Wet Signature on W&B?

Tony Cox wrote:

That's how I got into this conversation in the first
place, and why I think my existing W&B is out!


I thought that your point was that the AP who did the last
W&B weighed it with the fluids in place, but then subtracted
the "consumable fluids", but forgot to account for the "unusable"
fluids?

The differences in weighing proceedures shown for various models
on the 182 TCDS either call for computing a "dry" weight, or
a "wet" weight where the aircraft is ready to fly, but contains
only the "unusable fluids".

I cannot conceive a situation where the capacity of your fuel tanks
could change by ~ 10 gallons unless some major mods were done to
the fuel system, i. e. plastic liners inplace of bladders, etc.

The "unusable" fuel in my 182 is only 3 gal (79 usable, 82 total),
so even if the AP did the calc wrong, we would be quibling about
only ~ 18lbs. How you think you got screwed out of 60lb?

MikeM

"MikeM" wrote in message
...

The "unusable" fuel in my 182 is only 3 gal (79 usable, 82 total),
so even if the AP did the calc wrong, we would be quibling about
only ~ 18lbs. How you think you got screwed out of 60lb?

I added all the mods that had happened over the years to the
data sheet W&B (with the exception of a paint job, which I assumed
ended up being a wash). There was a 60lb difference, which I
attribute to the A&P mathematically subtracting 79 gals of fuel
when there was actually more). I assume that the 10 gals difference
that this represents is made up of some unusable (which the A&P
forgot to account for) and some extra buffer courtesy of Cessna.
The POH claims 5 gals unusable. Also, I drained the tanks once
for an SB (and for fun) when the 'stick' indicated 20 gals. I drained
nearly 7 5gallon drums worth.