![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote:
All the pontification I've been reading from the purists with the totalizers is getting to be a bit much for me. I've never flown an aircraft with a totalizer and somehow have survived the experience. Most of my club's planes now have totalizers. At first, I thought they would be a great tool for more precise fuel management. Over time, however, I've come to realize that, like many other things, they're not as magical as you might think. If they are correctly calibrated, they can be amazingly accurate. The problem is, in a fleet like mine, you can never really know if they're calibrated or not. Each unit has a "k factor" which must be determined and programmed into the unit. If the k factor is wrong, what you've got is a very precise random number generator. You can reset the k factor with some combination of button presses, and you never know which of the N pilots who flew the plane before you have finger-****ed the unit sufficiently to reset the calibration. The units have the potential to be a very valuable addition to the panel. If properly interfaced with your GPS, you can get information like "how many minutes of fuel will I have left when I reach my destination?" Of course, that assumes that your current fuel burn rate will remain constant for the rest of the flight, and the winds won't change, and you won't get rerouted, etc. And that the k-factor is set right. And that you've mastered the totally inscrutable user interface sufficiently to have set the starting fuel quantity correctly. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote: Too true. My personal rule is at the point where I'm starting to worry about fuel, I don't have enough. All the pontification I've been reading from the purists with the totalizers is getting to be a bit much for me. I've never flown an aircraft with a totalizer and somehow have survived the experience. I don't have a fuel totalizer. However I won't hesitate to plan a flight with 30 minute fuel reserve if all the conditions I mentioned in my previous post are met. Fuel reserve has more to do with weather, alternate runways, enroute progress check than an arbitrary number of minute in fuel reserve. One can easily name a situation when even an hour of fuel reserve isn't safe (say flying a limited range aircraft to a wide spread IFR area). |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
M wrote:
I don't have a fuel totalizer. However I won't hesitate to plan a flight with 30 minute fuel reserve if all the conditions I mentioned in my previous post are met. Fuel reserve has more to do with weather, alternate runways, enroute progress check than an arbitrary number of minute in fuel reserve. One can easily name a situation when even an hour of fuel reserve isn't safe (say flying a limited range aircraft to a wide spread IFR area). Not me, Buddy. I once ran a C-210 out of gas at the end of a 45 minute flight that started with 1.5 hour's fuel (figured from elapsed time). Beautiful VFR weather coming back from Freeport, Bahamas into Ft. Pierce, FL. Ended up with one wing hanging over the edge of the tarmac at Ft. Pierce... another 30 second's fuel and I'd have been fine. As it was, it only injured my pride and my wallet a bit. No violation from the feds at least.... They teach you not to believe the fuel gauges; to go by elapsed time instead. Well, I did, and it bit me on the ass. So now I leave with full tanks and take elapsed time with a grain of salt. And once I start worrying about fuel, I stop and get some because I don't have enough. As a result, I never really worry about fuel anymore except in the planning phase of the flight. 30 minutes? Sheeeeiiitttt. -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote: Not me, Buddy. I once ran a C-210 out of gas at the end of a 45 minute flight that started with 1.5 hour's fuel (figured from elapsed time). So, what went wrong? |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Roy Smith wrote:
In article , "Mortimer Schnerd, RN" mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com wrote: Not me, Buddy. I once ran a C-210 out of gas at the end of a 45 minute flight that started with 1.5 hour's fuel (figured from elapsed time). So, what went wrong? Never really found out. Personally, I think fuel was stolen at Freeport. I took off early in the morning; I couldn't buy fuel or find a ladder to climb up and physically look in the fuel tanks. For me to run out when I actually did, mathmatics would suggest I burned over 22 gallons an hour. That just wasn't possible. I had averaged maybe 15 gallons block to block on earlier trips. 65% power at my selected altitude should have yielded about 13.5 gallons per hour at cruise. Anyway, I freely admit I screwed the pooch on many different planes, pardon the pun. Be that as it may, and after much grumbling from the FAA, they finally decided to do nothing. No violation, no civil penalty, not even a nasty letter. It just went away. However, I have adjusted my practices quite a bit in the years that followed. And of course, my personal rule about worrying about fuel means I don't have enough came out of that. As an aside: my father, a former USAF command pilot, ran out of gas while driving near his home a couple of weeks later. Some wag down there asked if he'd taught me how to fly. G -- Mortimer Schnerd, RN mschnerdatcarolina.rr.com |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Ok, I have to admit, for me to plan a flight with 30 minute fuel reserve, I have to start with full tanks. Otherwise there're just too many variables to do it safely. Mortimer Schnerd, RN wrote: Never really found out. Personally, I think fuel was stolen at Freeport. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I contend a better way to set power is needed in fixed pitch A/C. We had a manifold pressure gage in our 172. Others thought it was guilding a lily, but fuel consumption could be predicted within maybe 4 percent. A tachometer is so variable w altitude. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
M wrote:
Ok, I have to admit, for me to plan a flight with 30 minute fuel reserve, I have to start with full tanks. Otherwise there're just too many variables to do it safely. Even with full tanks, there are too many variables to really fly down to 30 minutes left. Just being a little off level when you fill your tanks can make enough difference to make 30 minutes dicey in a plane that burns less than 6 gallons in 30 minutes. That isn't much margin. Matt |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
nrp wrote:
I contend a better way to set power is needed in fixed pitch A/C. We had a manifold pressure gage in our 172. Others thought it was guilding a lily, but fuel consumption could be predicted within maybe 4 percent. A tachometer is so variable w altitude. How does a tachometer vary with altitude? The tachometer reads accurately at most any altitude. Matt |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Neil Gould wrote: I question this scenario as you've presented it. As you've pointed out, the weather plays a large part in fuel burn over a distance. Landing your plane with 30 minutes reserve fuel presumes that when you've travelled x.y hours at a particular burn rate, the airport is right under you. Chances are good that will not be the case, and you will wind up with either more or less than 30 minutes fuel remaining. Well, that's why you would need multiple "continue on or land to refuel" checkpoints for such flight. With a GPS, it's fairly easy to tell at multiple points enroute whether you're ahead or behind. Also as you've pointed out, another consideration is that accurate leaning is important to precise fuel burn. However, as GA mixture controls lack precise calibration, one of the few other ways to know your fuel consumption would be with a fuel flow meter. Many planes are not so equipped, and if the plane you fly is one of those, then it doesn't really matter whether you own it or not; you're making a guess about the precision based on past experience, possibly against RPM. If you own a plane with all cylinder EGT and have many hours in it, it's not hard to fly a fuel burn rate to a tenth of a gallon, even without a fuel flow meter. I'm sure many plane owner can attest to that. Lastly, how much fuel should be remaining at your destination may be better determined by how much additional fuel might be needed if there is some unexpected problem at the destination. I wouldn't want to have 30 minutes remaining at the destination if the alternative is 45 minutes away. ;-) well, if the an alternate runway is more than even 15 minutes away, it's obviously not a candidate for such flight! See my original post about alternate runways on the flight planning. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Air Force One Had to Intercept Some Inadvertent Flyers / How? | Rick Umali | Piloting | 29 | February 15th 06 04:40 AM |
Passing of Richard Miller | [email protected] | Soaring | 5 | April 5th 05 01:54 AM |
Mountain flying instruction: McCall, Idaho, Colorado too! | [email protected] | General Aviation | 0 | March 26th 04 11:24 PM |
bush rules! | Be Kind | Military Aviation | 53 | February 14th 04 04:26 PM |
Progress on Flying Car | Steve Dufour | General Aviation | 5 | December 19th 03 03:48 PM |