I considered that, but there are baffles in the tanks and I couldn't see the finger screens. Feeding a bore scope through the baffling holes would prove to be challenging, not to mention the possibility of submerging the bore scope in the fuel.
I considered that, but there are baffles in the tanks and I couldn't see the finger screens. Feeding a bore scope through the baffling holes would prove to be challenging, not to mention the possibility of submerging the bore scope in the fuel.
Phil Nelson
A&P-IA, Maintenance Instructor
KF 5 Outback, Cont. IO-240
Flying since 2016
You could the cheap borescope sold on Amazon. I have this one and use often
https://www.amazon.com/Endoscope-Dep...orescope&psc=1
Alex
It seems to me that if the strainers are anyway accessible/visible through the filler cap hole that it's much more desirable to do it that way than removing the fittings, for many obvious reasons. Draining the tanks, if necessary to protect the bore-scope, seems like much less work and much less problematic... just my opinion. Of course if they are clogged with something they would have to come out.
John Evens
Arvada, CO
Kitfox SS7 N27JE
EAA Lifetime
Chap. 43 honorary Lifetime
I can verify the strainers are not visible thru the fuel cap as Phil says. There is at least one if not two baffles in the way (on my SS7) and the holes thru the baffle are not large. I have been thru this drill with a boroscope when I stupidly dropped a fuel measuring gauge stick into the tank and was trying to see where it was. Fortunately it didn't slide thru the baffle hole and I was able to fish it out after several hours of frustration. To me a boroscope would only make sense if you removed the drain fitting because it is nearby and in the same baffle bay as the strainer.
Jim Ott
Portland, OR
Kitfox SS7 flying
Rotax 912ULS
I am a bit confused here, but most likely because all my experience is with Denney Kitfoxes. I agree with those who are reluctant to remove fittings screwed into fiberglass. But, isn't the drain fitting screwed into fiberglass?
While I had my first Model IV, I removed the finger strainers for each annual - nine years worth. In those tanks, there was a Reducing Bushing screwed into the fiberglass tank and the finger strainer was screwed into that. I would hold the bushing in a wrench and remove the finger strainer without disturbing the bushing to tank threads. Are the new tanks designed to have the finger strainer screwed directly into the fiberglass?
As a side note, I only found foreign material once in all those annual inspections. It consisted of fairly large chunks of rubber consistent with what you might expect after an overhaul of an avgas fuel dispensing set-up. Nothing that would cause a problem given the fuel strainers, but definitely a likely issue with only a fuel port at the exit from the tank.
Yes Lowell you right, the drain fittings are also screwed into fiberglass. That's why I will continue to avoid removing them unless I feel a real need. What Phil and I were trying to say was that removing the drain fitting was the only practical way to insert a boroscope to look at the strainer without removing it.
I am open to correction here if I am wrong (its been 3.5 years since I assembled it) but I believe the finger strainer basket is attached to the bushing which screws into the fiberglass, and the 90 degree fuel barbed fitting screws into the bushing. If I am wrong and Lowell's description is correct for the SS7, that would be great-get the strainer out without disturbing the fiberglass thread.
Jim Ott
Portland, OR
Kitfox SS7 flying
Rotax 912ULS
Like Jim says, it is almost impossible to get past the baffles with a bore scope. The drains are right by the finger screens and made it easy to check them.
In my model 5 the wing drain fitting screws right into the fiberglass. That is why I am reluctant to do this every year. It would be nice if there was a threaded brass fitting put in there when the tanks are manufactured so we can remove the drains without worrying about ruining the threaded fiberglass.
FYI I used Fuel Lube when I reinstalled the drain fittings.
Phil Nelson
A&P-IA, Maintenance Instructor
KF 5 Outback, Cont. IO-240
Flying since 2016
Yes, you're right Jim... at least my tanks are also that way. Not trying to be an alarmist, but that is one issue I thought about before and during installing my tanks. I wish I had given it more thought. I did think of enlarging the hole for the strainer assembly, tapping it for the next size larger pipe thread, then permanently installing a brass bushing with epoxy on the threads. Same with the drain valves, because the o-rings in those things usually have to be replaced sometime, which usually requires removing the valve. But then I decided that whoever designed these particular assemblies probably knew what they were doing, and that there was historical experience to verify that they were robust and proper. That may or may not be the case. It would be interesting to get an idea of how many flying Kitfox tanks constructed/assembled like this are out there, for how long, and what the experiences have been. That might (or might not) be comforting. I'm sure only a relatively small percentage of strainers have actually had to be removed for inspection. At least I would like to believe that.
John Evens
Arvada, CO
Kitfox SS7 N27JE
EAA Lifetime
Chap. 43 honorary Lifetime
Phil Nelson
A&P-IA, Maintenance Instructor
KF 5 Outback, Cont. IO-240
Flying since 2016
Mine's like Lowell's- finger strainer into brass bushing into tank. I check yearly and use the 2-part polysulfide to re-seal.