Post-Annual Flight

On Feb 21, 11:05*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
Bottom line: If you rely on a fuel gauge (instead of physically looking in
the tank) you are taking a risk.

That's been affirmed several times in this thread. It's never been in
dispute. No one suggests using the gauges INSTEAD of inspection and
timing. What's being questioned is using inspection and timing ALONE,
with no way to detect a fuel leak.

I also have the JPI FS-450 digital fuel flow gauge in our plane, which is a
hundred times more accurate than the Piper fuel tank gauges.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but a flow gauge has no way of sensing
the amount of fuel actually in the tank, does it? So it has no way of
indicating a leak, which is the whole crux of the matter.

It appears that the regulation we may have violated
(and I'm still not convinced that we did)

Really? FAR 91.205b9 requires, "in operable condition", a "fuel gauge
indicating the quantity of fuel in each tank". Can you explain how you
think that could be consistent with a tank that lacks a working fuel
gauge?

had little connection to practical reality.

Unless you consider it practical to be warned if you're leaking fuel.

In article ,
wrote:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but a flow gauge has no way of sensing
the amount of fuel actually in the tank, does it? So it has no way of
indicating a leak, which is the whole crux of the matter.

You keep talking about detecting a leak. Have you flown a comanche?
Do you consider the pa-24-260 to be unsafe because the fuel gauge
can only read one tank at a time? How often does a tank develop
a leak in flight?

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

On Feb 22, 4:12*am, Bob Noel
wrote:
You keep talking about detecting a leak. *Have you flown a comanche?
Do you consider the pa-24-260 to be unsafe because the fuel gauge
can only read one tank at a time? *

Why would reading just one tank at a time make it unsafe? Even with
both displayed simultaneously, I generally read one, then the other--
one at a time.

Most aircraft that don't have a gauge for each tank only read a tank
that is currently selected. So to say that the fuel gauge is there to
detect leaks is specious at best.




wrote:
On Feb 22, 4:12 am, Bob Noel
wrote:
You keep talking about detecting a leak. Have you flown a comanche?
Do you consider the pa-24-260 to be unsafe because the fuel gauge
can only read one tank at a time?

Why would reading just one tank at a time make it unsafe? Even with
both displayed simultaneously, I generally read one, then the other--
one at a time.

In rec.aviation.owning Bob Noel wrote:
In article ,
wrote:

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but a flow gauge has no way of sensing
the amount of fuel actually in the tank, does it? So it has no way of
indicating a leak, which is the whole crux of the matter.

You keep talking about detecting a leak. Have you flown a comanche?
Do you consider the pa-24-260 to be unsafe because the fuel gauge
can only read one tank at a time? How often does a tank develop
a leak in flight?

How often does an oil leak develop in flight? Might as well do away with
the oil pressure guage by that reasoning.

Most in flight gas "leaks" in GA aircraft are from the filler cap not
being secure.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

In article , wrote:

How often does an oil leak develop in flight?

Don't know. But I'd be willing to bet that it's more frequently
than a fuel leak.

Might as well do away with
the oil pressure guage by that reasoning.

Then you didn't understand the reasoning... or more accurately, I wasn't
clear.

btw - the oil pressure gauge works just fine. Determining fuel levels is
a significantly different challenge.

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)

On Sat, 01 Mar 2008 09:34:35 -0500, Bob Noel
wrote:

In article , wrote:

How often does an oil leak develop in flight?

Don't know. But I'd be willing to bet that it's more frequently
than a fuel leak.

Oil leaks develop? I thought they were just a fact of life that was
always there.


Might as well do away with
the oil pressure guage by that reasoning.

Then you didn't understand the reasoning... or more accurately, I wasn't
clear.

btw - the oil pressure gauge works just fine. Determining fuel levels is
a significantly different challenge.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

Oil leaks develop? I thought they were just a fact of life that was
always there.

Ain't it the truth?

I've spent six years, and a fair number of AMUs, chasing "a" pesky oil leak
in our Lycoming O-540. Every time I think we've licked it, theres a new
drip somewhere else. It really is like owning an old Harley...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:sUxyj.58101$yE1.15312@attbi_s21:

Oil leaks develop? I thought they were just a fact of life that was
always there.

Ain't it the truth?

I've spent six years, and a fair number of AMUs, chasing "a" pesky oil
leak in our Lycoming O-540. Every time I think we've licked it,
theres a new drip somewhere else. It really is like owning an old
Harley...


There's always going to be a drip when you're around.

Bertie