Salty's Crash Speculation Thread

PaulS said:
Too close Salty, you gotta feed the beast.
Click to expand...
Landing in day, VFR weather with an hour of usable fuel is too close? I'm not arguing, but that certainly is not how I've looked at things to date.
 
Salty said:
Landing in day, VFR weather with an hour of usable fuel is too close? I'm not arguing, but that certainly is not how I've looked at things to date.
Click to expand...


Once you’re too low/too busy to switch tanks, you have to leave the second tank out of the equation.
 
Ironically, I used to burn fuel unevenly so I'd have all the fuel in one tank at the end of a flight, and I changed that approach in the last couple years. I would commonly run a tank dry so I'd have max available in the other tank at landing.
 
Four gallons? You could have unported. I've never burned a tank that low unless I was at altitude. Part of the prelanding checklist is to turn the fuel selector to the tank that's full of gas. If neither one is you're doing something wrong.
 
Be cautious of flight attitude vs useable fuel, especially if you’re using self-determined values.

For my Musketeer, Beech specs 1.2 gallons unusable in the POH. Several folks say they can get all but about a quart in level cruise but it would be dangerous to enter a landing attitude with fuel that low. The POH number should account for pitch all the way down to stall speed.

And if you’re in a slip all bets are off. My Beech prohibits slipping for more than 30 seconds because of fuel tank unporting.
 
Half Fast said:
Once you’re too low/too busy to switch tanks, you have to leave the second tank out of the equation.
Click to expand...

So, if 30 minutes of fuel isn't enough, how much would be enough?
 
My personal mins are 1hr reserve, but honestly, I've never cut it that close. I like lots of fuel, more fuel means more choices in many situations. Still, I don't see anything wrong with @Salty landing with an hour in the tanks, that should be more than plenty.
 
Bob Noel said:
So, if 30 minutes of fuel isn't enough, how much would be enough?
Click to expand...

I like full tanks to start, or full gross if that's an issue. In comparison to an airframe, gas is cheap, no reason not to have as much as you can.

Imo, landing with 1 hour reserve should be a well thought out rarity, not sop.
 
Bill said:
My personal mins are 1hr reserve, but honestly, I've never cut it that close. I like lots of fuel, more fuel means more choices in many situations. Still, I don't see anything wrong with @Salty landing with an hour in the tanks, that should be more than plenty.
Click to expand...

I tend to agree, I don't think Salty is wrong here, but I like extra gas in the tanks.
 
The purpose of the flight was to get gas. ;)
 
Bob Noel said:
So, if 30 minutes of fuel isn't enough, how much would be enough?
Click to expand...


About 3 more minutes than he had. ;)

Seriously, 30 minutes should be plenty. My point was just that it wasn’t an hour as stated, since one tank was no longer accessible. Also, 4 gallons may not be enough if it’s not accessible in a slip, considering it’s pretty common to slip a bit when landing.

But we’re speculating that fuel exhaustion was the issue. Could have been a contaminant. Or some engine problem. Or many things. Right now the NTSB is probably busy trying to rule out ingestion of orange peels.
 
Salty said:
The purpose of the flight was to get gas. ;)
Click to expand...

There was a guy around here, I didn't know him, but he flew out of a small field to get cheaper gas about 10 to 15 miles away. He got about 50 to 100 feet off the ground, his engine died, then he died. That one stuck has stuck with me. It's hard to check a tank that's almost empty. I don't know what this guy's deal was. I suspect he was low on gas from his last flight and what was left was stolen out of his tanks by someone. The airport is close to a well travelled back road and not very secure. Purely my speculation on the theft part, the guy is still dead.
 
Salty said:
Ironically, I used to burn fuel unevenly so I'd have all the fuel in one tank at the end of a flight, and I changed that approach in the last couple years. I would commonly run a tank dry so I'd have max available in the other tank at landing.
Click to expand...
What changed your approach a couple years ago? Is that when you got the JPI?
 
luvflyin said:
What changed your approach a couple years ago? Is that when you got the JPI?
Click to expand...
People were uncomfortable with it. My wife in particular. She was ok with 3 or 4 gallons, but below 3 she'd be a wreck. She didn't care if it was cruise at 10,000 feet or not.

I will most certainly be going back to that method of doing things. That is one lesson I'm taking away from this. Even though I do not think I was out of fuel, or that it unported, that is still something I will change.
 
I'm pretty sure I've even had that conversation with @Half Fast. Pretty sure he was on board and questioned why I wanted to run a tank so low (or even dry perhaps). Not blaming this on him, just saying a lot of people were questioning my method.
 
Salty said:
I'm pretty sure I've even had that conversation with @Half Fast. Pretty sure he was on board and questioned why I wanted to run a tank so low (or even dry perhaps). Not blaming this on him, just saying a lot of people were questioning my method.
Click to expand...


IIRC, I told you about an accident report I had read where a pilot ran a tank dry and when he tried to switch tanks, the fuel selector broke off in his hand.

I don’t like running a tank dry for two reasons:
1) If there’s any dirt or sludge in the fuel tank it will accumulate in the bottom. Running the tank all the way down could suck that into the fuel line and engine.
2) If there’s a problem with the switch and the second tank won’t feed properly (like a plugged vent), you’re out of options.

Rather than dry, why not run the first tank to, say, 5 gallons and then switch?
 
Half Fast said:
IIRC, I told you about an accident report I had read where a pilot ran a tank dry and when he tried to switch tanks, the fuel selector broke off in his hand.

I don’t like running a tank dry for two reasons:
1) If there’s any dirt or sludge in the fuel tank it will accumulate in the bottom. Running the tank all the way down could suck that into the fuel line and engine.
2) If there’s a problem with the switch and the second tank won’t feed properly (like a plugged vent), you’re out of options.

Rather than dry, why not run the first tank to, say, 5 gallons and then switch?
Click to expand...
10 gallons never used would work. Man, that’s going to make for some short IFR flights. That only leaves 30 gallons usable if you can fill the tanks, less if you can’t fill them.
 
Salty said:
10 gallons never used would work. Man, that’s going to make for some short IFR flights. That only leaves 30 gallons usable if you can fill the tanks, less if you can’t fill them.
Click to expand...

Your Mooney only hold 40g usable? Dang. I have 64 if I fill fully, and me, my wife, and 150# of luggage can still fly. If I leave 10 in the tanks, I still have a little over 5hrs of flight time, more than my bladder can stand actually.
 
Bill said:
Your Mooney only hold 40g usable? Dang. I have 64 if I fill fully, and me, my wife, and 150# of luggage can still fly. If I leave 10 in the tanks, I still have a little over 5hrs of flight time, more than my bladder can stand actually.
Click to expand...
No, that's assuming a 1 hour IFR reserve + 10 gallon personal reserve.
 
The one advantage I have with my little sport plane is being able to visually see the amount of fuel in the tank before take off as the tank is translucent. I also have a fuel gauge (my most untrusted instrument on the panel ;)) and keep up with my time as to know my fuel burn.

I'm required to keep 3 gals minimum (30 min) but I have adopted having an hour of reserve fuel (6 gals) when I land. This means my flight legs are ~ 2 hours but I'm a pretty conservative kind of guy.

Regardless of the outcome of the investigation I'm very thankful Salty & his bride got down safely.
 
it's pretty common for the mooneyspace folks to run tanks dry. personally I think it's just the dumbest thing on the planet to promote. I spoke out against it and got whamboozled by the regs. fk 'em, I can't imagine a flight plan that includes running a tank dry on purpose. I did it once because I had to have a tank inspection panel resealed so I needed to run that tank dry, which I did while circling the airport and plenty of fuel in the other tank. it was, admittedly, not a big deal but as far as regular flight planning goes, that is not a part of it for me.
 
Salty said:
10 gallons never used would work. Man, that’s going to make for some short IFR flights. That only leaves 30 gallons usable if you can fill the tanks, less if you can’t fill them.
Click to expand...

You need a J, ~8 hours of duration, my personal record is a 6 hour flight, left me 14 gallons when I landed.
 
I've not run a tank dry and have no plans to do so. That said, I'd happily do it at altitude knowing there was lots of gas in the other tank.
 
MooneyDriver78 said:
You need a J, ~8 hours of duration, my personal record is a 6 hour flight, left me 14 gallons when I landed.
Click to expand...

14 gallons of gas or 14 gallons of something else that ended up with a panic run into the FBO looking for the restroom.?? :lol::lol:
 
Salty said:
My JPI was calibrated to show a bit less than actual usable. On more than one occasion, at altitude, I've allowed the gauge to read 0 and go to a red X with the engine still running.
Click to expand...
I hope the JPI wasn't the sole method for determining the 4 gallons remaining. There's a few things that can go wrong with that.
 
asicer said:
I hope the JPI wasn't the sole method for determining the 4 gallons remaining. There's a few things that can go wrong with that.
Click to expand...
It was always 100% reliable in the past. But there's always a first time. After the fact, the math using the totalizer matched. But the reality is it might have been wrong.

I did not have time to switch tanks. Another lesson for me is to not fly a plane that I can't change tanks quickly without losing attention from flying. I could not do that in the M20C. In another aircraft I certainly would have switched tanks under the circumstances. In this aircraft, I had to focus on making a safe landing. I am not questioning this decision at all.
 
asicer said:
I hope the JPI wasn't the sole method for determining the 4 gallons remaining. There's a few things that can go wrong with that.
Click to expand...
I think I missed part of your point. No, the JPI was not used for pre-flight. I ALWAYS visually check the tanks in pre-flight. I always visually compare the tanks to the JPI in pre flight and they did match before that flight.
 
Salty said:
I think I missed part of your point. No, the JPI was not used for pre-flight. I ALWAYS visually check the tanks in pre-flight, and I did that flight.
Click to expand...
Ah good. This is what I was getting at.
 
asicer said:
Ah good. This is what I was getting at.
Click to expand...
Yes, but as my mechanic said to me when I described the situation. "It's possible more information was a bad thing in this case". And he's right. I would not have made that flight in that way had I not had the JPI.
 
Salty said:
Another lesson for me is to not fly a plane that I can't change tanks quickly without losing attention from flying.
Click to expand...

Yours is the only Mooney I've flown in; do they all have the selector in the same location?

Mine's on the floor also, but between the seats. That's the main reason I installed the inertia reel shoulder belts. With the original fixed belts I couldn't reach the selector.
 
Half Fast said:
Yours is the only Mooney I've flown in; do they all have the selector in the same location?

Mine's on the floor also, but between the seats. That's the main reason I installed the inertia reel shoulder belts. With the original fixed belts I couldn't reach the selector.
Click to expand...
No, the newer ones are more easily accessed.
 
I put about 20 hours on a 1967 M20F this past summer. One thing about it that I really didn't like was the fuel selector. It was far forward on the floor in the pilot's footwell -- too far forward to reach comfortably, and difficult to see while doing so. The prior owner had cobbled a foot-long, T-shaped tool out of PVC pipe, with slots cut in the end to engage and turn the fuel selector handle. It was fairly easy to use at altitude in cruising flight, but I'd hate to have to do it in a stressful situation close to the ground. I also flew a mid-'80s M20K this summer, and immediately noticed the fuel selector was much easier to reach and use.

I've got four tanks in the PA-32. If I never let any of them get under six or seven gallons, that's essentially two hours of "unusable" fuel sloshing around. And if in some emergency I had to stretch the range, the tank-switching workload would only get more frantic and error-prone. I've nothing against running a tank dry in cruise in order to consolidate my assets. Part 23 certification regs require that if a tank is run dry, the engine will be restored to 75% max continuous power within 10 seconds after switching to a tank with fuel in it. FAR 23.955(e). In the old CAR 3, under which a lot of our fleet is certified, full power must be restored within ten seconds (CAR 4.437(e)).

My K35 Bonanza had aux tanks totaling about 18 gallons usable. But the fuel injection system drew fuel from those tanks at the rate of over 20 gph (with the engine burning about 12.5 gph), and returned the excess to the left main tank. The aux tanks were not to be used for takeoff or landing. I would routinely run the aux tanks in cruise until the fuel flow needle started to twitch -- just about 44 minutes duration -- because every minute of fuel left in the aux tank system was two minutes of fuel unavailable for landing.
 
Salty said:
I did not have time to switch tanks.
Click to expand...
Not at low altitude and energy. That's why you switch tanks at the top of the descent (or on downwind as part of your GUMPS check), and don't let it go too low. I do it at the top of the descent because I have to unlock my seat belt and go head down to change, and I don't like to do that in the landing pattern where there could be other aircraft.

Salty said:
Another lesson for me is to not fly a plane that I can't change tanks quickly without losing attention from flying. I could not do that in the M20C. In another aircraft I certainly would have switched tanks under the circumstances. In this aircraft, I had to focus on making a safe landing. I am not questioning this decision at all.
Click to expand...

The lesson is in fuel management. I'm betting you unported, that just isn't a lot of fuel in the aircraft. I did have it down that low once, and did a fairly high approach to landing just in case things went wrong. That was after a LONG flight with lots and lots of unexpected delays at the end.
 
steingar said:
Not at low altitude and energy. That's why you switch tanks at the top of the descent (or on downwind as part of your GUMPS check), and don't let it go too low. I do it at the top of the descent because I have to unlock my seat belt and go head down to change, and I don't like to do that in the landing pattern where there could be other aircraft.



The lesson is in fuel management. I'm betting you unported, that just isn't a lot of fuel in the aircraft. I did have it down that low once, and did a fairly high approach to landing just in case things went wrong. That was after a LONG flight with lots and lots of unexpected delays at the end.
Click to expand...
You miss the point. neither tank was fullest according to the gauges. But if I had more time, I would have certainly switched when the engine shut off, in case the tank pickup was clogged, or the gauge on that tank was wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top