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="]This brings me to the next step of research: putting a percentage on these figures with how many are in service.
[/FONT]
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="]This brings me to the next step of research: putting a percentage on these figures with how many are in service.
[/FONT]