X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sun, 03 Jan 2010 16:08:29 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from blu0-omc3-s8.blu0.hotmail.com ([65.55.116.83] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.0) with ESMTP id 4060981 for lml@lancaironline.net; Sat, 02 Jan 2010 11:02:16 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.55.116.83; envelope-from=gt_phantom@hotmail.com Received: from BLU0-SMTP51 ([65.55.116.72]) by blu0-omc3-s8.blu0.hotmail.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 2 Jan 2010 08:01:41 -0800 X-Originating-IP: [68.223.73.228] X-Originating-Email: [gt_phantom@hotmail.com] X-Original-Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: gt_phantom@hotmail.com Received: from [192.168.1.67] ([68.223.73.228]) by BLU0-SMTP51.blu0.hotmail.com over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Sat, 2 Jan 2010 08:01:40 -0800 X-Original-Date: Sat, 02 Jan 2010 11:01:45 -0500 From: GT Phantom Reply-To: gt_phantom@hotmail.com Organization: None User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: Re: [LML] Re: Fuel Planning References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 02 Jan 2010 16:01:40.0291 (UTC) FILETIME=[DEE57130:01CA8BC4] Hi Tom,

Agreed,

Known Quantity - ("Mental Math" + "I see it isn't leaking on the ground" + visual looks about right + taking off on an second or later leg of the day after a quick turn) = Known Quantity (at least sufficient for planning).

It seems like such a nit, but I just didn't want our youngsters thinking "Known Quantity" - "Current Gauge Reading" = "Known Quantity." Looks like someone else has picked up on at least one failure mode of these gauges due to water and/or gasahol.

Cheers,

Bill

mikeeasley wrote:

Bill,

I saw a quote the other day on a T-shirt in a store:

"Confidence is the feeling you have before you fully understand the situation."

I definitely think it applies here. I think we are on the same page. Just looking at the fuel gages is taking additional risk that's not necessary. I would say that about 20% of my flights take place with less than full fuel at takeoff. On most of those partially fueled flights, I have done the "mental math" to confirm what's left in the tanks based on fuel flow and time, and I compare that to the fuel quantity gages. Buy I must admit a few times where my plane has been sitting in the hangar for a while, and I don't remember exactly what the previous flight fuel situation was, and I just look in the tanks, trust the fuel quantity gages and go fly.

Your points are well taken.

Mike