fbpx

 

Looking for some technical help on my 912ULS. I lost power shortly after takeoff and crashed in a school yard. My plane is a Slepcev Storch. I just purchased it and put the wings on and was doing my first test flights. It has 215 hours total time. My first flight went well and I did a full power climb to 4,500 (2,300 AGL) at 1,000 FPM with no issues except for slightly warm oil temp (120 deg. C). I came back down and landed and removed the engine cowling. This helps expose the oil cooler to a more direct airflow. That was about a 15 minute flight. The second flight without the cowling was a climb back up to 4,500 MSL and now the oil temp was at 100 C. The OAT was around 87 deg F. This flight lasted about 45 minutes and everything seemed fine and the engine never missed a beat. My climb RPM was 5,400. I landed and came to a full stop. I then took off with about 1,000 feet of runway remaining. The Storch gets off at 35 kts and about a 150 feet. 

Now this is where it all goes bad. Shortly after liftoff I must have lost some power as the plane wasn't climbing as it should have been. At around 65 feet AGL the engine really started to lose power and surged very slightly and the plane started to lose altitude. At 50 feet I made a quick decision to turn 140 degrees to the left and crash into a small school yard as there was nothing but buildings straight ahead. The engine must have quit completely as the prop was not turning upon impact.

I pancaked the plane into the grass area so that I wouldn't fly/crash into the house 200 feet away. I am luckly that I was not injured as my landing gear took as the impact and colasped completely.

My post crash inspection has not revealed anything so far that would explain this engine failure. I suspect a fuel issue. Checks performed so far. Fuel tanks had 4 gals remaining in each side and I was running on both tanks. Both carbs overhauled 2 hours ago and new fuel pump installed. No water in any sumps, gascolator full of fuel and clean, all fuel hoses are without any obstructions, both carb bowls were full of fuel and clean, carb slides move easily and vacuum diaphragms as new,all jets clear, float weights in spec, all carb cables working normally, all ignition wiring intact, fuel pump removed and inspected internally and appears OK (new pump). Checked the resistance of all ignition stator coils per MM. Charging coils both 4.0 ohm (3.2-4.5 acceptable), all 4 trigger coils 240 ohms (220-250 acceptable). All ground wires were removed and cleaned prior to the flight. The ignition P-leads were rewired using correct toggle switches and new ground wires.

The plane flew 20 hours prior with no changes to the fuel system. The fuel plumbing on this is odd as the fuel return line coming from the manifold just goes back to the fuel supply hose going to the engine pump. This hose is about 10 inches long. It does not have a restrictor oriface, it's  just a 1/4 inch hose back into a T. It does not return to the fuel tank. This is how the AFM shows the fuel system. How can the pump provide any pressure to the carbs like this?

Any ideas would be greatly appreaciated. I will be redesigning the fuel system and putting in an electric aux fuel pump and a pressure regulator (for the carbs) returning to a header tank.

Before and after pics

8135_1_20200804_162141.jpg (You do not have access to download this file.)
8135_1_20200805_1337450.jpg (You do not have access to download this file.)
8135_1_20200805_133814.jpg (You do not have access to download this file.)
  • Re: Lost Power on Takeoff & Crashed...HELP

    by » 4 years ago


    You have high wing tanks, so in reality the fuel pump is redundant.  a 2 foot drop will produce about 1psi.

    The pressure is irrelavent as long as the flow is sufficient.

    But as you suspect, the fuel plumbing is WONKY!

    Once you develop a vapor bubble in the fuel lines, it will just go around in circles picking up more bubbles with no place to vent until all you have is vapor.

    Your slow loss of power supports this theory.

    Every time the fuel went around the circuit it became hotter.

    Returning the fuel back the main supply would allow cooler fuel to take its place.

    An electric AUX pump, restrictor orifice and a return line to a VENTED tank is the solution.


    Bill Hertzel
    Rotax 912is
    North Ridgeville, OH, USA
    Clicking the "Thank You" is Always Appreciated by Everyone.


    Thank you said by: David Botich

  • Re: Lost Power on Takeoff & Crashed...HELP

    by » 4 years ago


    Bill, this is what I suspected. But here is the $64 question. How was this plane flown from SC to texas through the southern states in Oct. without this ever happening? The ferry pilot must have seen some warn temps. The only change I made to the engine was to raise the radiator up 2 inches to allow for the oil cooler to be exposed to the slipstream. Maybe the hot air from the radiator was now passing over the top of the engine causing the vapor lock? I think I need to do a study of cooling systems for this 912 engine. I would think that ideally the hot air from the radiator should be ducted to exit below the engine and out the cowling. This way none of the hot air will get to the top of the engine where the fuel lines are.

    My fuel tanks do not have a provision for a return fuel line. I am thinking about a small header tank behind the firewall where the wing tanks feed into the top and having the fuel returm line go there. This would be mounted above the gascolator but not really any higher then the carbs due to limited placement options.

    I am a retired professional pilot and have made a few engine out landings but this is my first real crash landing (more of an impact) and I want it to be my last.

    Here is a pic of this crazy fuel plumbing. The hose on top loops from the manifold right back to a "T" going into the fuel pump inlet...DUH. I thought this was weird but that is the way it is depicted in the AFM from Slepcev.

    27074_2_IMG_1961 1.JPG (You do not have access to download this file.)

  • Re: Lost Power on Takeoff & Crashed...HELP

    by » 4 years ago


    I can't say how it worked for so long.

    Even with a header tank, that tank will need to be vented back to the main tank or it too will eventually become vapor locked.

    Rem> You can't put fuel into a tank unless you can get the air out.

     

    There are after-build fittings that will allow adding a vent port to to an installed tank.

    https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/90fuelelbow.php

    https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/tankaccfitt.php


    Bill Hertzel
    Rotax 912is
    North Ridgeville, OH, USA
    Clicking the "Thank You" is Always Appreciated by Everyone.


  • Re: Lost Power on Takeoff & Crashed...HELP

    by » 4 years ago


    Well David, first of all good job getting the airplane down without hurting anyone including yourself.  Looks like a sturdy airplane and the landing gear did its job well as it spread the load out during the impact sequence.  No idea why that fuel line design made it onto your airplane and into your AFM but it is definitely not in accordance with the current Rotax installation manual, which calls for he return line to a fuel tank through a restrictive office as Bill said, and an electric boost pump as well. The 912 install design on my Zenith STOL places the radiator below the prop and vents the hot air down and out below the engine. The oil cooler mounts low and behind the engine, a few inches forward of the firewall on the passenger side.


  • Re: Lost Power on Takeoff & Crashed...HELP

    by » 4 years ago


    Bill Hertzel wrote:

    I can't say how it worked for so long.

    Even with a header tank, that tank will need to be vented back to the main tank or it too will eventually become vapor locked.

    Rem> You can't put fuel into a tank unless you can get the air out.

    There are after-build fittings that will allow adding a vent port to to an installed tank.

    https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/hapages/90fuelelbow.php

    https://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/eppages/tankaccfitt.php

    Bill, 

    Assuming that both wing tanks are vented, and assuming those wing tanks are plumbed so that they feed into the header tank, then the header tank is in fact vented – through the wing tank vents.  Any air bubbles in that fuel will flow to the top of the header tank, then back to the wing tank through the feed line.  So instead of having to plumb the return line all the way to a wing tank, it should be OK to plumb the return line to the header tank, which is effectively vented through the wing tanks.  

    I learned this at an Oshkosh seminar conducted by an engineer who designed fuel systems for a living.  His take was that simpler is better, and that adding a vent line to the header tank was unneccesary.  Ditto for returning fuel to a wing tank in a system that already has a header tank. 

    He said he would only plumb a return line to a wing tank if there was no header, and the aircraft design could not reasonably accommodate a header tank.  But in that case, he suggested using a full-duplexing fuel valve with L/Both/R/Off positions for both feed and return lines, and run a fuel return line to each wing tank so that fuel was being returned to the same tank you're feeding from.  That avoids the possibility of drawing from the L tank and returning fuel to the R tank that's already full, or vice-versa.  (This is a common issue with the Bonanza's fuel system, which was designed a long time ago, before "ergonomics" and "simplified cockpit management" were considered important.  In that Bonanza system, fuel always returns to the left main tank.  Thus you have to fly for at least an hour on the left main before you even consider running off the right tank, lest you pump all that returning fuel straight overboard via the wing vent.)


You do not have permissions to reply to this topic.