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 |
#61
|
|||
|
|||
Doing it not only checks the guage indication.
It also checks. 1. Fuel Pickup integrety 2. Fuel Cell Integreity (Bladders especially) 3. Fuel Filling issues (some airplane are difficult to fill completely) Brian |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005 09:58:18 -0400, "Peter R." As far as disadvantages, I am concerned about what might happen with the sediment in these aging fuel bladders as the fuel empties. But, I have read articles that dispel this myth so perhaps this is a non-issue. Maybe this one? http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182044-1.html "The Creeping Crud OWT Then there is the secondary OWT that says something like "But what if some crud gets sucked into the system from the tank bottom?" Give me a break! Think about this, for a moment. There are three areas where "crud" might be a concern. Crud lying on the bottom, crud suspended in the fuel, and crud floating on the surface. When we fuel the airplane, fuel is injected rather violently, stirring up the whole tank. When we fly in turbulence, fuel sloshes rather violently around the tank. Do you really think anything will be peacefully lying on the bottom, year after year? If it were, why would running the tank dry stir it up, and if it's that tenacious, how on earth is running the tank dry going to magically pick it up? How about suspended crud? It is no more, or less likely to be sucked into the fuel lines at any fuel level. Floating crud, on the surface? Well, maybe, but can you name me something that will do that? And if there is, well, how much of it will you allow, before you rip the tank out for "cleaning," or how WILL you get it out, someday? Just how, and when, will you identify it, detect it, and get rid of it? And, how much fuel do you want as a "buffer" below the floating crud, to keep from sucking it in? In fact, if there is a little something floating on the surface, I WANT it to be sucked into the fuel lines, preferably a little at a time, so that the strainers and filters can catch it, and alert me that something is going on in there. The likelihood of there being enough to cause a problem is remote, at best, and if running a tank dry will pick up a little crud, then running a tank dry often is a very good thing, because you'll catch it a little at a time, and drain it out the strainer. Of course, if you keep the tank full most of the time, and the cap on, and drain the sumps often, there isn't any way for crud to get into, or stay in the tank in the first place." |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
Nope. I have drained the tanks before and used that measurement to
calibrate the computer. Draining the tank shows the computer to be correct within 0.1 gallons (1/10 of a gallon). Running the tank dry once doesn't tell me if I get a new leak but I do also have accurate fuel gauges. If you fly long trips as often as I do, spend some money on the gauges and a good, calibrated fuel computer rather than scar the crap out of your pax. |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
Too many of you have been reading "The Cheap *******'s Pilot's Guide".
I have good working gauges and a fuel computer that has been professionally calibrated and verified at each 100 hour inspection. I don't need to make the wife want to leave me in order to know how much fuel I have. Flying over the Sierras, dodging TS's is exciting enough, I don't need to turn off the fan to add more excitment to my life. |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
Are your gauges accurate enough to reliably tell the difference between
30 minutes fuel at 60% power and empty in tyubulent air? Will your fuel computer account for fuel that leaves via a cap that has developed a leak? Michael |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
"Robert M. Gary" writes:
Flying over the Sierras, dodging TS's is exciting enough, Yeah, been there, didn't enjoy it. I don't need to turn off the fan to add more excitment to my life. We seem to have diverging groups. Some of us see running a tank (nearly) dry as a non-event. Others see it as "turn[ing] off the fan". I've seen a few references to the *possibility* that some planes will actually lose power for more than an instant if the tank is run down. Are any of us who run the tanks "dry" actually experiencing this? I suspect that the reason most of us who do this don't get so excited about it is because it is such a non-event. Is that plane-specific? (I've had it take a long time to figure out which tank just went dry when an engine started surging. It wakes me up but it's sure not so exciting that I'd avoid the practice.) --kyler |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
In article .com,
"Michael" wrote: Are your gauges accurate enough to reliably tell the difference between 30 minutes fuel at 60% power and empty in tyubulent air? Will your fuel computer account for fuel that leaves via a cap that has developed a leak? Michael INHO, the biggest error thet the "don't run it dry" crowd fails to grasp is that, at the end of the flight, it is far better to have that 45 minutes of fuel in a single tank, rather than scattered among three or four tanks totaling 45 minutes worth. That is where a lot of fuel starvation accidents happen. Pilot gets busy on approach, thinking he has selected a tank with enough fuel in it when that fuel is in another tank. |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 19 Aug 2005 09:17:22 +0200, Thomas Borchert
wrote: Robert, I know exactely how much fuel is in each tank. Nope, you don't. In fact, without running the tanks dry at least once (or emptying them in the hangar), you have no idea. You know how much has gone from the tanks if there is no leak. That doesn't tell you at all how much is left. Coming back from HTL with full tanks, the gauge on the left main started down. I didn't know if I had a gauge problem, or the tank was leaking, or if the quick drain had failed. It was moving fast enough that if it was correct I was going to be really wing heavy on the right. As soon as I noticed the gauge going down I switched to the right tank. At any rate, I had filled the tank prior to starting out, but I had no real idea as to how much gas was left. I knew I'd only burn about 4.5 gallons on the way home so I knew what *should* be in there, but not how much I really had. I did a precautionary landing at GDW. A check showed no leak and the level was where it should be. When I fired back up the gauge was reading properly. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
The primary function of the fuel gauges in most light aircraft is to
indicate when the master switch is on. Jim I did a precautionary landing at GDW. A check showed no leak and the level was where it should be. When I fired back up the gauge was reading properly. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
On 19 Aug 2005 10:48:45 -0700, "Robert M. Gary"
wrote: Too many of you have been reading "The Cheap *******'s Pilot's Guide". I have good working gauges and a fuel computer that has been professionally calibrated and verified at each 100 hour inspection. I don't need to make the wife want to leave me in order to know how much fuel I have. Flying over the Sierras, dodging TS's is exciting enough, I don't need to turn off the fan to add more excitment to my life. What happens if a tank develops a leak? We had a Comanche go down a few years ago due to running out of fuel. He took off with full fuel and at that point should have had near half left. The verdict? Mice had chewed holes in the bladders. When he fueled up the pressure kept the bladders sealed against the metal so no leaks were apparent, but once in the air the turbulence kept him bouncing enough that the tanks lost a lot of fuel. He knew how much he burned, but the gauges were bouncing too, or at least until they were near empty. He was doing really well on that paved mountain road until he found that mail box sent on a steel pipe full of concrete. No injuries except for the airplane and with a new wing it's been back flying for some time. Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member) (N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair) www.rogerhalstead.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Time, running out of fuel and fuel gauges | Dylan Smith | Piloting | 29 | February 3rd 08 07:04 PM |
Engine running again, the good, bad and ugly | Corky Scott | Home Built | 34 | July 6th 05 05:04 PM |
It's finally running! | Corky Scott | Home Built | 19 | April 29th 05 04:53 PM |
Rotax 503 won't stop running | Tracy | Home Built | 2 | March 28th 04 04:56 PM |
Leaving all engines running at the gate | John | Piloting | 12 | February 5th 04 03:46 AM |