Climb and Maintain ...

The flying adventures of a software engineer in the Pacific Northwest.

Saturday, July 14, 2007

Hot and High

My recent trip took place during a heatwave throughout most of the Southwestern United States. The Reno airport, with an elevation of 4,400 feet, registered +45 degrees C at the time I landed. That equated to a density altitude of about 8,600 feet. While the runways at Reno are long enough to alleviate any density altitude issues associated with takeoff and landing (other than, of course, the airplane accelerating more slowly and taking up much more runway), consideration has to be given to climb performance after takeoff -- especially if one is piloting an aircraft under IFR.

Reno, as a major airport, is served by a number of standard instrument departure procedures. Controllers usually do not realize (or maybe do not care) that an aircraft may not be able to fly a certain departure procedure because of the required climb rates. For example, take a look at the Mustang Seven Departure. This departure requires a minimum climb gradient of 525 feet per nautical mile to 8000 feet, which at 75 knots ground speed translates to about 650 feet per minute. This is no small feat for a Cessna 182 -- even a lightly loaded one -- when the temperature on the ground is +45 degrees C (and even when the temperature is standard, a Cessna 182 might not be able to climb that fast).

What's the solution? Refuse a clearance that includes a standard instrument departure (SID). Or, if you are already on a SID, and are unable to meet the required climb gradient, say so, and request a VFR climb to altitude while providing your own terrain separation. This may mean flying the route provided by the SID -- but at a lower climb rate -- or flying a different route altogether. Either way, the controllers will be glad you told them about your predicament. :-)

Thursday, July 12, 2007

Cessna Fuel Selectors

A good friend of mine got married recently in Phoenix. And, what better way to gain more flight experience than go on a long trip? So, as soon as I knew the wedding date, I reserved the FBO's G1000 Cessna 182 for the flight. Milen and I actually made a very similar flight almost a year ago to date -- but we only went to Sedona, so not quite as far south as Phoenix.

The original plan was to go to Phoenix all in one day -- especially if there was tailwind en route. That would be just under nine hours of flying time; I thought I could certainly manage that, especially with a capable aircraft with a good autopilot. But, as luck might have had it, on the day I flew, I had excellent VFR weather, but no tailwinds. So I had to scrap the plan of making it to Arizona in one day, and I decided to overnight in Las Vegas instead. An en-route fuel stop would need to be made in Reno.

The trip to Reno required some thought about good fuel management, although with 87 gallons usable fuel, I estimated that I'd still have more than 30 gallons left at my destination. Usually, Cessna fuel management is brain-dead simple: just leave the fuel selector in the "Both" position -- which causes fuel to be burned from both tanks at an approximately even rate. Note that I said "approximately": sometimes, for one reason or another, things do not quite work exactly right. This time, on the way down to Reno, just on the east side of the Cascades, I observed a noticeable difference in the indicated fuel quantity between the left and the right tank. In my mind, there could have been several problems: faulty fuel gauge, plane not burning from the left tank, blocked fuel supply line from the left tank, etc. Given that I had enough altitude to restart the engine in case the problem was with the fuel line, I put the fuel selector valve on "Left". The engine continued running, and I was slightly relieved. Now: is it a faulty gauge? It would take a while to find out, because the fuel quantity indicators in G1000 equipped C182's only indicate up to 36 gallons per tank (the actual capacity is 43.5 gallons usable) -- so for the first 7.5 gallons (about 30-45 minutes of flight, depending on the fuel flow), the pilot cannot observe any movement on the gauge. Fortunately, somewhere between Bend and Lakeview, OR, the left gauge started moving as well. If it hadn't moved, my plan was to divert to Lakeview, in southern Oregon.

As I was considering my situation, I sure was glad that I printed out the JeppView approach plates not only for my departure and destination airports but also for most airpors en-route. What if the fuel gauge did not move? What if the engine did not continue running when I moved the fuel selector to "Left"? I probably would not have touched the fuel selector if I had been in instrument conditions, but I sure would have liked to make an instrument approach to the Redmond, OR airport. :-)