914 Fuel Flow

[Ed Midgley]

It’s the European way. The customer is always at fault and must be punished.
I had a Ferrari and Mercedes and it was the same with both.
We must be spoiled here.
Ed

[jboyd]

BMWs too! BMW = Buy More Warranty or Buy More Work. It's all the same in the end...

[montanapilot]

I finally received the LOA for the installation of the transducers for the fuel flow indicator.It was a 6 month process with these people.

I see that the LOA is only for my airplane. However, Josh at Tecnam (who's been great through this process) told me that the fact that they issued mine will make anybody else's application go through quickly (although as in "Tecnam quickly), since mine had to go through a couple of levels of engineers and then be evaluated by the chief engineer and they all had to do their homework. Now that that homework's been done, there should be little problem for anybody else.

The process will be that if you would like to apply for an LOA, I will send you my application (which took a whole lot of back and forth with Tecnam to get it in exactly the form they wanted it), and you can send an application to Josh in that format.

If you'd like a copy of my application, please email me at [e-mail].

Marshall Friedman - Montanapilot

[ChiMike]

Thank you for laying down all the groundwork.

[montanapilot]

You are quite welcome! That's what our little group is for.

[MarkGregor]

I know its frustrating and I apologize. Obviously there are some cultural differences and you all know Tecnam takes on the liability of these LOAs and thus take it seriously. They need to be 100% sure its not a safety issue.

I don't disagree it took longer than it maybe should have but keep in mind there are other LSA manufactures who haven't issued a single LOA despite many requests from their customers.

I know there was discussion at the factory of positives and negatives. For those of us traveling longer distances in remote areas this LOA will be huge and Tecnam acknowledges that.

Big thanks to Montana Pilot for all the work he put into it for us!!

Mark G

[grantopperman]

Oct 23, 2019 16:18:59 GMT MarkGregor said:

I know its frustrating and I apologize. Obviously there are some cultural differences and you all know Tecnam takes on the liability of these LOAs and thus take it seriously. They need to be 100% sure its not a safety issue.

I don't disagree it took longer than it maybe should have but keep in mind there are other LSA manufactures who haven't issued a single LOA despite many requests from their customers.

I know there was discussion at the factory of positives and negatives. For those of us traveling longer distances in remote areas this LOA will be huge and Tecnam acknowledges that.

Big thanks to Montana Pilot for all the work he put into it for us!!

Mark G

Alternatively, you could be like me and re-register your aircraft as E-LSA (experimental LSA). Once you have that designation, you can make changes as you like. You just can't go back to S-LSA unless you return the plane to the manufacturer's exact approved specs. 

Going 'E' gave me latitude to do some small things (add LEMO plugs so that my headsets could be ship's power instead of battery) and big things (equip and gain approval for IFR ops!) without giving up overall LSA status. Right now, I'm commercial + instrument, but who knows? Maybe in the future I'll want to operate within the confines of LSA.

I would advise anyone (especially those beyond warranty) to consider this option though I know that for many it's not the right answer. Biggest downsides that I see are (1) the plane can't be used for hire, which I don't care about and (2) it makes your plane a little different at time of resale. Who knows if that's a good or bad thing? For the right buyer, it could be cool!

Other E-LSA upsides include the ability to take a two-day course and become certified to do your own annual condition inspections. Or the few-weeks course and be approved to do all maintenance yourself. I took the lighter LSA inspection course just for education purposes and now have that maintenance rating--though I don't consider myself at all qualified to do an independent inspection!

If anyone is interested in knowing more about this, feel free to contact me via direct message. Figuring this stuff out is at times difficult and lonely. I'm glad to share what I have learned.

[whitey]

Montana Pilot. Have you completed your fuel flow transducer installation ?? I am curious to know if you have managed to fine tune the readings. I have found it quite a challenge to get the calibration spot on,and this was quite easy with previous single transducer and low flow installations. Note the flow is very high. At 127 lph or 33.5 gals p h. I have done the K factor corrections many times but it seems to overshoot or undershoot dramatically so I reverted to trial and error.
Help might have arrived. The latest G3X update now has a handy new tab under fuel calcs where you merely enter actual fuel used v G3x calc and it self corrects. Can’t wait to try it out.

[montanapilot]

Thanks for that, Whitey.

They've just now received the transducers. They'll be installed in January. Thanks much for this information - I'm going to forward it to my maintenance shop and my avionics shop.

I'll keep you in touch with how it goes.

Best,
Montanapilot

[whitey]

Montana pilot After chasing my tail with endless k factor corrections ,both manually and via the G3x new fuel calc tab,which always seemed to wildly overshoot or undershoot, I think I have finally nailed the fuel flow by trial and error. I also rerouted my fuel hoses to remove 90* bends from close proximity to the transducers.,which according to Garmin can cause issues.
I need to do a few more longer flights but I am now confident it is accurate. How are you progressing?