New carb socket fits loose

Roger Lee wrote:

There’s a lot of things in life you can do until you can’t and or it goes very wrong. Just like the US IRS. You can claim anything you want until you get caught. Why pay Russian Roulette if you don’t have to. There is a reason most 912 engines have them. Just because some engines don’t have them doesn’t make it a good idea. Why wear seatbelts. For decades cars didn’t have them.  Always better the error on the side of safety.

Thanks Roger,

I do not dispute your safety philosophy.

I do question the fitting of every safety system available (& then some) when clearly there are those that are on periphery of effectiveness.

The few Rotax engines that I have seen, fitted with a drip tray, the tray can not possibly containe small (or large) amounts (drips) of fuel, given the heat from the exhaust below and the high speed air blast from prop/forward movement. Fuel would  heat "flash' & /or be blasted into an aerosol.The fumes & droplets following the air movement, within the cowling, eventually exiting into the slipstream (assuming no ignition).

I guess I would concede, that in a major carburettor fuel spill, some fuel may be deflected away from the hot exhaust but for real effect/benefit the drip tray would have to enclose at least the bottom half of the carburettor - never seen one like this.

Seems to me, that a far more effective safety investment, is in prevention of fuel spill,  by attention to maintenance, so that a spill will not occur in the first instance.

As I have mentioned before, the fitting of safety features/systems has a diminishing return on effect. It is for the pilot/owner to prioritise what systems he/she thinks are most effective and importantly gives piece of mind.

The wearing of seat belts/crash helmets/ airbags/ crush zones have a clear well documented benefit. The design/installation of these systems have been exhaustively researched. While increasing complexity & a little weight, the benefits far outweigh the costs.

The use of safety, as the justification for fitting these peripheral/doubtful benefit systems, may be correct in the strictest sense but then so is the advice never to fly.😈

This thread is about an SLSA, for which modifications aren't allowed. This debate about whether drip trays should or should not be used is diluting the thread from actionable discussion. It's an interesting design discussion, but I would really appreciate if you would take it to another thread of your own. Other people may see this thread in the future looking for a solution to a similar problem, and this debate is doing nothing to keep this thread relevant and on topic.

"My current theory is that the drip tray or the manifold on the 2/4 side is not completely flat and its pulling the socket open a bit. The drip trays are fabricated from sheet aluminum according to Vans' kit assembly instructions, and there is some fuel tank sealant that goes between the main piece and a doubler that is attached to it. Maybe there is too much fuel tank sealant in there and its causing some bowing outward of the metal. Just a theory for now."

 You opened the door to drip trays - I just eased it open a little further😈

The discussion has stalled - other than your possible problems with the drip trays (which are at best a heat shield, that could be easily deleted) there does not seem to be a solution to your loose fitting manifold socket, other than replacing it.

Kelsie, did you find out out what was causing the problem?

I've replaced the socket 3 times, one time being one that Dean at Lockwood tested before sending it to me. They've all fit exactly the same. I do not think its the carb socket.