Bad Aircraft Fuel Level Indication Can Lead to Aircraft Fuel Starvation.

Really Where's your Proof 

Yes I know you have read every publication put out by AOPA and the FAA and they clearly say fuel level indication is clearly a pilot error issue.  In NTSB reports they have a rubber stamp that reads like the following :

"The pilots improper pre-flight and inflight planning, which resulted in fuel exhaustion."

What most in the general aviation community opinion on this issue is referred to as Fundamental Attribution Error.  (FAE) This is where we naturally blame people, even when circumstances or conditions are the primary issue.  

Last week I wrote a blog with the intentionally provocative title: "Let's Legislate Accurate AIrcraft Fuel Level"

For this I received the expected typical responses below: 

"How about we simply look at the number of people that have fuel related accidents and see if they did a proper preflight ...which...since you keep going by FAR's is required. If they didn't do a preflight correctly...they are poor pilots...and if they are poor pilots...gauges won't make a difference. You can't save people from being stupid"

"So, how much of this is lack of awareness, poor training or just laziness I do not know. But this is one of the most preventable accidents out there that keeps happening on a regular basis. I am not convinced an AOPA video will change that.  That is the real crime. They are still happening twice a week and none of them have to."

You would actually expect this pilot response to the provocative inquiry.   In looking at this as a pilot cultural issue or a FAE  the concept of  "Just World Phenomenon" features prominently.  This is the belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get.   


Unfortunately, the just-world hypothesis also results in a tendency for people to blame and disparage victims of an accident or a tragedy.  It is actually a protective strategy of the mind, providing mental separation from those kind of pilots that run out of fuel.   It won't happen to me, I am not like one of those pilots.

Sorry - These are random events and they happen to good pilots - I have a files and files from Transportation Boards across the world - you are not immune.  You have a doppleganger who was just as careful as you are and ran out of fuel in their aircraft.   I am sorry to burst the protective bubble.

What appears to happen in General Aviation is that, blame for fuel starvation, falls squarely on the those pilot shoulders .  This appears to be cultural phenomenon among pilots of all types.  The primary message we hear is that education will cure the miscreants, those bad pilots that will always get into trouble.

Very rarely do we delve into the situational factors of the fuel starvation issue at hand.  Our cultural bias doesn't allow that possibility.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Fuel indication in aviation is loathsome at best - it is not a deep dark secret that most aircraft fuel indication systems are marginal from the start. 

 When you compound a marginal system with poor or no maintenance,  you can make a general statement that a functionally inoperative fuel gauge is common place in aviation.  

This is illustrated by responses from a General Aviation News inquiry as to what pilots felt about general aviation fuel level indication.

"Maybe they’re also more in the habit of keeping an eye on the clock in flight, even sneaking the occasional glance at those notoriously inaccurate fuel gauges." 

"Airplanes are legendary for having inaccurate fuel quantity gauges" 

"These devices are notoriously inaccurate, showing empty when there are gallons left in the tank and showing full for the first 1/2 hour."

"Aircraft fuel gauges can be notoriously inaccurate." 

"Without a means of measuring fuel flow, you must rely on the aircraft fuel gauges or total time of flight. Aircraft fuel gauges are notoriously inaccurate (they are only required by the FAA to read accurately when displaying empty)." 

"Aircraft fuel gauges have a well-deserved reputation for being unreliable and the FARs only require that fuel gauges read correctly when they are empty!" 

"Second, as others have said aircraft fuel gauges have historically been
poorly designed and grossly inaccurate.  Many will indicate something significantly different in a climb vs a descent and there are some airplanes with fuel gauges that are designed to read full until a substantial amount of fuel has been consumed." 

"Don’t bet your life on your fuel gauges, visually check the fuel level by “dipping” all tanks. Some aircraft models have notoriously unreliable fuel gauges." 

"All light aircraft gauges are notoriously, infamously and reliably, unreliable." 

"Sounds great in theory, but I have not yet seen an accurate Cessna fuel gauge, Ever. A fairly expensive AD would be the only thing that would ever change that."

I don't think a statement that  "Aviation fuel level indication could be improved" would fall very far from the mark. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Better fuel indication will lead to better decisions and appropriate warnings in aviation.  

While it seems obvious to a layperson

Strangely, Thats not the popular opinion in GA.  But here is the proof. 

EASA (European FAA) - In a Transport Aircraft study for revisions to required powerplant instruments.  EASA showed that better fuel indication would have improved the result of the 65 incidents and accidents in Transport AIrcraft - well over 70% of these accidents/incidents could have been avoided.  Transport aircraft are not GA, but it is the same mode.

CASA (Australian Civil Aviation Authority) Requires that aircraft fuel Indication in Australian aircraft meet a performance standard, every 4 years.   The reasons cited are improving the fuel starvation incident and accident rate. 

TSBC (Transportation Safety Board of Canada) Makes findings of faulty fuel indication a factor in fuel starvation events.  They point to the wide use of fuel sticks as an indication that fuel level reliability could be improved in aviation

 The fuel quantity indicators on this type of aircraft were not reliable. As a result, the pilot could not be sure of the quantity of available fuel in the left tank during flight.

Tests on the components of the fuel level indication system established that the only time the fuel level in the wing tank was shown correctly was when the tank was empty 

The Bell 214B and Bell 205 flight manuals be modified to provide information regarding the inaccuracy of fuel quantity indications, thereby allowing pilots to make informed decisions in the event of a loss of fuel boost pump pressure. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cognitive Bias 

While these two points are associated with the same system and appear plain as day 

1. General Aviation Aircraft have inaccurate fuel level indication.
2. General Aviation Aircraft are prone to fuel starvation and fuel exhaustion.

A general aviation pilot won't recognize those statements as connected. 

Why: 

Anchoring Bias -  The tendency to rely too heavily, or "anchor", on one trait or piece of information when making decisions (usually the first piece of information that we acquire on that subject.

Pilot's are told to never trust the fuel gauge on the first training flight. 

Availability Cascade A self-reinforcing process in which a collective belief gains more and more plausibility through its increasing repetition in public discourse (or "repeat something long enough and it will become true.

Bandwagon Effect The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same.

AOPA, FAA continually tell us that we need to use proper pre-flight procedure including sticks.

Confirmation Bias The tendency to search for, interpret, focus on and remember information in a way that confirms one's preconceptions

Aircraft fuel gauges only have to be accurate at zero 

You're only interested in selling senders  

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have a passion for European Sports cars of the 50's and 60's  and I was talking with a group of MG-TC owners.  The subject of fuel indication came up and the MG owner brought out his calibrated stick.   MG T Series cars don't have a fuel gauge, they have a warning light, and Old British cars being what they are the warning light isn't a trusted component or indication of anything of merit.    

I mentioned that small aircraft use a stick as well to determine fuel quantity.  There were lots of raised eyebrows and a few quizzical looks.    The very first statement I heard was.

  "I bet they run out of gas"

  followed by 

"They can't just pull over and check with the stick can they"

I told them the various reasons why,  and they asked if something was being done to improve that.  

I told them sadly no.  A pilot will go out today after purchasing a new aircraft and obtain a stick to measure their fuel.  

It's  startling commentary, that in aviation, we use fuel measurement methods and techniques to prevent running out of fuel that were common on minimal equipment British sports cars of the 40's & 50's.  

I hope it makes us think.

Fuel Gauges: Do they Indicate Properly

Fuel Gauges: Do they Indicate Properly?

by Tom Bennett, Civil Aviation Safety Inspector, Aircraft Maintenance and Manufacturing, Prairie and Northern Region, Civil Aviation, Transport Canada

There have been multiple incidents of fuel exhaustion over the past few years. In the last issue of the Aviation Safety Letter (ASL), you read about fuel starvation due to improper fuel selector condition. In this article, I would like to talk about another common factor in fuel starvation incidents: fuel gauges that do not indicate properly.

Some incidents were very public, whereas most incidents went unnoticed with the exception of being listed in the Civil Aviation Daily Occurrence Reporting System (CADORS). Some incidents were directly related to poor fuel management by the flight crew(s); however a few came as a surprise to the flight crew, as the fuel gauge(s) still indicated there was fuel in the tanks. An accurate reading of the fuel gauge may have prevented many of these occurrences.

There is some confusion about the need for serviceable fuel gauges. This confusion is especially prominent in the general aviation world. As both an aircraft maintenance and manufacturing inspector and an enforcement investigator, I have heard statements like: “The gauges have never worked properly. I just keep track of time in my tanks,” many times.

Such a statement is contrary to Canadian Aviation Regulation (CAR) 605.14(j)(i), which states: “No person shall conduct a take-off in a power-driven aircraft for the purpose of a day VFR flight unless it is equipped with a means for the flight crew, when seated at the flight controls to determine the fuel quantity in each main fuel tank […]”. This regulation is then carried through in sections 605.14, 605.15, 605.16 and 605.18 of the CARs, to apply to all power-driven aircraft in all nature of flights (day/night visual flight rules [VFR]/instrument flight rules [IFR]).

Furthermore, many aircraft must have their fuel gauges working as per their type certificates. For larger aircraft, especially transport category aircraft, the fuel gauges can be deferred by means of the minimum equipment list; however, this usually involves using other measuring devices installed on the aircraft and making complex calculations.

A common factor in fuel starvation incidents:
fuel gauges that do not indicate properly

Recently, a commercial pilot was fined because one of his fuel gauges was not working while he was operating an aircraft. In this case, as in others, the fuel exhaustion caused substantial damage to the aircraft during the forced landing. The pilot applied to the Transportation Appeal Tribunal of Canada (TATC) to seek relief from the $750. The TATC upheld the Minister’s decision.

The Aviation Enforcement Branch has also sanctioned aircraft owners and operators for unserviceable fuel gauges found during Transport Canada’s oversight activities. The maximum sanctions for an infraction under CAR 605.14, 605.15, and 605.16 are $3,000 for an individual and $15,000 for a corporation. The maximum sanctions for an infraction under CAR 605.18 (IFR) is $5,000 for an individual and $25,000 for a corporation. Inspection, maintenance and repair of a fuel indication system seem less costly, in my opinion.

Another common excuse I hear is that the gauges have always displayed faulty readings or they are too difficult or expensive to calibrate. As an aircraft owner, if you rely on this flawed thinking you are exposing yourself to numerous risks. First and foremost, you risk running out of fuel. This can lead to personal injury/fatality and damage/loss to the aircraft. Second, you are exposed to regulatory action by enforcement (fine or suspension). I think we can all agree that none of these are pleasant outcomes.

For the aircraft maintenance engineers (AME) in this scenario, I have not yet seen an inspection where the functionality of the fuel quantity indication system is not checked. Be careful what you sign for on the inspection forms and subsequently, the maintenance release. Following manufacturers’ instructions for inspection, maintenance and repairs will never lead you astray.

Most pilots and AMEs are aware that any accident or incident results from a series of events; there is never just one cause. Anything we can to do tighten up against the possibility of an error is a step in the right direction. 

---

Crown Copyright and Licensing, Public Works and Government Services Canada
Crown Copyright Clearance CCL FILE # 2011-33369
(c)Transport Canada, Aviation Safety Letter Issue 1/2011

PA28 Hits the Road - Out of Fuel

Out of Fuel, Pilot Lands on Highway

Flying Magazine

By Stephen Pope / Published: Jul 16, 2013

Related Tags: Pilots, Adventures & More, News

Courtesy of WSOC

Enlarge Photo

A North Carolina pilot late last night successfully landed his single-engine Piper Cherokee between cars on Highway 321 a few miles short of Hickory Regional Airport after running out of fuel.

The pilot, Eric Klein, told a reporter for WSOC that when he ran out of fuel he was too low to make the airport and so he decided to set his airplane down on the northbound lanes of the highway, using the lights from the cars as a guide.

“I was coming back from Clarksburg, West Virginia, and should have had three hours of fuel left in the plane,” Klein told the news station. “I had excessive fuel burn for some reason and only had two hours and 10 minutes, and ran out of fuel about five miles short of the Hickory Airport.”

Klein managed to land his airplane without hitting anything, bringing it safely to a stop on the road in Granite Falls, North Carolina, at about 11 p.m.

No NTSB Action 

Don’t Blame your Fuel Gauge

"According to the Joseph T. Nall report (produced by AOPA’s Air Safety Institute), 89 accidents occurred in 2010 as a result of fuel exhaustion; 11 of them fatal. And despite a decline in fuel management accidents through 2008, more recently those numbers have been reversing, accounting for eight percent of all accidents in 2010.
According to the Nall report, inadequate flight planning — failure to determine the amount of fuel required for the flight or the amount actually on board, or to verify the rate of fuel consumption en route — accounted for the largest share (48 percent)."

This was reported below in the FAA Safety Team Briefing in October 2013 and is indented in italics:

FAASafety

Briefing - Fuel Monitoring 

October 2013

The General Aviation Joint Steering Committee

Safety Enhancement Topic of the Month

Don’t Be “Fuel-ish”

While fuel exhaustion continues to be a a top ten issue for General Aviation safety - It gets very little insight or a real root cause analysis to the factors involved.  To most in the aviation field this is a simple pilot problem with a very simple answer, But there is a hidden truth lying in the commonly held belief below:  

"One of the more head-scratching aspects of fuel management accidents is simply how easy they are to prevent, as well as recognize well before they happen.Blaming a bad fuel gauge doesn’t cut it. To help prevent getting into this situation, here are some tips:"

Note:  A fuel gauge is required equipment on all powered GA aircraft and it is supposed to be accurate throughout the range from empty to the zero fuel level.  

The FAA Safety Team implies in the paragraph above that you could be flying your aircraft with a bad fuel gauge - I hope this isn't so.

§91.7   Civil aircraft airworthiness.
(a) No person may operate a civil aircraft unless it is in an airworthy condition.
(b) The pilot in command of a civil aircraft is responsible for determining whether that aircraft is in condition for safe flight.  The pilot in command shall discontinue the flight when unairworthy mechanical, electrical, or structural conditions occur.

§23.1305   Powerplant instruments.
The following are required powerplant instruments:
(a) For all airplanes. (1) A fuel quantity indicator for each fuel tank, installed in accordance with §23.1337(b).

§23.1301 (Systems and Equipment) Function and installation.
Each item of installed equipment must—(a) Be of a kind and design appropriate to its intended function.(b) Be labeled as to its identification,function, or operating limitations, orany applicable combination of these factors;(c) Be installed according to limitations specified for that equipment; and (d) Function properly when installed.

§23.1337   Powerplant instruments installation.
(b) Fuel quantity indication. There must be a means to indicate to the flightcrew members the quantity of usable fuel in each tank during flight. An indicator calibrated in appropriate units and clearly marked to indicate those units must be used. In addition:
(1) Each fuel quantity indicator must be calibrated to read “zero” during level flight when the quantity of fuel remaining in the tank is equal to the unusable fuel supply determined under §23.959(a)

And this is where the hidden truth lies,  and this is where I believe the  FAA Safety Team author missed the point - It is a subtle but significant difference and it should read as follows:

Flying an aircraft with a bad fuel gauge doesn't cut it 

If we review  -  I believe the accident chain starts at this point.

• After visually checking the fuel in the aircraft,  the pilot then got into the aircraft   put power onto the aircraft and observed that the fuel gauges did not report accurately how much fuel was in the tank.  

Or 

• The pilot observed on filling the aircraft that the gauges indicated the aircraft had more or less fuel than that required to fill to tabs as an example.

STOP RIGHT THERE - Take your aircraft to the nearest service center and have your required aircraft equipment repaired or replaced to make your aircraft airworthy.  

Don't fly an aircraft with bad fuel gauges - it is that simple.

If you are flying an aircraft with bad fuel gauges - you should have a ferry permit.     

------------------------------------

When you look at it from this perspective - yes the solution to fuel exhaustion may be just as easy as the brief author suggests.  

Simply mandate that required fuel level reporting equipment function properly when installed on the aircraft.  

I understand fuel level reporting is not good in GA - That they don't work is the universal complaint.  

If that is true, then this problem lies with the FAA Administrator -

1.) Did the FAA Administrator allow an Aircraft Type Certificate to be issued that ignored fuel level reporting requirements of FAR 23.1301, FAR 23.1305 and FAR 23.1337.

2.) Does the FAA enforce the requirement that this equipment is to function     throughout the life of the aircraft as designed above.

-------------------------------------------

Why have we turned a blind eye to fuel level equipment & why are fuel reporting systems treated in a different manner than any other required equipment on the aircraft. 

Because if we re-write the FAA Safety Brief and replace fuel level with another piece of required equipment ..... Frankly, it just sounds silly.   

"One of the more head-scratching aspects of airspeed management accidents is simply how easy they are to prevent, as well as recognize well before they happen.Blaming a bad airspeed indicator doesn’t cut it. To help prevent getting into this situation, here are some tips:"

Required equipment is required for a reason - let's make it that way.