My (ex) instructor called me and nagged me because..

AustinPilot said:
I always wondered how it was pilots managed to run out of fuel in the air. Now I have a giant thread that explains it. :lol:
Click to expand...

Yep. For people incapable of thinking , good planning, monitoring the situation and making the proper adjustments, the best thing to do is load up the fuel and land after a couple of hours.
 
Well, what can I add that hasn't already been hashed completely?

Let's see, I think the reserve is required to plan at normal cruise burn, sadly I don't know what that is in the book.

If he landed 31 mins after civil twilight, then he was below the planned min. If it was 29 min after civil twilight I guess above.

Here's the real world situation. There's an old codger in a Bonanza landing in front of you, and while on downwind, he lands gear up. Now - can you safely get to the alternate airport, execute a pattern, landing and rollout to the fuel pump? If yes - go forth and enjoy. If you would have felt worried, then you need to alter your methods.

Two more things. No, they will not close this thread, it's got a life of its own now, and lastly:

I like pie.
 
vintage cessna said:
What good is an opinion that is not based on the facts at hand? The OP detailed what he did . I don't see anything he did that could lead to a bad habit .

Show something real, other than a feeling, that indicates a flaw in his decision making process.

If you want a 1 hour or better reserve regardless of the circumstances, that is your decision. Hard to criticize someone who had more than the required reserve and nothing remotely possible in the scenario that would have lead to an off airport landing.
Click to expand...
Some planes do NOT hold their documented usable. Things happen. I read about a dead guy who was a recognised expert on the type he was killed in. He was killed by running out of fuel in a plane that had been topped off. His planning was correct and reasonable. ...except that he did not now the problem with _that_ plane he was flying. I don't recall the details, but the summary is that it didn't hold as much as it was supposed to. If you have verified your airplane, that is very different from pushing limits in a rental. That guy is dead in spite of doing it right. Think about it and consider your limits.
 
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

vintage cessna said:
Depends on how one thinks , doesn't it? Some people may get comfortable, others may apply critical thinking to each situation.

Judging from what the OP has said, he impresses me as the latter. If I could find some flaw in his reasoning, I would join the camp of " don't push your luck " .
Click to expand...
Some planes don't hold their expected usable. The reasons vary. That is one hole in the OP's planning.
 
kestrel said:
Some planes do NOT hold their documented usable. Things happen. I read about a dead guy who was a recognised expert on the type he was killed in. He was killed by running out of fuel in a plane that had been topped off. His planning was correct and reasonable. ...except that he did not now the problem with _that_ plane he was flying. I don't recall the details, but the summary is that it didn't hold as much as it was supposed to. If you have verified your airplane, that is very different from pushing limits in a rental. That guy is dead in spite of doing it right. Think about it and consider your limits.
Click to expand...

First post..

Welcome to POA...:cheers::cheers:
 
bflynn said:
You could also consider that the instructor is an employee of the rental organization, who probably has a strong interest in their airplane not running out of fuel.
Click to expand...

He is also the last instructor with his name in the OPs logbook giving him a strong interest that the OP doesn't do anything dumb.
 
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

kestrel said:
Some planes don't hold their expected usable. The reasons vary. That is one hole in the OP's planning.
Click to expand...

Was it an Experimental, or an aircraft with a defective bladder? The situation we have been discussing is a DA20 with a single metal tank. If you can't have faith in even how much the tank holds , then you may as well add a 50 percent fudge factor and forget the whole exercise.
 
vintage cessna said:
How about the DPE?
Click to expand...

DPE's do not sign the examinee's logbook as "dual given" as it is not an instructional flight. They are not required to sign the logbook at all.

But your premise is correct. In the event of an accident with a low-time private pilot, you can bet his DPE would be contacted by the investigating FSDO.
 
weilke said:
Had the DPE seen the plane come in with 4.5gal in the tank after a evening passenger carrying flight, he too would have called the OP about it.
Click to expand...

Now it is down to 4 1/2 gallons...:rolleyes::rolleyes:...

Let this thread continue for another 5 pages and it will be landing on fumes...:redface:
 
N801BH said:
Now it is down to 4 1/2 gallons...:rolleyes::rolleyes:...

Let this thread continue for another 5 pages and it will be landing on fumes...:redface:
Click to expand...

It was fumes I tells ya, I was there and fueled the plane myself. Fueled it twice to be sure of the volume. Dude was lucky to get it to parking...maybe he pushed it in.
 
N801BH said:
Now it is down to 4 1/2 gallons...:rolleyes::rolleyes:...
Click to expand...

The DA20 has 1/2 gallon unusable fuel. So if they filled up 19 gallons, he had 4 and 1/2 useable.

Yes, with a burn of 6gph that is 45 minutes. As pointed out earlier, 2 go-arounds for a mower on the runway, a geared up bonanza or some issue with your radios and now you are in the dark with 2 gallons remaining heading to your alternate field that is only '10min away'.
 
My personal minimum is to be on the ground with an hour or more of fuel in the tanks. This means 5 gallons per side in addition to the unusable. If I have to make an additional fuel stop to make myself very comfortable, I will. I keep very close track of fuel usage on any flight longer than an hour, the totalizer helps with that but I don't rely on it entirely and always give it a margain for error...
 
weilke said:
The DA20 has 1/2 gallon unusable fuel. So if they filled up 19 gallons, he had 4 and 1/2 useable.

Yes, with a burn of 6gph that is 45 minutes. As pointed out earlier, 2 go-arounds for a mower on the runway, a geared up bonanza or some issue with your radios and now you are in the dark with 2 gallons remaining heading to your alternate field that is only '10min away'.
Click to expand...

Where did you get the 19 gallons from ? But, if it took 19 gallons to top it off that would mean there was 5 usable left. The .5 gallon is always there occupying space. If he had run to fuel exhaustion there would still be .5 in the tank and it would take 24 gallons to fill it, not 24.5.

Why only 2 go arounds, make it 3.
 
Clark1961 said:
You aren't required to land with the reserve, only plan for it.
Click to expand...

yes. So did he plan for it? Because if he did, then he either illegally took off intending to fly into the reserve, unaware that he would land after night or he misjudged his burn significantly.

I dont see a positive answer there.
 
weilke said:
Had the DPE seen the plane come in with 4.5gal in the tank after a evening passenger carrying flight, he too would have called the OP about it.
Click to expand...

So, if the pilot tells the DPE to F off, what happens next? Does the DPE notify the FAA that he wants the pilot retested because he landed with 45 minutes of fuel remaining?
 
Does anyone recall the young pilot flying back westbound VFR across Lake Michigan at night in the winter near Milwaukee in a Cherokee? He passed on a fuel stop and ran out of gas within a mile or two of shore near Milwaukee because he miscalculated the winds and fuel remaining. He survived the ditching and made some calls for help on his cell phone before the plane sank. They never found his body.
 
Popcorn.gif
 
Last edited:
bflynn said:
yes. So did he plan for it? Because if he did, then he either illegally took off intending to fly into the reserve, unaware that he would land after night or he misjudged his burn significantly.

I dont see a positive answer there.
Click to expand...

Aren't you going a little overboard here ? You insist he landed with 37 minutes vs 45 minutes. Is that a huge miscalculation? Could he safely make another airport if need be?

I don't think the OP was real careful with some of the details , like perhaps the departure time. He wasn't penning a post expecting the conversation to turn the way it did.

The CFI chewed him out for landing with 5 gallons left. For a DA20 with a 125 HP engine , that is at least 45 minutes, OK.
 
MarcoDA40 said:
giphy.gif
Click to expand...

See what you started. You will know better next time.
 
bflynn said:
yes. So did he plan for it? Because if he did, then he either illegally took off intending to fly into the reserve, unaware that he would land after night or he misjudged his burn significantly.

I dont see a positive answer there.
Click to expand...

If you actually read the initial post, I said around 6:30. When I landed I could still see the ground from sunlight. Maybe 8:20-8:25?

I never said night, anywhere in any of my posts. Everything "night related" posts are just peoples assumptions..
 
Last edited:
vintage cessna said:
So, if the pilot tells the DPE to F off, what happens next? Does the DPE notify the FAA that he wants the pilot retested because he landed with 45 minutes of fuel remaining?
Click to expand...

Why so testy ? Are you another one of these kids who likes to cut it close ?
 
MarcoDA40 said:
If you actually read the initial post, I said around 6:30. When I landed I could still see the ground from sunlight. Maybe 8:20-8:25?
Click to expand...

So you had 2 hrs to stop for some additional fuel but didn't ?
 
MarcoDA40 said:
If you actually read the initial post, I said around 6:30. When I landed I could still see the ground from sunlight. Maybe 8:20-8:25?

I never said night, anywhere in any of my posts. Everything "night related" posts are just peoples assumptions..
Click to expand...

I did read the original post and I read 6:30. But you never gave a landing time.

You made it from Fulton County to Sanford in under 2 hours? It's nearly 300 nm. In a DA20, I put the time at 2:20+, meaning I would have expected landing 8:50 at the earliest. But even 8:20 is after sunset.

You're cutting it very close on a lot of margins. Keep doing that and sooner or later you'll find an empty bag of luck when you need it.

If I were Stuart, you'd have a strike against you in terms of renting from me again.
 
I'm a late comer here and I haven't read every post.

On the ground, it's easy to tell how much fuel it took on the ground. In some airplanes, knowing how much you have left can be hard.

I'm just curious how you determined you had 5 gallons left when you were en route in. Does the aircraft have a good accurate are fuel flow meter?

Folks express their disagreement with me about things all the time. Sometime they seem to know what they are talking about, sometimes I just disagree with their analysis.

As long as I know I can substantiate my answers with good hard fact based science, data, knowledge & experience I welcome the challenge. It keeps me honest and on my toes.
 
Last edited:
N801BH said:
First post..

Welcome to POA...:cheers::cheers:
Click to expand...

Dang! I just noticed that you are at KJAC? I _really_ wish I had noticed that before and had a chance to see your plane!

Edit: I was in Jackson all of this past week hiking. That I had been in the area was on the context of a post I had just made but disappeared. I have made a much shorter re-post of that missing post. Shorter is probably better anyway.
 
Last edited:
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

vintage cessna said:
Was it an Experimental, or an aircraft with a defective bladder? The situation we have been discussing is a DA20 with a single metal tank. If you can't have faith in even how much the tank holds , then you may as well add a 50 percent fudge factor and forget the whole exercise.
Click to expand...

Might be a good time to pull up this one:
truth.jpg


I don't see any extremes here. Hopefully the OP can filter out the BS and add to his knowledge base.

It doesn't take an experimental or bladder for things to go wrong. It might be something you can't imagine would happen, even after you finally see it. It could just be bad maintenance. I haven't seen anything done wrong on an airplane since flying home from KJAC in an A319 yesterday. 3 of 3 seat belts where installed incorrectly. Minor, but relevant. $h!t happens.

Reducing margins in your own airplane that you know well and trend monitor carefully is one thing. Ferrying a plane you've never seen for someone you don't know is an other. Renting a plane you've flown a bunch is somewhere in between.

Everyone has to figure out their own risk profile. I would have added a few gallons at the destination. However, I enjoy landing off-airport and in small backyard airports. These activities have their own risks and I choose to take them.

However, in this case there is an other interested party. The plane is owned by someone else. They have a right to set standards for the operation of their aircraft. ...even of the message could have been more productively conveyed.

Cheers!
 
MarcoDA40 said:
Any way to delete this thread?

All I was asking was if my old CFI was justified to call me and chew me out over what I felt was a safe flight. I answered the phone expecting a "how was your flight?" but no, I answer to "So you landed with 5 gallons left, isnt that cutting it close?" After I haven't seen the guy in over 3 months.. Once again, your own experiences and personal minimums might be different than mine, but that doesnt make you or me, right or wrong.
If I remember correctly, my old CFI told me that his personal minimums to pop out of the clouds on an instrument approach was 800ft AGL.. well if I were to land poping out at 200ft AGL and he were to find out somehow..(assuming i was IR) would it be okay for him to call me and tell me I was cutting it too close? just because my personal minimums are different than his?
Click to expand...

We have wandered a bit from your question, but the beauty of this site is you get a lot of perspectives and can decided for youself. Personally, I have learned from these posts.

I would suggest this, and maybe you did it already: Probe your instructor a bit to understand his reasoning. Maybe there's a lesson learned for you. Maybe not.

I'm guessing, without knowing your CFI, that he contacted you out of sincere concern for your safety and the safety of your passengers. He has the right to do that, and you have a right to decide not to work with him again if you find that offensive.

Focusing again on the original question...I think it was totally within his professional responsibilities to make this call. And if that offends you, there are many other CFI's out there.
 
Another "I didn't get the answer I wanted so I'll delete it" thread.

It's a message board. Be prepared to hear other answers than what you are seeking. You'll likely get them:)
 
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

kestrel said:
Might be a good time to pull up this one:
truth.jpg


I don't see any extremes here. Hopefully the OP can filter out the BS and add to his knowledge base.

It doesn't take an experimental or bladder for things to go wrong. It might be something you can't imagine would happen, even after you finally see it. It could just be bad maintenance. I haven't seen anything done wrong on an airplane since flying home from KJAC in an A319 yesterday. 3 of 3 seat belts where installed incorrectly. Minor, but relevant. $h!t happens.

Reducing margins in your own airplane that you know well and trend monitor carefully is one thing. Ferrying a plane you've never seen for someone you don't know is an other. Renting a plane you've flown a bunch is somewhere in between.

Everyone has to figure out their own risk profile. I would have added a few gallons at the destination. However, I enjoy landing off-airport and in small backyard airports. These activities have their own risks and I choose to take them.

However, in this case there is an other interested party. The plane is owned by someone else. They have a right to set standards for the operation of their aircraft. ...even of the message could have been more productively conveyed.

Cheers!
Click to expand...

I guess you missed the part where Marco talked to the FBO owner.

I would be confident that if I was renting a DA20 equipped with a 24 gallon tank in any of the 50 states , that they would all indeed have 24 gallon capacity.
 
Hopefully, someday, having accrued more hours, he will look back and regret starting this thred and be embarrassed.
 
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

vintage cessna said:
I guess you missed the part where Marco talked to the FBO owner.
Click to expand...

This is about message 235 in this thread. I assure you that I had much more fun hiking in the Tetons than keeping up with all of the replies. Which would you think was more fun? :D

I would be confident that if I was renting a DA20 equipped with a 24 gallon tank in any of the 50 states , that they would all indeed have 24 gallon capacity.
Click to expand...

Maybe. I'll leave it to the OP to decide if he considered the fuel system in that much detail or he just happened to be flying an airplane with what appears to be a very good system that is likely to get essentially all the fuel out. I don't know the details well enough to know for certain if an issue with the fuel pick-up might possibly cause it to have less than the expected usable. If it drains out the bottom, then maybe it is pretty much assured to give all of it. ...but again, did the OP consider that or did he get lucky to be in an airplane with such a system.

By pointing places that it _might_ have gone wrong, he might consider these details for future aircraft even if they don't apply to this one. By suggesting that there can be thing outside of what one has considered or has control of, we might provide information that changes how he evaluates risk.

Cheers!
 
Re: My instructor nagged me because..

kestrel said:
This is about message 235 in this thread. I assure you that I had much more fun hiking in the Tetons than keeping up with all of the replies. Which would you think was more fun? :D



Maybe. I'll leave it to the OP to decide if he considered the fuel system in that much detail or he just happened to be flying an airplane with what appears to be a very good system that is likely to get essentially all the fuel out. I don't know the details well enough to know for certain if an issue with the fuel pick-up might possibly cause it to have less than the expected usable. If it drains out the bottom, then maybe it is pretty much assured to give all of it. ...but again, did the OP consider that or did he get lucky to be in an airplane with such a system.

By pointing places that it _might_ have gone wrong, he might consider these details for future aircraft even if they don't apply to this one. By suggesting that there can be thing outside of what one has considered or has control of, we might provide information that changes how he evaluates risk.

Cheers!
Click to expand...

Welcome to Paradise....:):):):)
 
Ultimately you are PIC. You planned the flight carefully and you executed your flight as planned.

My only comment is that you seem defensive. Recognize that the defensiveness may come from some doubt in the back of your mind. Applying a cliche, your former CFI "struck a nerve" when he questioned your fuel planning.

Maybe it comes from getting older, maybe it's from being married for years, but I find it easier to accept criticism these days. If someone called me up and said, "you were cutting it kind of close on gas, weren't you?", I would have agreed. I would have explained my reasoning but been open to input on the subject. Listening to an alternative point of view doesn't mean that you were WRONG.
 
If you land with 5 minutes of fuel, you get bitched at, you land with 15 minutes of fuel you get a lecture, you land with over half an hour of fuel, you get asked if you knew you had a half an hour.
 
Henning said:
If you land with 5 minutes of fuel, you get bitched at, you land with 15 minutes of fuel you get a lecture, you land with over half an hour of fuel, you get asked if you knew you had a half an hour.
Click to expand...


Damned if you do................ Damned is you don't.....:mad2::mad2::rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top