> Don't know if anybody else noticed but the final FAA report on Paul's
> [Conner] crash has been out since beginning of the month. According to thej
> report the likely cause of engine failure is the fuel valve selector
> position which was partially sucking air from the empty right tank. It
> brings a memory flash of John Denver's death in his EZ with the fuel
> selector problem.
> > So now I am glad to have a 2.3 gal sump tank where the fuel feeds
from
> either tank with the selector valve. In fact I took off once with the
> selector valve off and the sump tank low level warning light came on.
 > richardt2005

Nothing about it being aft of the CG limit?  Amazing.
Paul, if the final report is out, can you now "talk"?

Perry Mick.

Sure! What do you want to know?

No way for me to know if the airplane was aft of the CG limit
or not. I am sure  he pulled too many G's (90 degree bank) and stalled
the canard trying to make it back to the runway. (There was a plowed field
more or less straight ahead.)

When that happens the canard airplane turns towards the ground.
That is what the pilot witness described. We had another fatal crash
similar situation at SZP when an air show pilot pulled too many G's
in a canard at low level and crashed in the river bed.

Paul got it rolled out 90 degrees and mostly pulled out but the
vertical velocity was still high when he struck the ground almost
level. Hard enough to bury the inflated tire below ground level.
It was not muddy ground either.

I felt it was the fuel selector valve but there is no real proof
as it could have moved during the crash. I will say the detentes
on that Andair fuel selector valve were no where near strong enough.

Some body else checked the only two fuel injectors well after the crash
and found one of them intermittent or some such. Not a good idea to use
only two injectors.

First mistake was taking off with an improperly designed fuel
system using a left, right and both fuel selector valve along with a
myriad of other errors in the fuel system design. Fuel in only one
tank.  Sump tank was like a 2 x 4 across the entire width of the
fuse. Sump tank was improperly vented to one strake tank. All
this is AFTER the crash.

Paul was not too good on sharing the details of his airplane with us.
For example we went around and around on the cooling.
When I got there and saw the airplane there were two large
holes one in each side of the plenum that was supposed to be
feeding air to the rad.
Paul Lamar

------------------------------------------------------------
Did you take notes when you visit Paul Conners crash site? At the time you
implied a lot of mistakes were made. I already have an aircraft fuel system
article up. Could you please review it in light of the crash and recommend
alterations.
http://www.wankel.org/28_Fuel/28-10%20fuel_system.htm

Mark Wrathall
Wankel.org

Yes I wrote a report and submitted it to the FAA.

Paul Lamar
----------------------------------------------------
Here is the final report. Substantially what I suggested
to the FAA as the most likely scenario.

On further hind site and after someone obtained the wreckage
from the heirs the injectors were tested and one was found
to have some sort of problem. Don't use only two injectors.

Paul Lamar
--------------------------------------------------
ATL05LA081

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On May 16, 2005. at 1545 central daylight time, a Homebuilt Experimental Built
airplane, N2992, registered to and operated by the commercial pilot, collided
with trees shortly after takeoff from runway 24, at the St. Elmo Airport,
in St. Elmo, Alabama. The flight was operated under the provisions of
Title 14 CFR Part 91, and visual flight rules. Visual meteorological
conditions prevailed and no flight plan was filed for the local flight.
The pilot received fatal injuries and the airplane sustained substantial
damaged. The flight originated from the St. Elmo, Airport in St. Elmo, Alabama
on May 16, 2005, at 1540.

According to witnesses, during takeoff the engine did not seem to
be developing full power. At about 250 feet above the ground the
airplane banked left and the engine quite. The airplane's bank angle
increased and exceeded 90-degrees. The airplane's nose dropped suddenly,
the wings leveled and the nose came back to nearly level prior to the
airplane colliding with trees in a wooded area. Witness, telephoned
the 911 operator reported the accident, and proceeded to the scene to
provide assistance.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

A review of records on file with the Airmen Certification Branch,
Federal Aviation Administration, Oklahoma City, revealed that the
pilot was issued a commercial pilots certificate with ratings for airplane
single engine land, airplane multiengine land, and instrument rating on
May 27, 1986. In addition, the pilot was issued a repairman certificate
with ratings for experimental aircraft builder on July 14, 1999. The pilot
held a third class medical certificate issued on June 03, 2005 with no
limitations.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

Review of aircraft records on file with the e Federal Aviation
Administration, Oklahoma City, revealed the amateur built experimental
 airplane was registered on November 17, 2004.

METEORLOGICAL INFORMATION

At 1656, the Mobile Regional Alabama weather reporting facility,
located 13 statue miles north of the accident site, reported winds
variable at 3 knots, visibility of 10 statute miles, scattered clouds
at 7000 feet, temperature 28 Celsius, dew-point 12 degrees Celsius,
and an altimeter setting of 29.90 inches of mercury.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

Post-accident examination of the wreckage site revealed that the
airplane rested approximately 1500 feet west of the St. Elmo Airport,
in a wooded area. The direction of travel at impact was 040 degrees.
Examination of the airframe revealed damage to the fuselage and empennage.
 The landing gear and the right and left wing also exhibited damage.
Examination of the engine reveled that the engine was separated from
the engine mounts.

Post accident examination of the fuel tanks revealed that both fuel
caps were secured and the tanks were not breached. No fuel was found
in the right wing tank and the left wing tank contained approximately
 6 to 8 gallons of automobile fuel. The fuel selector was observe
selected between the both and left position.

MEDICAL AND TOXICOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The toxicology examinations for the pilot were negative for carbon monoxide,
cyanide, and ethanol.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The fuel selector has three inlet ports (left, right, and both) and
four positions (left, right, both, and off). The right fuel tank line
was attached to the both port. According to Antare, the manufacturer
of the fuel selector, if the selector handle is allowed to rotate to
the position between both and left, the fuel output line from the selector
valve is connected to both the right and left fuel tank. With only fuel
in the left tank the high pressure electric fuel pumps could draw air
only from the right tank and no fuel.

When the fuel selector lever was rotated by hand, the detents in
the selector valve were very weak and almost unnoticeable.
------------------------------------------------------------

RE> After reading the various posts on this unfortunate accident, I am still
RE> not clear on why a left, right, both, off fuel selector is a bad idea.
RE> Can you dumb it down for me?  I have one and was planning on using it.

RE> jeremy solomon

RE> What brand is it?

RE> Is this a high wing airplane, mid wing airplane
RE> or low wing airplane?

RE> The main problem with a low wing airplane
RE> is if you put it on "both" and one tank is empty or one of the tank
RE> pick up tubes becomes momentarily uncovered or dry the engine
RE> will quit as the high pressure pump will suck air from the
RE> line with the least resistance. The pump is attempting to suck all of
RE> the time. With the Andair valve this can happen when the valve
RE> is in between settings or passing from one setting to another.
RE> There could be a situation where the plane is in a slip or
RE> an uncoordinated turn. One of the inlets will become uncovered
RE> and the pump will suck air. High pressure pumps don't suck well
RE> and are hard to re prime.

RE> On a high wing airplane there is always a head of fuel on
RE> the valve (a slight pressure) and on the pump. The pump does
RE> not really need to suck.

RE> On a high wing airplane when the valve is set on "both" some
RE> fuel can actually flow out of one tank into the other.  Not
RE> necessarily so with a low wing airplane depending on the height
RE> of the valve.

RE> There are three things you always need to keep in mind.
RE> The height of the fuel above or below the valve and the pump inlet
RE> under all flight conditions or attitudes. The fuel level should
RE> be as high as possible.

RE> On Paul Conner's airplane the valve was not as low as it could be and was
RE> quite far forward. There were other mistakes as well.

RE> Also the air pressure in the fuel tank due to venting differences.
RE> At 150 MPH or more fuel can be transfered from one tank to the other
RE> and hence overboard just due to improper venting. Venting configuration
RE> is extremely important.

RE> The third thing is where is the return flow going? It is possible
RE> to pump a tank dry in less than half or 1/4 of the time if the return
RE> flow is going to other than the tank fuel is being drawn from.

RE> The red line in these 3Ds is the return flow.
RE> The green is the supply line. Here are are few plumbing scenarios.


RE> Paul Lamar ...No rotor no motor.

RE> The Rotary Engine NewsLetter. Powered by Linux.
RE> ACRE NL web site. http://www.rotaryeng.net
RE> Copyright 1998-2006 All world wide rights reserved.


Hi Paul,
As you know I purchased a Pulsar XP 3. The only reason I purchased it
was that it was a quick build and all structural work was done by the
factory. As it came with no engine all mechanical had to be done
again. I am glad the guy that built it only flew it for three hours.
The fuel system he had was dangerous. The plane has three tanks, two
low wing of 9 gal each and a high tank behind the fire wall of 5
gal. He used a four way valve and piped the two wing tanks to the two
side ports, He then put a tee piece in the port tank line with a valve
in line from the header tank. If the 5 gal header tank valve was turned
on all the fuel would run to the wing tank and then flowed out the
wing tank breather as they are under the wing. I have installed a
Jabaru 3300 engine. The plane arrived at my house on 11th Feb and I
hope to have it completed before the end of the month. If you are
interested I will send some photos.