Auto fuel/tank config is not always working for me (748)

[adl320 3]

Interesting thread as I’ve just experienced a similar incident. I started my flight from PANC - RKSI with 240,000 Lbs of fuel. I had all main and override pumps turned on. My FMC is set for AUTO TANK/ENG CONFIG upon reaching the tank/eng condition. 

About 500 miles out from my destination, I hear my stick shaker going off and notice that engines 1 and 4 are not operating. Main 1 and Main 2 tanks each have exactly 200 lbs of fuel in them. My fuel pumps were not configured TANK/ENG yet Main 2 and 3 tanks were both equal as expected. 

I configured the airplane in TANK/ENG except for Main 1 and 2 pumps which had no fuel in them. I was able to re-light engines 1 and 4 and continue the flight w/o incident but wondering what may have gone wrong. Possible I had my fuel pumps configured incorrectly at departure?

 

Aaron

[Jetlinker 13]

5 minutes ago, adl320 said:

Interesting thread as I’ve just experienced a similar incident. I started my flight from PANC - RKSI with 240,000 Lbs of fuel. I had all main and override pumps turned on. My FMC is set for AUTO TANK/ENG CONFIG upon reaching the tank/eng condition. 

About 500 miles out from my destination, I hear my stick shaker going off and notice that engines 1 and 4 are not operating. Main 1 and Main 2 tanks each have exactly 200 lbs of fuel in them. My fuel pumps were not configured TANK/ENG yet Main 2 and 3 tanks were both equal as expected. 

I configured the airplane in TANK/ENG except for Main 1 and 2 pumps which had no fuel in them. I was able to re-light engines 1 and 4 and continue the flight w/o incident but wondering what may have gone wrong. Possible I had my fuel pumps configured incorrectly at departure?

 

Aaron

Sounds like you forgot to open the crossfeed valves in the preflight.... so essentially you were already TANK/ENG configured and tanks 1 and 4 were being used from the beginning so they eventually ran dry. 

[adl320 3]

1 minute ago, Jetlinker said:

Sounds like you forgot to open the crossfeed valves in the preflight.... so essentially you were already TANK/ENG configured and tanks 1 and 4 were being used from the beginning so they eventually ran dry. 

Totally makes sense. Missed that step. Lesson learned! I was going to say, I know this was working flawlessly on my previous flights and just didn’t believe it was a bug. User error for sure. 🙂

 

Aaron

[Jetlinker 13]

3 minutes ago, adl320 said:

Totally makes sense. Missed that step. Lesson learned! I was going to say, I know this was working flawlessly on my previous flights and just didn’t believe it was a bug. User error for sure. 🙂

 

Aaron

Yeah, the procedure is to always open the crossfeeds in the preflight flow. Then, if you have a smaller fuel load (for a short flight) and you get the TANK/ENG message during start you then reconfigure for fuel tank to engine. That way the crossfeed valves should never get left closed when they should be open. 

Edited December 28, 2018 by Jetlinker

[adl320 3]

6 minutes ago, Jetlinker said:

Yeah, the procedure is to always open the crossfeeds in the preflight flow. Then, if you have a smaller fuel load (for a short flight) and you get the TANK/ENG message during start you then reconfigure for fuel tank to engine. That way the crossfeed valves should never get left closed when they should be open. 

Thanks!

[berts 97]

13 hours ago, Jetlinker said:

Yeah, the procedure is to always open the crossfeeds in the preflight flow. Then, if you have a smaller fuel load (for a short flight) and you get the TANK/ENG message during start you then reconfigure for fuel tank to engine. That way the crossfeed valves should never get left closed when they should be open. 

This statement isn't quite correct, because the Fuel Panel should always be configured pre-flight based on the actual fuel load and distribution you have for the intended flight. 

It is worth bearing in mind that the synoptic may not represent the actual fuel system operation, because the fuel flow displayed is generated by the pump status and valve positions and not by the actual fuel flow.  This can sometimes catch out the unwary and lead a person to turn off the pumps too soon when the relevant tank(s) appear to be very low or empty.  It is better to resist the temptation to change the fuel configuration too early and wait until you see the relevant Fuel Pump messages indicating low fuel pressure and the tank is empty or below the minimum level required (e.g. <900Kgs in the case of the B744 CWT).

Displaying the Fuel Synoptic during the Pre-flight Scan with the correct amount of fuel on board will help you to configure the panel correctly and show you which pumps need to be turned on (i.e. those with fuel in them!) and which valves need to be opened or closed.  It is also recommended that the Fuel Synoptic page is displayed on the Lower EICAS when making any fuel configuration changes or when jettisoning fuel.  Provided you do this and let the FSMC's do their job then operating the fuel sytem should be relatively straightforward. Fortunately there is a full description of the Fuel Systems for the B744 & 747-8 FCOMs under Systems Description, Chapter 12, Section 20.

[Jetlinker 13]

2 hours ago, berts said:

This statement isn't quite correct, because the Fuel Panel should always be configured pre-flight based on the actual fuel load and distribution you have for the intended flight. 

It is configured preflight for the actual fuel load. Perhaps different companies teach things differently, I take it from some of your posts that you also have some 747 time as well. The procedure where I work is for the Captain to open the crossfeeds during the Preflight flow, and to turn the necessary pumps on during the Before Start flow. If at that time you need to configure FUEL TANK/ENG based on a smaller fuel load you would do so. I realize it seems redundant to open the crossfeeds with a planned fuel load of say, 35000 kilos, just to have to close them again before start... but flows and procedures are made for consistency to prevent situations like were described by the user above. 

Edited December 28, 2018 by Jetlinker

[scandinavian13 5,192]

Differences in SOPs fascinate me.

The latter sounds distinctly...well...British.

[exstense 23]

31 minutes ago, scandinavian13 said:

Differences in SOPs fascinate me.

The latter sounds distinctly...well...British.

why are pilots so mysterious about which airlines they have flown.
Why is it 'not done' to say that they have flown for (for example) BA?

[Jetlinker 13]

50 minutes ago, exstense said:

why are pilots so mysterious about which airlines they have flown.
Why is it 'not done' to say that they have flown for (for example) BA?

Because some companies frown upon employees appearing to represent them by using their name on social media and in other outlets. I generally refrain from that but it’s also not a “Giant” secret seeing as the number of remaining 747 operators out there is rather small these days. 😉

Edited December 28, 2018 by Jetlinker

[berts 97]

5 hours ago, Jetlinker said:

The procedure where I work is for the Captain to open the crossfeeds during the Preflight flow, and to turn the necessary pumps on during the Before Start flow. If at that time you need to configure FUEL TANK/ENG based on a smaller fuel load you would do so.

Jeffery, is opening the Crossfeeds during the Captain's Pre-flight flow part of your company's standard operating procedures and does the Captain more or less swap roles with their co-pilot when they give them a handling sector (excluding situations such as 2 engine landings, genuine Cat III Autolands, the decision to evacuate in an emergency, etc)?  (Swapping roles - but not necessarily seats - is a great way for co-pilots to gain experience in command management and handling of the aircraft).

5 hours ago, Jetlinker said:

I realize it seems redundant to open the crossfeeds with a planned fuel load of say, 35000 kilos, just to have to close them again before start... but flows and procedures are made for consistency to prevent situations like were described by the user above.  

I presume you are just talking about Crossfeeds 1 and 4 and not the other two guarded ones?  Even allowing for the fact you say it seems redundant with a fuel load of say 35,000Kgs, it does seem unusual why any operator would not require the Fuel Panel and Crossfeed Valves to be set up correctly for the fuel load being carried as part of the Pre-flight flow. Then, when it comes to your Before Start flow you would in effect be double-checking the panel is already set up correctly, instead of changing the configuration at a particularly busy time with the potential that could bring of making a mistake.

4 hours ago, scandinavian13 said:

Differences in SOPs fascinate me.

Kyle, It's not the differences in SOP's that fascinate me. It's the decisions and reasons for them, especially when they differ from Boeing's!     

[Jetlinker 13]

42 minutes ago, berts said:

Jeffery, is opening the Crossfeeds during the Captain's Pre-flight flow part of your company's standard operating procedures and does the Captain more or less swap roles with their co-pilot when they give them a handling sector (excluding situations such as 2 engine landings, genuine Cat III Autolands, the decision to evacuate in an emergency, etc)?  (Swapping roles - but not necessarily seats - is a great way for co-pilots to gain experience in command management and handling of the aircraft).

It is part of the Captain’s Flight Deck flow, which is essentially an initial cockpit setup, so this particular procedure is generally performed by the Captain. For training purposes we are all PIC trained (in the left seat) and have to be in order to assume the PIC role while the Captain is in rest. As for preflight flows the roles are not interchanged as the Captain is always up front for that time period. 

42 minutes ago, berts said:

I presume you are just talking about Crossfeeds 1 and 4 and not the other two guarded ones?  Even allowing for the fact you say it seems redundant with a fuel load of say 35,000Kgs, it does seem unusual why any operator would not require the Fuel Panel and Crossfeed Valves to be set up correctly for the fuel load being carried as part of the Pre-flight flow. Then, when it comes to your Before Start flow you would in effect be double-checking the panel is already set up correctly, instead of changing the configuration at a particularly busy time with the potential that could bring of making a mistake.

Yes, I’m referring to 1 and 4. Is it common at other operators to turn fuel pumps on during a cockpit setup flow? I just figured it was standard for that to be a Before Start function which is when we configure the panel as needed for that flight. Opening the crossfeeds is done prior to that as part of the initial cockpit setup, then if they need to be closed for the flight that’s done in the Before Start. Keep in mind that there may not be a final fuel load number when the preflight cockpit setup is performed  

 

42 minutes ago, berts said:

Kyle, It's not the differences in SOP's that fascinate me. It's the decisions and reasons for them, especially when they differ from Boeing's!     

My guess is consistency. All in all we have about a half dozen renditions of the 747 from LCF’s to BCF’s to -8’s to passenger airplanes. It makes sense to use procedures that can be kept the same on all of them as much as possible, which this does. 

Edited December 29, 2018 by Jetlinker

[Jetlinker 13]

 Also, I’ve double checked this with PMDG’s FCOM which I believe is based on Boeing documentation and their procedure shows the same as I’ve stated above. NP.21.12 which is the initial cockpit setup says:

“All X FEED valve switches - ON”

Then on NP21.26, which is the BEFORE START flow:

“If FUEL TANK/ENG message shows:”  I’m not going to type it all but it basically says to configure tank to engine  

So from what I can see there is nothing unusual about the way that I’ve stated to do it? PMDG’s manual essentially says the same thing as my company FCOM. 

Edited December 29, 2018 by Jetlinker

[scandinavian13 5,192]

6 hours ago, exstense said:

why are pilots so mysterious about which airlines they have flown.
Why is it 'not done' to say that they have flown for (for example) BA?

Companies can get a bit odd about what their employees say, when people can tie them to an airline.

I, for example, posted a joke in an aviation forum waaaaay back in the day about the awful service the ground handling company I worked for provided on a particular day. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek (and I had forgotten that selective parts of the forum were viewable without logging in), but higher ups caught wind of it, and I ended up in someone's office to get fussed at.

Luckily, the guy fussing at me was about as bunt as I was so my blunt retort about how awful the ramp operations actually were was met with curiosity rather than consternation (and I was still in college, so I still had a safety net of sorts if I got fired for that bluntness). Unfortunately, the other pieces relevant to the issue: being the lowest bidder, hiring people on that low bid, and keeping the service equipment working on that low bid, were too much to handle and not much changed. I did, however, much like many crew members at various airlines/ops, get very secretive about who I worked for, and where.

 

For what it's worth, I wasn't intending to assign it to BAW, specifically. Any sort of British operation - airline, rail, bank, whatever - just seems to be mired in red tape and procedure for the sake of procedure, as a general observation. That's not to throw stones, either. At least their government currently functions...

[Jetlinker 13]

At the end of the day if someone decides that since they are doing a 45 minute flight with 30,000kgs of fuel to leave the crossfeed valves closed because it’s pointless to open them just to close them again it’s certainly not the end of the world. Especially not in a sim. At least you are deviating from procedure with an understanding of the system at hand and WHY you are doing it. I merely wanted to point out to the poster who lost two engines that if the written procedure were followed the fuel system would have been configured correctly. That’s all. 😉