Ditching - how to do it
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ditching - how to do it
Here's how:
Great job!
Great job!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty certain this would be a ferry flight, 310 has a max range of 1000m so a 2200m flight must have had ferry tanks installed.
It's a long hop in any case which would have made a small change in wind direction/strength significant given the distance, no matter he's safe and that's what counts.
It's a long hop in any case which would have made a small change in wind direction/strength significant given the distance, no matter he's safe and that's what counts.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Western USA
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder if he encountered unforecast winds, had a fuel leak or didn't have enough fuel, initially? From MRY, OGG is the closest HI airport. Be interesting to hear his version of the story.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 1,929
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that the same Brian Mellor who instructs at a well known Spanish FTO?
Moderator
Happily, I have no experience at ditching 310's (or anything else!). I do, however, have a hundred hours flying the same model 310 shown, and can attest to it's having one of the best fuel systems, and fuel quantity indicators I have ever flown. The one I used to fly also had wing locker tanks. If I remember correctly, those six tanks would get you about 1300 miles, so that plane would have to have been tanked for such a long flight.
I compare the C 310 fuel system, to that of the C 303, which I copiloted Transatlantic. The 303 fuel system, though much more simple, and error resistant, was nowhere near as nice, or reassuring for a very long flight.
Nice job ditching!
I compare the C 310 fuel system, to that of the C 303, which I copiloted Transatlantic. The 303 fuel system, though much more simple, and error resistant, was nowhere near as nice, or reassuring for a very long flight.
Nice job ditching!
I think it is much more likely to be a pilot decision making accident. He probably launched with a considerable head wind which was scheduled to diminish, a not unusual situation at this time of the year, ....but did not and he paid the price.
While you are , by virtue of considerable experience, qualified to comment on the operation of a Trinidad in domestic eurocontrol airspace, I would suggest you have very little experience in the reality of transoceanic ferrying operations, and should therefore comment (or not) accordingly.......
The bottom line is he was in a very ugly place and pulled off a text book ditching manoever
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BPF
Thank you for your tip
but unfortunately you have undermined it considerably by suggesting that you think the following (which may or may not have happened on this flight) is OK:
[my bold]
I have never come across a wind which is "scheduled to diminish". Where do you find those, and where does the wind publish its diminishing schedule?
Having done a number of 900nm+ flights (no ferry tanks) e.g. UK to the bottom of Sardinia, I know a little about fuel planning too.
Also, accurate fuel gauges (no fuel gauge can be that accurate, being just a small analog gauge) are of little use when you are say 1000nm from the nearest airport, over the sea. The best you can read a gauge to is about 5% and that assumes zero errors elsewhere. The 29.5 and 30.1 outcomes mentioned were just pure luck because nobody can read these gauges to that accuracy - of the order of 0.1 to 0.01% of full scale deflection.
Thank you for your tip
While you are , by virtue of considerable experience, qualified to comment on the operation of a Trinidad in domestic eurocontrol airspace, I would suggest you have very little experience in the reality of transoceanic ferrying operations, and should therefore comment (or not) accordingly.......
I think it is much more likely to be a pilot decision making accident. He probably launched with a considerable head wind which was scheduled to diminish, a not unusual situation at this time of the year, ....but did not and he paid the price.
I have never come across a wind which is "scheduled to diminish". Where do you find those, and where does the wind publish its diminishing schedule?
Having done a number of 900nm+ flights (no ferry tanks) e.g. UK to the bottom of Sardinia, I know a little about fuel planning too.
Also, accurate fuel gauges (no fuel gauge can be that accurate, being just a small analog gauge) are of little use when you are say 1000nm from the nearest airport, over the sea. The best you can read a gauge to is about 5% and that assumes zero errors elsewhere. The 29.5 and 30.1 outcomes mentioned were just pure luck because nobody can read these gauges to that accuracy - of the order of 0.1 to 0.01% of full scale deflection.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, I know that was what BPF meant. I was just playing with him
The real Q is whether one should use a forecast of a headwind dropping off in one's planning, especially in a scenario like this where you will quite likely pay with your life.
The real Q is whether one should use a forecast of a headwind dropping off in one's planning, especially in a scenario like this where you will quite likely pay with your life.
Last edited by IO540; 9th Oct 2011 at 07:51.
IO540
The fuel gauges in the Cessna 310 are in my experience pretty accurate. Also, they are standard panel hole sized - pretty large in size, easy to read. certainly a lot larger and more accurate than the tape gauges fitted in your flying Renault.
The fuel gauges in the Cessna 310 are in my experience pretty accurate. Also, they are standard panel hole sized - pretty large in size, easy to read. certainly a lot larger and more accurate than the tape gauges fitted in your flying Renault.
IMHO discussing the accuracy of the fuel gauges is not relevant. The pilot knew he was going to run out of fuel so he must have known reasonably accurately how much fuel he had.
Either he did not have enough fuel to start with or he used more than expected. We can all think of lots of reasons for those, some the pilots error or lack of judgement, many not.
Bill
Either he did not have enough fuel to start with or he used more than expected. We can all think of lots of reasons for those, some the pilots error or lack of judgement, many not.
Bill
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pilot knew he was going to run out of fuel so he must have known reasonably accurately how much fuel he had.
It is not necessarily foolish to depart with initial headwinds that will result in insufficient destination fuel because the route wind forecast (happy now IO 540
) is usually pretty accurate. Everyone keeps a 1/2 hour PLOG update which allows you to compare the actual headwind component to the scheduled maximum you can accept to keep going. The bad news is you may be 7 or 8 hours into the trip when you hit the no go mark and have to turn around and fly another 5 or 6 hours back to the airport you left. That is a pretty bitter pill and the temptation to push on just a little further to find those lighter winds, is going to be pretty strong, although I guess that would not be a factor to a pprune skygod like yourself.......The other cause could be a malfunction of the ferry fuel system. I know of a guy who found out well past the PNR that the ferry tank would not feed the bottom third of the tank
. He made it but ran out of fuel on the taxi in 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No idea why you are making personal attacks on me, BPF.
I am asking what should be reasonable questions.
Sure one might do a flight into a constant headwind; I have done so many times, obviously. But one needs to have a decent fuel margin, because winds can change. On a ~ 700nm flight the other day I saw everything from 10kt head to 10kt tail, despite a forecast of about 10kt tail all the way, and the MSLP chart showing that should have been the case. At only ~ 150kt, a 20kt wind change is a helluva lot.
Are you a ferry pilot? If so that might explain it. They mostly seem to hate each other. But I am not a ferry pilot.
Incidentally, does anybody know how FlightAware tracks planes 1000nm from the nearest land?
I am asking what should be reasonable questions.
Sure one might do a flight into a constant headwind; I have done so many times, obviously. But one needs to have a decent fuel margin, because winds can change. On a ~ 700nm flight the other day I saw everything from 10kt head to 10kt tail, despite a forecast of about 10kt tail all the way, and the MSLP chart showing that should have been the case. At only ~ 150kt, a 20kt wind change is a helluva lot.
Are you a ferry pilot? If so that might explain it. They mostly seem to hate each other. But I am not a ferry pilot.
Incidentally, does anybody know how FlightAware tracks planes 1000nm from the nearest land?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is that the same Brian Mellor who instructs at a well known Spanish FTO?
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/ind...518282950.html
"Charles Brian Mellor, 65, of Spain, was an experienced airman, licensed in the U.S. as an instructor and commercial pilot, according to FAA records."
Darwin Awards
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Cilboldentune, Britannia
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think (Charles) Darwin would be turning over in his grave at this complete nonsense; doesn't the idiot know that the aircraft was fitted with ferry tanks?