My POH says that I have 72 gals of useable fuel (Piper Turbo Arrow III).
How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?
Could it be 70? 68? Does the number change if I am climbing,
descending, cruising, or in turbulence? I would imagine it would be
affected by attitude.

I have come to understand that the fuel flow gauge and the fuel quantity
gauges are highly inaccurate. It sure would be nice to know, with
pretty high confidence, at any given time, exactly how much fuel you
have and how many more minutes before your airplane becomes a glider.
Does someone make reliable gauges of this sort for GA aircraft?

Is there a rule of thumb for conserving fuel in getting from point A to
point B. I presume one uses the "Best Economy" settings at 55% power.
Of course, that also slows you way down...but I am guessing that you
would still be better off in terms of preserving the most fuel by the
time you got to point B, right?


-Sami

"O. Sami Saydjari" > wrote:
> My POH says that I have 72 gals of useable fuel (Piper Turbo Arrow III).
> How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?
> Could it be 70? 68? Does the number change if I am climbing,
> descending, cruising, or in turbulence? I would imagine it would be
> affected by attitude.

The answer you seek is found in part 23, which has to do with
certification of aircraft. Most, but not all, aircraft flying today
were certified under part 23:

> 23.959 Unusable fuel supply.
>
> (a) The unusable fuel supply for each tank must be established as not less
> than that quantity at which the first evidence of malfunctioning occurs
> under the most adverse fuel feed condition occurring under each intended
> operation and flight maneuver involving that tank. Fuel system component
> failures need not be considered.

So, yes, you can use all 72 gallons. In reality, of course, it's really
36 gallons per tank. Having one full tank doesn't mean you can run the
other one below the usable level and still draw from it.

Notice, however, that this is only true for "each intended operation".
Some POH's contain warnings like "turning takeoffs prohibited", "avoid
extended slips with fuel tank less than half full", "takeoff prohibited
using a tank less than 1/4 full", etc. If your POH says things like
that, then those are not "intended operations", and there's no promise
that you'll still be able to draw fuel while doing those things.

> I have come to understand that the fuel flow gauge and the fuel quantity
> gauges are highly inaccurate. It sure would be nice to know, with
> pretty high confidence, at any given time, exactly how much fuel you
> have and how many more minutes before your airplane becomes a glider.
> Does someone make reliable gauges of this sort for GA aircraft?

The best way I know is to know how much fuel you started with, know what
your fuel burn is (from careful pre-flight planning, power settings, and
experience), and keep track of the time with your watch.

The next step up is to install one of the electronic fuel computers
currently available for many GA models. These things measure fuel flow
quite accurately (much more accurately than the analog gauge on your
panel, which is really a fuel pressure sensor). They also typically
have some convenient totalizing functions, and often interface with a
GPS to tell you things like estimated fuel remaining at your destination.

> Is there a rule of thumb for conserving fuel in getting from point A to
> point B. I presume one uses the "Best Economy" settings at 55% power.

Often that's the answer, but not always. Flying with a tailwind, you'll
cover more ground per gallon at a lower speed. With a headwind, you'll
want to fly at a higher speed. How much faster or slower? There's
rules of thumb (add half the headwind, for example), but the real answer
is to sit down with the performance charts for your plane and an E6B and
work out some sample scenarios.

Of course, one of your pre-flight planning tasks should be to look at
the winds aloft and see which altitude will give you the most favorable
winds. Most GA planes operate in such a narrow altitude band that it
often doesn't matter too much which you pick, but you said you're flying
a turbo. Your service ceiling is probably in the flight levels, so
you've got a lot more possibilities than most people.

> How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?

You might want to read this article, "Run That Fuel Tank Dry!":

http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182044-1.html

Barry

>
>
> The answer you seek is found in part 23, which has to do with
> certification of aircraft. Most, but not all, aircraft flying today

Most light aircraft are certified under Part 23. Most serious aircraft are
certified under Part 25.

> wrote in message ...
>
>
>
> >
> >
> > The answer you seek is found in part 23, which has to do with
> > certification of aircraft. Most, but not all, aircraft flying today
>
> Most light aircraft are certified under Part 23. Most serious aircraft
are
> certified under Part 25.

There are many more Part 23 airplanes than Part 25 airplanes, in the US.
>

"O. Sami Saydjari" > wrote in message >...
> My POH says that I have 72 gals of useable fuel (Piper Turbo Arrow III).
> How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?
> Could it be 70? 68? Does the number change if I am climbing,
> descending, cruising, or in turbulence? I would imagine it would be
> affected by attitude.
>
> I have come to understand that the fuel flow gauge and the fuel quantity
> gauges are highly inaccurate. It sure would be nice to know, with
> pretty high confidence, at any given time, exactly how much fuel you
> have and how many more minutes before your airplane becomes a glider.
> Does someone make reliable gauges of this sort for GA aircraft?
Yes. Get a fuel flow sensor (transducer). The one I have (in a
Bonanza) is made by JPI
and is typically accurate to less than a gallon. This provides the
double benefit of being able to know just when to switch tanks in the
event of a low fuel situation as well as total fuel available. Coupled
to my GPS, the sensor tells me how much fuel I'll have remaining at
the end of the flight. Its very accurate.
>
> Is there a rule of thumb for conserving fuel in getting from point A to
> point B. I presume one uses the "Best Economy" settings at 55% power.
> Of course, that also slows you way down...but I am guessing that you
> would still be better off in terms of preserving the most fuel by the
> time you got to point B, right?
>
>
> -Sami

Tarver Engineering wrote:

> > wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > The answer you seek is found in part 23, which has to do with
> > > certification of aircraft. Most, but not all, aircraft flying today
> >
> > Most light aircraft are certified under Part 23. Most serious aircraft
> are
> > certified under Part 25.
>
> There are many more Part 23 airplanes than Part 25 airplanes, in the US.
> >

There are more Fords than BMWs, too. So what?

Get a copy of John C Eckalbar's book, FLYING THE BEECH BONANZA.
All your questions will be answered and more. This and his other books
are must reads for anyone flying high performance aircraft.

"O. Sami Saydjari" wrote:
>
> My POH says that I have 72 gals of useable fuel (Piper Turbo Arrow III).
> How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?
> Could it be 70? 68? Does the number change if I am climbing,
> descending, cruising, or in turbulence? I would imagine it would be
> affected by attitude.
>
> I have come to understand that the fuel flow gauge and the fuel quantity
> gauges are highly inaccurate. It sure would be nice to know, with
> pretty high confidence, at any given time, exactly how much fuel you
> have and how many more minutes before your airplane becomes a glider.
> Does someone make reliable gauges of this sort for GA aircraft?
>
> Is there a rule of thumb for conserving fuel in getting from point A to
> point B. I presume one uses the "Best Economy" settings at 55% power.
> Of course, that also slows you way down...but I am guessing that you
> would still be better off in terms of preserving the most fuel by the
> time you got to point B, right?
>
> -Sami

Sami
my gauges seem pretty accurate, I also have a shadin fuel flow monitor that
tells me how many hours I can fly and so on. I would recemmend anyone who
does long XC's where they have to stop to refuel to get a fuel flow monitor.

I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like you
have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is when
I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really affect my
ground speed.

If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not to fly
more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.

"O. Sami Saydjari" wrote:

> My POH says that I have 72 gals of useable fuel (Piper Turbo Arrow III).
> How do I really know if it can burn all 72 gals before running out?
> Could it be 70? 68? Does the number change if I am climbing,
> descending, cruising, or in turbulence? I would imagine it would be
> affected by attitude.
>
> I have come to understand that the fuel flow gauge and the fuel quantity
> gauges are highly inaccurate. It sure would be nice to know, with
> pretty high confidence, at any given time, exactly how much fuel you
> have and how many more minutes before your airplane becomes a glider.
> Does someone make reliable gauges of this sort for GA aircraft?
>
> Is there a rule of thumb for conserving fuel in getting from point A to
> point B. I presume one uses the "Best Economy" settings at 55% power.
> Of course, that also slows you way down...but I am guessing that you
> would still be better off in terms of preserving the most fuel by the
> time you got to point B, right?
>
> -Sami

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...
>
> I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like you
> have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
when
> I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really affect
my
> ground speed.
>
> If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not to
fly
> more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.

Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do that,
but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
after five hours.

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like
you
> > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
> when
> > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
affect
> my
> > ground speed.
> >
> > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not to
> fly
> > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
>
> Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do that,

Damn...HOLLOW leg.

> but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
> after five hours.
>
>
>

last july 4th I made a trip from las vegas to louisville Ky in one day.
left at sunup and landed just before dark.
longest leg was from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Joplin, Mo. Then on the way
back, went from louisville to oklahoma city in one leg.

I am 38, I dont think I am that young :)


Tom Sixkiller wrote:

> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like you
> > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
> when
> > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really affect
> my
> > ground speed.
> >
> > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not to
> fly
> > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
>
> Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do that,
> but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
> after five hours.

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...
> last july 4th I made a trip from las vegas to louisville Ky in one day.
> left at sunup and landed just before dark.
> longest leg was from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Joplin, Mo. Then on the
way
> back, went from louisville to oklahoma city in one leg.
>
> I am 38, I dont think I am that young :)

Yeah, just you wait about 15 years....

>
>
> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>
> > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > >
> > > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like
you
> > > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
> > when
> > > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
affect
> > my
> > > ground speed.
> > >
> > > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not
to
> > fly
> > > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
> >
> > Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do
that,
> > but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
> > after five hours.
>

shoot, dont talk about 15 years here, I have hard enough time dealing with being
38 !!!


Tom Sixkiller wrote:

> "Jeff" > wrote in message
> ...
> > last july 4th I made a trip from las vegas to louisville Ky in one day.
> > left at sunup and landed just before dark.
> > longest leg was from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Joplin, Mo. Then on the
> way
> > back, went from louisville to oklahoma city in one leg.
> >
> > I am 38, I dont think I am that young :)
>
> Yeah, just you wait about 15 years....
>
> >
> >
> > Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> >
> > > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like
> you
> > > > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
> > > when
> > > > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
> affect
> > > my
> > > > ground speed.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not
> to
> > > fly
> > > > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
> > >
> > > Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do
> that,
> > > but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
> > > after five hours.
> >

Tom Sixkiller wrote:

>
> Yeah, just you wait about 15 years....
>
> >
> >
> > Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> >
> > > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > >
> > > > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys like
> you
> > > > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only exception is
> > > when
> > > > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
> affect
> > > my
> > > > ground speed.
> > > >
> > > > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is not
> to
> > > fly
> > > > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
> > >
> > > Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do
> that,
> > > but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the cockpit
> > > after five hours.
> >

"Jeff" > wrote in message
...
> shoot, dont talk about 15 years here, I have hard enough time dealing with
being
> 38 !!!

Every year is shorter.

> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>
> > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > last july 4th I made a trip from las vegas to louisville Ky in one
day.
> > > left at sunup and landed just before dark.
> > > longest leg was from Albuquerque, New Mexico to Joplin, Mo. Then on
the
> > way
> > > back, went from louisville to oklahoma city in one leg.
> > >
> > > I am 38, I dont think I am that young :)
> >
> > Yeah, just you wait about 15 years....
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys
like
> > you
> > > > > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only
exception is
> > > > when
> > > > > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
> > affect
> > > > my
> > > > > ground speed.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is
not
> > to
> > > > fly
> > > > > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
> > > >
> > > > Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do
> > that,
> > > > but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the
cockpit
> > > > after five hours.
> > >
>
> Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>
> >
> > Yeah, just you wait about 15 years....
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> > >
> > > > "Jeff" > wrote in message
> > > > ...
> > > > >
> > > > > I fly at 65% power, thats because I dont have all the nifty toys
like
> > you
> > > > > have, other wise I would be flying at 75% power. The only
exception is
> > > > when
> > > > > I have a strong tail wind and a reduction in power does not really
> > affect
> > > > my
> > > > > ground speed.
> > > > >
> > > > > If you want to use less fuel fly higher. But my rule of thumb is
not
> > to
> > > > fly
> > > > > more then 5 hours per leg, this is with full tanks.
> > > >
> > > > Not without a wooden leg, either. You young whippersnappers might do
> > that,
> > > > but I'd think us older guys would have to be winched out of the
cockpit
> > > > after five hours.
> > >
>