If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On Feb 21, 4:15*pm, wrote:
* *(9) Fuel gauge indicating the quantity of fuel in each tank. If "you can't trust it to within a quarter tank", you should probably get it fixed. Yeah, I know, it is common and nobody seems to care, but that isn't what the regs say. The regs are kind of vague about how precise and accurate the indication has to be, so there's some leeway. But a gauge that's flat- out broken is obviously beyond the pale. |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 20:51:30 GMT, Jay Maynard wrote:
I won't argue with that statement. I was simply taught that aircraft fuel gauges are chronically unreliable to the point that they should be ignored, and that they should never be considered "working". "The FAA has said repeatedly that the intent of FAR 23.1337(b) and FAR 91.205(b)9 is to prevent fuel-exhaustion accidents. If you have a fuel gauge that doesn¢t give you a useful indication of the amount of fuel, it is not doing its job. In particular, if the gauge is so inaccurate that you prefer not to look at it, that¢s a violation of the letter and spirit of the regulations." http://www.av8n.com/fly/fuel-gauges.htm -- Dallas |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
|
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On Feb 21, 4:21*pm, Ray Andraka wrote:
It should tell you if the tank is empty. *The fuel gauge is required to read correctly for an empty tank. There's an urban legend that the fuel gauge is only required to be correct for an empty tank. The legend apparently arises from a bizarre misreading of 23.1337b1. What 23.1337b1 actually says is just clarifying that the 'empty' reading must correspond to zero USABLE fuel, as opposed to zero TOTAL fuel. There is nothing whatsoever to suggest that non-empty readings needn't be correct--that would be absurd. (If it were true, a gauge that ALWAYS says 'empty' would be legal! You could just write 'empty' on a piece of paper and call that your fuel gauge!) The requirement for indications of a tank's fuel level (not just on empty) is stated in 91.205b9, 23.1305a1, and 23.1337b. |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On 2008-02-21, Dallas wrote:
In particular, if the gauge is so inaccurate that you prefer not to look at it, that's a violation of the letter and spirit of the regulations." If that's the case in real world aviation, then every aircraft I flew while I was flying regularly, way back when, would have been grounded waiting a fix that never came. Why is it so remarkable that the fuel gauges in the new aircraft I'm looking at are actually considered reliable? I've hear dlots of comments to that effect. "Hey, fuel gauges you can believe! Wow!" -- Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!) Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390 |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
I thought placarding as "INOP" was only legal for non-required
equipment? Required equipment being what is listed in 91.205 ANDed with the aircraft equipment list? Apparently having three other fuel tanks to choose from makes a single tank's fuel gauge "non-required"... -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
http://www.metcoaire.com/products/pr...straight.shtml
Scroll down to 'Replacement Fiberglass Tail Cone' section. Metco's fiberglass parts are first rate quality. Thanks for the link! The repaint can't be all that bad. We had a custom paint job on old wheelpants accurately duplicated onto a set of new ones by a local auto paint & body shop for only a couple hundred dollars materials & labor. All the stripes on the plane (3 different colors) are on that tail cone, plus the base coats of gray and white. What a PIA to do, but I'm afraid it will have to be done. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
Yikes. You didn't even take the precaution of always using the other
tank when landing, rather than using the one that doesn't tell you if it's about to run dry? Placarding INOP is for optional devices. Working fuel gauges are required for airworthiness. IMO having four gas tanks makes a single one of them "optional". After the gauge went TU, we notified our A&P, who agreed that we could wait until the annual inspection to fix it. We placarded it as INOP, and didn't use it on take-off or landings. How do visual inspection or your timer tell you if you've got an in- flight fuel leak? That's an important reason for the fuel-gauge requirement. That's why we didn't use that tank for take-offs or landings. In cruise flight, if the thing ran dry, we could always change tanks. It never did, of course. -- Jay Honeck Iowa City, IA Pathfinder N56993 www.AlexisParkInn.com "Your Aviation Destination" |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On Feb 21, 5:39*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
Placarding INOP is for optional devices. Working fuel gauges are required for airworthiness. IMO having four gas tanks makes a single one of them "optional". * The tanks themselves may be optional, but a working gauge for each tank is required equipment (see below). After the gauge went TU, we notified our A&P, who agreed that we could wait until the annual inspection to fix it. * Does an A&P have the authority to waive the basic airworthiness regs for you? (That's not a rhetorical question--I would guess not, but having never owned a plane, I don't really know.) We ... didn't use [that tank] on take-off or landings. Ok, I'm relieved to hear that. Previously, you made it sound as though you just placarded the plane as unairworthy, and then flew it without further precautions. In cruise flight, if the thing ran dry, we could always change tanks. * Fuel starvation isn't the only reason to want to know if there's a leak. A fuel leak also implies an in-flight fire risk, and an inop fuel gauge deprives you of an important warning sign. |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Post-Annual Flight
On Feb 21, 5:27*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
Apparently having three other fuel tanks to choose from makes a single tank's fuel gauge "non-required"... Huh? FAR 91.205b9 requires, "in operable condition", a "fuel gauge indicating the quantity of fuel in each tank". Which part of "each tank" makes a single tank's fuel gauge sound optional? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Post-Annual Flight | Jay Honeck[_2_] | Piloting | 114 | March 2nd 08 10:55 PM |
Post Annual Report | Jack Allison | Owning | 7 | July 7th 07 04:37 AM |
Annual Xmas Post - HawkSanta.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 21st 06 02:54 AM |
Annual Xmas Post - Flight Line Santa.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 21st 06 02:54 AM |
Annual Xmas Post - 001index.jpg (1/1) | Mitchell Holman | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 21st 06 02:54 AM |