rankamateur Posted August 28, 2016 Posted August 28, 2016 Bucks party group in light plane escape uninjured after emergency landing in Sydney paddock
planesmaker Posted August 28, 2016 Posted August 28, 2016 Worked very well, pilot carried out good forced landing with no injuries. Well done! 1
Deskpilot Posted August 28, 2016 Posted August 28, 2016 Now, was it a crash, or was it a forced landing?
flying dog Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Sorry guys, I didn't see this when I posted my thread about the Menangle landing.
rankamateur Posted August 29, 2016 Author Posted August 29, 2016 I was interested in how a bucks party with four people in a light plane works. Wonder which one was the stripper? 2
flying dog Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 And who was playing with the joy stick! EEEEEEEWWWWWWWWW!!!!!!!! 1 1
facthunter Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 They often empty the keg, under those conditions. Nev
Roundsounds Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Reportedly the selected fuel tank empty, the other had over an hours worth of fuel in it.
scooter75 Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Reportedly the selected fuel tank empty, the other had over an hours worth of fuel in it. Damn..thats gotta hurt.. take a while to live that one down... 1
Roundsounds Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Wait 'til the ATSB report comes out. If the info provided to me is correct, the pilot was trained by the best pilot training organisation in the country.
Robbo Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Strange its not on the atsb website now, usually there up within an hour of the incident. 1
cooperplace Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Wait 'til the ATSB report comes out. If the info provided to me is correct, the pilot was trained by the best pilot training organisation in the country. RAAF? 1
bexrbetter Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 Obviously they were preparing the garden for when the new missus moves in and were going into town to get some hoes. 1
DrZoos Posted August 29, 2016 Posted August 29, 2016 They are all alive and that's the important bit, at least whatever happened will now become a great lesson for all. Perhaps the other tank had an hour of beer left in it? 1 1
Deskpilot Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 It has never made sense to me that twin/multiple tanks aren't cross connected so that they all feed, all of the time. Sure, in the event of a fuel leak there'd be a problem but that's not insurmountable if isolation taps were provided for such an emergency. Glad I only have one tank to worry about on my Thruster. 1
Roundsounds Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 Low wing aircraft that rely on a fuel pump to deliver fuel to the carburettor /fuel injection system need to feed from one tank at a time. Should both tanks be simultaneously plumbed to the fuel pump and one tank empty, the pump would suck air and result in an engine failure. The only way that type is system works is to have a sump tank lower than the wing tanks and gravity fed, then pumped to the engine. The Yaks and Nanchangs use this style of system. Despite the western propaganda, the eastern block countries produce some smart, well designed and built aircraft. 3
facthunter Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 The simplest twin set up is tank to engine, and they stay (almost) balanced. Obviously when on one engine crossfeed is needed, and you keep within balance limits. If every tank has a non return valve fitted, select ALL and all pumps ON will exhaust all fuel without air getting in the system. Mismanagement of some systems can introduce air to ALL engines, OR vent some fuel overboard so you MUST KNOW your plane's fuel system, as well as carry sufficient fuel for the flight. W&B and Fuel Management are usually 100% to pass the exam . Like you wouldn't really be good enough if you got it wrong nearly 50% of the time would you? Nev 1
Robbo Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 Hmmm still nothing up on the atsb website, very strange.
Roundsounds Posted August 30, 2016 Posted August 30, 2016 No damage, no injuries = no investigation? There'll be a record of the incident, but no investigation.
flying dog Posted September 3, 2016 Posted September 3, 2016 It has never made sense to me that twin/multiple tanks aren't cross connected so that they all feed, all of the time. Sure, in the event of a fuel leak there'd be a problem but that's not insurmountable if isolation taps were provided for such an emergency. Glad I only have one tank to worry about on my Thruster. There is a story about a jet. Flying over the ocean, carrying a lot of people. They deviated from their flight path and went a bit south of the plan. Suddenly, it was noticed that they were losing fuel! Because of systemic problems with the process, they did NOT shut off the fuel to that engine and rather connected the tanks together with the cross flow system. This further wasted fuel. Only by luck did they make it and no one was killed. Having the two tanks linked could be very dangerous for that exact reason. You get a leak in one tank and it drains - not too much of a worry. You get a leak in one tank and both tanks run empty: BIG PROBLEM
facthunter Posted September 4, 2016 Posted September 4, 2016 Cross connecting all the time can cause venting problems and with the fuel return set ups in some systems, you can't allow for it. You need to be in control of your fuel system. Nev
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now