Running out of Fuel

[Wagit]

I currently subscribe to the ATSB reports so when they are release I have them emailed to me. I have noticed in the last 12 to 18 months a disturbing tend of pilots suffering from fuel exhaustion, with differs from fuel starvation. (fuel starvation is when there is a problem with the fuel system but there is still fuel on board). My question is quite simple.

With all the experts on aviation in this world. Why is there still fuel exhaustion accidents? and how do we as an industry fix the problem?

Do you think the dropping of mandatory fuel reserves, such as the 45 minutes fixed reserves has caused the problem ? What about the automation of the flight planning, the removal of the briefing office at our GAAP aerodromes, the loss of many experienced flight service officers, the ability to fly anywhere in Australia on a VFR flight with out having to submit a flight plan. Do you think they have contributed to the problem

What are your thoughts????????

[Blue Hauler]

Wagit

Obviously a human factors problem. But go back twenty years and you may find the answer.

The closure of briefing offices eliminated the second check that was performed by briefing officers who would vet your plan and ensure, the paperwork at least, was feasible.

For IFR there was the operational control which ensured the diversion or continuation of flight and the request for ‘endurance’ when things were sticky.

But how much does GPS contribute to VCA’s and fuel problems. Tracking direct to a destination is so simple. It doesn’t require ‘revised estimate’, calculation of TAS and G/S, determination of W/V or cross checking enroute waypoints. One simply plods on to the end of the flight. If one is early he/she will hit the control zone boundary before realisation sets in…VCA. If one is late the tanks will run dry.

There is no formal course for PPL in the proper use and programming of flight plans in the readily available handheld GPS receivers.

There is no training in the need to use GPS in conjunction with a properly prepared flight plan AND a formal flight log.

Finally aviation seems to lack the discipline that CFI’s and CP’s instilled twenty years ago.

[I Fly]

Blue Hauler, The Day VFR Syllabus Element 12.8 stipulates ADF, VOR, DME, and GPS. I suppose if the aircraft does not have any, you can't learn and be tested. You can bring your own GPS or find an aircraft that has one. Those Students who want the training, can get it and those who don't will not listen anyway.
You cant blame running out of fuel on the GPS or lack of one. The GPS does not order the fuel nor plan the refuelling stops. The engine does not know whether the GPS is on or not, it uses fuel just the same. The GPS also does not monitor the nut behind the wheel.

[Binitang]

Blue Hauler has hit the mark. There is a general lack of attention to flight planning and navigation, both of which create a sense of (amongst other things) fuel awareness.

Like most problems in aviation there is no simple quick fix. A combination of sound training and comprehensive testing will establish a basic standard, but the maintenance and gradual improvement of that standard requires a combination of professional self discipline, a "hands on" chief pilot, and company culture which encourages both.

[Torres]

Unrelated and probably irrelevent question:

Is the correct spelling "Binitang" or "Binatang"?

G'Day BH. Long time between beers! When are you next out this way?

[Binitang]

Torres:

The spelling is correct - 'tis the small animal, not the gentleman with the interesting occupation.

[Arm out the window]

Wagit, do you have any records on the historical rate of fuel exhaustion accidents in this country? It would be interesting to see if there has actually been an increase in the number per flying hour, or some similar indicator.
I reckon that the requirement to ensure that you load on enough fuel to safely complete the flight you're about to embark on is so fundamental that it would be very surprising to find that the advent of GPS has caused people to become cavalier enough to stop worrying about it!
My guess would be that as many people were running out of fuel years ago as do now.

[Sheep Guts]

I agree with arm out the window, the Advent of GPS, hasnt necessarily contrbuted to amount of fuel exhaustion accidents or incidents.

I can undestand, one getting blazay about continueing to a alternate destination, by just hiting NEAREST an GOTO DIRECT to get there on the GPS. But to use that feature only, (and I must admit before any GPS training I did the same), is really only using the equipment in limited form.

Most GPS have a fuel page, some even with fuel management pages these days integrated with Shadin Fuel Computers DATA INPUT and alike, make management easier. This knowledge as well as normal manual fuel planning shoud be adhered to in Flying Schools.Wether it IS or ISNT part of the syllabus, it should be included.

It seems inflight re-calculation needs to be looked at during training awell.:rolleyes:

Regards
Sheep

[Beech Boy]

Automation - GPS, Computerised Flight Planning, Computerised WX downloads- you don’t have to think about the WX and Notam info you might need or want “it” just prints it out, Auto Pilot, FMS, yes and even ATC. All designed to enhance safety and convenience.

The down side is these items give you choices to consider (sometimes information over load) rather than make you think about the choices you might have to look for, a passive processor of information rather than an active information gather – subtle difference.

The modern technical devices available these days can leave some pilots less in control than they should be and more the “thing” will do it for me- have you ever heard of high tech a/c and the pilot saying “what’s it doing now”, believe me it happens!!!!.

As far as Fuel Exhaustion situations occurring in all this, it is one of the things that the pilot, through technological advances, tends to think less and less of. IMHO the technological advancements have tended to reduce the pilot’s perspective of situational awareness.

[Wagit]

Interesting

To me a fuel exhaustion accident or incident does not occur because of one issue. It seems to occur because of a chain of events. The pilot doesn't recognise the chain of events and the next thing he/she knows is they are out of fuel.

I believe the issues of no operational control, no briefing office, GPS, automation of flight planning are all secondary failures or to use the ATSB words "latent failure" In other words if the briefing office or operational control was still with us it may break the chain of events leading up to the accident. If the GPS and automation technology wasn't with us then pilots may require to put more thought into the planning process which again would break the chain of events.

As for chief pilots being more hands on, I agree. But in the end the chief pilot can't check every plan and every flight. He relies on the pilot to do his or her job professionally.

With regards to the increase or decrease in fuel exhaustion or starvation accidents I think the ATSB keeps records on this and actually has released a discussion paper on the issue.

Aviation Safety - Discussion Paper: Australian Aviation Accidents Involving Fuel Exhaustion and Starvation. http://www.atsb.gov.au/atsb/discuss/fuel.cfm

Some interesting facts in this paper. Fuel Starvation accidents for the past 20 years remain relatively the same. Fuel exhaustion accidents down by 29%. During the period of 1991 to 2000 there was 139 fuel related accidents costing 49 lives and $63 to $127 million.

Any lost of life to me is not acceptable. But to lose 49 souls and cost the community $127 million is a big cost for a small industry such as aviation. I think as an aviation community we need to decrease the fuel exhaustion and starvation rate even further. How do we do it ??????

[cficare]

It is an amazing thing that many newly licenced pilots are unable to tell me what their endurance is when asked during a flight.

Equally amazing is the number of pilots fronting for their first BFR who cannot calculate an endurance figure to save their lives.

If you ask most "experienced" `PPLs questions regarding their aircrafts fuel usage characteristics they look at you with glazed eyes.

The points above are my theory as to why pilots run out of fuel (and I didn't mention GPS once)

Any thoughts anyone?

[Time Bomb Ted]

An aircraft runs out of fuel every 7.3 days according to the ATSB. And they are only the ones they hear about.

We are definitely getting it wrong. Have a look at the average Private Pilot's in-flight fuel log sometime. You will be lucky to see one and if you do, most of the time they are grossly wrong.

[Bevan666]

People, it isnt just the PPL's running out of fuel... I can think of a number of CPL's who have done it.. the C310 at Newman, the Nomad on the beach in Queensland, a Lance on a charter in NSW.

They are only the ones I remember! Given that PPL's outnumber the everyone else, statistically they will have the greater number of fuel starvation/exhaustion accidents.


Bevan..

[Wagit]

Bevan 666

I agree it is not just PPL holders that are running out of fuel it is also CPL and ATPL holders.

What does that tell us about the standard of pilot this country is producing??????

I mean we have introduced competency standards and still we are not improving......... Now don't get me wrong I'm not knocking instructors or the flying training industry these guys are doing it tough just like every one else.

I remember a little saying told to me a long time ago. Previous Preparation Prevents Poor Performance.

[hurlingham]

Blue Hauler

I agree with you. I have seen too many young aces who have no idea how to map read or navigate unless the GPS gives them the info.
Very sad reflection on the current instuctional ideas.

[cficare]

Seems some people have interpreted my contribution as an attack on PPL holders, read it again in the context of holders of all licence types and you may see a different picture. while it may be a factor , the current methods used for flying instruction are a poor excuse for many pilots inability to "control" their fuel.

What it boils down to is that many pilots dont deserve their tickets but the industry has no means to pull then and CASA has'nt the guts to do it either (although in their case they DO have the power)

[flyboy6876]

I'm currently doing my navex's at the moment and have been taught to draw up a fuel plan and to log my fuel all the way through the flight. I don't understand how one can run out of fuel if one is doing the clearoffs throughout the flight as well.

If this is the norm in instruction, I guess my question would be, is there a lacksadaisical attitude that slips in after gaining a licence? Could this be because there is no longer scrutiny by an instructor and the pilots feel they do not have to "do this" anymore?

I would like to think this is not the case and that I would continue to do as taught even when I am a more experienced pilot.

[gaunty]

Blue Hauler

As usual spot on.

My favourite question to the GPS flogger "I know that's what it says but where, exactly, are we.?" was often met with a puzzled look.

Having said that, there is too much reliance on six decimal place computer calculation of fuel and flight plan, without what you and I were taught as standing back and seeing if the result was correct "by inspection"

The reliance today on "well that's what the computer or programme says so it must be right" without checking to see if it makes sense is scary.

Neither do they seem to carry as a matter of course a continuously updated picture in their heads of where they are in space.
It is too many moons ago for me to remember how I got to do it, but is this something that comes with experience or does it have to be taught
I think it is called SA, at least it was.
By applying a bit of 'nouse it is possible (to the amazement of many youngsters) to construct a perfectly serviceable "plan" from A to B using nothing else but a pencil. No protractor, ruler, whiz wheel, calculator. Even a good quality Shell road map will do.

Kiddies do not try this at home.:p

BTW there is no possible reason for running out of fuel whilst airbourne.

[Wagit]

cficare

The answer to the problem is not taking peoples licences off them. To take someone pilot licence away after it was issued because they where incompetent is like shutting the gate after the horse has bolted.

If CASA was really serious about aviation safety and the issue of competent flight crew. They should get out into the flying school and aero club scene and start do some education.

For example: Sitting in on instructor rating course, sitting in on PPL and CPL theory course, picking up flight tests.

When they recognises a problem instead of sending the lawyers in to take enforcement action they should sit down with the CFI and Instructional staff a discuss the issues and find a plan to resolve them.

Buy taking someone licence away from them only solves the issue for the pilot in question. Lets face it the pilot is only a product of his or her training.

Ask yourself these question

1. When was the last time a CASA FOI was in your flying school?

2. How often do they visit you to watch a test or an instructional sortie?

3. When did they last discuss issues they are seeing in piloting skill such as fuel exhaustion?

Lets face it are the senior management of CASA really serious and concerned about aviation safety. They would attack the root causes of safety issues and not the results of them:eek: :eek:

[Blue Hauler]

I Fly

… if the aircraft does not have any, you can't learn and be tested….Those Students who want the training, can get it and those who don't will not listen anyway…

If you care to look at the statistics of the fuel exhaustion accidents in the ATSB report some thirty-five percent occurred to aircraft engaged in Private Operations. My reference to GPS raises concerns I have had for a number of years due to the reliance on GPS as a sole means of navigation and the resulting ‘tunnel vision’ that pilots develop with constant use of the ‘DTO’ button. Or as Gaunty has alluded, ‘Situation Awareness.

Operators who use FMS with GPS sensors (usually backed up with multiple DME and VOR sensors) probably have instituted strict procedures for pre-flight and in-flight use of the equipment. In addition such systems generally display additional information such as the present and destination fuel-state, weight, range and endurance. A graphical display appears overlaid on the radar or MFD. The box allows the programming of SIDs and STARS and most ILS/LLZ/GPS-NPA. Many of the procedures developed by operators are not unlike those contained in the syllabus at 12.8. In addition comparison with enroute aids and the flight plan will quickly highlight deficiencies in programming or pre-flight preparation.

In conducting BFR’s I ask the pilot if he owns or uses a GPS. Those that do, display a lack of discipline in its operation and have never received formal instruction in its use. Unlike the NDB and VOR, most early PPL’s will gravitate rapidly towards a GPS because of its reliability, ease of use and availability (Dick Smith Electronics).

I think the BFR is a good opportunity to intercept those pilots who misuse GPS and, for thirty or forty minutes effort, set them on the right track to its use.

[tumble_weed]

I think Wagit and CFICARE, and pretty much everyone has got it covered as to the reason people (of all licence types) run out of fuel. It is very very basic.....The people who are instructing our student pilots must be well below the standard required. Yes, the advent of all the technology in the world has created distractions to the pilot of today, but that is not the reason or excuse for why people are running out of fuel, they are basically not being taught properly.

This situation may be coming from instructors (through their flying schools) planning NAVEXs which fit well into the endurance of the aircraft being flown. Which does not teach the student the a whole bunch about fuel management.

When you have people with only the bare numbers of hours, who have been taught themselves by instructors with the bare number of hours, teaching new students you are eventually going to end up with the standard of pilot being produced slowly getting worse and worse. (A bit of a generalisation, but you can see my point).

[Blue Hauler]

Tumble_weed

… When you have people with only the bare numbers of hours, who have been taught themselves by instructors with the bare number of hours, teaching new students you are eventually going to end up with the standard of pilot being produced slowly getting worse and worse. (A bit of a generalisation, but you can see my point)….

I would suggest that statement is somewhat naive or ill informed.

Most G3FI’s turn out of the schools with a pretty good repertoire of ‘canned briefs’ and a reasonable delivery of the flight sequences. What they lack in experience is made up in enthusiasm. Selected G1FI’s are then responsible for the direct and indirect supervision of the junior instructors. This can be done by sitting in on briefs, discussing issues with instructors and evaluating students at regular intervals. The CFI obviously sets the teaching standards.

The syllabus lays out quite clearly both the sequences to be taught and the achievement level required. Such standards are assessed during training by each instructor and by an experienced instructor at the pre-licence test. An ATO then tests the student in accordance with the proforma prescribed by CASA and in conjunction with the VFR Day Syllabus. In the latter stages of his/her training the student is usually instructed by a senior instructor who refines the student towards licence standard.

Navigation training requires skill in flight planning, fuel management, engine handling and in-flight emergencies.

I admit that GPS is just one issue. An examination of the ATSB report suggests that the majority of accidents were attributed to pilots flying sophisticated types with little experience on that type.

But 35% of such accidents were attributed to Private Flying and just eight per cent to Training. 18% were attributed to Charter! On that basis it would seem to me that pilots develop fuel management problems after leaving the training environment!

[Spinnerhead]

Correct leaning is probably the most badly taught subject in flight training, and can account for a huge increase in fuel consumption. Irrespective of what your standard leaning policy is, I have found that very few commercial pilots could accurately find the Max EGT in the aircraft they fly everyday (I would assume it is worse with PPL). Without this magic figure how can you lean to say 100 deg rich of peak? You can't, and so your fuel consumtion will suffer.

I know pilots who have used 20% more fuel than myself, over the same sectors, after leaning to the company policy. Not just on one occasion either. These same pilots write down a Max EGT 100 deg lower than mine for the same aircraft the day before. So they are running 100 deg richer than I am.

20% over 3 hours is 36 minutes more fuel required, put some headwind and weather in there and hey presto, no reserves. All of a sudden that alternate you had just enough fuel for is (unknown to the pilot) an impossible dream.

How many people are still being taught not to lean below 3000 or 5000' whilst flying the likes of a C 172. How many people are taught to calculate their actual fuel consumption at the end of a trip when they refuel?

Many aero clubs will have standard fuel consumptions for their aircraft i.e. 35 lph for a C172. It should read 35 lph at ### deg rich of peak at 2300 RPM, and maybe to add 5 l for every take off.

As for GPS I cannot understand how it could be a disadvantage. It will tell you (using the GOTO button) just how long it will take you to get from your present position to your destination. It will also take into account strong headwinds, which account for many running out of gas. Try doing that with a VOR or NDB!

[Jamair]

Spinnerhead:

If you REALLY want to scare yourself, jump in a piston-prop aeroplane that has both the factory EGT/CHT gauges AND a multi-cylinder digital engine analyser.

I flew my Aztec 'by the book' and 'by the gauges', leaning by EGT and watching CHTs on the standard single cylinder gauges, then switched on the JPI and looked at what was REALLY happening. The standard EGT showed 100 f ROP - the JPI showed the 6 cylinders were between 20 LOP and 50 ROP, primo detonation zone! The standard CHT gauge showed 300f - the JPI showed 450f on 2 out of 6 cylinders!! The others were between 400 and 300. The standard fuel flows read 2-3 gallons less/more the the callibrated transducers in the JPI. The motto here is - old, cheap instruments are NOT reliable.

Technology can be a boon to fuel management - the TSO GPS is linked to the JPI fuel flow, so both instruments can give accurate readings of fuel on board, fuel used, fuel flow, fuel & time remaining and fuel required. These expensive bits are backed up by the most accurate system available - opening the caps and looking / dipping, EVERY STOP; supported by pencil & paper calculations, done in the cruise (great way to keep the mind active).

Anyone remember the story about the pilot who launched from ?SY in a lightie for Cairns using a hand-held GPS; he was running low on fuel and looking for assistance, when ATC asked 'where are you?' he said '428nm south of Cairns':eek:

Cheers.

[Blue Hauler]

The old method of fuel calculation that was taught in schools in the sixties and seventies was to determine the Fuel Burn from the POH in US gallons and treat them as IMP gallons. Hence an in-built safety margin. The change to metric makes that difficult. But a variable reserve included in private operations should result in a similar outcome. Perhaps variable reserves is a saving factor in the CHTR statistics!

Students should be taught to lean the mixture straight after solo circuits (i.e. the next trip to the training area) and hammered from there on. Even a PA38 will lean out at 1000 feet with a noticeable movement of the mixture lever. Another old myth that should be axed is not allowing students to change tanks below a certain level. How the hell will they ever apply such procedures if they are not drilled at every opportunity pre-PPL?

Spinnerhead

My reference to the GOTO/DTO button relates to the ease in continuing to destination without checking enroute WPTS, ETA and fuel reserves. It seems that once that button is pressed some folk literally toss the charts and the flight log in the map pocket and let the aircraft fly them to whatever outcome. I guess it requires some self-discipline but also needs training to make potential users of the equipment aware of GPS limitations and sound operating techniques. At least with NDB’s and VOR’s users still need to calculate an ETA that will lead to some situation awareness on the fuel front.

[tumble_weed]

Blue Hauler

I agree that these new instructors may be the most enthusiactic flyers around, and probably a lot of them are more talented aviators than most, but when you look at how the Big guys do things you have to ask yourself.....Why do we have inexperienced guys teaching aviation? (ANS: That's the way the industry is.) You don't see the airlines or the Airforce, take guys they have just trained and get them teaching other guys. (They tried that once and it didn't work out)

You can be the best pilot in the world when it comes to all the flying sequences, but nothing replaces good old experience in the type of operations, that you intend to teach. You can't teach someone SA, they have to build it up over time.

I believe that the Airforce requires its pilots to have at least 300hrs command before they are sent to instructors course, and when you think about your Herc or P-3 guys they would have had a lot of time spent as the F/O before they get anywhere near this. They gain the experience from being in the aircraft with an experienced Captain. We just don't get that in GA.

This may seem to have developed into an argument about the instructing system in GA, but I do believe that these issues have a direct relation to the quality of pilot that is coming out at the other end.

Tumble_Weed's Solution: Try and entice more experienced pilots to return to instructing.

Chance of this happening: NIL