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 |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
NoSpam wrote: Is there a way to accurately measure the fuel in the tanks while the aircraft is on the ground (using some "mechanical" measuring tool/gauge)? Yes. Make or buy some sort of dipstick. Mine is a clear plastic tube. I bought it and drained one of my fuel tanks. We then pumped in 5 gallons and marked where the level was when I stuck the tube in. Put in another 5 gallons and marked that. And so forth. Now I can stick the tube in the tank, pull it out, and know within a gallon or two how much is in that tank. Is there a way to accurately measure the amount of fuel in the tanks while in flight? No. As others have stated, use your watch and the gauges. Whichever indicates the least amount of fuel is what you "believe". Land if you even think you *might* be getting low. George Patterson Great discoveries are not announced with "Eureka!". What's usually said is "Hummmmm... That's interesting...." |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
John, who had more ratings than I ever will, approached a homebuilt with the
mindset that he was dealing with a certified aircraft - that don't have such 'gotchas'... Denny "C J Campbell" wrote The gauge should be calibrated and marked with the fuel quantity at several different levels, but no one had done this on Denver's plane. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Newps ) wrote:
I bought the fuel hawk for my 182. Total waste of money. LOL! Hence the value of Usenet. Just out of curiosity, was the FuelHawk you bought *specifically* for your model 182? The one I bought only listed late model 172SPs. In my case, I did confirm the stick's readings on a few occasions by reading the remaining, then refilling the tanks. The amount of gallons going in equaled total capacity minus my stick's reading. This was done for varying amounts of remaining fuel over a few flights. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Peter R. wrote in message ...
NoSpam wrote: Is there a way to ACCURATELY measure the available fuel in the tanks of a general single-engine piston aircraft??? Just after receiving my private pilot certificate, I bought a FuelHawk to accurately measure remaining fuel in my Skyhawk's tanks: http://makeashorterlink.com/?O202128F6 ... I would be very uncomfortable flying one of these missions without it. Peter, I would be very uncomfortable relying on that FuelHawk unless you have personally calibrated it in your plane and know it to be accurate. We used to rent C172s, we had a FuelHawk, and the reading would be different in different tanks which had the same amount of fuel left as judged by how much fuel was added to 'top off', even different tanks in the same plane. I think Greg Travis posted a similar observation regarding his 180 HP C172. When we bought our Grumman, we calibrated the FuelHawk by noting the reading before each top-off then doing a polynomial fit once we got enough readings across the range. The other method of course is to fly one tank dry then pour in fuel 1 gallon at a time, taking due precautions against static. The latter method is quicker, both methods are quite accurate if carefully done. Once the stick (any stick -- fuel hawk, paint stirrer, etc) is calibrated, it is quite accurate and I recommend it even to people who always take off with full tanks, to determine whether they actually landed with the amount of time in the tanks that they thought they had. This has been a revelation to us a couple of times (though, when the tank under the stick is dry, I still have between 0 and 14 gallons, just our tank design). Cheers, Sydney |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Snowbird ) wrote:
I would be very uncomfortable relying on that FuelHawk unless you have personally calibrated it in your plane and know it to be accurate. Thanks, Sydney. See my reply to NewPS. -- Peter ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
"NoSpam" wrote in message ...
Is there a way to accurately measure the fuel in the tanks while the aircraft is on the ground (using some "mechanical" measuring tool/gauge)? Yes, using a dipstick calibrated *for that aircraft*. This is quite accurate w/in the range it can measure (for example, when my dipstick reads 0 on each tank, I have between 0 and 14 gallons of fuel left. Is there a way to accurately measure the amount of fuel in the tanks while in flight? Not of which I'm aware. As you note, fuel computers measure fuel flow, but don't account for fuel loss due to, say, leakage around an improperly sealed gas cap or sump valve. A friend of mine has bought some digital fuel gauges (a combination a several digital engine instruments -- but I forgot the manufacturer's name). Using these fuel gauges, you "calibrate" the instrument/gauges by leveling the aircraft (both "wings level" and "pitch/flying attitude level") and starting with 0 gals of fuel in the tank, then adding one gallon at a time, wait a while for the fuel to settle, then take an electronic reading, add 1 gal of fuel and repeat the process until the tanks are full. How accurate is this method? (personally I do not know how accurate this is, but would like to know from someone with experience using these instruments...) The method of adding 1 gallon and taking a reading on the ground is accurate enough -- it's one way of calibrating a fuel dipstick. I'm not sure how accurately it would translate to monitoring fuel in flight -- the pitch attitude for level flight will vary so much depending upon the atmosphere, the W&B, airspeed, and so forth. It seems to me the design of the fuel tanks and the placement of the gauge would be critical to accuracy, but I'm unfamiliar with the technology used to make what you call an "electronic reading". That's the point I'd want to investigate, though -- how much do the readings I get with this wonder differ if I change the plane's pitch? Cheers, Sydney |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
I use a fuel stick to measure the fuel and put that information in my
fuel flow computer. I'm usually within a tenth of a gallon on landing. Its pretty easy to make your own fuel stick, the best ones are wood. I've made some out of the paint stir sticks you get at the home improvement stores (they look like rulers). The best part about wood is once you measure the fuel you just shake it and the fuel stain is gone and ready for the next tank. The glass ones that you have to stick your thumb in kinda suck. -Robert |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Newps ) wrote:
I bought the fuel hawk for my 182. Total waste of money. I use a fuelhawk with general markings. I have a calibration table for a specific Cessna 172 with long range tanks. I use it for any Cessna with long range tanks, and use it for others with standard tanks by multiplying the amount by 0.8. Is it accurate? Certainly not. Is it better than the fuel gauges or my unaided eye? Sure is. So, by being conservative about fuel burn and possible inaccuracy this tells me wether I have enough fuel for the trip. Works thus far ;-) |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Ok. I give up. How did it fail? The cork stick to the tube or what kept the gas from draining through the bottom of the guage? In article , "karl" wrote: ******Doesn't it have a float on a wire? Not the same****** Exactly the same.You really should go have a look. No wire. Just a sight gauge with a red colored cork floating. I spent my pilot youth ferrying these fine airplanes from Lock Haven to Washington. Oregon, Alaska. The float on a wire is on a J3, Taylorcraft, Aeronca, usually on a forward fuselage tank. Super Cub tanks are in the wings. Karl |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
By acurate I mean within one galon of actual fuel quantity.
I am only asking for interest sake. Whenever I fly our club's Archer, I calculated the amount of fuel remaining by starting with a full tank and then estimating the fuel burn per hour, etc. etc. But this has always left me feeling nervous -- the aircraft did not have an accurate fuel flow instrument (e.g. JPI) on board, and as a result a was always "guestimating" -- although I was on the conservative side... Thanks Cameron "Jim Weir" wrote in message ... Two questions: What is "accurate"? Why do you need "accuracy"? Jim "NoSpam" shared these priceless pearls of wisdom: -Is there a way to ACCURATELY measure the available fuel in the tanks of a -general single-engine piston aircraft??? Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup) VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor http://www.rst-engr.com ----== Posted via Newsfeed.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeed.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 100,000 Newsgroups ---= 19 East/West-Coast Specialized Servers - Total Privacy via Encryption =--- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Is taking off on single mag bad for engine | flyer | Home Built | 10 | September 21st 03 09:43 PM |
WANTED: partnership, rental or club with fast single or light twin in San Diego | Jim McGarvie | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | September 13th 03 03:55 PM |