skippydiesel

Also Aeroflow https://aeroflowperformance.com/ - Incredible catalogue (takes a little while to load). Page 56 . This is where I get most of my AN fittings from. Lots of fitting for you to choose from.

To the best of my understanding. 1. Solid billet of aluminium of sufficient gauge/dimension to allow for all the fittings 2. Any, with the exception of SS (doesn't go well in aluminium) 3. For return line/ pressure restriction - Rotax recommended is Mikuni VM 22/120 #35. These slow idle jets come is a wide range of flow rates # 10 - #140 . In my installation the #35 was delivering over 7L/hr back to the tank. I installed a smaller jet #15 jet which brought my return rate down to 5L/hr. Your fuel return rate may vary from mine. The restrictor for the fuel pressure should be as mall as you can fit suggest Mikuni VM 22/120 #10

Probably says something about my aesthetic standards - I prefer the straight vertical fin eg old Cessna's, Mooney (sort of strait)

"Having 3-4 threads proud is about normal when tightened." All true but I need the space ie the male needs to go in about 4-5 mm , so that other fittings can meet up

This is in a fuel fitting. I am short on space , currently the male fittings sit proud, quit a few threads showing, so need the male to fully enter the females (😆) so that other stuff can get in. Rang around the area - no luck. Have ordered a tap & die 1/8-27 NPTF - probably wont get delivered until next week (another delay!!!) Expensive result for just two fittings - Oh well if its worth doing do it right!

For clearance reasons, I would like to have two NPT fittings, screw in further than they currently do. I cant figure out how to do this, short of obtaining an NPT tap, that would enlarge the female side, to allow the male to screw in further - your thaughts?

The Fuel return Line has nothing to do with the Boost Pump operation. Rotax recommend a Fuel Return Line. It has two related functions: When you do your pre start checks and turn on the Boost Pump to check function/pressure vaporised fuel will be drawn off by the return line. Ideally the fuel return line is from the fuel distributer (on a Rotax) which is close to the carburettors, thus reducing the amount/chance of fuel vapour entering the carburettor. Once the Boost Pump and or engine pump is running, cooler fuel will circulate, reducing the chance of vaporisation. The Fuel return Line usually has some form of fixed restriction in it - min sues a carburettor slow idle jet. This is so that fuel will preferentially go to the carburettors.

".............it just gets returned to the tank ..............." One of the fixes I implemented , when trying to address low fuel pressure on climb out was to put a small aperture restrictor jet in the return line, reducing fuel return flow from 7+L/hr down to 5L/hr - helped but not 100%. The RV-12 advise pretty much mirrors my concerns, so I will try the higher capacity pump AND re install the larger aperture restricted jet in the return line.

Wow! talk about sweeping statement - The Chinese have put people/satellites into space, such is their "general lack the attention to critical detail" Its odd that on the one hand you label the Chinese as "worship money and wealth more than the Americans" & then give an Uncle Sam example of home grown as apple pie greed & corruption "Boeings performance can be held up as a classic example of what can happen when regulatory oversights are corrupted............." pretty well proving that no one nationality/country has exclusive rights to particular human traits good or bad. A few commonly held racial (Europeans ) profiles for you to ponder: The Poms (one of the European tribes), made some of the most badly constructed vehicles (Ladas/were worse again). Their DB tractors were a lesson in appalling ergonomics (solid though). etc etc The Italians made Fiats that came with non optional corrosion, also made some of the best sports cars ever and some stunning aircraft. The Germans, great engineers, great attention to detail, so much so they furnished much of the evidence at the Nuremberg Trials ............ The Yanks tend to throw HP at just about everything and this probably describes their foreign policy. Their domestic system is a shambles but they put man on the moon - go figure On worshiping money/possessions - Not sure but "Market Economics" may have its origins in Reagenomics/USA, possibly a close second to Communism, in its evil outcomes. As for the Japanese - probably the World greatest technological forgers, they just copy the Europeans (mainly German) repackage with an Asian look . They are very good at it and often improve on the original. I could go on on - Its BS to label an entire nation & its people with such narrow and negative epithets.

It would seem that Sonex may offer this fuel level probe but cant find anything on their web site. I am interested in getting feed back , from any user of this system.

This may be a useful hose catalogue http://mackayrubber.com/pdf/hose_ID_listing.pdf I have never used Mackay but have always heard good things about their products.

Imitator is the sincerest form of flattery If the Chinese follow the post WW2 Japanese model, they will copy all sorts of technology for a few years, then start improving the copies, then come out with original stuff that is World Class . On this basis, I would expect the next version, to delete all those strange Rotax 9 quirks, that no one seem to know why they do it.

Just checked them out Danny_G - they could be quit competitive (didn't factor in delivery or GST)

Thanks for that Onetrack (the Forum at its best) - will follow up your lead on Monday. Float Needle with neoprene ti Just noticed what the BM Bikes said about their offering "Float Needle with neoprene tip" . The Rotax one has a "Viton" tip - is this just a terminological juxtaposition or are they actually different???

On another topic: Anyone got a reliable cost effective source of Rotax / Bing Float Needle Valve (fuel shut off)? OM Part Number 261708 Similar to this:

I remember "Purple Pig" are they still trading?

Marty I think it might have been Gemini bottom radiator hose - definitely 25mm ID. I have a great relationship with my local Repco. They let me peruse their hose (paper) catalogue . I then purchased several likely, pre bent, 25mm hoses - took back those unused for full refund. This would be a modern version of the one I searched through: https://www.gatesaustralia.com.au/~/media/files/gates-au/automotive/catalogues/hose-application-catalogue-aus-nz-january-2018.pdf You must be able to find something in the above (Joiners page 24 & Uncoils Page25) Personally, I would avoid silicon: expensive/heavy/unlikely to find a good fit . The only good thing - comes in fancy colours for the fashion conscious.

I Ian, Yes its great stuff, reminiscent (same smell and tackiness??) as most of the pre silicon sealants. I have had the same tube of STAG in my plumbing tool box for possibly 8- 10 years - used sparingly works a treat. You think it would work around the studs on a flange mounting, as depicted previously??

Does this mean that, in your opinion, all of the other sealers mentioned, will work?

Which one is No.3? Permagasket No.2?

The key to all this is the characteristics of the sealant - not the cost. I have yet to hear a convincing argument against a, (hopefully) "local" readily available, automotive product (which I assume is out there) Just because a product doesn't come from an aviation supplier/ aviation in its title, does not mean its unsuitable for the task. Just because its associated with aviation does not guarantee suitability/quality eg The Belite fuel level sensor for aircraft , supplied from a well know aviation parts business, is not fit for purpose. I have found that I can get AN fuel fittings from an automotive supplier - way bigger range and cheaper - does this make the fittings unsuitable for aircraft - no way!!! Assuming you are of a certain age - when you were an apprentice "silicon" was the latest fix all product that hit the market, we now know it does do well when exposed to fuel. We had gasket goo's back then, that were nasty to work with but sure did did the job - they lost market share, became hard to get (some probably disappeared) its probably one of these products that I would like to find.

Just so we are all "on the same page" about what is proposed: The tank has been made to facilitate a fuel level pressure sensor, screwed into a small flange at the bottom of the tank. As you may know from other conversations, the fuel level pressure sensor consent just isn't working. The time has come to consider alternative fuel level sensors. So far all of the alternatives would seem to require fitting to the top of the tank. After taking appropriate precautions against fuel vapour ignition, I envisage cutting a circular hole in the top of the tank and installing something like this: The sensor would then be attached to this flange. There will be a need to ensure that the flange & studs are well sealed (this is where I am looking for a cost effective product). The sensor will come with its own gaskets. I would seal a "79 Commodore.) withe the same care and attention as I would bring to my aircraft. What will work for a vehicle will altos work for an aircraft ,given the same fuel type, location of flange and metal fuel tank. If I "cock-up" the modification, the risks are: some fuel spillage (not a massive leak), in cockpit fumes, which will impact on me, from discomfort to explosion, both of which I seek to avoid. The way I see it . the appropriate product will: Chemically secure (low strength) the inner flange, to the tank wall Seal the studs where they penetrate the tank wall. Seal the outer flange, to the external surface. Various processes, to achieve a successful result, have been carried out in the automotive/aircraft world for the last 100 years - its not the problem some would hint at - it just requires selecting the right sealing materials.

One thing I have learned, in my long armature mechanics life - there is a lot of hype out there, its bad in the automotive world and rampant in the the aviation world. Not suggesting your recommended product is at all inferior (its probably the creme de la creme) BUT for a job that will probably use up 1/4 or less of a small tube of automotive sealant, purchasing a tub (never to be used again) for what will probably work out to be $150 -$200 AU delivered to my home, seems a tad overkill IF a readily available automotive product will do just as well at a fraction of the cost.

What does the "Brains Trust" think of: Three Bond 1104 or 1207? Permatex Permashield 85420? Permagasket No 2? Aviation Form a gasket No3? High temperature thread sealer? Locktite 1252795? 577 Pipe sealant? 512 Flange sealent? STAG? Others?

I have a fair sample of this on my shelf BUT this is an in fuselage tank (don't want fumes let alone spillage) and I would like to think that I have chosen a product known to do an excellent job over extended period of time (nothing like a respondent with first hand experience /knowledge)