On Fri, 11 Feb 2005 00:19:48 GMT, "Capt.Doug"
wrote:


Here is a link that adequately describes why both engines should not be in
the crossfeed position-
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...16X01434&key=1

D.

How does that accident adequately describe why you shouldn't have both
engines on crossfeed? In the statement made by the pilot, he stated
that he placed the fuel selectors on crossfeed during his taxi but
prior to takeoff, he had them in the on position. Then after the plane
landed on the highway and on his exit of the plane, he flipped them
down missing the off position (which is very possible if you have ever
flown in a Seneca) The FAA's examine found them just as the pilot
stated. In the probable cause statement, all the FAA could do is
state that there was a loss of engine power in the left engine. There
is no other facts supporting the notion that he had taken off with
both on crossfeed.

Now you could make the assumption that the pilot was lying, but
because there was no other evidence to show that he was, you can not
say that this was the cause of the accident. The FAA sure didn't feel
comfortable saying it, because it wasn't even mentioned as a
possibility.

I am curious as well as why. I fly for a company part time that has a
Seneca II and I have also taught many students in a Seneca II and not
once has that question been poised to me nor have I really thought
about it. But it does make for an interesting question.



Scott D

To email remove spamcatcher