Beech Baron Digital Fuel Level Sender Retrofit - Part 4

Beech Baron 55 Fuel Level Senders

We have now digitized the Baron 55 Senders.  For the Baron 55 we have gone ahead with part production for top mount senders and have established the arm lengths to complete this design.   

As we produce the arms in house -                                                                                                                                                    This gave us the shortest time to achieving a TSO Baron Fuel Sender for our customer.

All dimensions for these new senders  were captured from a legacy set of Beech Baron Fuel Level senders.  As our design constraints are different from the legacy senders - there is a little bit to getting the right geometry in the tank 

We are looking forward to this system in the aircraft as it represents a chance for us to utilize our capability of giving a multiple tank system accurate fuel level.

Stay tuned for further updates and pictures.

Does Airport Density Affect Aircraft Fuel Starvation Rates

One of the aircraft owners user groups postulated an interesting question.  

Does the density of airports affect the number of fuel starvation events? 

Are you more likely to push the fuel envelope if you feel safer knowing there are many suitable 
alternatives to land and refuel,  and do pilots take advantage of those opportunities. 

As always when it regards aircraft fuel,  it is always an interesting question and not a lot of concrete information available.  Most of what is written about aircraft fuel level is unfortunately anecdotal.

So armed with a fuel starvation/ exhaustion dataset gleaned from the ASRS (Aviation Safety Reporting System)  I set out to see what actually would shake out if we looked at number of airports per sq. mile and fuel related aircraft issues and put it on an overlay of the USA.   Darker States are worse off than Lighter States.  

Generally speaking - pilots seem to be more careful out West where airport density is lower.   

I did evaluate the per state fuel starvation statistic by number of aircraft per state, but as aircraft quickly transition from one state to the next, I didn't believe it held much merit to display.  

What does show up in many graphs of this type is that Wisconsin and EAA draws a number of pilots from around the USA and a fair percentage tend to inadvertently stay longer than planned. 

Stealing an safety idea from the Cirrus Pilots Association  

Fuel Early, Fuel Often  

Beech Bonanza Fuel Level Senders

Beech Bonanza Fuel Level 

CiES is rapidly expanding the number of aircraft that can utilize our Fuel Level Sender technology.   Today we delivered the first set of Beech Bonanza / Debonair fuel level senders.   

This set replaces the Beech original equipment Leigh senders still found in the aircraft.   The old senders had long ago given up on providing accurate fuel level. 

These new fuel level sender utilize non contact, wear free magnetic field technology to locate the float in the tank.  The technology found in CiES Senders is similar to that in your cell phone for it's compass operation.  But instead of pointing North in the compass example, the sensor in the CiES Sender points to the float and to an accuracy less than a 1/4 of a degree.  It does this accurately and repeatably.  You trust your compass to always point North - you'll trust this sender to always tell you how much fuel is in the tank.

The old rusty senders depicted in the pictures utilized continuous wearing potentiometers typically found in legacy General Aviation fuel tanks.  

Potentiometer senders have an in aircraft life of approx. 10 to 12 years before replacement or rebuild.  

You should'nt fly with fuel level senders that are 30 to 40 years past their functional life, Now you don't have to 

Beechcraft Bonanza Fuel Level Senders

We just completed our first set of Beechcraft Bonanza Fuel Level Senders


These magnetic field senders are for Tip tanks produced by a popular Beechcraft modification facility.

We are starting to branch out into multiple applications in the aviation field with our magnetic field fuel level senders, from turboprop, helicopter or piston aircraft. 

Our technology allows for a nearly plug and play solution for legacy resistive fuel level sender installations.

What started as a Cirrus Aircraft only application for fuel level sensing is slowly starting to spread across the aviation field.  With over 10,000 senders produced to date,  CiES is "The Word" in aviation fuel level sensing.

Ask us about your application? 

Cessna Cardinal 177 & 177 RG Fuel Level Sensor

Well we produced another configuration of our fuel level sender for a very popular Cessna Aircraft model with a rabid and enthusiastic following.

---- Yes the Cessna Cardinal 177 ----

We had sought out common aviation fuel level sensors to copy into our format and we had a few mixed results, for example owners of Cessna 177's would send in the sensors per our request,  but the part numbers of the units supplied only matched up to another model Cessna Aircraft and did not match any of the Cessna Fuel Level drawings we have on hand.  

Finally, last year we got what we were looking for - Senders from an aircraft that matched the P/N for the aircraft. 

Note:  When you get involved in this small segment of aviation - It becomes very clear why fuel level in aviation has a very low reputation.

A Cardinal Aircraft owner tells a better story: 

Anyway, I saw the mention of CiES on one of the Cardinal Flyers Digests and gave them a call.  I spoke with Scott Philiben, who said that they could build them for me, and it would interface correctly with the JPI.  JPI confirmed this.  This was last FEB 2014 when I initially purchased the JPI, based on that answer.  

I had to wait till July 1 to start install, both due to the cold weather here, and because that was my annual date  (I also wanted to install an Oilamatic Pre-oiler and an Alpha Systems AOA Gauge).  

What Scott didn't tell me initially, was that I was to be the guinea pig for them getting a TSO sender for Cardinals as this minor variation needed to be sent to the FAA and approved - they had predicted an October delivery.

Scott & company finally came thru with fully TSO'd senders in late Nov, but I then encountered the passing of my Mom, which has led to further down time - anyway, FINALLY got the senders installed last Saturday.

CiES Above - Competitor Below

I was quite impressed on the substantial difference internally between CiES senders and the Electronics International ones.  The electronics in CiES look great, and based on the digital freq meter I have, they work VERY smoothly. I am also impressed with the machining on the fuel senders.

For JPI's part, their wire harness to the wing has three wires - +5V, Ground, and Signal. The JPI diagram says NOT to connect the +5V for CiES, but what they didnt say, and I didnt know until early Nov (when I mentioned that to Scott at CiES) is that the CiES units need +12V!! Turned out not to be an issue - the JPI harness has a "Y" connection in the harness shortly after the harness leaves the JPI box enroute to the wings - I unpinned the +5 wire that comes from the JPI and capped it off, and instead ran a +12 supply from one of the Circuit Breakers (dont remember which at the moment) into the same pin spot. (There is NO interface box as there is with some other senders. Not sure if my JPI is any different internally - JPI could answer though.) Works great (again, on my digital freq meter out at the sender)

One thing I particularly like about the CiES is that the float arm wire is 3x as thick as the one from Cessna, BUT the CiES float arm easily disconnects from the sender, making installation MUCH MUCH MUCH easier. I placed a long tie wrap on the fuel sender arm (in case I dropped the float/arm combination into the tank while working the sender into position) and then after the sender was connected and small cotter pin inserted, the tie wrap was removed. The senders come with a new rubber gasket, and there is no chance of leakage in the middle (like Cessna supplied Rochester, Stewart Warner, or Leigh senders) as there is no pass-thru screw terminal.  CiES uses a 3-pin connector with a twist lock shield. VERY easy to plug in.

At first, Scott and his engineers were concerned about MIN/MAX settings, but they had an epiphany one night and realized that all measurements are relative. They were worried about setting hard "stops" these are the little metal tabs on Cessna original equipment fuel senders that limit the float arm travel.   Turns out the CIES senders have the capability to move thru-out an almost 180 degree range from straight down to straight up.  The original equipment Cessna fuel sender contained a 60 degree potentiometer which limited the angle range allowed by these senders.   The calibration in the JPI is what establishes the fuel level limits and the physical limits of the fuel tank are the physical limits of the sender.

Scott Philiben's phone number is 541-408-1095 - they are in Oregon, so there is a 3hr time difference for me. His email is scott.philiben@ciescorp.com I still have the prototype sender/float combination that we used for testing and verification that this new simpler configuration would not hit any internal ribs/structure. Can't see internally, but externally it looks exactly like the ones with the TSO labels on them!

Update - Installed and calibrated - first impressions are good