|
Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
I wouldn't quarrel with the 14 gal/hr at the reduced 125 kt speed and assuming lean-of-peak operation (which requires matched injectors such as GAMI, cylinder-by-cylinder engine monitoring and a knowledgeable pilot). And "stratobee" has put the margin in the additional 2 - 3 hrs that he's budgeting.
I wouldn't do it myself, but the numbers look OK. Ernie |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I'd like to ad that I wouldn't fly that route myself, I'd have it ferried by a more experienced pilot. It's just that if it does that trip more than twice, then the mods probably make sense compared to the hassle of a ferry tank. Obviously there's always the northern route that needs no mods at all, but at winter that can be hazardous.
__________________
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
Holy crap. What a waste of money and effort.
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
Ferry Tanks
Your best shot is internal, inside the cabin, Ferry Tanks.
These are custom made, will require some plumbing and pumps, to get the fuel to your wing tanks. Owen adds internal to the wing tanks outboard of the current tanks. These are small tanks, several of them, in each wing. With each tank there is a fill port, and a fuel drain, both of which add to the drag on the airframe. Then there are the wing extension tanks. These are ever further outboard of the wing end. Finally, there are the under the wing tanks, attached with hard points under the wing. All of these tanks require additional plumbing, and pumps to work. The deal about all of those is that they are expensive, they are modifications to the airframe, that place additional loads on the wing, in an area that is not necessarily designed to take those loads. In addition, when you are all done, they are there forever. If you get an internal ferry tank, you can take it out when you reach your destination. You can take off at 30% over gross weight, and not affect the drag that is on the airframe. I remember listening to someone talk at the last Bahamas fly-in about flying from St. Johns to the Azores. It was the shortest route to go to Africa. There was a temporary installation of a HF radio, mounting it up in the cabin overhead. The route is direct, over well traveled shipping lanes, and avoided all the potential for icing that can be found on the northern route. In the fuselage tanks were used by the AF to ferry 0-2's to Viet Nam. I would suggest talking to Don Nieser about installing a fuselage tank. I think for long distance, this is your best bet. |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
Visited a booth at Sun N Fun but can't remember the name of the company. I will keep looking but here is one that I found.
http://www.turtlepac.com/products/bu...l-bladder.html
__________________
Herb R Harney 1968 337C Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Thanks for the info.
A ferry tank is both cheaper and easier when you ferry to Europe. However, if the aircraft ever has to go back, it needs a whole slew of approvals from various dignitaries and national air authorities. This is Europe after all. Last I heard a ferry tank would need a £6000 approval or temporary type certificate from the UK's CAA... That's why the built in option is desirable - they can't mess with that if it has a US STC. The nature of my job is that I might spend 6 months in the US, then 6 months in Europe. That's an awful long time to be away from an aircraft you own. And owning two aircrafts, two insurances? I'm afraid I'm not that rich. But who said aircraft ownership should be easy?
__________________
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
Another option is to put a tank in a cargo pod. The pod would proably cost about 2 mph at 125kt.
|