What's new
Van's Air Force

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

Fuel Tank Concern

joedallas

joedallas

Well Known Member
New RV 12 Builder
Ordering my first kit. I like the RV12 very much, but have a concern for the fuel tank location. I think this is main drawback in my choice to build a 12.

I would like to see two 12 gal tanks, one in each wing for builders who do not plan to remove wings after moving to the airport.

I will build the wings last and consider building the tanks Myself

Joe Dallas

www.joesrv12.com
 
joedallas said:
New RV 12 Builder
Ordering my first kit. I like the RV12 very much, but have a concern for the fuel tank location. I think this is main drawback in my choice to build a 12.

I would like to see two 12 gal tanks, one in each wing for builders who do not plan to remove wings after moving to the airport.

I will build the wings last and consider building the tanks Myself

Joe Dallas

www.joesrv12.com
Click to expand...

Things to keep in mind if you do so.....
Re-engineering the wings structurally for the weight of the fuel.
Dealing with the possible center of gravity issues...the RV-12 was designed with specific seating, wing, engine, and fuel positions. If you change any one of them it would probably require changing another.

Lastly, any change will prevent you from certifying as E-LSA. You will have to build it as experimental amateur built.
 
Better than wings...

I assume that you are concerned about the location in case of a tank rupture during an accident. I've thought of this before but have thought that the location is perhaps safer than in the wings. It seems that if the accident is bad enough to rupture the tank behind the cockpit that the occupants were likely smashed also. Out there on the wings it is easy to rupture a tank, even completely take off a wing, and still not crush the occupants. I have no data or engineering knowledge to know whether this is true, but would be interested to hear others opinions on this.
 
tank location

I have the same thoughts about a lot of designs.....
"geez, it'd be perfect if I just......"

sounds like you are going down the road of designing your own aircraft!

by the way, there is an RV-12 with the fuel in the wings....it's called a -9a! :)

seriously, build light, put in a 125hp engine, and you'll have the best of both worlds, I'd think....( but I could be completely wrong also!)
 
Michael Burbidge said:
I assume that you are concerned about the location in case of a tank rupture during an accident. I've thought of this before but have thought that the location is perhaps safer than in the wings. It seems that if the accident is bad enough to rupture the tank behind the cockpit that the occupants were likely smashed also. Out there on the wings it is easy to rupture a tank, even completely take off a wing, and still not crush the occupants. I have no data or engineering knowledge to know whether this is true, but would be interested to hear others opinions on this.
Click to expand...

I have a engineering back ground enough to be dangerous

The main spar is the only thing holding the wing on. The front and back are shear and compression connections. A strike to the right wing may cause a compression failure at the back of the right wing and punch a hole in the right side of the fuel tank.
A tension connection at the front of the wing would help
Dyeing in a crash from the G-force is one thing
Burning is far worse.

Joe Dallas
 
joedallas said:
The main spar is the only thing holding the wing on. The front and back are shear and compression connections. A strike to the right wing may cause a compression failure at the back of the right wing and punch a hole in the right side of the fuel tank. A tension connection at the front of the wing would help


Joe Dallas
Click to expand...

The mainspar resists bending and the mainspar pins provide the tension connection. The front and rear locating lugs resist shear due to torsion and the connection itself takes compression. If an impact was severe enough to hole the fuselage tank, there's probably a good chance it would split a wing tank as well. I don't think there's any good place for a fuel tank in an aircraft about to hit something hard.
My main concern about the fuselage tank surviving a crash is that the plexiglass covering the sight holes would rupture even if the tank itself remains intact.
Robert
 
Last edited:
Good Point

chuckster said:
Why does no body complain about the gas tank in a J-3 or T-Craft, Champ or Chief? Just wondering?
Click to expand...

Something else to consider: There are probably far more aircraft accidents where the front bears the initial impact. Not too many planes get rear-ended.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
 
terrykohler said:
Something else to consider: There are probably far more aircraft accidents where the front bears the initial impact. Not too many planes get rear-ended.
Terry, CFI
RV-9A N323TP
Click to expand...

Terry If I have a engine out
I will try to land at stall speed and let the wings take the impact if possible.

Joe Dallas
 
chuckster said:
Why does no body complain about the gas tank in a J-3 or T-Craft, Champ or Chief? Just wondering?
Click to expand...

Chuck why build any thing better the Wright brothers plane was just fine.

Just kidding. I just thing vans should have wing kit with a fuel tank option for people who do not want to remove the wings

Joe Dallas
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top