Is this the death of GA

In article 9Gpwj.48454$9j6.9828@attbi_s22, says...


I never dug deep to find out why. I can only suppose they didn't want
to lose an airplane AND a building.

That's the rule here, too. We can have it parked right in front of the
hangar but no part of the airplane can be across the door threshold. I
assume it is for the reason you state.

Our FBO routinely fuels owner's aircraft in their hangars. Always has.

Ten years ago, when we first moved into a hangar, we would return from a
flight, put the plane away, and flip a little red flapper up on the door.
Next time we came to the airport, the flapper was down, the plane was fully
fueled, and we'd get a bill at the end of the month. God, I miss those
days...



Those days still exist in many places.
Often you will leave the FBO to find your prop aligned horizontally -
indicating the tanks are full. And yes, you can be certain to receive a bill.

I have always been astonished that we allow linemen and fuel salespeople to
usurp our responsibility as pilot in command. As a student, you cannot take
yourself, your instructor and full fuel in a C-152 without being significantly
over gross. Later, as a private pilot, the lineman has no way of knowing you
intend to take your entire family in the 172 to a destination just 200 nm away
- something you cannot do with full fuel, but which you can easily do with a
bit less dead weight. The further you progress up the ladder, the more
important this management becomes.

Fuel management is the ultimate responsibility of the PIC. You may have a
personal understanding with your FBO or whatever, and they may know your
personal habits - as long as you scrupulously check behind them this is fine.
But as a general rule, having trucks driving around an airport pouring their
expensive product into aircraft unable to carry the weight under some mission
statements is not compatible with sound management and safety practices.

But as a general rule, having trucks driving around an airport pouring
their
expensive product into aircraft unable to carry the weight under some
mission
statements is not compatible with sound management and safety practices.

I'm not catching your point. Why would an FBO do anything an owner didn't
authorize?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Feb 27, 10:58 am, "Jay Honeck" wrote:

I'm not catching your point. Why would an FBO do anything an owner didn't
authorize?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

This one I learned the hard way early on -- I flew the fam down to
Ocean City for the day in a rented Cherokee Archer. Everyone was
anxious for the beach so I told the FBO desk lady, "Only to the tabs,
please!"

When we returned at 10 PM, guess what?

Right -- overflowing.

My (then) 150 lb son had to stay the rest of the week with friends who
were vacationing there. With him on board I would have been 30 lbs
over max allowable gross.

It wasn't too great a hardship for him, but could have been a major
inconvenience.

So now if I don't fuel it myself, I stand and observe and check the
levels as he/she is fueling and afterwards, and *I* secure the caps.

Dan

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:OMfxj.52129$9j6.4081@attbi_s22:

But as a general rule, having trucks driving around an airport
pouring their
expensive product into aircraft unable to carry the weight under some
mission
statements is not compatible with sound management and safety
practices.

I'm not catching your point. Why would an FBO do anything an owner
didn't authorize?

Idiot.


Bertie