Fuel crossover

[Darrenr]

A header tank with a visible sight gauge will certainly help things. FD many years ago had fuel selector valves, but there were crashes because some never bothered to switch over so they removed them. It will be interesting to revisit the selector valve in 2 years and see if any more of those crop up. It has certainly happened in the GA world.

 

Rocky Mountain High, I believe that's what took John Denver down.

 

Just to be clear if one tank runs dry and you don't adjust yaw and the other tank is full the engine will be able to pull over the force created by the forces of flight? Or if u don't adjust yaw you could have an engine out with one full tank and one empty?

 

I am used to a fuel selector, one tank is burning faster just flip the switch.

[Darrenr]

Mocfly very interesting will give it a try. On my trip I went for adjusting one wing high to correct it and did nothing I didn't think about the forces of yaw which make total sense and to think about it I had a northerly wind while flying east which caused me to crab creating the side force which would hinder one tank and help the other. I calculate fuel and leave big margins and check site tubes routinely as part of my cruise checks to make sure I have equal draw but when I saw the one tube way down I headed to the next safe haven.

Just one of those flights, heavy crab, turbulence heavy enough to have IFR's calling for block altitudes, and watching one tank getting lower and lower.

[opticsguy]

With my CTSW it was important to have the Dynon level. It meant marking the holes to make sure it was in the same place after annuals. While I fly, I adjust rudder trim to adjust fuel burn. If I see air in the right sight tube, I raise the left wing by moving the rudder trim wheel to the left (which raises the left wing and moves the ball to the right). I can usually balance fuel flow, but in bumpy air all bets are off.

[FlyingMonkey]

Never fly with marginal fuel and you'll never have to worry. I rarely look at the sight tubes. I look at pre-flight and if there is more than enough or I dip the tanks I don't bother to look again.

 

That's my theory. Do your fuel/time calculations and leave fat margins, stick your tanks to confirm fuel, and go fly. All you really need to make sure you don't run out of fuel is a watch. As I mentioned, the sight tubes just help let me know if I'm leaking fuel or something.

[sandpiper]

That's my theory. Do your fuel/time calculations and leave fat margins, stick your tanks to confirm fuel, and go fly. All you really need to make sure you don't run out of fuel is a watch. As I mentioned, the sight tubes just help let me know if I'm leaking fuel or something.

 

Maybe a watch is all you "really" need but, as mentioned somewhere before, there are reasons to want to be able to see from a reliable gauge what is really in the tank. Especially when minimums are being approached. At least for me - keeps my pucker factor in check.

[FlyingMonkey]

Maybe a watch is all you "really" need but, as mentioned somewhere before, there are reasons to want to be able to see from a reliable gauge what is really in the tank. Especially when minimums are being approached. At least for me - keeps my pucker factor in check.

 

Right, but the fact is the MOST reliable device is a sight tube, you see *actual* fuel in an *actual* tank. Gauges lie or break, and flow meters don't tell you if you are losing fuel to a leak. I think my position of doing the fuel calculations for the flight, physically sticking the tanks, then verifying the sight tubes throughout the flight is about as conservative a method as possible, even if my plane had gauges, fuel flow meters, a totalizer, and what have you (which it has none of).

[sandpiper]

Right, but the fact is the MOST reliable device is a sight tube, you see *actual* fuel in an *actual* tank. Gauges lie or break, and flow meters don't tell you if you are losing fuel to a leak. I think my position of doing the fuel calculations for the flight, physically sticking the tanks, then verifying the sight tubes throughout the flight is about as conservative a method as possible, even if my plane had gauges, fuel flow meters, a totalizer, and what have you (which it has none of).

 

I think we are saying the same thing. I consider my sight tubes to be a gauge and, in my plane it is the only in cockpit reference.

[FlyingMonkey]

I think we are saying the same thing. I consider my sight tubes to be a gauge and, in my plane it is the only in cockpit reference.

 

Yeah, I agree we need to be looking at the tubes.

[Jim Meade]

On my trip I went for adjusting one wing high to correct it and did nothing I didn't think about the forces of yaw which make total sense and to think about it I had a northerly wind while flying east which caused me to crab creating the side force which would hinder one tank and help the other.

Just one of those flights, heavy crab, turbulence heavy enough to have IFR's calling for block altitudes, and watching one tank getting lower and lower.

I'm not sure I follow your comments. From AFH Glossary:

CRAB—A flight condition in which the nose of the airplane is pointed into the wind a sufficient amount to counteract a crosswind and maintain a desired track over the ground.

YAW—Rotation about the vertical axis of an aircraft.

One can yaw the airplane to enter a crab, but it's rather an inelegant method. Usually, one executes a slight coordinated turn and then levels the plane on the new heading. There would typically be no yaw involved in a crab. Now, I grant that if one has to correct a few degrees that one can "kick the rudder" and make the change but as soon as the crab is established the wings are level and there is no yaw movement. A crab should not affect the level of fuel in the tanks any more than it would in a boat that was moving across a river.

It may be that you were flying with the ball out of center but it was because the airplane was out of rig, not because it was flying in a crab. By out of rig I mean the rudder was not centered, perhaps because the ailerons were out of trim.

SKID—A condition where the tail of the airplane follows a path outside the path of the nose during a turn.