Excellent comments. If you strike something with the nose hard enough
to put the
engine through the header tank you better have a shoulder harness or
you will be
going through the back side of the tank at the same time.
Usually there are multiple objects (trees, rocks, cows) at the crash
scene (if not
you should avoid the one object) and I was taught to let the wings
take the
brunt of the de-acceleration.
Dan C
On Apr 19, 2009, at 11:44 AM, John Cooper wrote:
Has that been reintroduced yet? I think John was having some
issues and never released it when he bought the company.
When I owned Skyport I did not produce the 30 gallon fuel system. I
was uncomfortable with the way the system vented, in light of the
fact that both tanks fed the engine all the time. The problem
could be solved by either adding a vent line to connect the tanks
or adding a left-right-off fuel valve. I didn’t have the time or
resources to pursue either option.
Regarding the danger of the header tank in a crash, Bob Hoover (and
likely others) once said the pilot’s job is to fly the airplane as
far into the crash as possible. One benefit of this is that damage
to the engine, mount, and fuel tank would be minimized. In the
case of a crash where “flying” the plane is precluded, fire likely
is not at the top of the list of things to worry about.
The STC applies to all planes from the 415C through the M10. There
may be an issue with the early planes with the steel landing gear,
I’m not sure. It’s either a different STC or a field approval.
John Cooper
Skyport Services
www.skyportservices.net
