this feature can be called a "barb" - a barb being a sharp edged devise designed to make removal, without damage, impossible.

Further the "barb" style of fitting requires multi small points of contact to make a seal. This is why so many people apply damaging pressure, using a hose clamp, to ensure a seal. 

The smooth pipe relies on the correct size of hose being in contact with a much much larger surface area. In this situation the seal  has been achieved and the clamp, lightly tightened, provides security/ hose from slipping. 

How do you figure the oil lines have no pressure? If this were the case the oil would not circulate. The oil lines are subject to both negative (suction) and positive (return) pressures.

The point is not the pressure per say but the ability of the (low pressure) system to resit leaking (air in/oil out) and the hopefully reasoned choice you might make between the traditional multi sharp(ish) ring style and newer smooth pipe, often  fitted with a smooth ring/swelling, to do the job.

I agree that these fittings are designed for low pressure (not nil) as is the case for the fuel lines under discussion. High pressure lines require a very different engineering approach.

Check out the photos I provided above - other than size they are all similar to the Rotax fittings in your schematic.

56 minutes ago, Old Koreelah said:

Can you suggest a brand name and seller?

My favorite are the Hengst brand and the two filter I use are H102 WK & H103WK (there are others) and I am fairly sure I purchased mine (way back) from Tooley Imports https://www.tooleyimports.com.au/

58 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Push lock fitting are great for use with water and low pressure hydraulics with inflexible hoses. Higher pressure push lock fittings usually are barbed. The 6mm push fittings for the thermoplastic hose that goes from my water filter to the fridge are a genius design, strong & never leak but can be removed with ease any time.

Googled "push lock" -turns out  I have used this system on plastic (potable) house water supply systems - great, very quick, bit costly and I would expect to be heavy in an aircraft application - not sure how this relates to barb or no barb hose push connections.

Back on track - I had forgotten -  my Rotax oil hoses,  are all no barb push fittings. What say the naysayers to that?

Just to assist you doubting Thomas's - Below are  typical modern push on/hose applications,  (note the non barbed spigots):

The after market customer expects to purchase a "barbed" spigot - so that's what the supplier gives him - to do otherwise would require "expensive" (lost sales) education. Manufactures on the other hand have found a better way and overwhelmingly have moved to non barbed spigots.

28 minutes ago, RFguy said:

I wouldnt use anythign that wasnt barbed or olive crimped. 

Its a sort of free world - go for it!

Constructive reasoning rather than bald statements are a tad more persuasive.

27 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Aircraft Spruce sell various plastic polymer coated paper element plastic filters which are 30 microns or less and are barbed. All of the brass fuel line fittings, shutoff valves, fuel selector valves and facet fuel pumps I bought from Aircraft Spruce have barbed inlets and outlets. All designed for use in petrol delivery systems, not diesel. Diesel filters probably need 50 microns mesh size or more to allow adequate flow due to the higher viscosity of diesel & consequently let more dirt through however this would not be enough to cause blockages to even the smallest jets.

Yeah! well both the aircraft industry and the Yanks (who dominate) are conservative to a stultifying level.

True erring on the side of caution is a good thing in aviation but sometimes this caution is just  a cover for tradition & stubbornness, in the face of of strong evidence in support of a better alternative.

21 minutes ago, onetrack said:

Maaate, the difference between a diesel application and a petrol application, is the fire potential from a diesel leak is only a miniscule level of the fire potential of a petrol leak.

 

My reference is Number 7 on the webpage below ...

 

https://firesafety.tips/guide-to-car-fire-prevention-and-control/

 

Good quality fuel piping that utilises barbed tails doesn't possess sharp-edged barbs that can cut hose. You will find the vast majority of fuel line fittings have barbed tails, the smooth pipe fittings are in the small minority.

 Automotive fires are predominantly electrical in origin (diesel/petrol/LPG/eclectic) Always has been .

Agricultural machinery fires add, bearing/bush failures and flammable dust.

Fuel is rarely the primary cause.

The suggestion that any leaking fuel (diesel/petrol/LPG) is somehow less of concern, because the fuel has a lower flash point, is ludicrous . 

A cursory glance at your reference leaves me somewhat unimpressed  - does not come across as a factual, pragmatic, authoritative,  document - more of light weight reading from a magazine article.

In my experience your last statement  is incorrect - almost all factory fittings, where push on hose is used, utilise smooth (metal/plastic) pipe, sometimes with single ring/bulge to assist mechanical (clip) retention. After market stuff tends toward the barb fitting - a marketing ploy to visually entice/reassure the naive.

I would go so far as to state - where the hose is correctly matched to the spigot/pipe,  the barb is an unnecessary and even unhelpful hang over from a by gone era, when hose quality was not as consistent as it is today (if you go to the trouble to purchase quality hose). 

3 minutes ago, onetrack said:

There's enough reason alone just in that poor design, to not use these Hengst inline plastic filters on an aircraft. What VH aircraft uses fuel piping connections that are not barbed? None, I'll wager. It's an accident waiting to happen.

 

Barbed fuel line connections are standard throughout the automotive industry to prevent fires. Even the cheap Ryco plastic inline filters have barbed tails. 

Maaaate  your grasping at ephemeral straws - if you have to rely on the "barbs" for security, your installation is suspect. Properly sized, cut to length and supported fuel hose/filter will not give you any problems (guaranteed). Remember the Hengst  type filters are used in a multitude of diesel (vibration) applications and have been since about the mid 1960's, if not erlier - millions & millions of hours without issue.

As for "Barbed fuel line connections are standard throughout the automotive industry to prevent fires" -  incorrect on both accounts.

The "barb" is almost exclusively found on the cheap plastic mower type filters you are promoting & not found on the more "professional" filters.

I would suggest they are there to "impress" the naive, more of a marketing gimmick than a practical requirement.

Perhaps they have an application where people want to use them for varying hose ID - not what I would see as good practice.

Barbs have the potential to damage the inside/lining of the hose, particularly when you are removing the filter for inspection/replacement. When installing the new/cleaned filter, you run the risk of liberating small bits of hose which will ending up in carb jets.

Further - the barbs require considerable stretching of the hose, this may cause a permanent hose deformation, which could impact negatively on sealing the next time a barb is introduced.

As for fires?? where did this unsupported statement come from?? Please justify.

11 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

Vaporisation is only really an issue above 10,000 feet with Mogas & we are not supposed to go there anyway but yes it happens on the ground with a hot engine which is why the start procedure for a hot or cold engine with my engine is electric fuel pump on for 10 seconds, off then start. Starting is always instant. I don't actually know what the material is in the filters I use. It is coloured orange and designed for use with Mogas. These filters are used extensively in the automotive industry and I have never heard of any problems & I have not had any either. There are plenty of recreational aircraft using them.

No offense KG but the lower vaporisation point of MoGas/ULP at high altitude is not the " every day/practical" problem for most LSA aircraft - it is the heat soak situation described above..

You are indeed lucky that you experience little effect of hot engine /hot day vaporisation, for this is where most pilots have the problem. Like you, I have developed management strategies and rarely have a start problem however on really hot days (I try to avoid flying in the heat of the day) after a fueling/wee landing I can experience rough running during taxi and run up and have on two occasions (over 10 years) had partial loss of power at lift off - aborted with plenty of runway left - backtracked & tried again with success.

I am usually an advocate of using automotive "stuff" in LSA type aircraft however there are always exceptions and this is one of them - why use, a  very likely  inferior product, when a better one is  available (& from the automotive world) for a similar price??

As for "plenty of recreational aircraft using them" - this just suggests to me that there are those who have little mechanical understanding, influencing their similarly afflicted peers. I dont know of any factory built equivalents that use the off the shelf  mower type filters - that should tell you something.

33 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

If you mount an electric fuel pump directly below or fed by gravity from the tank which is capable of delivering more fuel than the engine can consume at any power setting you will not suffer from vapour locks as you are pushing the fuel through and not just sucking it as the engine driven pump does.

 

As far as in line filters go I use automotive clear plastic paper element filters from supercheap. They cost about $5.00 & have 6mm barbs. It is easy to inspect for contamination being completely clear & I replace it every 50 hours and have a bunch of old ones in the hangar that look as new. I only found a few bits of debris in the first one after the build and I have always without fail used by Mr Funnel when refuelling from Jerrycans

KG - vaporisation is mainly an issue of nil/minimal fuel flow, on hot days, after the engine has been operated and then shut down causing "heat soak" of the over engine fuel lines - boiling/vaporisation of the stagnant fuel in these lines. Some fuel set ups may be better than others for removing the vapour but as far as I know all carburetted  91 engines suffer from the same design problem.

Paper Fuel Filters:

I am horrified that you would risk the safe operation of flight by using cheap paper type fuel filters that are unlike to be subject to any sort of consistent quality control. 

The unknown durability of the "paper" and the possibility of it breaking down & releasing fibres to block your carb jets.

Due to the pleated/convoluted nature of the filter, it is almost impossible to visually asses condition/blockage of the filter.

There has been a long standing recommendation that gauze filter medium, uncased in a clear body (for easy visual inspection) are the standard.

The gauze filters, I use, were about $6 each (I did purchase  about 20 to get the best price) but what price would you put on your life?

1 hour ago, RFguy said:

The high rate of fuel return should improve/fix  vapourization/hot fuel in lines problems of MOGAS.

 

(There is a SL from Rotax requiring fuel returns to be installed  for all their 912 MOGAS engines if people are not aware) 

As you will know - fuel vaporisation , in Rotax 91 carburettor applications, is almost always  as a result of heat "soak"  after  engine shut down and usually (in my engine) on hot days (above 30C). It is most usually apparent when trying for a hot start (with difficulty) and taxying (engine running rough). It can also appear on take off run when full power is asked for. It is not an inflight problem, as there is usually sufficient fuel & air flow to keep the over engine fuel lines & fuel cool (below vaporisation). It is not exclusively a ULP issue although more likely than with Avgas.

The fuel return that mitigates the problem does three things:

Encourages/intercepts, vaporised fuel to return to the tank

Allows for fuel flow, using the boost pump, when the engine is not running driving out the vapour and cooling the system.

Generates a greater fuel flow (more cooling) in the  system,  at least close to the point of the fuel line splitting to each carb.

Fuel injected systems all have a fuel return - I am not so familiar with petrol systems but would speculate it is similar to a diesel  - excess fuel allows for sudden increase in demand (acceleration), cooling and lubrication 

2 hours ago, Bill said:

I'm interested Skip. Where do I buy them in OZ?  Thanks,  Bill

It was quite a few years ago (bought quite a few, to get the best price) through an importer,  I think it was this crowd  https://www.tooleyimports.com.au/manufacturer/hengst-filters/

Application pointers:

Make sure you are using the correct fuel line ID - (the "spigots" F & G are 8mm OD)

The "spigots" are not barbed - so hose length and security against movement are important. I tend to cut my hose so that  it pushes all the way, touching the main housing.

I also use good quality fuel injector hose clamps, that are just large enough for the job and only "snug" them down (ie not too tight)