How much fuel do you prefer to carry?

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

Ricky writes:

You don't have to be proven wrong. You simply ARE wrong. Why can't
you accept that from of a bunch of IFR pilots with thousands of
hours?

Most pilots here are not instrument rated, and some of those who are
are more interested in scoring points against me in a one-sided game
than in following the path of safety. I will not yield to this, so
there's no sense in trying it.


Translation: I, Anthony Atkielski, am a ****ing moron and damn proud of
it!

On Aug 14, 3:59*am, Benjamin Dover wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote :

Ricky writes:

You don't have to be proven wrong. You simply ARE wrong. Why can't
you accept that from of a bunch of IFR pilots with thousands of
hours?

Most pilots here are not instrument rated, and some of those who are
are more interested in scoring points against me in a one-sided game
than in following the path of safety. *I will not yield to this, so
there's no sense in trying it.

Translation: *I, Anthony Atkielski, am a ****ing moron and damn proud of
The other aspect of his personality is last-word-itis. Don't you
really enjoy getting tutorials from a non pilot recluse living in a
hovel in Paris? It isn't that wisdom can't come from such a location,
but this particular fountain doesn't offer wisdom, but self gratifying
babble.

We do give him attention, though, so that justifies his postings.

I'll follow viperdoc's suggestion though, and attempt to ignore him
for a while. Exchanges are no longer entertaining.

Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:

Care to quote the law or regulation that says you must be "on instruments"
whenever you are in IMC?

This is a bit like asking for a law that prohibits you from grabbing live
wires and electrocuting yourself. Why do you exhibit this adversarial
attitude towards instrument flight?

You can often depart SVFR in poor weather, but just because you aren't
absolutely required to be IFR doesn't mean that SVFR is a smart idea. If you
want to fly in marginal weather conditions, get an instrument rating instead
of gambling on technicalities; you'll live longer.

Ant, you are the one that said it was illegal.

On Fri, 08 Aug 2008 21:43:19 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:

When you fly, how much fuel do you prefer to carry? Do you just load enough
to meet the FARs? Do you like to add a fudge factor? If so, how much? Do
you prefer to fly with full tanks irrespective of the length of the flight?
Is it significantly more expensive to fly with the tanks topped off for every
flight on small aircraft, or does it not make much difference?

I almost always carry full fuel (70 gallons). That is opposed to also
filling the tip tanks for a total of 30 more gallons. I'm paranoid
about fuel. Even a 20 mile trip may turn into several hundred miles
due to weather. The weather isn't always as predictable as some think.

Significant is a nebulous term. Yes, it costs more to haul an extra
30 or 40 gallons (180# to 240#). and yes, I've had weather that was
forecast to be clear and unlimited visibility result in one of the
roughest rides I've ever had in IMC.

Roger (K8RI) ARRL Life Member
N833R (World's oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

writes:

I almost always carry full fuel (70 gallons). That is opposed to also
filling the tip tanks for a total of 30 more gallons. I'm paranoid
about fuel. Even a 20 mile trip may turn into several hundred miles
due to weather. The weather isn't always as predictable as some think.

You can't be too careful in aviation.

Significant is a nebulous term. Yes, it costs more to haul an extra
30 or 40 gallons (180# to 240#). and yes, I've had weather that was
forecast to be clear and unlimited visibility result in one of the
roughest rides I've ever had in IMC.

Airlines seem to worry about the cost of hauling fuel. I don't know how much
that cost amounts to in small aircraft; probably not very much. At least from
my cautious point of view, I see it as cheap insurance.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
writes:

I almost always carry full fuel (70 gallons). That is opposed to also
filling the tip tanks for a total of 30 more gallons. I'm paranoid
about fuel. Even a 20 mile trip may turn into several hundred miles
due to weather. The weather isn't always as predictable as some think.

You can't be too careful in aviation.

Significant is a nebulous term. Yes, it costs more to haul an extra
30 or 40 gallons (180# to 240#). and yes, I've had weather that was
forecast to be clear and unlimited visibility result in one of the
roughest rides I've ever had in IMC.

Airlines seem to worry about the cost of hauling fuel. I don't know how
much
that cost amounts to in small aircraft; probably not very much. At least
from
my cautious point of view, I see it as cheap insurance.

Makes no difference, moron, all you every fly is a desk.

On Aug 21, 8:16*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:

Since you never came up with that "reliable information" you claim to
use it means you are lying.
Anthony, you are a liar and not telling the truth. Where are your
cites from the necessity of flying by reference to instruments while
IMC, hmmm? I knew you didn't have any, as does everyone else which
makes you a liar. Nothing you say on here can be trusted unless you
back up your words.

Ricky

On Aug 21, 6:16*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
writes:
I almost always carry full fuel (70 gallons). *That is opposed to also
filling the tip tanks for a total of 30 more gallons. *I'm paranoid
about fuel. *Even a 20 mile trip may turn into several hundred miles
due to weather. The weather isn't always as predictable as some think.

You can't be too careful in aviation.

But you certainly can have too much fuel.

-Robert

On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 20:46:12 -0700 (PDT), Ricky wrote:

Anthony, you are a liar and not telling the truth.

That's prolific, copyrighted?

He's also go the longest lineage of pulling morons like you around by
their dicks in Usenet history. Isn't it fun to be a part of Imbecilics
Hall of ****ing Fame

Robert M. Gary writes:

But you certainly can have too much fuel.

You can't have too much fuel, but you can be overweight.