[rebel-builders-d] DIGEST - rebel-builders-d

indabush · Post by **indabush** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:06 pm

Ditto for Transport Canada, Drew.

Mike. C-FNBO

---------- Digest Message #2 ----------
Date: Fri, 22 Oct 2010 19:54:06 -0400
From: drewjan@cabletv.on.ca
To: rebel-builders
Subject: OT humour

FAA NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULE MAKING (NPRM)
[/b]

1000.1A No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction
or
suggestion or supervision of the pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to
try
or make or make attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all, in
whole or in part of the herein mentioned Federal Aviation Regulations,
except as authorized by the Administrator or an agent appointed by, or
inspected by the Administrator.

1000.1B If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or
realizes, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are
or have been beginning to understand the Federal Aviation Regulations,
they
must immediately, within three (3) days notify, in writing, the
Administrator.

1000.1C Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending
comprehension, the Administrator will immediately rewrite the Federal
Aviation Regulations in such manner as to eliminate any further
comprehension hazards.

1000.1D The Administrator may, at his or her option, require the offending
pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in Federal Aviation
Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable
of
understanding anything.
Drew
----------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-d-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

steven bowley · Post by **steven bowley** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:35 pm

rebel-builders-d digest wrote:

Digest of list: rebel-builders-d Total messages in digest: 21

1 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 20:28:10 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: fuel flow testing

2 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 18:39:32 -0800
From : elist@whidbey.com
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

3 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:51:49 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

4 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:19:41 -0600
From : lynncole@foxvalley.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

5 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:49:04 -0800
From : rshannon@cruzcom.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

6 Date : Sat, 05 Feb 2011 00:04:32 -0500
From : klehman@albedo.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

7 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 22:22:45 -0800
From : jessejenks@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] C.G.

8 Date : Fri, 4 Feb 2011 22:40:04 -0800
From : jessejenks@hotmail.com
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] Weight and ballance datum

9 Date : Sat, 05 Feb 2011 12:05:32 -0800
From : rtpalmer@shaw.ca
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

10 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 16:41:14 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

11 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:01:10 -0800
From : walter.klatt@shaw.ca
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

12 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:12:39 -0800
From : rshannon@cruzcom.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

13 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:18:17 -0900
From : mike.davis@dcsol.com
Subject: Fwd: Problems posting on website forum

14 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:30:24 -0900
From : snowyrvr@mtaonline.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

15 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:31:16 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

16 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:35:05 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

17 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:39:15 -0900
From : snowyrvr@mtaonline.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

18 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:40:15 -0800
From : rshannon@cruzcom.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

19 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:44:23 -0800
From : walter.klatt@shaw.ca
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

20 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:49:11 -0800
From : rshannon@cruzcom.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Re: for sale

21 Date : Sat, 5 Feb 2011 18:27:28 -0500
From : brownell@cottagecountry.net
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

---------- Digest Message #1 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 20:28:10 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: fuel flow testing

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

---------- Digest Message #2 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 18:39:32 -0800
From: elist@whidbey.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Don't worry, be happy.

Seriously.

For high wing airplanes like Cessnas, it is typical in the POH to state that
both fuel tanks should be on (both selected) for takeoff and landing. This
addresses your issue as well as what happens when you are doing slips to
land, etc.

Ultimately, you are defining what your "unusable" fuel level is. Unusable is
not necessarily when the last drop comes out. You can define your aircraft,
that you have built, as the manufacturer, when either tank does not provide
the 150% fuel flow or when both on do not provide the 150% fuel flow. Put it
in your POH, placard only if the inspection requires.

You've done good.

Eric
N645E

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:28 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #3 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:51:49 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks for that,so would I call my unuseable fuel 3gal per tank?Any
ideas on the angle?I jacked the front up till the back of the floats
were almost touching the floor.Too much?
On 4-Feb-11, at 9:39 PM, Eric Fogelin wrote:

Don't worry, be happy.

Seriously.

For high wing airplanes like Cessnas, it is typical in the POH to
state that
both fuel tanks should be on (both selected) for takeoff and
landing. This
addresses your issue as well as what happens when you are doing
slips to
land, etc.

Ultimately, you are defining what your "unusable" fuel level is.
Unusable is
not necessarily when the last drop comes out. You can define your
aircraft,
that you have built, as the manufacturer, when either tank does not
provide
the 150% fuel flow or when both on do not provide the 150% fuel
flow. Put it
in your POH, placard only if the inspection requires.

You've done good.

Eric
N645E

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:28 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #4 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 21:19:41 -0600
From: lynncole@foxvalley.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Hi Jason,
My Cessna 140 is placarded for no takeoffs with fuel quantity in the
red area (the bottom 1/4 tank, about 3 gallons). It is OK to fly
level with less fuel. Incidentally, the fuel selector has only
"Left", "Right", and "Off" positions. No "Both". I have to think
carefully about which tank is selected when slipping for a landing or
landing in a crosswind.
Lynn Cole
Murphy Elite #709

On Feb 4, 2011, at 8:51 PM, Rebecca Brownell wrote:

Thanks for that,so would I call my unuseable fuel 3gal per tank?Any
ideas on the angle?I jacked the front up till the back of the floats
were almost touching the floor.Too much?
On 4-Feb-11, at 9:39 PM, Eric Fogelin wrote:

Don't worry, be happy.

Seriously.

For high wing airplanes like Cessnas, it is typical in the POH to
state that
both fuel tanks should be on (both selected) for takeoff and
landing. This
addresses your issue as well as what happens when you are doing
slips to
land, etc.

Ultimately, you are defining what your "unusable" fuel level is.
Unusable is
not necessarily when the last drop comes out. You can define your
aircraft,
that you have built, as the manufacturer, when either tank does not
provide
the 150% fuel flow or when both on do not provide the 150% fuel
flow. Put it
in your POH, placard only if the inspection requires.

You've done good.

Eric
N645E

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:28 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #5 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 19:49:04 -0800
From: rshannon@cruzcom.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

I concur with Eric. Some add'l. thoughts re (US) inspections:

If I'm not mistaken, the standard requirement is only 125% of max engine
requirement if you have an aux. fuel pump, as you probably know.

With VG's and Fife tips, 254R reaches approx. 17.5 deg. up attitude in slow
flight, just before power on stall. Apart from passing inspection, as Eric
more-or-less suggests, IMHO the real question is: in high power slow flight,
how high can the nose get before the engine starves -- when you're also
banking X deg. in a canyon and the high tank is empty? Of course, none of us
would _ever_ get in that situation (ahem!) but... I've pondered whether the
mere possibility is reason enough to have an aux. pump. (Answer here: no, so
far.)

FWIW, I tested my gravity only system at 15 deg. up and got approx. 21 GPH
at the carb. My DAR didn't ask about flow rate tests, although in a moment
of temporary insanity, I volunteered the results -- so I suppose he might
have asked, if I hadn't volunteered first. I'm not sure if he actually paid
any attention to the numbers, but no doubt he was glad to know I had done
the tests.

The DAR knows you've busted your butt getting to this point, and most of
them want your plane to pass inspection if at all possible. If you've had
some other knowledgeable eyes inspect it first (EAA Technical Advisor if
possible), then sweep the floor, and you'll be fine. ;-)

Ron
N254MR

PS - Don't have anybody else present. Even if sworn to silence, they might
_look_ like they're saying something! Or the DAR might feel he has to say
something! ;-)

On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 5:28 PM, Rebecca Brownell <
brownell@cottagecountry.net> wrote:

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #6 ----------
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 00:04:32 -0500
From: klehman@albedo.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

I would agree. Frankly I doubt that it is normal to have much more nose
up than the airplane sits on conventional gear. On amphibs that is much
less than pulling the tails of the floats to the ground. Sure it will
do ridiculous nose high flight but it is not normal especially with
flaperons extended. On floats if I haul the airplane off the water with
the aft float bottoms parallel to the water, I immediately lower the
nose to get speed and then let it fly out of ground effect at a
reasonable best climb angle speed of around 50+ knots. Many guys also
insist on having both tanks on for takeoff and landing to avoid trapping
bubbles that can restrict flow. The regs are designed to allow a low
fuel go around but to me that also means accelerating to at least best
climb angle speed before climbing.

Ways to improve the flow might include replacing 90* fittings with bent
tubing, better flowing gascolator, and definitely toss the restrictive
plastic handled fuel valves that used to come with the kits. Make sure
the tank vents are clear or see if opening the gas caps makes any
difference.

Ken

On 2/4/2011 9:39 PM, Eric Fogelin wrote:

Don't worry, be happy.

Seriously.

For high wing airplanes like Cessnas, it is typical in the POH to state that
both fuel tanks should be on (both selected) for takeoff and landing. This
addresses your issue as well as what happens when you are doing slips to
land, etc.

Ultimately, you are defining what your "unusable" fuel level is. Unusable is
not necessarily when the last drop comes out. You can define your aircraft,
that you have built, as the manufacturer, when either tank does not provide
the 150% fuel flow or when both on do not provide the 150% fuel flow. Put it
in your POH, placard only if the inspection requires.

You've done good.

Eric
N645E

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 5:28 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

hello all
need some info if possible.What would be the maximum angle used for
doing fuel flow tests?The info I have tells me I need 150% of the max
fuel required by the engine.13.5gph =19.75gph required on the flow
test.I can achieve over 20 gph when in flight attitude but I get 17
gph when I raise the nose.I used 4gal in each tank, tested
seperatly.Not sure if I'm using to much of an angle,not enough fuel?
Anything below 3gal in a tank and the flow drops below the 150%
requirement.Help!Didn't know the paperwork would be the hardest
part.Any insights here would be appreciated.
Thanks
Jason
817R

---------- Digest Message #7 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 22:22:45 -0800
From: jessejenks@hotmail.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] C.G.

I forgot to mention the big a$$ tailwheel I have as well so that may throw of your prediction a bit, we'll see on Thursday when I get weighed...but that is exactly the kind of flying I want to be doing, the amphib stuff that is.

From: oifa@irishfield.on.ca
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] C.G.
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 12:20:19 -0500

All I can tell you Jesse, if you plan to go to amphibs at any point and do
some serious cross country and back lake fishing etc... it is relatively
easy to get carried away with items being stuffed into the airplane where
it's so far aft c of g that it won't roll up on the step.. even with full
fwd stick! So starting nose heavy isn't a bad thing when it comes to that
type of flying. I'll hazard a guess that yours is going to come out at ~ 9"
to 9.7" aft of datum on wheels.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Jenks" <jessejenks@hotmail.com>
To: "Builders list" <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2011 11:07 AM
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] C.G.

So I hear.
All good info Wayne, but what I was trying to nail down are the loaded CG
limits which the flight manual I have on pdf lists as 10.85" to 18.1". As
you say, who cares (within reason of course) what the empty cg is as long
as you load the plane to get the CG within limits. There are no empty CG
limits are there?
I have an 0-320 and metal prop with original firewall location and tail
mounted battery, so hopefully my empty CG will not be too forward, but as
you say, everything you load in moves CG back, so it seems to me that with
such a large baggage area volume to carry all my gear that starting with
an empty CG that is a bit far forward is a good thing from a load hauling
perspective.
Airworthiness inspection scheduled for next weekend and I still have quite
a bit to do...
Thanks.
Jesse

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #8 ----------
Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2011 22:40:04 -0800
From: jessejenks@hotmail.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] Weight and ballance datum

Thanks a lot for sharing that Charlie. It's very illuminating, and frustrating that once again it's not always smart to trust what's in the manual. I think I have it figured out now though
Jesse

From: charlie@troyairpark.com
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Weight and ballance datum
Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 19:33:02 -0600

Jesse

A couple years back I asked a similar question to MAM.

The answer I got from Darryl Murphy was

"Hello Charlie

I think the confusion is that the data point (center of axle) is
approximately 1.15" aft of the leading edge. 20% of 60" = 12", 12" - 1.15" =
10.85" A.O.D. (aft of datum).

Hope this helps.

Cheers

Darryl"

As Darryl says

I hope this helps

Charlie E.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Jesse Jenks" <jessejenks@hotmail.com>
To: "Builders list" <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 02, 2011 1:32 AM
Subject: [rebel-builders] Weight and ballance datum

The cg envelope is 12" to 19.7" as stated in the construction manual, but
what are they using as the datum? On the cg calculation page to compute
empty cg the datum is the landing gear leg, but just want to make sure
it's apples to apples, and that the max forward and aft limits are also
referenced to the the gear legs and not the wing leading edge.
Thanks again.

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #9 ----------
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 12:05:32 -0800
From: rtpalmer@shaw.ca
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

I think the most important issue is the fuel flow. The test seems to be
designed to place the aircraft in the worst orientation for that, with
the height of the tank outlet to carb/injector pump being the least.
This is what everyone wants to know in order to be confident that you
will get adequate power with as little fuel remaining as possible. The
test helps prove out, not only that your lines aren't plugged by debris
but also that there are not too many other forms of friction impeding
the flow.
It does not consider a descent attitude and so has less to do with the
minimum fuel you would consider safe.

Bob.
773E

---------- Digest Message #10 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 16:41:14 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks to all for the replies.Heres what I figured out today in case
it may help somebody like myself in the future(not feeling to smart
lately).The best results I could get when in flight attitude was
21GPH.At an angle of 15deg it was down to15GPH at best.Took out the
flow transducer and got 36GPH in flight attitude and 27GPH at the
seemingly extreme angle of 15deg.Lots of flow.I was assured by
the"experts", that the sender would work.guess not.Luxury item
anyway.Thanks for the inputs.May need some more for this weight and
ballance....................FOR SALE 1 MGL Fuel computer...........
Thanks
Jason
817R
On 5-Feb-11, at 3:05 PM, Bob Palmer wrote:

I think the most important issue is the fuel flow. The test seems to
be
designed to place the aircraft in the worst orientation for that, with
the height of the tank outlet to carb/injector pump being the least.
This is what everyone wants to know in order to be confident that you
will get adequate power with as little fuel remaining as possible. The
test helps prove out, not only that your lines aren't plugged by
debris
but also that there are not too many other forms of friction impeding
the flow.
It does not consider a descent attitude and so has less to do with the
minimum fuel you would consider safe.

Bob.
773E

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #11 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:01:10 -0800
From: walter.klatt@shaw.ca
To: rebel-builders
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B. That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop, so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:41 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks to all for the replies.Heres what I figured out today in case
it may help somebody like myself in the future(not feeling to smart
lately).The best results I could get when in flight attitude was
21GPH.At an angle of 15deg it was down to15GPH at best.Took out the
flow transducer and got 36GPH in flight attitude and 27GPH at the
seemingly extreme angle of 15deg.Lots of flow.I was assured by
the"experts", that the sender would work.guess not.Luxury item
anyway.Thanks for the inputs.May need some more for this weight and
ballance....................FOR SALE 1 MGL Fuel computer...........
Thanks
Jason
817R
On 5-Feb-11, at 3:05 PM, Bob Palmer wrote:

I think the most important issue is the fuel flow. The test seems to
be
designed to place the aircraft in the worst orientation for that, with
the height of the tank outlet to carb/injector pump being the least.
This is what everyone wants to know in order to be confident that you
will get adequate power with as little fuel remaining as possible. The
test helps prove out, not only that your lines aren't plugged by
debris
but also that there are not too many other forms of friction impeding
the flow.
It does not consider a descent attitude and so has less to do with the
minimum fuel you would consider safe.

Bob.
773E

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #12 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:12:39 -0800
From: rshannon@cruzcom.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they claim has a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was inline for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca> wrote:

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B. That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop, so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

---------- Digest Message #13 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:18:17 -0900
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Fwd: Problems posting on website forum

Begin forwarded message:

From: Donna and Blaine Kresse <bdkresse@hotmail.com>
Date: February 5, 2011 12:23:58 PM AKST
To: <mike.davis@dcsol.com>
Subject: Problems posting on website forum

Hi Mike, I could not get this message to post, not sure why, I used the email
rebel-builders@dcsol.com. Could you please get it on for me.
thanks
Blaine
Hi to the Rebel Builders Community
I am new to the site, referred by Mr. Patterson. This is info overload but will be a great resourse when I start building. I am looking at a Rebel with the 100 hp Rotax and want to use Full Lotus Floats for remote lakes in the northeastern part of Saskatchewan. I presently live in Fort McMurray Alberta and plan on moving south within the next year and starting my Rebel project.
Is the 912 ULS 100 hp enough power if loaded to 1400 to 1500 lbs on Full Lotus Floats. The lake area I will be flying from will be difficult to access AV Fuel which is the main reason I want to stick with Rotax. I say now I will never load to max but it probably will happen once or twice. I have read where the 2150 floats are best for the Rebel.
I would appreciate any info from Rebel owners who have similar planes. If possible a few pics would be appreciated.
Thanks
Blaine Kresse

---------- Digest Message #14 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:30:24 -0900
From: snowyrvr@mtaonline.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Hi Ron,

On the FT-90 subj, I was in panic mode after I ordered my Dynon stuff
because I saw your comment on site that stated that the "90" was for grav
feed. Dynon ships with the FT-60 for my eng with a grav feed. I called both
Dynon and EI and was assured by both that the FT-60 would work correctly
with min pressure drop. Fingers crossed. CW

----- Original Message -----
From: "Ron Shannon" <rshannon@cruzcom.com>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:12 PM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they claim has
a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was inline
for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca> wrote:

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B. That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop, so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #15 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:31:16 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks again,it is a floscan 201 A-6.Should trust ones instincts ,I
knew that hole looked small.I'll check out the other senders for
later.I have to get this thing inspected before the end of Feb.Have a
pilot lined up but the insurance co. is frowning on his age a
bit.Can't really fly it till I get a hydraulic pump,the one I had made
isn't going to work.Just another few hundred down the tubes.Any word
on that pump Bob,I guess the end of January didn't work eh.
Thanks again folks.Much appreciated.
Jason
On 5-Feb-11, at 5:12 PM, Ron Shannon wrote:

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they
claim has a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was
inline for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>
wrote:

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a
low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B.
That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop,
so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #16 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 17:35:05 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Walter do you recall the size ,is it 3/8 through the sensor?
On 5-Feb-11, at 5:01 PM, Walter Klatt wrote:

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a
low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B.
That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop,
so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:41 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks to all for the replies.Heres what I figured out today in case
it may help somebody like myself in the future(not feeling to smart
lately).The best results I could get when in flight attitude was
21GPH.At an angle of 15deg it was down to15GPH at best.Took out the
flow transducer and got 36GPH in flight attitude and 27GPH at the
seemingly extreme angle of 15deg.Lots of flow.I was assured by
the"experts", that the sender would work.guess not.Luxury item
anyway.Thanks for the inputs.May need some more for this weight and
ballance....................FOR SALE 1 MGL Fuel computer...........
Thanks
Jason
817R
On 5-Feb-11, at 3:05 PM, Bob Palmer wrote:

I think the most important issue is the fuel flow. The test seems to
be
designed to place the aircraft in the worst orientation for that,
with
the height of the tank outlet to carb/injector pump being the least.
This is what everyone wants to know in order to be confident that you
will get adequate power with as little fuel remaining as possible.
The
test helps prove out, not only that your lines aren't plugged by
debris
but also that there are not too many other forms of friction impeding
the flow.
It does not consider a descent attitude and so has less to do with
the
minimum fuel you would consider safe.

Bob.
773E

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #17 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 13:39:15 -0900
From: snowyrvr@mtaonline.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Jason,

Keith Kinden at Montana Floats sells a hydraulic pump that'll work with
Murphy floats. If it's not too late give him a call. Craig
----- Original Message -----
From: "Rebecca Brownell" <brownell@cottagecountry.net>
To: <rebel-builders@dcsol.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 1:31 PM
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks again,it is a floscan 201 A-6.Should trust ones instincts ,I
knew that hole looked small.I'll check out the other senders for
later.I have to get this thing inspected before the end of Feb.Have a
pilot lined up but the insurance co. is frowning on his age a
bit.Can't really fly it till I get a hydraulic pump,the one I had made
isn't going to work.Just another few hundred down the tubes.Any word
on that pump Bob,I guess the end of January didn't work eh.
Thanks again folks.Much appreciated.
Jason
On 5-Feb-11, at 5:12 PM, Ron Shannon wrote:

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they
claim has a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was
inline for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>
wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #18 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:40:15 -0800
From: rshannon@cruzcom.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Good luck. I'll be interested to hear how it works out. If you have a fuel
pump, you should be fine. I do not use a fuel pump with my throttle body
carb -- it's just gravity to the carb -- so losing 0.5 PSI didn't seem like
a good idea. Mine was spec'd & supplied by Advanced Flight Systems (AFS) for
their EFIS/EMS, specifically for my true gravity only system.

Ron

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:30 PM, craig <snowyrvr@mtaonline.net> wrote:

Hi Ron,

On the FT-90 subj, I was in panic mode after I ordered my Dynon stuff
because I saw your comment on site that stated that the "90" was for grav
feed. Dynon ships with the FT-60 for my eng with a grav feed. I called
both
Dynon and EI and was assured by both that the FT-60 would work correctly
with min pressure drop. Fingers crossed. CW

---------- Digest Message #19 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:44:23 -0800
From: walter.klatt@shaw.ca
To: rebel-builders
Subject: RE: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Yeah, the problem with the 201 A-6 is the flow rating is too low at only 30
gph. The 231 is rated to 65 gph, I believe, and the .5 psi pressure drop
isn't reached until max flow. So at normal fuel flow of 7 - 16 gph, the
pressure drop would be much less than the 201.

Yes, it works with 3/8 fuel lines, that's what I have.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 2:31 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks again,it is a floscan 201 A-6.Should trust ones instincts ,I
knew that hole looked small.I'll check out the other senders for
later.I have to get this thing inspected before the end of Feb.Have a
pilot lined up but the insurance co. is frowning on his age a
bit.Can't really fly it till I get a hydraulic pump,the one I had made
isn't going to work.Just another few hundred down the tubes.Any word
on that pump Bob,I guess the end of January didn't work eh.
Thanks again folks.Much appreciated.
Jason
On 5-Feb-11, at 5:12 PM, Ron Shannon wrote:

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they
claim has a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was
inline for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>
wrote:

Jason, if you run a fuel flow sensor, you need one would that has a
low
pressure drop. If it is a Floscan, make sure it is not the 201B.
That one
does not work well with gravity fuel systems.

I run a Floscan 231 in mine, and it has only 0.5 PSI pressure drop,
so it
works fine. I was getting around 27 gph IIRC

Walter

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

---------- Digest Message #20 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 14:49:11 -0800
From: rshannon@cruzcom.com
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] Re: for sale

Keith,

I've been trying to reach you via direct email at the address below,
regarding the Glasair cabin heat air mixer, but haven't heard back, so I'm
wondering if the email is getting through. Please contact me direct if
you're still interested. Thanks.

Ron

On Sat, Jan 29, 2011 at 10:18 AM, montanafloat <keith@montanafloat.com>wrote:

Ron

I gave you a misspelled address the correct one is keith@montanafloat.com

Keith

---------- Digest Message #21 ----------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2011 18:27:28 -0500
From: brownell@cottagecountry.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks again folks.Craig I believe I checked that option out
before.the problem was it took so many strokes.but I'll double check.
Thanks
Jason

On 5-Feb-11, at 5:44 PM, Walter Klatt wrote:

Yeah, the problem with the 201 A-6 is the flow rating is too low at
only 30
gph. The 231 is rated to 65 gph, I believe, and the .5 psi pressure
drop
isn't reached until max flow. So at normal fuel flow of 7 - 16 gph,
the
pressure drop would be much less than the 201.

Yes, it works with 3/8 fuel lines, that's what I have.

Walter

-----Original Message-----
From: mike.davis@dcsol.com [mailto:mike.davis@dcsol.com] On Behalf Of
Rebecca Brownell
Sent: Saturday, February 05, 2011 2:31 PM
To: rebel-builders@dcsol.com
Subject: Re: [rebel-builders] fuel flow testing

Thanks again,it is a floscan 201 A-6.Should trust ones instincts ,I
knew that hole looked small.I'll check out the other senders for
later.I have to get this thing inspected before the end of Feb.Have a
pilot lined up but the insurance co. is frowning on his age a
bit.Can't really fly it till I get a hydraulic pump,the one I had made
isn't going to work.Just another few hundred down the tubes.Any word
on that pump Bob,I guess the end of January didn't work eh.
Thanks again folks.Much appreciated.
Jason
On 5-Feb-11, at 5:12 PM, Ron Shannon wrote:

FWIW, I use an EI FT-90 "gold cube" flow transducer, which they
claim has a
0.05 PSI pressure drop at 20 GPH.
http://www.buy-ei.com/Pages/Miscellaneo ... _Flow.html (It was
inline for
the gravity only results reported earlier in the thread.)

Ron
N254MR

On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 2:01 PM, Walter Klatt <Walter.Klatt@shaw.ca>
wrote:

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

----------

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-d-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

I purchased a tail spring for my Moose from Dale Fultz several years
ago. I showed it to another Moose owner and he would like to purchase
one. I have flown my Moose for four years and this tailspring has to be
one of the best mods you could do for a Moose. If anyone has contact
information for Dale Fultz, I would like to contact him.
Steve Bowley stvnjb1@cox.net

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------

indabush · Post by **indabush** » Sun Feb 19, 2012 8:50 pm

Hi Charlie.
I posted a file with the background for my right wing tank site guage
under Rebl / fuel system. Note: the quantities are litres. Gallons?

Mike, C-FNBO
_______________________
Date: Sat, 14 May 2011 16:50:15 -0500
From: rebel802@centurylink.net
To: rebel-builders
Subject: Fuel gage markings

Hello All

I have been thrumming thru my old magazines trying to find an article
(photo) that I think appeared about a year or two ago in either Sport
Aviation or Kit Planes. The photo illustrated how to paint a background of

diagonal bars behind the fuel sight gages in the wing roots that made the
fuel quantity much easer to read.

I wonder if any one else may have seen this photo and could direct me to
the
right magazine & date.

Thanks in advance.

Charlie E. 802R

-----------------------------------------------------------------
List archives located at: https://mail.dcsol.com/login
username "rebel" password "builder"
Unsubscribe: rebel-builders-unsubscribe@dcsol.com
List administrator: mike.davis@dcsol.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------