How well do you know your fuel tanks

[pelmet]

Or fuel rate of consumption. Might not want to try a max range flight on your first flight......

"C-GQIF, a privately registered wheel-equipped Bellanca 8GCBC Scout aircraft, was conducting a
flight from Minaki (CJA6) ON, to Estevan (CYEN) SK with the pilot and 1 passenger on-board.
Approximately 1/2 hour from CYEN the engine (AVCO LYCOMING, O-360-C2E) lost all power.
The pilot conducted a forced landing onto a field. The occupants were uninjured and the aircraft
sustained damage to its left wing and right side landing gear.

The aircraft had just been purchased by the pilot. Prior to departure, the fuel quantity onboard had
been calculated to be enough for 5 hours of flight while the flight planning indicated a 4 to 4.5 hour
flight to the destination. It was reported that the fuel tanks were empty during a post-incident
aircraft examination."

[Blakey]

Do you have a CADOR number for this event? I can't seem to find it in the database.

[challenger_nami]

It’s amazing how many Fuel Exhaustion events happen in aviation....it’s the easiest type of event to prevent.

Some Pilots love to run their fuel tanks low:
aside from the risk of running the tanks dry, we should note that there are always some sediments and dirty fuel at the bottom of fuel tanks.

It’s a good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low... your engine will love you and you won’t have to land on a field in the middle of nowhere...because you ran out of fuel.

[digits_]

It’s amazing how many Fuel Exhaustion events happen in aviation....it’s the easiest type of event to prevent.

Some Pilots love to run their fuel tanks low:
aside from the risk of running the tanks dry, we should note that there are always some sediments and dirty

It’s a good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low... your engine will love you and you won’t have to land on a field in the middle of nowhere...because you ran out of fuel.

So how many gallons of "Fuel I Shouldn't Use" do you suggest I carry in a plane with 6 fuel tanks? Not some exotic plane by the way, fairly common set up in airplanes with tip tanks. If you don't want to run a tank dry, and add 2 gallons per tank for that, you just lost an additional hour of flying.

Run the tanks dry frequently, drain properly, and there won't be an issue either.

[challenger_nami]

So how many gallons of "Fuel I Shouldn't Use" do you suggest I carry in a plane with 6 fuel tanks? Not some exotic plane by the way, fairly common set up in airplanes with tip tanks. If you don't want to run a tank dry, and add 2 gallons per tank for that, you just lost an additional hour of flying.

Run the tanks dry frequently, drain properly, and there won't be an issue either.

I hope you got my point, Cuz I am not going to repeat myself... if you did not, don’t think about it too much. Just keep what you want to do... you know your airplane more than most other people.

If You are concerned about that one hour of flying out of your aircraft’s fuel tanks, maybe ask the pilot of C-GQIF.
(S)He got all of the flying possible out of those fuel tanks. Can you do better than that?

[CpnCrunch]

If you have a fuel flow meter, it's quite enlightening. The carbureted O-360 burns about 12gph at 75% power before leaning, and fuel flow after leaning can vary by at least 1gph depending on how you've leaned it. Climb is about 14 or 15 gph, and it's burning 2gph all the time you're farting about on the ground. You can get it down to 7.5gph in economy cruise.

[digits_]

So how many gallons of "Fuel I Shouldn't Use" do you suggest I carry in a plane with 6 fuel tanks? Not some exotic plane by the way, fairly common set up in airplanes with tip tanks. If you don't want to run a tank dry, and add 2 gallons per tank for that, you just lost an additional hour of flying.

Run the tanks dry frequently, drain properly, and there won't be an issue either.

I hope you got my point, Cuz I am not going to repeat myself... if you did not, don’t think about it too much. Just keep what you want to do... you know your airplane more than most other people.

If You are concerned about that one hour of flying out of your aircraft’s fuel tanks, maybe ask the pilot of C-GQIF.
(S)He got all of the flying possible out of those fuel tanks. Can you do better than that?

I got your point and I disagree with it. Running a tank dry is not necessarily a big deal. It can be safer on longer trips than not running a tank dry.
That Bellanca scout had at least 2 fuel tanks, probably more. Know your airplane, yes, but just "not running a tank dry" is useless advice, sometimes even dangerous. In small airplanes, the only time you are absolutely sure how much fuel is in a tank, is when it's either full or empty. So use that information when available. Obviously don't runn *all* your tanks dry. And some planes do have limitations about fuel in certain tanks during landing, but it still gives you a lot of leeway to play with your fuel.

If you need to resort to "don't run a tank dry" due to a lack of knowledge of your fuel system, then the problem is your lack of knowledge of your fuel system, not the "running a tank dry".

[J31]

we should note that there are always some sediments and dirty fuel at the bottom of fuel tanks.

All aircraft fuel systems draw fuel from low points in the tank. If there is enough contaminant it will be drawn to the engine whether there is one gallon or 100 gallons of fuel.

That is why there are fuel sumps that are checked as per the aircraft manufactures recommendations. You must make sure all contaminants are removed and only clean, correct fuel is present for flight.

As previously stated, many aircraft fuel systems require some fuel tanks to be completely emptied to meet the calculated range and reserve fuel requirements.

Once again, following the aircraft manufactures procedures will produce planned results.

[porcsord]

It’s a good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low... your engine will love you and you won’t have to land on a field in the middle of nowhere...because you ran out of fuel.

What? You clearly have never flown in shit weather in a Beaver for example. Would you rather have 5 gallons in each of your three tanks or 15 gallons in one tank? If you've ever had to worry about weather, mountains, etc I can guarantee you would take 15 gallons in 1. It's actually even worse than that, because when you switch off a tank that isn't empty, you don't know how much fuel you left in it. It's easy and safe to drain tanks and not scare your passengers or yourself.

Ps

[challenger_nami]

It’s a good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low... your engine will love you and you won’t have to land on a field in the middle of nowhere...because you ran out of fuel.

What? You clearly have never flown in shit weather in a Beaver for example. Would you rather have 5 gallons in each of your three tanks or 15 gallons in one tank? If you've ever had to worry about weather, mountains, etc I can guarantee you would take 15 gallons in 1. It's actually even worse than that, because when you switch off a tank that isn't empty, you don't know how much fuel you left in it. It's easy and safe to drain tanks and not scare your passengers or yourself.

Ps

Nope. I am not a float pilot, and flying beavers don’t interest me.
My flying is in the flight levels, where I prefer to be.

It’s funny that you and couple of other posters probably misunderstood my Original point and are running with it in the wrong direction.

Just do what you do ... just don’t run out of fuel like the aircraft in the original post.

[photofly]

All aircraft fuel systems draw fuel from low points in the tank. If there is enough contaminant it will be drawn to the engine whether there is one gallon or 100 gallons of fuel.

If the contaminant is something that floats on top of the fuel then it won’t enter the engine until the tank is emptied.

[valleyboy]

Back in the day "blowing" tanks was SOP - fuel gauges (except for maybe the whoredyne) were always considered unreliable and the only known quantity was either full or a measured quantity into an M/T tank. This is turning into a trip down memory lane.

When I started flying pilots, fuel and equipment did not enter into load calculation. Aircraft had "standard" loads. (180 600 lbs, 185 750, beaver 1200, norsemen 1800 and beech 18 2400) and it did not matter distance or if you were on floats, wheel or skis. Gross weights were not entered into log book and "under gross or W/L" were written in that column. No weight and balance calculations. Training and mentor-ship on how to properly load your aircraft was the flavour of the day.

The point is that we always were on the "fat" side of fuel requirements and people who ran low on fuel was usually because they out thought the issue and their calculations were too optimistic. Back then it was always important to have sufficient fuel (no fuel stops), even if the T/O weight crept up (remember standard loads).

Times have certainly changed and sometimes when I see threads like this I have to wonder if theory and tech has trumped common sense.

[jakeandelwood]

we should note that there are always some sediments and dirty fuel at the bottom of fuel tanks.

All aircraft fuel systems draw fuel from low points in the tank. If there is enough contaminant it will be drawn to the engine whether there is one gallon or 100 gallons of fuel.

That is why there are fuel sumps that are checked as per the aircraft manufactures recommendations. You must make sure all contaminants are removed and only clean, correct fuel is present for flight.

As previously stated, many aircraft fuel systems require some fuel tanks to be completely emptied to meet the calculated range and reserve fuel requirements.

Once again, following the aircraft manufactures procedures will produce planned results.

You are right about that. I drive a fuel truck for a living, they draw from the bottom. If there is any water or crap in a compartment the 1st customer of the day will get it, not the last one when you run it dry.

[Castorero]

[quote][/quote]porcsord wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 10:03 pm

challenger_nami wrote: ↑Mon Sep 21, 2020 6:37 am
It’s a good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low... your engine will love you and you won’t have to land on a field in the middle of nowhere...because you ran out of fuel.

What? You clearly have never flown in shit weather in a Beaver for example. Would you rather have 5 gallons in each of your three tanks or 15 gallons in one tank? If you've ever had to worry about weather, mountains, etc I can guarantee you would take 15 gallons in 1. It's actually even worse than that, because when you switch off a tank that isn't empty, you don't know how much fuel you left in it. It's easy and safe to drain tanks and not scare your passengers or yourself.

Porcsord , lives in the real world, well stated and worth highlighting.

[J31]

All aircraft fuel systems draw fuel from low points in the tank. If there is enough contaminant it will be drawn to the engine whether there is one gallon or 100 gallons of fuel.

If the contaminant is something that floats on top of the fuel then it won’t enter the engine until the tank is emptied.

What kind of contaminant would be floating on top of the fuel?

[NotDirty!]

What kind of contaminant would be floating on top of the fuel?

Bread.
Apples.
Very small rocks.
Cider.
Grape gravy.
Cherries.
Mum
Churches, churches.
Lead, lead.
A duck.

[goingnowherefast]

What about tanks that transfer into another tank? Does a king air pilot need to leave fuel in the aux tanks (contrary to the AFM)?

Pretty sure this thread should have been called "how well do you know your engine(s)? Sounds like this guy knew his fuel tanks quite well, but didn't know his engine burned a little more than normal.

[challenger_nami]

What about tanks that transfer into another tank? Does a king air pilot need to leave fuel in the aux tanks (contrary to the AFM)?

Which King Air type are you actually referring to? ... by that I mean: on which type do you have actual flying experience?


.

[NotDirty!]

What about tanks that transfer into another tank? Does a king air pilot need to leave fuel in the aux tanks (contrary to the AFM)?

Which King Air type are you actually referring to? ... by that I mean: on which type do you have actual flying experience?


.

I have a little time in the A100 and B200... and I will echo his question: how much fuel should I leave in the Aux tanks? It’s easy to turn aux transfer off in the BE10, but IIRC in the BE20 you have to pull CBs if you don’t want it to continue transferring until the Aux’s are empty.

How about in an Airbus? Should I be turning off the centre tank pumps in the A319/320 when the fuel in the centre tanks reaches a certain level? Is it different in the 321 with its centre tank transfer system? Or with Additional Centre Tanks do you have to leave a few kilos of fuel Untransferred? AC has their own procedure wrt centre tank pumps that differs from Airbus’s, but do they all have it wrong?

[digits_]

What about tanks that transfer into another tank? Does a king air pilot need to leave fuel in the aux tanks (contrary to the AFM)?

... by that I mean: on which type do you have actual flying experience?


.

Who cares. You're the one advocating a procedure that goes against a dozen or more flight manuals. One could reasonable expect the onus of proof lies with you.

[challenger_nami]

Who cares. You're the one advocating a procedure that goes against a dozen or more flight manuals. One could reasonable expect the onus of proof lies with you.

Sure. Let’s say you are right.
whoever thinks I was advocating a procedure that goes against any flight manual:

• Write me a Brief summary of what you actually understood from the procedure I was advocating,..... don’t just quote what I said, write a one or two sentence summary from what you understood in your head.

• Then tell me the flight manual of which type of airplane it goes against.

I will give it a day or so to see what responses I get, then I will respond to them all in 2 days or so.

[goingnowherefast]

You said "It's good practice not to let the fuel level in the tanks go too low". Pretty sure that means leave a little fuel in each tank. You even went on to talk about avoiding drawing sediment or dirty fuel into the engine(s). Now if you had said to leave sufficient fuel in the primary tank(s) that feed the engine(s), I'd agree. But that's not what you said.

It's been a number of years since I flew a King Air. However, there was always several hundred pounds left in each main tank. The aux tanks were usually bone dry. I emptied the aux fuel before reducing the quantity in the main tanks. I did it that way because that's what the AFM says. The King Airs I flew, the aux tank pumps had 3 options, ON, AUTO or OFF.

Been a while since I flew Navajos too. Take-off and landing is to be conducted on the inboard tanks, and I always had lots of fuel in those tanks. The outboard tanks were usually sucked dry, not to the point of the engine stumbling, but very close. I'm not going to leave 30 minutes of fuel in the outboard tanks because I'd rather have that fuel in the inboard tanks. Get stuck with unforecast weather and a diversion, I'd rather have 45 minutes in the inboards than 15 minutes in the inboards and 30 minutes in the outboards. That's just good fuel management.

[NotDirty!]

I forgot to talk about the MU-2. It has a somewhat unique fuel system... both engines draw out of the centre tank, but there are also small tanks in the outer portions of the wings, and large tip tanks. The tip tanks are actually hold the largest volume of all the tanks, but because of the anhedral design of the wings, the fuel must flow up hill to be transferred to the centre main tank. The tips are pressurized with bleed air, and this transfers the fuel from the tips to the centre, where it is then used by the engines. In order to transfer the fuel out of the outer tanks and into the centre tank, electric pumps in each outer tank are used. In the auto mode, the outer transfer pumps will not be activated until both tips are empty, and have been empty for two minutes. Once the outer tank is empty, the respective outer empty light illuminates to remind you to turn fuel transfer off. Later models have an outer fuel gauge, but earlier models with extra small outer tanks had no gauging system for these outer tanks, you simply transferred until the outer empty lights came on.
In none of these aircraft I have mentioned is it a good practice to leave useable fuel in aux/centre/ACT/tip/outer tanks. At the same time, it is not recommended to allow the main tanks in any of these aeroplanes to run completely dry, as in each case you will have a sudden decrease in engine noise, and corresponding increase in pucker factor as you are suddenly at the controls of a very expensive glider.

I think what you are fundamentally forgetting is that all of these fuel tanks are designed with a certain amount of unusable fuel, which serves a function you are talking about trying to duplicate with usable fuel. The unusable fuel should be where the water and whatever other sediment collects, and by draining the fuel strainers on a semi regular basis, we should be able to remove the worst of this from the fuel system.

Now back to your regularly scheduled discussion.

[challenger_nami]

It's been a number of years since I flew a King Air. However, there was always several hundred pounds left in each main tank. The aux tanks were usually bone dry. I emptied the aux fuel before reducing the quantity in the main tanks. I did it that way because that's what the AFM says. The King Airs I flew, the aux tank pumps had 3 options, ON, AUTO or OFF.

So are you referring to King Air 200?

[goingnowherefast]

Every king air and 1900 has the same basic fuel system. Exception being the original 100 and perhaps the 90 series (never flew any of the King Air 90s).

So to answer your question, I'm referring to the A100, 200, B200, 300, 350, 1900, 1900C, 1900D. Transfer ALL the aux fuel into the mains. If the mains aren't full, there better be no fuel left in the aux tanks (exception being an aux transfer failure, but that's through no fault of the pilot).