• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Switching fuel selector valves

PA-12 headerless also placarded left tank for takeoff and landing. However - - I played around with that some, decades ago, and I had to be pretty dramatically nose-down on right tank only to get it to quit. Then, setting up for best glide, it would restart. Not saying the placard is wrong, by any means - it makes good sense. Just saying it isn't necessarily a dramatic gotcha.

Edit: Seems to me that one or more header tanks can help for a brief un-porting, but it also seems that when switching tanks because one went dry refilling header(s) and then carb would not happen in a comforting time frame.

I usually use the both configuration, however from time to time I have to shut one off to get balanced. I make a point of leaving some in the left (landing) tank. BTW, with the Atlee Dodge tanks and sight gages, when there's nothing left in the sight gage there's nothing left in the tank either!` All usable.
 
Last edited:
Good discussion, this emphasizes why every pilot should know his particular fuel system. How it functions and why. Especially now, since there are many approved and unapproved (Experimental) alterations to Piper's original version. Do not just assume because you are intimately familiar with one airplane, that the next one you get into is identical even though on the surface it appears to be.
 
Good discussion, this emphasizes why every pilot should know his particular fuel system. How it functions and why. Especially now, since there are many approved and unapproved (Experimental) alterations to Piper's original version. Do not just assume because you are intimately familiar with one airplane, that the next one you get into is identical even though on the surface it appears to be.

This is a point I’ve made with Cub pilots for years. There are at least a half dozen approved fuel systems on these things. The accident that I mentioned earlier was a pilot flying a cub with a CC header less system. Took off on left tank, apparently thinking it was stock system, but left was mostly empty.

Know the system in the airplane you’re flying.

MTV
 
IMG_5126.JPGDrained the tanks in our 12 today...or so we thought...
In case your reading this on your phone - the left sight glass still reads half full!


Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5126.JPG
    IMG_5126.JPG
    175.5 KB · Views: 577
Last edited:
Drained the tanks in our 12 today...or so we thought...
In case your reading this on your phone - the left sight glass still reads half full!
Yikes! Have you figured out why yet?
 
It appears that the 40 year old Wag tank is simply higher than the sight gauge....so just marked the gauge for now.IMG_5146.JPG
'Hard to see from the picture, but the bottom hose drops a couple inches to below the level of the bottom of the tank.

Sent from my iPhone using SuperCub.Org mobile app
 

Attachments

  • IMG_5146.JPG
    IMG_5146.JPG
    470.1 KB · Views: 132
Last edited:
I discovered when draining fuel from my cub that my fuel selector was not left right off as placard said, but left both right off. There is 1/2 inch fuel line from the selector to gascolator. At one time my cub had 180hp installed by STC SA36RM. The 337 states the fuel system was altered IAW. I have front and rear headers. Currently I have a 160hp installed with 3/8 fuel line from gascolator to carb. I do not have the STC paperwork in my logs just the 337. I am wondering what my legal basis for having this both selector is as I would like to keep it. Ideas?
 
Got the CubCrafters STC in mine. Headerless and a BOTH position... Was a bit labor intensive to install but works great!!
 
I discovered when draining fuel from my cub that my fuel selector was not left right off as placard said, but left both right off. There is 1/2 inch fuel line from the selector to gascolator. At one time my cub had 180hp installed by STC SA36RM. The 337 states the fuel system was altered IAW. I have front and rear headers. Currently I have a 160hp installed with 3/8 fuel line from gascolator to carb. I do not have the STC paperwork in my logs just the 337. I am wondering what my legal basis for having this both selector is as I would like to keep it. Ideas?
If that fuel selector was installed at the time and in accordance with STC SA36RM it is still approved, unless you specifically removed it on paper.
 
In my humble opinion the right left off fuel selector is advantageous.

1. It is easier when doing fuel burn calculations if the burn is done from one tank. While it can be done from two tanks it complicates the issue and is more prone to errors especially when cross feed causes some error.

2. When running to nearly the end of fuel range it is advantageous to keep fuel reserves in one tank. This means running one tank dry then switching to the other tank. Piper stated that takeoff and landing should be done on the left tank. I am aware of several fuel starvation incidents resulting from takeoffs on the right tank. It is my understanding that in a climb with the aft header tank servicing the right tank low on fuel the fuel pressure may become inadequate. Keep in mind that a low wing can require use of a different than recommended tank. In a low dihedral wing such as a cub it is easy to pass the dihedral angle which keeps water in a tank flowing toward the inboard side. Example: if one walks out on a float to check fuel, it pushes that wing down causing water in the tank to move toward the outboard end of the tank. Same happens on a slanted beach. While an 18 has a sump stamped in the bottom of the tank that holds some water, additional water or water introduced while fueling in that configuration flows to the outboard side of the tank and can’t be drained. When flying it doesn’t stay in that end of the tank. The 12 has no sumps, a flat bottom and a boss for the quick drain is put in this flat bottom. After a water in the fuel engine failure on takeoff, prior to which I sumped my 12 not once but twice, I had significant time to experiment and learn and come up with a fix. During my rebuild I found that the numerous 12 tanks I examined ALL had the area surrounding the quick drain oil canned upward from years of people pushing up on the quick drain and it returning from the force of the spring. Water would sit in a ring around the quick drain or move toward the lowest point of the tank. In low dihedral wing it doesn’t take much rotation to pass the dihedral angle and allow water flow to the outboard side. On a 12 with cub gear that means if one axel is raise .62”, 5/8” higher than the other, any water in the fuel from the low wing can’t be drained when sumped. My fix was to change the 12 tanks and eventually install 18 wings and tanks and in all my cubs I have installed quick drains in not only the inboard sump but the outboard sump as well. I can sump from both quick drains even if one wing is low. The 18 has a tank bottom with a sump on the inboard and outboard side. This issue was pointed out to the NTSB, Piper while they were still making super cubs and to the FAA. John McCalis agreed to give a field approval for any fix I came up with.

3. With a right left valve in the event of engine issues due to fuel contamination, at least there is a chance that you can switch tanks and perhaps if there is enough altitude and time, get good fuel to the carburetor. At least if your on one tank, not both, you know which the offending tank is and have a chance to go to the other tank.

While the headerless fuel systems have the advantage of flying on a both position and the STC specifies that, it is easy and for someone who is inclined not to pay too much attention to fuel that may be fine, but I feel active management of fuel is a good thing. I’m not sure that the accident with the headerless fuel system that MTV talked about is the same one I’m familiar with, if so he was an experienced pilot, a coworker and a friend who was manuvearring at low altitude on the left tank af a headerless system as one would on the other standard cubs in that fleet.

I might add that while I’m not fond of the headerless system I have it in both of my cubs. I am still not as comfortable with it as I am with the left right valve.

Stu
 
Last edited:
Back
Top