VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics

  #181  
Old 05-14-2019, 12:08 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 4,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breister View Post
While O2 tanks do lose some weight slowly as they discharge, the difference in weight change over a flight is far less than for fuel. Locating them where a header tank would have been would result in far less CG change than a comparable fuel tank.
You missed the point entirely. It was never about CG, it was about the oxygen.

Throw a rod on the engine, ventilate the block and fill the FWF with an oil fire - now lets think for about half a second about what happens when the oxygen tank ruptures/leaks and turns your airplane into a blowtorch, with you on the downwind side.

Adding a second firewall further forward and then putting those things in the new firewall-aft space has some merit - but some things should NOT be FWF.
__________________
Greg Niehues - PPSEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2019 dues paid
N16GN flying 400 hrs and counting! Built an off-plan 9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.

Last edited by airguy : 05-14-2019 at 12:11 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #182  
Old 05-14-2019, 10:58 PM
Darin Watson Darin Watson is offline
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Calgary, AB
Posts: 134
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airguy View Post
You missed the point entirely. It was never about CG, it was about the oxygen.
...not to mention the inevitable drop of oil or oil mist around O2....Iíll take the next fight, thanks.
__________________
Regards,
Darin
C-GULF RV-7 located in Calgary, AB
Reply With Quote
  #183  
Old 05-17-2019, 12:28 PM
breister breister is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airguy View Post
You missed the point entirely. It was never about CG, it was about the oxygen.

Throw a rod on the engine, ventilate the block and fill the FWF with an oil fire - now lets think for about half a second about what happens when the oxygen tank ruptures/leaks and turns your airplane into a blowtorch, with you on the downwind side.

Adding a second firewall further forward and then putting those things in the new firewall-aft space has some merit - but some things should NOT be FWF.
I don't think it would be the issue you make it out to be. Yes, there would be a momentary increase in combustion temperature - but only momentary.

Edit: Reading back through this, somebody misunderstood me. I did not advocate for O2 forward of the firewall, but in lieu of the header tank.

Last edited by breister : 05-17-2019 at 12:33 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #184  
Old 05-17-2019, 01:07 PM
airguy's Avatar
airguy airguy is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Garden City, Tx
Posts: 4,572
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by breister View Post
I don't think it would be the issue you make it out to be. Yes, there would be a momentary increase in combustion temperature - but only momentary.

Edit: Reading back through this, somebody misunderstood me. I did not advocate for O2 forward of the firewall, but in lieu of the header tank.
Fair enough on your position choice - but as for the momentary increase in combustion temperature, I'm going to disagree.

I have a fair bit of experience in "assisting" things normally not considered to be fuels to burn in the presence of various oxidizers. I know what can happen, I've seen it and done it, and I prefer not to let it happen in an aircraft.

Now back to the subject at hand - what is the ballpark timeframe on this RV14 install?
__________________
Greg Niehues - PPSEL, IFR, Repairman Cert.
Garden City, TX VAF 2019 dues paid
N16GN flying 400 hrs and counting! Built an off-plan 9A with too much fuel and too much HP. Should drop dead any minute now.
Reply With Quote
  #185  
Old 05-19-2019, 06:33 PM
breister breister is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 1,172
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by airguy View Post
Fair enough on your position choice - but as for the momentary increase in combustion temperature, I'm going to disagree.

I have a fair bit of experience in "assisting" things normally not considered to be fuels to burn in the presence of various oxidizers. I know what can happen, I've seen it and done it, and I prefer not to let it happen in an aircraft.
You can disagree. IMHO the air moving under the cowl would blow any O2 short of a catastrophic tank failure clear too fast to materially affect combustion unless fuel were streaming directly onto the leak or the tank was otherwise right up against the source of fuel, which would indeed be a foolish installation choice. A catastrophic failure would empty the tank almost immediately.

I played around with O2 tanks too as a kid, both in a welding shop and a steel mill where everything was oily.... It might be fun if we had lots of government funding to run simulations to find out how likely various installations and disasters would be to cause a catastrophe...
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:01 PM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.