----[Please read http://ercoupers.com/disclaimer.htm before following any advice in this forum.]----
Thanks for passing this on, Bob!
Anyone seeking useful knowledge from accident reports must not accept them at face value. The gentlemen authoring this "information" show little better "command" of how works the Ercoupe fuel system than the "recent purchaser" in this "accident".
1. The "main" fuel tanks, by virtue of overall volume and by being plumbed so as to empty
together first, are the wing tanks. The nose tank is best described as a "reserve". "Fuel
exhaustion" of the "main tank" is not a cause of an accident. An unexpected "Fuel
exhaustion" of the engine(s) may initiate an unexpected descent under adverse
circumstances, but that's merely an inevitable result once one or more actual causes have
occurred and been ignored.
2. How much fuel was on board at takeoff? We don't know. Did our birdman know there
was a nose tank to fill? We don't know. Is it possible the takeoff was made with low nose
tank fuel (drained through a leaky carb, not shut off post-flight), none indicated AND a bad
fuel pump? We don't know. The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius
has its limitations. On the other hand, when we maintain things so they work as Fred
Weick intended, with the engine running a low nose tank will fill automatically.
3. The engine's fuel gets there by gravity, but fuel transfer from the wings into the nose tank
requires pumping. Failures are not rare, so the pilot must periodically verify proper
transfer. Few other airplanes give you one-half to three-quarters of an hour endurance
following fuel pump failure and the descent of the nose tank float from "full". Did these
authors investigate fuel pump failure as the primary cause of the accident, which provided
information suggests strongly? We don't know.
4. A pilot's apparent failure to check fuel gauges during a flight of at least an hour
(presuming a full nose tank at takeoff) during which up to nineteen gallons of fuel may
have been burned (and/or lost) would necessarily preceed the unexpected and sudden
descent seemingly implied. How long was the flight? We don't know.
5. If his pump failed, then, yes, a pilot unfamiliar with the coupe might mindlessly drone on
toward a distant destination without comprehension of events already unfolding. Was a
primary cause of the accident Pilot Error in commencing a (solo?) flight and leaving the
airport landing pattern without an instructor (?) in an unfamliar aircraft with an unfamiliar
fuel system and an unknown quantity of fuel? They don't say so!
4. The Ercoupe fuel system design and maintenance seem to get closer than warranted
scrutiny. If the feds really believe the accident was caused by sudden and mysterious
disappearance of known fuel, what facts led them to this theoretical speculation? Before
establishing his/her destination heading, did the pilot visually check wing tank caps for
siphoning fuel? We don't know. Some line people are real professionals, and others seem
to evidence that somewhere a village is without their rightful idiot.
An Ercoupe pilot should remove and verify fuel and caps personally in each tank before a cross country departure or other such extended flight. Marking cap fronts with paint allows in-flight verification of proper orientation, but only careful monitoring of fuel consumption and transfer can suggest a cap gasket losing its seal, or a system venting problem early on.
If someone without thorough Ercoupe knowledge memorizes this report, I fail to see how they are better equipped avoid the exact same result, given how little we really know of the situation from the information provided. Nonetheless, note how strong and credible their opinions sound at first reading.
I believe the computer term "GIGO" is applicable...garbage in, garbage out.
Regards,
WRB
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
on 12/19/03 3:34 PM, Robert Q. Steinman, PhD at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ercoupe; Model 415-C; Incorrect Installation of Wing Tank Fuel Cap; ATA 2810
The following information was supplied as a joint effort of the Aircraft Certification Office (ACO) and Flight Standards District Office (FSDO) of Wichita, Kansas, Paul Pendleton, Aerospace Engineer, and Verle Engel, Aviation Safety Inspector, respectively. (This article is published as it was received.)
Recently an Ercoupe Model 415-C airplane experienced an accident as the result of fuel exhaustion of the main fuel tank. The pilot had recently purchased the airplane involved in the accident and was unfamiliar with the aircraft fuel system.
Investigation of the aircraft fuel system revealed that at least one of the fuel caps on the wing tanks was installed backwards. On Ercoupe aircraft the position of the cap is critical to fuel venting and can have a negative affect on fuel distribution. The pilot owner's manual contains a caution statement about this problem. Early serial number aircraft fuel caps could be installed backwards very easily. Later serial model aircraft fuel caps have a larger tab on one side to prevent inadvertent reversal of the cap. However, it has also come to our attention that some of the fuel cap tabs have become worn from years of service and can also be installed backwards. The accident aircraft still had at least five gallons of fuel remaining in the wing tanks that did not get transferred to the main center header tank for distribution to the engine.
Pilots flying these aircraft need to be reminded to perform a thorough preflight inspection, to pay special attention to the direction of fuel cap installation, and to become totally familiar with the aircraft fuel system. Also, mechanics need to be reminded to replace any worn fuel caps and seals while performing inspections and maintenance.
============================================================================== To leave this forum go to: http://ercoupers.com/lists.htm Search the archives on http://escribe.com/aviation/coupers-tech/
