UkerDuker

My Feedback: (3)

I am thinking of using a pair of 32oz center, fuselage mounted tanks for my latest project. These tanks will feed the respective wing engines. This is a 4-engine project.

My question is, if I go this route, I will have 2 output fuel lines (per tank), so will I have to have 2 vent lines (per tank)?

Thanks for any input...
Mike

Robby

My Feedback: (18)

Mike,
Lets look at two engines, two fuel lines from same tank
and only ONE vent from one engine to tank..
That will provide ample pressure to keep both engines
fueled..
HOWEVER.... If the engine that provides the vent to
tank dies now NEITHER engine has fuel pressure, soooo
they BOTH quit...
If the engine that does not provide the pressure dies
and the engine that does provide the pressure keeps
running,, guess what... Yupp,, STILL pumps fuel to the
dead engine.. Yes,, makes a real mess...

There is also the problem of distance.. The further you
go from engine to tank the less consistant the fuel supply
will be..

K I S S is always the best answer..
One engine, one tank per engine...
Fuel systems have shown to be more hassles than they are worth..

UkerDuker

My Feedback: (3)

Robby,

Ok, that makes sense, but I need to explain the entire setup. I was planning on using a Pery pump per engine(VP30) and have the tank vented to the atmosphere. No pressure was going to be used in my setup.

I understand the single tank per engine concept, but I dont care to mount 4 tanks in my fuselage. I guess if it came down to it, I could do it, but for ease of installation I would rather go with 2 main tanks.

The distance issue should not be a problem with the RCV90SP engine. I have seen people test these in the manor I described above, and was able to pump fuel nearly 3-4 feet without issue.

But with all this said, I will go with the KISS principle. Right now, I'm just exploring options/ideas.

Mike