What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

Fuel Tank In The Cockpit

Jcurry

Well Known Member
Hi All,
I have been searching for a low wing Light Sport for a while now. I have narrowed it down to an RV-12 or a Sport Cruiser.
As I have previously stated, I am a huge fan of Van’s designs but to be truthful I am worried about the fuel tank being in the cabin in the event of a crash.
For you folks that fly RV-12’s, was this a small, huge or no mental obstacle at all
to overcome in deciding to go with an RV-12? Has anyone added an emergency dump valve? Has anyone considered it? I get that fumes are explosive and bad but so is being soaked in fuel. I’m not saying a dump valve is a good idea. Just pondering....

Thanks
 
Chances are the tank will not empty in the limited time prior to a forced landing.
As the ground and obstacles loom in front of the pilot, he will forget to close the dump valve.
The pilot has just caused the fuel spill that he was trying to prevent.
A better plan is to shut off the master switch and close the fuel valve prior to landing off airport.
 
I don't have a dog in this hunt regarding the RV12, but if you think about it, there are lots of certified planes that have a tank in the cabin.

The Cub has a tank in the cabin and if memory serves, the Taylorcraft has a header tank that's about 6 gallons right above your shins.

Even a fuel injected Cessna has a header tank under the floor, but it's much smaller.

Not saying you're right or wrong to be thinking about it, just some perspective.
 
There’s no good place for fuel in a plane that’s about to crash. The rear cabin is arguably one of the better protected areas in the aircraft, so I didn’t have any particular concerns with having the tank in that location. Wing tanks are just as close to the occupants and possibly more exposed in a crash. The biggest factor in avoiding a post-crash fuel leak and fire is probably luck.
 
Last edited:
don't most aerobatic planes fly with centerline tanks? I imagine, as a category, they do more off-field landings than most.
-c
 
You have to figure, if you have a crash that's bad enough to damage to fuel tank and cause it to explode in flames, there's probably a good chance that you're not going to survive anyway.. Just my opinion..
 
Roll Bar Protection

It was a small consideration for me but then I thought about how the tank is housed within the confines of the roll bar area rather than out on a limb....as in out on the wing ready to be ruptured by a limb.

Where is the fuel tank on your car/truck/van? Right under/behind your kids in the back seat. Even if you have an electric car that lithium can be some pretty mean stuff if ruptured, as well, and it runs the entire floorboard of the cabin area of your car.
 
I don't have a dog in this hunt regarding the RV12, but if you think about it, there are lots of certified planes that have a tank in the cabin.

The Cub has a tank in the cabin and if memory serves, the Taylorcraft has a header tank that's about 6 gallons right above your shins.

Even a fuel injected Cessna has a header tank under the floor, but it's much smaller.

Not saying you're right or wrong to be thinking about it, just some perspective.

My wife's Ercoupe also has a header tank in front of the panel, and it gravity feeds the engine. I personally don't think that the 12's fuel tank location should overly concern one, JMHO.
 
I was not enthusiastic about 20 gallons sitting right behind me, but then I realized the WAR FW-190, Searey and Aventura HP I built also had the fuel tank in the cockpit. I don’t give it much thought now.
 
Van’s instituted a Service Bulletin very early-on to strengthen the fuel tank and mounting hardware. If crash was severe enough, the main landing gear could twist the U-channel carry-thru and the fuel tank could rupture. The fuel tank was strengthened and frangible bolts used for mounting will break prior to tank deformation.
 
Fuel

According to an article from Kitplanes regarding aircraft fires the Piper J3 and Aeronca 7AC are among the safest aircraft. Both have only fuselage tanks in stock configuration. With a high wing aircraft with wing tanks depending on how the fuel system is compromised, all the fuel may wind up in the cabin. Low wings do better in this regard. The plumbing between wing tanks and engine is VERY fragile in a crash.
The series of Kitplanes articles are highly recommended. The poor survivability of the A36 Bonanza, the Cirrus and the Lancair 4 is a real eye opener. The Cirrus of course does relatively well if the chute is used properly. However the chute requires significant altitude to deploy properly.
Bob Hoover lesson #??? fly the airplane until it stops moving.
 
Well,

If Rotax ever comes out with a 4 cylinder turbo diesel you can run on 15 ppm ULSD, and I am still current with flying... I want one... very, very low fire hazard if you crash, if you are running on true diesel engine fuel, not jet fuel.

Mark me down for one, as well. I personally put just over 340,000 miles (of its 467,000 total miles) on a 1985 Mercedes-Benz 300D and can attest to the durability of the MB diesel. The complete air conditioner system had to be replaced twice, the transmission overhauled once, and I lost count of power window motors and regulators that had to be repaired but the diesel engine required nothing more than maintenance over the years.

Big fan of the Diamond DA-62 here. I occasionally buy a lotto ticket in hopes of owning a DA-62 some day.
 
Go fly them both. The RV flies so much nicer than the Sport Cruiser. Some of those SLSA rules are scary.
 
Well,
Saw a Diamond DA-62 twin the other day, a couple of modified for aviation MB TD engines for power... only problem, at least for me, is pilot skills and price tag... about $1.45 Mil. I've never seen one of those before at WHP, did see Tommy Suell land a Pilatus there once, though.

I've seen one DA-62 up close so far. Ironically, it was on the ground at WHP! (I think it had hopped over from CMA.)

The Austro AE-330 sounds really nice.

Paul Bertorelli talks about it a little bit here:

https://www.avweb.com/multimedia/why-new-aircraft-engine-ideas-rarely-succeed/

I found the rest of the piece pretty interesting too.
 
Back
Top