"but what you are clearly here, is a troll."
you are are right and i have my peace. truly, there is no need for such a discussion. life is too short.
At least you admit it. Given that you've copped to being a troll (one who enters the discussion to stir up trouble, and who participates under false pretenses), there's no further need for you or discussion with you, and you're going promptly on the ignore list.
Most of us come here to gather and exchange information, not to participate in the text equivalent of a bar fight.
If you want to come here to have an adult, intelligent conversation, that's fine. Aerobat77 is not doing that. He came here with grossly inaccurate information, and has stated outright that he's here to cause trouble and is at peace with that. My comments to him (given that his participation thus far hasn't been a technical one or one or principle, but rather strictly one post after another of "I don't believe you") are point and have merit, and I offer no apology for them. Aerobat77 is on the ignore list now where he or she belongs.
This message is hidden because aerobat77 is on your ignore list.
It works perfectly.
The two sensors are approximately three feet apart and are entirely independent of each other - both mechanically and electrically.
That really depends on the motor and on the installation. that is not the case for the entire series.
Reference the previous discussion on the TPE-331 and electronic control, visit TCDS E4WE, as someone recently invoked the TCDS, for this comment:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/0/2c8af3bbc45fc47186256d96005eb743/$FILE/E4we.pdf
"
The -10A, -10B, -10N, and -12B engines are equipped with an integrated fuel control system consisting of an engine driven hydromechanical control and an aircraft mounted EEC which is energized by the aircraft electrical system. This system may be operated in either an Automatic Mode in which both control components are active, or in a Manual Mode with the EEC de-activated."
The point of the thread, of course, is oil quantity in an engine, and operating procedures thereof. The point of introducing the TPE-331 (which I do not presently fly) was as an example of an incident I had experienced regarding an engine with no oil, and the effects thereof. I believe the original poster was more interested in turbojet or turbofan operations. I have had turbofan powerplants run very low on oil, but to date haven't had to shut one down as a result . A couple of years ago we prepared to shut down a JT9D that reached the 1 gallon oil reading, and would have shut it down if it had reached the .5 gallon limit per the checklist. We were close to the destination, and continued to use it until landing, without incident.
Many aircraft and powerplant installations do not utilize oil quantity cockpit indications. This isn't the end of the world. In the event of an oil loss, other signs and symptoms exist which must be addressed, and procedures will be found to cover these eventualities.