It seems to me there is no such thing as a fool-proof fuel system, therefore we should all endeavor not to be fools. I view Scott’s methodology of an aware pilot using two separate systems to monitor fuel level and usage as more than adequate protection against buffoonery.

 

A properly calibrated, tested and proven fuel flow (totalizer) gage provides a good means of monitoring the amount of fuel the engine is currently using, which in turn allows the pilot to constantly update the fuel/time calculation.

 

Properly calibrated, tested and proven fuel quantity gages may lack the resolution to monitor fuel flow, but are certainly adequate to back up the fuel flow monitoring system.

 

Should the two monitoring systems not agree with each other methinks a precautionary landing would be in order to determine the problem. The chance that both systems would fail at the same time seems vanishingly small to me.  

 

I’m as big a fan of state-of-the-art, cutting edge technology as the next guy, but I’m also the guy who has to justify expenditures to the house appropriations committee. If using a bit of brain power in flight can save me a substantial sum, I’m willing to make the sacrifice. Besides, I need something to do to stay awake…

 

--Mark Sletten