I was taught that you always check fuel with a dipstick before every flight, and never rely entirely gauges. I have never run low on fuel.
Faulty fuel gauges, disregarded warning lights to blame for emergency landing on Kimberley highway, investigation finds
Faulty fuel gauges, disregarded warning lights to blame for emergency landing on Kimberley highway, investigation finds - ABC News
The fuel gauges indicated plenty of fuel, so when the low fuel warning lights came on while flying over outback Australia the pilot believed he would still make it to his destination.
But an Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATS investigation has found that even when the twin-turboprop Cessna took off in 2018 from Fitzroy Crossing destined for Broome with a pilot and nine passengers on board, it never had enough fuel to make it.
I was taught that you always check fuel with a dipstick before every flight, and never rely entirely gauges. I have never run low on fuel.
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
Yes - on one occasion, many years ago, I had about 50l fuel disappear from a PA-28 parked on a farm strip next to a rarely used road, almost certainly stolen, overnight! I'd almost forgotten about that!
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
The following was a couple of years ago:
NT children found stealing aviation fuel, raising fears of petrol sniffing crisis
NT children found stealing aviation fuel, raising fears of petrol sniffing crisis | Northern Territory | The Guardian
Children under 10 have been breaking into remote airstrips to steal aviation fuel, in a dangerous escalation of petrol sniffing in the Northern Territory.
We only do a dipstick test on the 737 is when we can't reconcile the fuel remaining at the end of the flight plus the fuel uploaded to +/- 3%. There are several sticks in the wings, and it can take quite some time to check them.
In flight we do regular fuel checks based on fuel remaining on the gauges plus that burned on the totaliser. If there's a discrepancy (ie it doesn't add up to what we had after refuelling) we have to reconcile and/or take appropriate action.
Interestingly, when we have fuel loaded in the centre tank, our FMC tells us that we'll have between 300-500kg more than what we calculate on landing. As we do our fuel checks, once the centre tank is empty, we magically 'lose' that fuel and the indications agree with what we originally calculated.
go figure...
I suspect that operations of the twin turboprop that was the subject of the first post are much more like the operations of the single engined planes I have flown than that of a 737.
Talking of fuel arrangements on airliners - I have recently finished reading the book "QF32" by R. De Crespigny, who was the captain of this flight when it made an emergency landing in Singapore following a catastrophic engine failure. The book explains the technical details involved - the A380 has eleven fuel tanks. After the engine failure (third stage of the compressor on No.2 failed due to a broken oil line, leading to no load on the turbine stage driving it, which almost immediately sped up far above its maximum design rpm and disintegrated, with bits causing extensive damage, basically to almost everything in the left wing, and also wiring and piping in the belly) only three tanks were usable and fuel could not be transferred or dumped. They landed over forty tonnes above the maximum landing weight, with no flaps or slats, being unable to risk staying airborne much longer, as the No.1 engine was going to run short of fuel. The full extent of the problems was shown when it proved impossible to shut the No.1 engine down after landing - it was eventually shut down by two fire tenders feeding foam into the intake.
John
JDNSW
1986 110 County 3.9 diesel
1970 2a 109 2.25 petrol
In my experience the biggest problem with "dipsticks" is that some of them end up behind the controls!
Search AULRO.com ONLY! |
Search All the Web! |
---|
|
|
Bookmarks