citizen500 Posted October 10, 2013 Report Share Posted October 10, 2013 Noise. This is why tort reform is needed. Pure noise. SP training absolutely involves emergency procedures for fuel. And the suit will fail because a 'reasonable' man would not try to drive either a car or a plane on low fuel - the risk is obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted October 10, 2013 Report Share Posted October 10, 2013 NTSB will likely sub it out to the FAA, but NTSB still has overall charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug G. Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I hope he doesn't give Yorktown a bad name. The first carrier with that name was sunk at Midway in the battle that turned the Pacific theater in WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 deleted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Craig Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Expect more price increases from FD next year. Disgusting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 For clarity and safety, and the short bus riders, I'm going to post this here, and make it a permanent post elsewhere. It is the best visual explanation of the CT fuel system, and the inherent issues associated with dual wing tanks. This is not an exact representation of the CT system, but close enough. The CTLSi is a bit different, but the header tank mitigates some of the uneven fuel flow and slosh issues. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 . . . . "This is not an exact representation of the CT system, but close enough." . . . Fuel gages? Electrical units? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 E-LSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 E-LSA? That works! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EminiTrader Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Wow..... Scumbag... as a student I can see his mistakes.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 here is the correct system for the SW taken from this http://www.pmaviation.co.uk/admin/upload_pdf/SB131%20CT%20fuel%20system%20ISS%201_CT2K%20&.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Znurtdog Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Neither image shows the baffles keeping fuel from moving outboard, does it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacques Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 yes it does Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Znurtdog Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I see the baffles in the second drawing. My question is regarding the fact that (in the drawing) the baffles don't seem to be doing anything to prevent fuel from heading outboard (which is the purpose afaik). Baffling? :unsure: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 Thanks, Jacques! BTW, the images were not meant to show, exactly, the fuel systems... but only to illustrate the concept of low fuel and slosh/bank/turn feed issues. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted October 11, 2013 Report Share Posted October 11, 2013 I see the baffles in the second drawing. My question is regarding the fact that (in the drawing) the baffles don't seem to be doing anything to prevent fuel from heading outboard (which is the purpose afaik). Baffling? :unsure: Its not hard to fly a CT in a slip, the CT drawing may be indicating that some of the fuel outboard of the baffle never made it inboard. The baffle can only prevent fuel moving outboard not remaining outboard and I don' think they even do that. I think all they do is slow the rate of fuel moving outboard. If they prevented transfer outboard as you got low you cold slip to move the fuel inboard until the little inboard compartment is full and then level out and have full sight tubes. This doesn't happen the fuel flows through the baffle in both directions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 13, 2013 Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 You guys were pretty easy on our "victim"... 'not so much over at the Pilots of America thread... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted October 13, 2013 Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Interesting reading. Anyone beside me see this story playing out again but just in the early stages? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 13, 2013 Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Please no.... not everyone can be so lucky. Tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted October 13, 2013 Report Share Posted October 13, 2013 Interesting reading. Anyone beside me see this story playing out again but just in the early stages? BINGO! Most definitely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 You guys were pretty easy on our "victim"... 'not so much over at the Pilots of America thread... Interesting thread on what looks to be an interesting forum. In any case, interesting reading below, if it has not already been linked here: http://www.publications.ojd.state.or.us/docs/S44863.htm Just one relevant assertion: "A judgment was entered in California against him in the amount of $34,000 for malicious prosecution." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 BTW, I just joined the Pilots Of America site. Fast Eddie B over there as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Meade Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 POA is not quite as polite a forum as this one is most of the time. There is a lot of experience and a lot of opinions over there, some very firmly held. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 To avoid a lawsuit, I'll create the placard... you can paste it on your monitor yourselves: Warning - Pilots of America Forum May become addicting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WmInce Posted October 14, 2013 Report Share Posted October 14, 2013 To avoid a lawsuit, I'll create the placard... you can paste it on your monitor yourselves: Warning - Pilots of America Forum May become addicting! Just like this one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.