A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Instrument Flight Rules
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

This is why you should never trust your fuel gages



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 13th 08, 04:00 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Sam Spade
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,326
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

wrote:
On Dec 9, 1:07 am, Sam Spade wrote:

wrote:


A dictionary will help:


From Merriam-Webster:


Main Entry:
gauge
Variant(s):
also gage \ˈgāj\
Function:
noun


2: an instrument for or a means of measuring or testing:


Furthermo Many Cessna Information Manuals also use this spelling.
You can too.


http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gage


Dude! Give it up:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gauge%5B1%5D

Also, have you ever flown a Cessna? Open the POH for crying out loud.


So what. All that proves is Cessna can't spell. Last time I checked
they weren't the Cessna Dictionary Company.

I've flown a lot of other aircraft than Cessnas and all the others have
gauges.
  #22  
Old December 14th 08, 02:41 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

"Sam Spade" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Dec 9, 1:07 am, Sam Spade wrote:

wrote:


A dictionary will help:

From Merriam-Webster:

Main Entry:
gauge
Variant(s):
also gage \ˈgāj\
Function:
noun

2: an instrument for or a means of measuring or testing:

Furthermo Many Cessna Information Manuals also use this spelling.
You can too.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gage


Dude! Give it up:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gauge%5B1%5D

Also, have you ever flown a Cessna? Open the POH for crying out loud.


So what. All that proves is Cessna can't spell. Last time I checked they
weren't the Cessna Dictionary Company.

I've flown a lot of other aircraft than Cessnas and all the others have
gauges.


"Gage" was used more predominately in the US in days past. It's probably
safe to assume a lot of older US manufactured aircraft prior to WWII used
the word "gage" in favor of "gauge".

At any rate both are correct so why you persist on saying otherwise is
anyone's guess. Grammar flames are pretty lame to begin with and harping on
a fallacious grammar flame has to be even more so.

  #23  
Old December 14th 08, 09:35 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Bear Bottoms[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:36:47 GMT, Mike wrote:

And if you're


STFU
--
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General
  #24  
Old December 15th 08, 05:32 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

"Bear Bottoms" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:36:47 GMT, Mike wrote:

And if you're

STFU


http://www.archive.org/details/Flyingwi1953

  #25  
Old December 17th 08, 05:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Bear Bottoms[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

On Mon, 15 Dec 2008 16:32:51 GMT, Mike wrote:

"Bear Bottoms" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 18:36:47 GMT, Mike wrote:

And if you're

STFU


Call me.


http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h1..._re_a_homo.jpg


You wish.
--
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General
  #26  
Old December 17th 08, 05:50 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Bear Bottoms[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:13:28 GMT, Mike wrote:

"Dale Scroggins" wrote in message
...

"Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote in message
...
"Dale Scroggins" wrote in message
...

"Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote in message
...
"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
http://ronsvideos.fliggo.com/video/uIgc0dP9

This video was shot in a Cessna 206 taking us to a game reserve in
South
Africa. Watch the fuel gage in the upper right corner.

This is typical for a Cessna and a few others where the fuel gauge uses
the same technology as a toilet tank float.

A fuel totalizer is a very nice thing to have.

Float-type sending units are, in fact, simpler than toilet tank float
valves, and more reliable. They work reliably for decades. However,
many have been in service nearly forty years. Eventually the resistance
winding will develop spots where the wiper doesn't make good contact,
and the gauge (U.S.) or gage (Brit.) will fluctuate wildly for a few
minutes, until fuel is burned off and the wiper moves to a new location,
then the gauge works normally again. Simple and relatively simple to
fix.

If what you say is true, why do quite a few relatively new planes exhibit
the same symptoms?


Do you believe fuel totalizers are more reliable? Or capacitance
systems? Do you trust totalizers totally?

I've flown lots of planes with totalizers and never seen a failure. I've
also seen lots of failures and gross errors in float type systems (new
and old), so in my experience, yes they are more reliable.

As far as your last question it appears to be argumentative. I could
just as easily ask you if you trust the standard Cessna fuel gauge
totally, but neither really deserves an answer.

I doubt my experiences are typical. Most of the fuel quantity and
totalizer systems I saw over thirty years weren't operating correctly, and
I was being paid to repair them. Age makes most indicating systems
untrustworthy. Having multiple systems is good, if they aren't
interdependent.


Agreed, and the best way to check them is simply to stick the tanks both
before and after a flight.

Even float rods on Piper Cubs and others hang occasional, or the floats
saturate and sink. Direct-reading sight tubes are probably the most
reliable indicators, but even those can become difficult to read with age.

I don't trust any fuel indication system.


There is one fuel indication system that's reasonably accurate, and that is
the prop which quits turning when you run out. Where many people get into
trouble is they DON'T trust their fuel indication system until the
aforementioned one indicates zero. I use mine to cross check my flight
planning, and if they don't agree it's time to do something different.


http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h1..._re_a_homo.jpg
--
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General
  #27  
Old December 17th 08, 05:54 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

"Bear Bottoms" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:13:28 GMT, Mike wrote:

"Dale Scroggins" wrote in message
...

"Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote in message
...
"Dale Scroggins" wrote in message
...

"Mike" nospam @ aol.com wrote in message
...
"Ron Garret" wrote in message
...
http://ronsvideos.fliggo.com/video/uIgc0dP9

This video was shot in a Cessna 206 taking us to a game reserve in
South
Africa. Watch the fuel gage in the upper right corner.

This is typical for a Cessna and a few others where the fuel gauge
uses
the same technology as a toilet tank float.

A fuel totalizer is a very nice thing to have.

Float-type sending units are, in fact, simpler than toilet tank float
valves, and more reliable. They work reliably for decades. However,
many have been in service nearly forty years. Eventually the
resistance
winding will develop spots where the wiper doesn't make good contact,
and the gauge (U.S.) or gage (Brit.) will fluctuate wildly for a few
minutes, until fuel is burned off and the wiper moves to a new
location,
then the gauge works normally again. Simple and relatively simple to
fix.

If what you say is true, why do quite a few relatively new planes
exhibit
the same symptoms?


Do you believe fuel totalizers are more reliable? Or capacitance
systems? Do you trust totalizers totally?

I've flown lots of planes with totalizers and never seen a failure.
I've
also seen lots of failures and gross errors in float type systems (new
and old), so in my experience, yes they are more reliable.

As far as your last question it appears to be argumentative. I could
just as easily ask you if you trust the standard Cessna fuel gauge
totally, but neither really deserves an answer.
I doubt my experiences are typical. Most of the fuel quantity and
totalizer systems I saw over thirty years weren't operating correctly,
and
I was being paid to repair them. Age makes most indicating systems
untrustworthy. Having multiple systems is good, if they aren't
interdependent.


Agreed, and the best way to check them is simply to stick the tanks both
before and after a flight.

Even float rods on Piper Cubs and others hang occasional, or the floats
saturate and sink. Direct-reading sight tubes are probably the most
reliable indicators, but even those can become difficult to read with
age.

I don't trust any fuel indication system.


There is one fuel indication system that's reasonably accurate, and that
is
the prop which quits turning when you run out. Where many people get
into
trouble is they DON'T trust their fuel indication system until the
aforementioned one indicates zero. I use mine to cross check my flight
planning, and if they don't agree it's time to do something different.


http://i63.photobucket.com/albums/h1..._re_a_homo.jpg
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General


Your puberty hasn't even hit its stride yet and you're already so sure,
Kookie?

I'm sure your mommie has known for some time.

  #28  
Old January 25th 09, 11:44 PM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Bear Bottoms[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 127
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

On Sun, 14 Dec 2008 01:41:30 GMT, Mike wrote:

"Gag" was used when I swallow spermies.


Excellent to know
--
Bear Bottoms
Private Attorney General
  #29  
Old January 29th 09, 08:26 AM posted to rec.aviation.ifr
Mike
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 573
Default This is why you should never trust your fuel gages

"Bear Bottoms" wrote in message
...
"Gag" was used when I swallow spermies.

Excellent to know


Not really, but I suspected as much anyway.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Trust those intruments Trust those instruments A Lieberman Instrument Flight Rules 5 May 3rd 06 01:26 AM
Trust those Instruments.... Trust those Instruments..... A Lieberman Instrument Flight Rules 1 May 2nd 06 03:54 PM
lighting for fuel gage, oil gages, etc. on 172N scott moore Owning 0 March 3rd 06 01:34 AM
Trust But Verify ... Tamas Feher Military Aviation 2 June 30th 04 03:17 PM
Gyros - which do you trust? Julian Scarfe Instrument Flight Rules 6 July 27th 03 09:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.