Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Quote: N4352H

The logic of all this is flawed beyond reason. You guys are suggesting that if you run one tank dry, you'll know the exact quantity (or even close) in the other or that you'll be less prone to a tank switching error at a lower altitude.

Posted

Quote: Shadrach

....recommends the following in the POH for my 67F.

"proper fuel management during flight will help maintain lateral trim and will also serve as a fuel quantity check. After takeoff with both tanks full, use fuel from one tank for one hour; switch to the other tank and note the time. Use all of the fuel from the second tank. The remaining fuel endurance in the first tank can be calculated from the time it took to deplete the second tank, less one hour. You must remember, however, that this endurance calculating procedure can be relied upon only if power and mixture remain the same and an allowance is made for extra fuel used during climb. For estimation purposes, consider fuel consumption during full-power climb to be 25 percent higher than that of best power cruise, and 35 percent higher than that of best economy.

CAUTION: Do not allow the engine to lose power or quit before you switch tanks. If a tank runs dry, and the engine quits, retard the throttle before restarting. Restarting with an advanced throttle may cause engine over-speeding and can lead to mechanical malfunction."

Posted

I've thought this over again and if I have this correct, the dry tank SOP is not to run one tank all the way dry and then leave the other tank all the way full correct? The SOP is to switch between tanks in a "normal" fashion, like say every 30 minutes and then at some point, when it looks like you might need to use your researves, you drain one tank, correct? So the only advantage of this method seems to me is that you won't need to possibly switch tanks at a bad time, like say on short final, or during a go around.


This makes some sense to me. I may use this one day.


For me however, I wouldn't call the dry tank method SOP. I would call it emergency operating proceedure. If I'm dipping into my researves (10 gallons left) I consider that a fuel emergency. So I will continue my SOP of leaving fuel in both tanks for all regularly planned flights, but will use the dry tank method if and when I find myself in a bad way regarding fuel and distance to the next stop. My fuel EOP means, slow down, lean way out and run a tank dry I think.


Thanks for the idea.

Posted

Right, Dave.


Switch fuel as you wish. If going prety far, plan your fuel strategy to run one tank empty at top of descent. Switch there.  Your other 10-15 gallons is in one place, has been sampled, and is one less thing to mess with in the terminal environment.  This procedure only comes into play if you are flying more than about 4.5 hours in a 67 gallon airplane.


 


 

Posted

Quote: N4352H

The first bit of real info pertinent to type. I would actually consider this after reading..only for a long XC VFR. A modern totalizer is MEL'ed on most J's, 1981 and up. Probably because it was needed. I just checked POH's for 79, 85 and 91 J models...no reference to fuel "procedure".

Your 67 F POH says "IF" a tank runs dry.

Posted

Certainly.  Perhaps even more inclined to do it, an IFR approach is a high workload task and a missed is even more.  Switching tanks is one less thing to do in that situation.  I would just pay more attention to not shut down the engine doing it.

Posted

Quote: jlunseth

 

Friends flew to Canada for a fishing trip some years ago.  Two aircraft, and they flew in formation.  One aircraft (NA) failed to switch tanks.  Pilot in the other aircraft said they reported trying to restart and nothing worked.  That plane is still in the bush somewhere in Can. to the best of my knowledge, if someone wants it, as I recall it is a nice Piper six place of some kind. 

Posted

Quote: Shadrach

In the mean time, I'll just keep flying my ratty old (pre-1981) bird while relying on tangible methods of fuel management,  mechanical methods of raising and lowering gear and flaps and be happy with my 1060lbs of useful load @2740lbs...

Posted

I think in his case flying a Rocket 900 NM, that was at full fuel.  A 54 gallon J is in a worse situaton,  around 750 NM with no wind (65% power).  VFR mins are 30 minutes, and as long as there is an exit strategy, and very close attention is paid to FOB, he completed the mission legally and safely. Perhaps you aren't aware of it but commercial jets routinely land with an hour of fuel and sometimes right at 45 minutes.

Posted

Quote: N6719N

 Interesting... the aircraft I almost landed off airport was a variant of the Piper Cherokee Six (Saratoga).  Coincidence??? Maybe. 

And previous to this experience, I had thousands of hours flight time, and plenty of experience running tanks dry in other GA type aircraft with never a problem.

From all of the posts, it appears Mooneys behave nicely when you run a tank dry... good news if I ever need to do it. 

But back to my original point for a moment, you may be comfortable running tanks dry, but I still would advise caution when doing so in another make or model.  All aircraft systems are not the same, and some may have a surprise lurking. 

Be careful out there.

Posted

Further, if you have 10 gallons remaining, our advanced fuel monitoring computers tell us how much fuel is on board, but not how much in each tank.   Do you know when you get down to 10 gallons total if it is 5 gallons left and 5 gallons right? Or could it be 3 gallons left and 7 gallons right?  How can you know? Thats only 2 gallons difference!    Do you do a VFR go around and now its 5 gallons left and 3 right?  Or was it 7 gallons right and 2 gallons left?  Oh, well, i THINK this tank is fuller, so lets switch on downwind, and HOPE it is still the fullest.  So, which is safer? A tank with 3 gallons in it or one with 10?  If yoy never run your plane bellow 10 gallons a side, well thats the same category I see on the news about once a week.  A "cautious pilot" who never pushes the boundaries of crosswinds, stalls, weather, fuel,  night flying, or IFR who stalls the plane or runs a tank dry on final..  A dead one. Who couldnt deliver when the situation required soemthing within the limits of the aircraft.


Here is a challenge to you.  Next time you fly more than 300-400 NM, and you stop to fuel, write down how many gallons it takes to tippy top the tanks each side.  say, 23.5 left and 20.0 right.  See how close you are.  Airmanshp says you should be right on.


 

Posted

Maybe it's cause I've flown planes with just one fuel tank or none at all that it doesn't seem like such a big deal to concentrate it all in one place for the final amount of fuel. Actually, it's kinda funny that by the time I'm down to a single tank in my Mooney, it is holding more gas than the entire single tank in the Piper Cub I trained in could hold.

Posted

Quote: jetdriven

Here is a challenge to you.  Next time you fly more than 300-400 NM, and you stop to fuel, write down how many gallons it takes to tippy top the tanks each side.  say, 23.5 left and 20.0 right.  See how close you are.  Airmanshp says you should be right on.

 

Posted

Quote: jetdriven

A "cautious pilot" who never pushes the boundaries of crosswinds, stalls, weather, fuel,  night flying, or IFR who stalls the plane or runs a tank dry on final..  A dead one. Who couldnt deliver when the situation required soemthing within the limits of the aircraft.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.