Vapor lock and the numbers

splash

your social justice comic center
<o:smarttagtype namespaceuri="urn:schemas-microsoft-com<img src=" http:="" forums.jetcareers.com="" images="" smilies="" redface.gif="" border="0" alt="" title="Embarrassment" smilieid="2" class="inlineimg"></o:smarttagtype>The purpose of this thread is discuss vapor lock on an intellectual level.

First, I would like to tell you what it is.
Vapor lock is a problem that mostly affects gasoline-fueled internal combustion engines. It occurs when the liquid fuel changes state from liquid to gas while still in the fuel delivery system. This disrupts the operation of the fuel pump, causing loss of feed pressure to the carburetor or fuel injection system, resulting in transient loss of power or complete stalling. Restarting the engine from this state may be difficult. The fuel can vaporize due to being heated by the engine, by the local climate or due to a lower boiling point at high altitude. In regions where higher volatility fuels are used during the winter to improve the starting of the engine, the use of "winter" fuels during the summer can cause vapor lock to occur more readily.

I searched the NTSB files that state the number of accidents caused by the various models of aircraft. Cessna 172, 182, 206, and the 210.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp

I searched under 2 different word strings the first under “vapor lock” and the second under “a loss of engine power for undetermined reasons” between <st1:date year="1990" day="1" month="1">1/1/1990</st1:date> to <st1:date year="2009" day="4" month="1">1/4/2009</st1:date>. My accident comes up under "a loss of engine power for undetermined reasons". I had never heard of vapor lock until the FAA guy put it in my ears.
<o></o>
Results for vapor lock:
<o></o>
172- 0 results
182- 1 result
210- 5 results
<o></o>
The subject on how the NTSB files “ vapor lock” is not presently clear to me at this time. I believe if the pilot says “vapor lock” in his/her statement then the search engine picks it up other wise it is filed as a loss of power for undetermined reasons. On <st1:date year="1991" day="22" month="8">8/22/91</st1:date> this under the 210 model report stands out: A CESSNA SERVICE LETTER HAD NOT BEEN COMPILED WITH THAT RECOMMENDED MODIFICATIONS OF THE FUEL SYSTEM TO PREVENT VAPOR LOCK PROBLEMS. THE PILOT WAS NOT FAMILIAR WITH FUEL SYSTEM VAPOR LOCK.

A Cessna service letter? http://www.cessna.org/public/index.html It's John Frank again! He looks familiar.

Results for a loss of engine power for undetermined reasons.<o></o>
<o></o>
172- 66 results
182- 43 results
210- 34 results
<o></o>
[FONT=&quot]This brings me to the next step of research: putting a percentage on these figures with how many are in service.
[/FONT]
 

SteveC

Really?
Staff member
< I think you might get some more discussion on this topic in the Technical Talk forum so I'll move this thread there. >
 

splash

your social justice comic center
thanks steve

114 seats filled in the arena and I can hear a pin drop. The facts are above. Have I proved my case so far? Any disagreements?
 

splash

your social justice comic center
1. Most importantly. Vapor lock has no early signs of warning to the pilot until it happens.

2. The 210 has it's quirks and vapor lock is one of them we as pilots should know about.
 

MikeFavinger

Hubschrauber Flieger
What are you proving?
1. Most importantly. Vapor lock has no early signs of warning to the pilot until it happens.

2. The 210 has it's quirks and vapor lock is one of them we as pilots should know about.
I'll second Sidious and again ask, what are you proving?

You provided a wiki definition for vapor lock. The causes of vapor lock should be covered fairly well during your private pilot training. Vapor lock should not be news to pilots.

You previously stated the 210 was "#1 for vapor lock." Is that what this thread is about? Or is it that vapor lock can happen in a 210?

A constructive thread about vapor lock would involve measures to prevent vapor lock from occurring, and immediate action items a pilot should do following an incident.
 

USMCmech

Well-Known Member
A constructive thread about vapor lock would involve measures to prevent vapor lock from occurring,
Make sure there is no ethanol in the fuel if you are useing a Mogas STC.

and immediate action items a pilot should do following an incident.
If something happens inturupting fuel flow, turn the boost pump on.

End of discussion



Splash,

I (as well as several others aparently) am very puzzled why you are makeing such a big deal about this. Vapor lock isn't an issue that many pilots have ever heard about much less seen first hand. The 210 doesn't have a safety record any better or worse than any other big single. It "may" be more prone to vapor lock than say a Bonanza, but I doubt it. I'm an A&P and I've never come across any airplane where it was a problem. There are many pilots here with YEARS of experiance flying the 210, and none of them seem to be worried about it. I flew a T210 for 6 months and had zero issues with it.

Every airplane design has it's share of issues, and the 210 was no exception. I personally have more issues with the MLG design than the powerplant.
 

wjmiller3

Well-Known Member
Make sure there is no ethanol in the fuel if you are useing a Mogas STC.



If something happens inturupting fuel flow, turn the boost pump on.

End of discussion



Splash,

I (as well as several others aparently) am very puzzled why you are makeing such a big deal about this. Vapor lock isn't an issue that many pilots have ever heard about much less seen first hand. The 210 doesn't have a safety record any better or worse than any other big single. It "may" be more prone to vapor lock than say a Bonanza, but I doubt it. I'm an A&P and I've never come across any airplane where it was a problem. There are many pilots here with YEARS of experiance flying the 210, and none of them seem to be worried about it. I flew a T210 for 6 months and had zero issues with it.

Every airplane design has it's share of issues, and the 210 was no exception. I personally have more issues with the MLG design than the powerplant.
I had to google MLG to figure out what it was..... Then I felt stupid.
 

BajtheJino

I'm looking at you.
I did the same NTSB search all the way back to 1964. I read all of the results and got 5, count it 5 confirmed vapor lock accidents.
I'll take those odds.
 

splash

your social justice comic center
Ian, you were so rude in the other thread that I refuse to answer or respond to any of your statements. I have the notion that the bad attitude is still there in your tone. Get rid of the tension. You and I are done here on this topic.


Make sure there is no ethanol in the fuel if you are useing a Mogas STC.



If something happens inturupting fuel flow, turn the boost pump on.

End of discussion



Splash,

I (as well as several others aparently) am very puzzled why you are makeing such a big deal about this. Vapor lock isn't an issue that many pilots have ever heard about much less seen first hand. The 210 doesn't have a safety record any better or worse than any other big single. It "may" be more prone to vapor lock than say a Bonanza, but I doubt it. I'm an A&P and I've never come across any airplane where it was a problem. There are many pilots here with YEARS of experiance flying the 210, and none of them seem to be worried about it. I flew a T210 for 6 months and had zero issues with it.

Every airplane design has it's share of issues, and the 210 was no exception. I personally have more issues with the MLG design than the powerplant.
I believe it became a big deal when I stated getting mud slung at me. My response was very short and to the point about vapor lock. In bold is why I said something about vapor lock because it is not an issue that many pilots have ever heard about.

I totally agree every airplane has it's share of issues and the 210 was no exception. Vapor lock is one of them just as your input with the MLG. Why was I bombed with all the mud? There was only one maybe two posters that respected me. I never said anything about FLX to start the mud slinging.

Flying magazine had a write up on the 210 and vapor lock being one of it's quirks back in mid to late 2005. I wish I could get my hands on that article about this matter.
 

splash

your social justice comic center
I did the same NTSB search all the way back to 1964. I read all of the results and got 5, count it 5 confirmed vapor lock accidents.
I'll take those odds.
I did as well. Did you get the one where I posted some of the info about it? If the pilot says "vapor lock" in his/her statement then that is confirmed vapor lock? Pieces of the puzzle are missing don't you think?

On the other hand you are right about the odds of vapor lock happening to you. Like the saying goes, "there are people it has happen to and those it will happen to". I wish it didn't happen to anyone or the ones it will come to. Can you not respect me, a person that it has happen to? I'm not forcing my views here it's all facts.
 

BajtheJino

I'm looking at you.
Are you schizophrenic? The NTSB query page. Cessna 210. Vapor Lock.

ACCORDING TO THE AVIATION TRAINING CENTER DIRECTOR OF MAINTENANCE THE CAUSE OF THE ENGINE FAILURE WAS A FUEL VAPOR LOCK.
REMARKS- PART PWR LOSS AFT TKOF,HOT DAY.DIDNT CK FUEL FLOW OR TRN ON BOOST PMP TO COR FOR PSBL VAPOR LOCK.
Wait...why am I proving your point?
 

USMCmech

Well-Known Member
I believe it became a big deal when I stated getting mud slung at me.
Dude, it's the internet. Getting worked up and losing sleep because someone on the internet said you were [insert insult here] is completely pointless. After I got drawn into a fight with a troll once, I decided that if I was upset with a post, I would simply ignore that entire thread.

I ocasionally still get sucked in, but quickly rember that arguing on the internet is like the special olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard.

Flying magazine had a write up on the 210 and vapor lock being one of it's quirks back in mid to late 2005. I wish I could get my hands on that article about this matter.
Ok, so Flying Magazine says it does have a slightly higher incidence of vapor lock issues. Aparently it wasn't enough of an issue for one of their editors, Dick Collins flew one for 25 years. He even profiled Flight Express and their excellent record useing 210s.
 

splash

your social justice comic center
I am very wrong about the 210 vapor lock thing. It is actually ranked #13 in case studies. All of this to be wrong is a big let down, no one is perfect. I pick up my things and go home for another day. Ball game is over here. Silly me.

Boris, I am sorry and you be sure you turn on the high side of the fuel pump if you expect vapor lock as you stated if you ever fly the 210 again.

Happy trails ;)
 

Copperhed51

Well-Known Member
I experienced vapor lock while climbing out of KAPA in Denver in the middle of summer with almost full fuel and 4 guys in a Cessna 310. The temperature was right at 100 degrees. I began climbing out and made it maybe 1,000AGL when my right engine began surging. First thing I did was look around to find an airport I could get to in a hurry while reaching down to turn on the electric fuel pump. As soon as I turned the pump on, all was well. Scared the poop out of me though because if I lost the engine, I would have landed at an Air Force base which would have been a crazy ordeal.

It was kind of funny, after we got cruising back to Kansas City, I asked my friends (not pilots) if they were worried at all after we took off. They said "yeah, it was really bumpy so I was kind of scared". They had no idea that the engine was quitting.

Moral of the story:
1) Vapor lock can and does happen under the right conditions.
2) Turning on the boost pump fixes the problem immediately...it's a non-event if you are capable of diagnosing a problem.
 

splash

your social justice comic center
Moral of the story:
1) Vapor lock can and does happen under the right conditions.
2) Turning on the boost pump fixes the problem immediately...it's a non-event if you are capable of diagnosing a problem.

Good job. In some cases though turning on the boost pump doesn't always work immediately. It is the best thing to do to get the engine back up but sometimes it doesn't happen immediately as in my case. It didn't happen at all.
 
Top