Mike Rapoport wrote:

A lot of people seem to think this way and it doesn't make sense to me
either. MU-2s prior to the Marquise had 364 gallons usable. The Marquise
has 404 useable. Gross weight is the same and empty weight is about the
same. Nobody that owns a MU-2 would prefer the lower fuel capacity but the
piston guys talk about "full fuel payload" like it is the grail. I don't
get it.

I understand the compromise between payload and range, but it's
different for little guys vs. big guys.

Taxi a Cherokee into Signature and ask for the tanks to be filled to the
tabs and see what you get. I sure wish I had more full fuel payload
instead of having to wait an extra hour for those clowns to drain 7
gallons out of each of my tanks.

I know that's just one incident, similar things have happened to me at
other FBO's. When you have a plane whose fuel capacity is under 100
gallons, it's my experience that it's pretty difficult to get line
people at corporate FBOs to follow fueling instructions properly. Would
be much better if you could just have them top it off. Also I would
prefer to keep tanks topped off between flights because it cuts down on
water condensation in them (or so I was taught when I did my private)
and so I could keep them topped and not have to wait until I am about to
leave to fuel up beause I don't know until then how much gas I can
carry. The fuel truck is never around when you're ready to leave, y'know.