Long Distances in Light Aircraft

I've flown from Daytona Beach to Long Beach, CA in a Seminole a little while ago. 17.3 hrs, stop every 4-5 hours. I got a little bit lazy on leaning and that got us pretty low on fuel. At some point a silent stare at my buddy and we both knew we had to put down in a hurry.
We landed with fuel below VFR mins (that was an expensive top off), but that's the US, you're never far from an airport. That was a great learning experience, and we both talked the problem through to make sure it wouldn't happen again. Long cross countries with GPS's, good autopilot, great VFR, music streaming, snacks and beverages, a good buddy and you're not far from a whole lot of troubles. Complacency kills.
 
Not to hijack the tread here, but...
I find it annoying that you can only draw fuel from one tank in Piper aircraft. You can plan out IFR reserves or VFR, even if you do though you split that into two tanks. Unless you have incredibly accurate fuel gauges you're never really going to know when you're critical fuel in that one tank. Score one for Cessna, I soppose drawing fuel from both tanks comes along with the gravity fed system though..
 
Ayork62493 said:
Unless you have incredibly accurate fuel gauges you're never really going to know when you're critical fuel in that one tank...
Click to expand...

When the engine starts missing and sputtering is an accurate indication of being at critical fuel in that tank. :)
 
On a Seminole each engine draws from its wing. If for a reason or another an engine is more thirsty than the other, you can crossfeed to reestablish a balance. On some light twins however, crossfeed is only to be done during an emergency.
 
MikeD said:
When the engine starts missing and sputtering is an accurate indication of being at critical fuel in that tank. :)
Click to expand...

That`s when you switch to the other tank....

I don`t think the piper system is soo bad, there are a lot worst systems out there, I flew this plane that had two tanks, one behind the panel the other on top our heads (tandem seating), The engine only gets fuel from the bottom one, and you have to keep feeding that tank with the top one, if you are not careful it will overflow and wash the entire windshield or the pilots if the side window it`s open, the indicator only shows when the front tank it`s full, the only way to know fuel consumption is with an E6B (or mental math)....wing tanks were a big invention, I remember seeing an old Rearwin ad that said it was the invention of the century.
 
Pépé le Pilot said:
On a Seminole each engine draws from its wing. If for a reason or another an engine is more thirsty than the other, you can crossfeed to reestablish a balance. On some light twins however, crossfeed is only to be done during an emergency.
Click to expand...

was the heater on?

Does the turbo seminole comes with fuel flow indicators?
 
hambone said:
Hey guys,

The hits just keep on coming over here at my school in Korea. First it was icing, now it's ridiculously long range flights without refueling. Am I unnecessarily stressing out flying for 5 and 1/2 hours in a Cessna 172 without refueling? It's a G1000, and I've had it leaned to about 7 gph on some flights, and 9 on others, at altitudes ranging from 7,000 to 9,000. This is according to the gph indicator. Let's say it does about 8 gallons an hour.

How many of you are ok with a flight like this?
Click to expand...

53/8=6.6 hours of fuel, your flight is 5.5, i would say you are ok. you are PIC just make sure the planning works out and everything is leaned correctly.

i go on a lot of flights where i end up with only minimum fuel for the leg. usually 45min to 1hr reserve (no less than 45 though due to IFR)
 
RICHARD5 said:
Yes, but he's a CFI and presumably he's talking of dual instruction flights with primary to advanced students. Should that make a difference?

I once tagged along with a pilot in training for his commercial. We agreed I would do the W&B calcs. Otherwise, it was his flight on a short x/c out and back. At the destination I reminded the pilot we needed to refuel. He acknowledged then surprised me by taxiing back out for immediate takeoff. We returned to our original departure airport and I watched the lineman refuel to within ounces of useable fuel capacity. That pilot's CFI tried to give me the 3rd degree to which I responded, Your student was PIC.

What is going through the minds of students and how does the CFI affect that? The pilot in question, the son of a current 121 pilot, had no idea or concern for how close he came to becoing a statistic.
Click to expand...

PIC hardly matters in a case like that. Why would you stay in the aircraft knowing you'd be on fumes before getting home? You should be primarily concerned with your LIFE, then with the potential certificate action. I would have no problem pulling the mixture to cutoff and having a nice discussion until we either topped off, or he left without me. I don't allow other people's stupidity to put me in danger.
 
swisspilot said:
That`s when you switch to the other tank....

I don`t think the piper system is soo bad, there are a lot worst systems out there, I flew this plane that had two tanks, one behind the panel the other on top our heads (tandem seating), The engine only gets fuel from the bottom one, and you have to keep feeding that tank with the top one, if you are not careful it will overflow and wash the entire windshield or the pilots if the side window it`s open, the indicator only shows when the front tank it`s full, the only way to know fuel consumption is with an E6B (or mental math)....wing tanks were a big invention, I remember seeing an old Rearwin ad that said it was the invention of the century.
Click to expand...
I never trust fuel indicators...It's all mental math here. I've been spoiled by Cessnas my entire flying life thus far, never had to worry about switching tanks.
 
As stated before, do you have enough to meet the legal requirements?

Im just curious - are you flying under FAA regs or Korean Rules?
So what are the fuel reserves if going by Korean Rules?
 
SteveC said:
I hadn't heard that. Do you know the reasoning?
Click to expand...

It might have to do with the fuel pump? Isnt the fuel pump lubricated by the fuel itself? But I guess if there was no fuel to burn the engine wouldn't be turning so the engine driven fuel pump wouldn't be pumping either.
 
F9DXER said:
As stated before, do you have enough to meet the legal requirements?

Im just curious - are you flying under FAA regs or Korean Rules?
So what are the fuel reserves if going by Korean Rules?
Click to expand...

I would bet the North has easier rules. ;)

Dear Leader is a bit busy right now trying to teach Jr Leader how to shell the South.....
 
dbrault17 said:
It might have to do with the fuel pump? Isnt the fuel pump lubricated by the fuel itself? But I guess if there was no fuel to burn the engine wouldn't be turning so the engine driven fuel pump wouldn't be pumping either.
Click to expand...

Not diaphragm pumps
 
dbrault17 said:
It might have to do with the fuel pump? Isnt the fuel pump lubricated by the fuel itself?
Click to expand...
No reason at all to run a tank dry. The fuel pump is NOT lubed by the fuel.

The reason is that many pilots come from turbine backgrounds where it IS a big problem, however piston engines are fine. Switch tanks, and the engine will return to power instantly.

But I guess if there was no fuel to burn the engine wouldn't be turning so the engine driven fuel pump wouldn't be pumping either.
Click to expand...

The engine will NOT stop while in flight. This is a common myth, but it is absolutely not true. You can see it when you fly twins, but it is the same for singles. In fact, in most cases you have to delibrately TRY to stop the prop.

The propeller will continue to turn the engine, and therefore the folowing will occur,

MAP will change with throttle movement
RPM will try to maintain the constant speed
oil pressure will be normal
the alternator will continue charging
fuel flow will be normal (if the failure is caused by ignition problems)

The only real indication will be a loss of thrust, and the resulting loss of airspeed or altitude.


This is why I would show my students a real failure by pulling the mixture (over a good field of course) at some point.
 
USMCmech said:
No reason at all to run a tank dry. The fuel pump is NOT lubed by the fuel.

The reason is that many pilots come from turbine backgrounds where it IS a big problem, however piston engines are fine. Switch tanks, and the engine will return to power instantly.



The engine will NOT stop while in flight. This is a common myth, but it is absolutely not true. You can see it when you fly twins, but it is the same for singles. In fact, in most cases you have to delibrately TRY to stop the prop.

The propeller will continue to turn the engine, and therefore the folowing will occur,

MAP will change with throttle movement
RPM will try to maintain the constant speed
oil pressure will be normal
the alternator will continue charging
fuel flow will be normal (if the failure is caused by ignition problems)

The only real indication will be a loss of thrust, and the resulting loss of airspeed or altitude.


This is why I would show my students a real failure by pulling the mixture (over a good field of course) at some point.
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

You have to just about stall the airplane to stop the (fixed) prop when an engine quits in flight. Provided the engine didn't seize, of course. It'll make the glide a lot better to have the prop stopped as well, as we all know if we've flown twins.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top