Cessna 172 with Wild Fuel Gauge Needle

"Travis Marlatte" wrote in message
ink.net...

Speaking of section 23, how do you know which version of section 23 was in
place when a plane was certified? In other words, there are rules there
now
which don't apply to older planes, right? Maybe the fuel gauge wording has
been there all along but how do you know? Section 23 only applies when
applying for certification, not for any plane flying, right?


Every aircraft has a type certificate which details what the condition of
the aircraft must be in order to conform to type. These are kept on file and
are available through such services as Summit Aviation. The certificates are
updated as new models are introduced. There are some real surprising things
in there, such as airframe life limits (if any), etc. There are many
variants of the Cessna 172, for example, and not all of them share the same
type certificate. IIRC, the 172RG and 172 XP share their type certificate
with the 175, not the 172. That implies to me that the 172RG is the same
type aircraft as the 175 fixed gear airplane, but is a different model,
while the 150 and 152 are two different types entirely. I doubt if it is
really all that important for anything except the occasional maintenance
question, since none of these airplanes require a type rating, but I thought
it was interesting anyway.

So, anyway, you look to the type certificate to see what version of section
23 applies to a particular aircraft.

C J Campbell wrote:

The gauge has to indicate the quantity of
fuel in gallons or pounds, none of this business of unlabelled marks at each
quarter level like you see on cars.

Really? Mine have five hash marks labeled "E", "1/4", "1/2", and "F". The mark
for 3/4 full is not labeled at all. The plane does have a placard beside the
tank selector valve indicating the total fuel capacity. Perhaps that's a fairly
new requirement? My aircraft was certified in the late '80s or early '90s.

George Patterson
A diplomat is a person who can tell you to go to hell in such a way that
you look forward to the trip.

C J Campbell wrote:

The gauge has to indicate the quantity of
fuel in gallons or pounds, none of this business of unlabelled marks at each
quarter level like you see on cars.

Perhaps on the new models. But on older models this is just flat out
wrong. My gauge has an F and an E and four lines, that's it.

"Newps" wrote in message
news:chSYb.73130$uV3.528318@attbi_s51...




C J Campbell wrote:

The gauge has to indicate the quantity of
fuel in gallons or pounds, none of this business of unlabelled marks at
each
quarter level like you see on cars.

Perhaps on the new models. But on older models this is just flat out
wrong. My gauge has an F and an E and four lines, that's it.

Gee, I've seen some pretty old airplanes and they all had the fuel quantity
calibrated on their gauges.

Of course I could be wrong. It is not like that would be a new experience
for me. :-)

That what makes this world such a great place - you trust your gauge and I will
trust a visual check for full tanks, and known fuel burn.

And we can agree to disagree.

C J Campbell wrote:
"Newps" wrote in message
news:chSYb.73130$uV3.528318@attbi_s51...



C J Campbell wrote:


The gauge has to indicate the quantity of
fuel in gallons or pounds, none of this business of unlabelled marks at

each

quarter level like you see on cars.

Perhaps on the new models. But on older models this is just flat out
wrong. My gauge has an F and an E and four lines, that's it.


Gee, I've seen some pretty old airplanes and they all had the fuel quantity
calibrated on their gauges.

The only place the majority of Cessnas even list the quantity where it
is visible is on the fuel selector.

Ron Natalie wrote:

no requirement for accuracy at all. All the misinterpreted rule says is the
EMPTY
mark means zero USABLE fuel.

Actually, the rule says that zero USABLE fuel will give an EMPTY indication, not
the other way around as you stated.

An empty indication does NOT necessarily mean zero usable fuel.