Harsh treatment? What do you think???

youngpilot85

New Member
Ok, the story I am about to share with you guys actually happened to a good friend of mine, and I thought that the end result was an extremely harsh one. Would love a second opinion from you guys. No names will be given for obvious reasons...

The person involved was about to embark on a simple dual flight with one of his students to a towered field in order to give that student some experience in communicating with ATC. Well just like every other flight, the student was allowed to conduct the pre-flight with the instructor following up just as a precaution. The aircraft was tied on the ramp as always, giving the impression that the aircraft carried enough fuel for at least two more flights. Everything seemed normal including the fuel quantities, having not only inspected the fuel gauges, but the tanks themselves.

The takeoff and flight to the practice airport (not more than 20nm away) were both uneventful. It was not until about halfway back to the home based airport that the instructor realised that the fuel gauges were indicating barely above E, meaning that the gauges didn't show a true reading prior to departure. He then went on to take over the aircraft and radioed in to any aircraft in the pattern that he would possibly make a straight in approach due to the fact that they were low on fuel. The landing itself proved uneventful as well. Apparenly the chief pilot was around for the whole thing, and was pretty peeved about what happened.

Whoever flew the aircraft prior to that flight failed to accurately read the fuel gauges and take the aircraft directly to the pumps. As a result the line crew were unaware of what was going on, leading to the aircraft returning with only about 15 mnutes of flight time remaining. Well the instructor tried to explain the whole thing to the chief pilot, who himself only felt that this was poor judgement on the instructors part for taking off low on fuel, deciding to 'let him go'. Now let's be serious here. Which seasoned instructor, in his or her sane mind, would intentionally take off knowing they were low on fuel?

Personally I feel like the instructor did everything he was trained to do but was still slapped in the face by the one person who was put in a position to impart guidance and knowledge based on his own experiences with situations such as this one. Honestly I felt that he should have asked the instructor what he learned from this, discussed what could have possibly gone wrong, and then moved on to fly another day. That's what I believe a chief pilot who trully cares about his instructors would have done.

As the caption says, I would love your opinions on this one, including those of chief pilots. Last time I spoke with the guy, he is still searching for a more 'realistic' flight instructor job.

Thanks!!!!!!

YP
 
Well just like every other flight, the student was allowed to conduct the pre-flight with the instructor following up just as a precaution.

....The aircraft was tied on the ramp as always, giving the impression that the aircraft carried enough fuel for at least two more flights. Everything seemed normal including the fuel quantities, having not only inspected the fuel gauges, but the tanks themselves.

It was not until about halfway back to the home based airport that the instructor realised that the fuel gauges were indicating barely above E, meaning that the gauges didn't show a true reading prior to departure

These two paragraphs do not align, in my mind.

If there was a visual inspection of the tanks, how thorough was it? My CFI hammered three things into my head regarding fuel tanks and gauges:

1) If you can touch the amount of fuel in the tanks with your finger, you've got enough fuel for a short, local flight. This was on a 152.
2) Using a fuelhawk to check fuel levels, if available, is smart.
3) Never, ever believe your gas gauges until they read E. Then believe them.

If the OP is accurate, given the information, then it is readily apparent here that, barring any mechanical deficiency, the CFI did not adequately ensure the fuel level prior to the flight.

Whether it was overly harsh or not depends on many things not listed in the OP. Was it a first-time mistake for him? Had the CP had other issues with the CFI and this was the last straw?

You've clearly defined a mistake on the CFI's part, IMO. But there isn't enough information given to determine if it was overly harsh or not.
 
Whoever flew the aircraft prior to that flight failed to accurately read the fuel gauges and take the aircraft directly to the pumps. As a result the line crew were unaware of what was going on, leading to the aircraft returning with only about 15 mnutes of flight time remaining. Well the instructor tried to explain the whole thing to the chief pilot, who himself only felt that this was poor judgement on the instructors part for taking off low on fuel, deciding to 'let him go'. Now let's be serious here. Which seasoned instructor, in his or her sane mind, would intentionally take off knowing they were low on fuel?



YP

It is the PIC responsibility to verify the fuel quantity before the flight. Check the gauges and and looking into the wing tanks verifies there is fuel, but not quantity. Did he use a calibrated stick to measure what is actually in the tank? If he did I bet he would have had some fuel put on. Who cares what was done before this aircraft became your friends responsibility. It is not their job to make sure the plane is ready for the next flight. It would be a nice courtesy if they did. I say your friend needs to own up to a mistake and learn from it. I bet he verifies quantity now.
 
Understandable KillBilly. As far as I know, he was not in bad standing with the CP. He was actually well respected by the aviation department in general which it why it shocked me to find out about the action which was taken.

Brian Z, sadly the school does not use calibrated sticks to measure the fuel quantity. I think that if a school does not actively incorporate such a practice into their daily operation, that at least this technique should be discussed, stressing its importance when it comes to flying trainers such as the high wing cessnas.
 
. . .put in a position to impart guidance and knowledge based on his own experiences with situations such as this one.

Now he has his own experience that reinforces the lesson here, and that he can pass on someday. He has gotten a lesson he'll never forget, and that is a good thing because no one was injured, and no metal was bent. This will make him a better aviator in the long run. Yes, it does seem a little harsh to let him go for this if it is an isolated incident, but being that casual about fuel issues could lead to someone dying.

There are lots of tragic examples that didn't turn out so well. One that comes to mind immediately is a friend at a local strip rolling it out of the hangar and taking off without sticking the tanks because he and his partners "always" fill 'er up before putting it back in the hangar. That assumption turned out to be incorrect, and a good pilot was lost for no good reason but complacency.

Always stick your tanks, something I always do. You can buy or make a calibrated stick. Well worth it to do so. Always check the caps are tight, and doublecheck if anyone else like a fueler handles them.
 
We all make mistakes, but clearly he was at fault. Judging from your post, it sounds like your friend didn't really own up to the mistake, but tried to blame it on the gauges, previous customer, the line service guys, or his student.

He made a mistake that could have cost him his life and cost the school a lot of headaches.

I feel sorry for him, but I feel like a Chief pilot has to look out for the company first.
 
The gauges are largely irrelevant, everyone flying a cessna knows that.

Whatever the previous pilot did is irrelevant.

The fact the normal SOPs were not followed regarding refueling are irrelevant.

HE took off with insufficient fuel. If I was the CP and I had an instructor come in with ANY excuses on a safety issue that is 100% the sole responsibility of the PIC I would be encouraged to fire him as well. Check your ego at the door...you screwed up, admit it, learn from it. Blaming ANYTHING else on a mistake that is completely your responsibility shows lack of maturity and a potentially dangerous attitude.
 
Thanks Morgan. I definitely don't disagree with you. As you said, despite the fact that the action taken was unfortunate for the CFI, he can only become a better pilot in the long run, as was stated by primate. Let this serve as an example to all. Keep the replies coming!!
 
inspected the...tanks themselves.

If he visually inspected the tanks, then he didn't know what he was looking at. Merely looking at the fuel level is inadequate, you must measure it in some way. I know that in the Cessnas, if I can touch it with my finger, I have about 3/4 full tanks. If I can't touch it, I get fuel, no matter what the fuel gauges say or what the dispatcher says we have.

Instructor is at fault, IMO.
 
The aircraft was tied on the ramp as always, giving the impression that the aircraft carried enough fuel for at least two more flights.
[snip]
Whoever flew the aircraft prior to that flight failed to accurately read the fuel gauges and take the aircraft directly to the pumps.


Whether it was harsh or not depends on the full picture, which none of us except the CFI and the Chief Pilot really knows. But these two snips, if they reflect what the CFI said in his defense to the Chief, might be the reason for the harshness, even for a first offense.

That's because the first one sounds like it wasn't necessary to do a careful preflight. The second one tries to cast the blame for an inadequate preflight on someone else.

That's not good. I actually saw something very similar recently in an enforcement case, including almost exactly the same reasons/excuses/justifications. Even though safety of flight was not really an issue, the FAA was imposing suspensions, one of which I thought was a little harsh.
 
We all make mistakes, but clearly he was at fault. Judging from your post, it sounds like your friend didn't really own up to the mistake, but tried to blame it on the gauges, previous customer, the line service guys, or his student.

primate said:
Always stick your tanks, something I always do. You can buy or make a calibrated stick. Well worth it to do so. Always check the caps are tight, and doublecheck if anyone else like a fueler handles them.

Monday morning quarterbacking, but I suspect Mojo has hit the nail on the head here. Attitude is everything in most professions. I suspect had he fallen on his sword, owned up, pick your metaphor, that the CP might have been a little less harsh.

A fuelhawk is like a 5-dollar accessory. I get annoyed when I rent airplanes that don't have them in the plane when I go to preflight, so I'm making it a point to buy my own and keep them in my flight bag in case I rent an airplane that doesn't have them.

That said, I'm surprised that the school doesn't keep them in the plane. You'd think if the CP was that concerned, they'd make a tiny investment in those.

Hope things turn out well for your friend. I'd suggest to him that when he interviews in the future, if the question of his departure from the previous employer comes up, he tells the unvarnished truth and how he learned from it. It will display character.
 
We all make mistakes, but clearly he was at fault. Judging from your post, it sounds like your friend didn't really own up to the mistake, but tried to blame it on the gauges, previous customer, the line service guys, or his student.
:yeahthat: I thought it sounded excessive until Mojo brought up a better than adequate reason for termination. He was at fault and didn't own up, if things are as they sound.

I admit that I do instruct in C-150s that I have personally not checked the fuel. I get a fuel/oil, gallon/quart break down from my students. If he returns from the preflight and can't remember the exact number of gallons and quarts, we both go over them together. Besides that I only check the oil cap, fuel cap and 100/ADs before I get in. Meaning I am susceptible to this someday if my students lie to me or make a mistake (really don't see it happening, too often).

Never ever ever trust the gauges and good luck in him finding a job.
I really don't think he would have or should have been fired if he would have said that he was solely responsible for the minimum fuel situation. It would have made him a better flight instructor from the experience. The positive turned to a negative.
 
If the tanks were truly visually inspected, the instructor would have noticed a difference between full, 3/4 tank, etc and 15 minutes worth of the blue stuff. 15 minutes is as good as taking off on fumes.

My two cents say that he skipped the visual inspection, relied on the unreliable, and tried to cover his ass by lying.
 
"...15 minutes is as good as taking off on fumes."

Just want to correct this statement you made Jpax. That's the amount of fuel I believe was remaining upon return to the field. Wanted to clear that up ;).
 
If you are the PIC and do not PERSONALLY check the fuel amount by visual inspection, you are taking a risk. I have a great story about this that you will either read in "Never Again" or hear over an adult beverage.

If in fact you make a mistake, then own up.

The Commodore has spoken:D
 
It's self-protection. The CP and FBO want to be able to say they took corrective action in case the student that was with the instructor complains to the FAA or files a lawsuit. No harm no foul doesn't count here. The instructor was careless and reckless with his airplane and his passenger. The fact that the passenger was also his student doesn't change that.

Let this be lesson in command and leadership. You may be able to pilot the airplane, but can you command the flight? In my opinion that is one difference between people who succeed in this profession and those who don't.
 
I make every student (while I watch) "stick" the tanks before EVERY flight! Even if I was the previous pilot. Gauges mean nothing to me! Looking in the tank means nothing. I want to know the number on gallons on board.
Same goes for oil...
 
I'm still trying to figure out why, if he visually inspected the tanks, he was surprised by what he saw on the gauges.

I'm with previous posters -- I was taught from day one of my PPL training to not trust the gas gauges in a Cessna, but to open the tanks and use the tabs to gauge fuel quantity.

I was also taught to click on the battery and check those gauges first thing before visually inspecting the tanks so that I'd have some idea what the gauges said to compare it with the "truth data" in the tanks.

Seems to me that the CFI screwed up in this situation.
 
If you are the PIC and do not PERSONALLY check the fuel amount by visual inspection, you are taking a risk. I have a great story about this that you will either read in "Never Again" or hear over an adult beverage.

You need to caveat this by knowing that there are LOTS of aircraft out there where you cannot visually inspect the fuel quantity through a filler cap.
 
Back
Top