News:



  • May 01, 2024, 07:02:27 AM

Login with username, password and session length

Author Topic: Tanks for carrier???  (Read 686 times)

Offline Jim Oliver

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1407
Tanks for carrier???
« on: August 29, 2009, 02:29:52 PM »
Will I need a "chicken hopper" tank for the Brodak Guardian/TT 36 combo, and will 3 1/4 ounces be large enough?

Thanks,
Jim
Jim Oliver
AMA 18475

david smith

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #1 on: August 29, 2009, 08:08:16 PM »
I wouldnt think you would have to run a chicken hopper.  I have enough room for a regular 4oz.  As for the 3.25oz Im not sure how those engines are on fuel but I would say that as long as you arent doing more than a 2 or 2.5 min low then you will probably be fine.

David

Offline Balsa Butcher

  • 24 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 2357
  • High Desert Flier
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #2 on: September 01, 2009, 01:08:43 PM »
Although not mandatory, a chicken hopper would work well. RSM sells them at a reasonable price. 3 1/4 ounces should be plenty with that engine unless you are planning to do some real NATS caliber prop hanging. 8)
Pete Cunha
Sacramento CA.
AMA 57499

Offline Jim Oliver

  • 23 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 1407
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #3 on: September 01, 2009, 05:20:28 PM »
Pete,

No prop hanging for me (even if I could!!)........not proto-typical, I don't think.  This will be my very first Carrier model, so I'm thinking 4 oz. to allow lots of low speed practice.

Thanks,
Jim
Jim Oliver
AMA 18475

Offline Bob Reeves

  • 2016 supporter
  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Admiral
  • *
  • Posts: 3415
    • Somethin'Xtra Inc.
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #4 on: September 09, 2009, 08:18:17 AM »
Not sure but you may have a problem with the chicken hopper at low speeds, the GRW depends on centrifugal force to feed fuel into the hopper and they may not feed at low speed. I really don't know just thinking. I do know most I've used required a different needle setting on the ground than in the air which I didn't really care for.

david smith

  • Guest
  • Trade Count: (0)
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #5 on: September 09, 2009, 10:12:48 AM »
This was one of my set ups it worked pretty well but you would have to set it way lean on the ground to get a good run in the air. The outboard wing would have to be held down and throttle at idle until I was ready to take off.  It seemed to work good until I crashed and it broke the tank. There was just one line that ran from the rear corner of the main tank to the feeder tank.

David

Offline Peter Mazur

  • Trade Count: (0)
  • Commander
  • ****
  • Posts: 136
Re: Tanks for carrier???
« Reply #6 on: September 09, 2009, 03:43:08 PM »
The chicken hopper setup is really the best that I know of to use for profile. The chicken hopper requires the big tank to be sealed (no leaks at all) and two lines, a feed and a return, to keep the little tank full but never overflowing. Once you have this right, all the rest of the effort goes into positioning the little tank and to the location of the uniflow vent in the little tank. (You may also choose not to uniflow the little tank and it will still work fine as long as there remains enough gas to keep the little tank full. You may start to go lean at the very end of the flight if you empty the big tank and start draining the little tank.)
I use side-exhaust engines in Profile, so I am free to position the little tank directly behind the engine. The big tank is mounted rather high on the fuselage, so gravity keeps the little tank full, even just sitting on the ground.
If you have problems going lean or rich in high speed, move the little tank farther in or out, respectively, to even out the setting. It is that freedom of movement to keep the runs steady that makes the system so versatile.
Pete


Advertise Here
Tags:
 


Advertise Here