Gascolator?

[Kai]

Indeed food for thought!

On the other hand, if memory serves me right after more than 40 years of flying experimentals, I do not seem to recall a single instance when the engine malfunctioned or stopped because of fuel starvation due to a fuel line leak, a (partial) clogged finger- or inline filter, or gascolator for that matter.

I had an engine stop once because I ran a tank dry, but I don´t think that counts. I also once had to cut switches and fuel because of a most unpleasant engine room fire when the Bing carby on the Jab engine overflowed (defective float valve), and that`s it.

I am of the old school finding flying more than exciting enough as long as everything goes to plan, and my desire to experiment with smart cost saving fuel line ideas is at an all time low.

IMHO this discussion gets us nowhere- you guys carry on this conversation- I´m dropping out.

[OneTallShort]

I think that posters that are minimizing fuel line issues is exactly the wrong attitude to take for an experimental aircraft. The statistics show that EAB are substantially more likely to experience fuel delivery related issues that our certified brethren.
https://www.kitplanes.com/homebuilt-acc ... rop-stops/
Fuel delivery is the prime area that deserves more care and focus. You need to consider all of the potential failure paths and best practices.

I'm aware that the Sonex factory has (somewhat) endorsed all metal aluminum fuel filters from Summit Racing ILO the Gascolator.
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/sum- ... vaOLSn_Sjl

That's not of plastic nor glass construction, and has standard AN fittings.

Proceed with care and stay safe!

Gregg Short
Sonex N715SX

[Skippydiesel]

Hi OneTallShort/Gregg,

I don't think anyone is minimising fuel line issues - the debate is really how best to achieve a reliable on board fuel delivery system.
So far all systems promoted, do just that, ergo there have been no wrong ways to achieve this goal (so far).
The approach differs - I am a minimalist / KISS proponent and open to other technologies (automotive being one) that may offer viable solutions.
My approach does not sit well with those wishing to emulate Certified aircraft standards. I absolutely support their right to go down this costly, complex & heavy path, if they so wish or regulation demands it.
My argument is, that rubber hose (often combined with aluminium tube) & in line automotive filters, correctly fitted, is a perfectly satisfactory, cost effective and may be, safer way of moving fuel from the tank to the engine.

[dboeshaar]

OK, so I'm an old Cessna pilot. Actually, not that expensive and an easy mounting bracket to boot.

I went with the gascolator.

Now just need to punch a hole in the cowl for sumping the thing.

[Skippydiesel]

Hi, dboeshaar

".....Actually, not that expensive and an easy mounting bracket ......."

I put it to you that your statement is relative ie comparing a gascolator to an alternative fuel filtering system .

A gascolator can be had for $220 - $500 + US Weight about 0.23KG, without fittings. Spare sealing ring $14 -$22

A Baldwin BF7850 for about $15- $25 (possibly the largest filter area in this style of in line filter) Dont know the weight but miniscule compared with even the lightest gascolator.

Gascolator
Plusses - Can be mounted in engine compartment, life of aircraft purchase, good at separating & holding fee water.
Negatives - Expensive, relativly heavy, complex installation, cant see contaminants, likly to need new sealing ring (expensive) from time to time. Potential for leaking.

Baldwin BF7850 (as typical of type)
Plusses - Can be mounted anywhere on fuel supply system, that suits pilot, for ease of installation & daily checks. Easy to see/monitor contaminant build up. Cheap. Light weight (can carry spare). Suitable for fitting on each supply line. Leak proof.
Negatives - Not as good as a gascolator in separating/holding free water. Should not be fitted in engine compartment. Should be replaced at regular service intervals.

[dboeshaar]

Thank you Skippy Diesel for the research! This is a great group.

I believe the filter you recommend is nylon and needs to be in the cabin with me.
Not a big deal because I have the fuel shut off valve handy. I would not be a big fan of a fuel filter with me tho.
There is also a metal filter with AN fittings discussed in this post that could be in the engine compartment. Not real expensive either and has AN fittings.

The Gascolator costs about $125, the bracket was $25 and two fittings were $10 each
The replacement screen (when needed ) is about $6 and the gasket is about $10

I guess after all discussion, I decided the extra weight and cost was OK for my peace of mind.

Thanks everyone for the help!

Dkb

[Skippydiesel]

Your welcome.

FYI:

For about 10-12 year, I used Hengst H102 WK & H103 WK, in line, filters on my ATEC Zephyr/912ULS with 2 in fuselage tanks.
Filter on each supply line (3).
Most of fuel delivery "rubber" (replaced at 5 year intervals).
Filters in cockpit, where I could check them before each flight. Never had any problems.
Fuel in & behind cockpit, so supply lines running through anyhow, adding filters did not not increase risk.
ATEC and many other Euro aircraft, use this system of fuel reticulation & filtration.

I got my gascolator prices from the Aircraft Spruce web site.

New aircraft Sonex Legacy (advanced plans built) came with all metal fuel lines & single filter (weak point) gascolator - I will not be changing anything in the foreseeable future but this is not the way I would have done my fuel.