Fuel mismanagement

Originally posted by Moggy C
Hear hear!

Any electronic instrument ALWAYS has the potential to let you down.

There is no substitute for checking the log AND a visual check.

Our analogue fuel gauge, (a piece of wood with markings on it)has never been known to under or over-read at any time.

I trust it with my life 😉

Moggy

The old wire in a cork fuel guage was infallible as long as the wire was undamaged even if it is an old fashioned idea it’s jaust a pity that manufacturers don’t still use them

Hear hear!

Any electronic instrument ALWAYS has the potential to let you down.

There is no substitute for checking the log AND a visual check.

Our analogue fuel gauge, (a piece of wood with markings on it)has never been known to under or over-read at any time.

I trust it with my life 😉

Moggy

When learning I always used a cut off broom handle to check the fuel levels. I found this a strange concept to start with but when you start to look at in inaccuracies in the fuel gauges you can see why people use other means of checking what is available. The one thing” Broom handle” method does make you do is sit down and work out your fuel calculations properly

Now I rely on a cork and wire system. It’s simple but effective 🙂

Glenn

Originally posted by millermilla
Hiya,

I only have a mere 70 or so hours flying but during that time I have never once used or looked at the fuel gauges in my aircraft as they are so inacurate. In fact during my training I dont ever recall the instructor making any other points about fuel gauges apart from not to use them. It realy is pretty poor that such an important instrument is so badly regulated. The technology of today deserves far better, you can jump in a old Ford Escort Ghia say “1987” and the trip computer will tell you how much fuel you have, your consumption and range and with todays technology fitting this sort of sytem in a GA aircraft would not involve major costs. I dont know if anyone has followed the story of G-OMAR the twin piloted by a brain surgeon that ran out of fuel and demolished a house near Shoreham but it just happens that the flying club I fly with hired G-OMAR and my CFI was called to court to testify so fuel calcs are very strict down here at the moment. I have spent long considering the case as the guy was charged with endangering life as he “chose to force land on a residential area” but I very much doubt the pilot chose to force land on a house or run out of fuel. The odds where staked against the pilot right from the start with an inacurrate tech log confounded by human error of incorrectly converting US to IMP gallons. The local papers down here wanted the guy hanged but I actually felt a little bit sorry for him. Anyway the guy got away with the charge of endangering life but I leave the case for you guys to decide if he should have got away with it.

Best Regards

Keith

I think that if car fuel guages were as inacurate the first motorist to run out of fuel due to an inacurate guage would sue. About time the aviation world woke up to this option-if they survive in the first place of course

Hiya,

I only have a mere 70 or so hours flying but during that time I have never once used or looked at the fuel gauges in my aircraft as they are so inacurate. In fact during my training I dont ever recall the instructor making any other points about fuel gauges apart from not to use them. It realy is pretty poor that such an important instrument is so badly regulated. The technology of today deserves far better, you can jump in a old Ford Escort Ghia say “1987” and the trip computer will tell you how much fuel you have, your consumption and range and with todays technology fitting this sort of sytem in a GA aircraft would not involve major costs. I dont know if anyone has followed the story of G-OMAR the twin piloted by a brain surgeon that ran out of fuel and demolished a house near Shoreham but it just happens that the flying club I fly with hired G-OMAR and my CFI was called to court to testify so fuel calcs are very strict down here at the moment. I have spent long considering the case as the guy was charged with endangering life as he “chose to force land on a residential area” but I very much doubt the pilot chose to force land on a house or run out of fuel. The odds where staked against the pilot right from the start with an inacurrate tech log confounded by human error of incorrectly converting US to IMP gallons. The local papers down here wanted the guy hanged but I actually felt a little bit sorry for him. Anyway the guy got away with the charge of endangering life but I leave the case for you guys to decide if he should have got away with it.

Best Regards

Keith

Although I would also tend to rate running out fuel as gross negligence, I find that whoever certify the ridiculously inaccurate and unstable fuel gauges which most GA aircraft are fitted with almost equally blameable. I have been told that only the empty indication has to be calibrated, every other indication doesn’t matter. I often wonder what newcomers to GA think – after they have recovered from the sight of the non-inertia reel seat belts – when they see us peering into the tanks and sometimes dunking things in it to determine the contents.

I have to agree with Moggy C. Running out of fuel can have far more serious consequences than a visit from the CAA’s legal department!

From Dave Unwin – Editor of Today’s Pilot

——————————————————————————–

It is true that the CAA do take a very dim view of accidents that occur due to running out of fuel. However, as with so much in aviation, it is often not quite as simple as it may appear and there can be extenuating circumstances. A good example is the recent failed prosecution of Donald Campbell, whose defence lawyer proved that errors in the tech log meant that there was considerably less fuel in the aircraft than Campbell believed. This error was compounded when Campbell miscalculated the conversion for litres to gallons, causing the aircraft to run out fuel and crash. Nevertheless, Campbell’s defence lawyer was able to prove that had the Seneca contained the amount of fuel indicated in the tech log then the aircraft would not have run out of fuel, despite the fuel miscalculation. Personally, I feel that although most cases of fuel mismanagement are probably down to some degree of negligence, clearly, and as the Campbell case proves, each case needs to be considered individually as there can be extenuating circumstances.

Regards,

Dave Unwin
Editor of Today’s Pilot

——————————————————————————–

There are, of course, some who run out of fuel who are beyond the reach of prosecution 🙁

Moggy