[HN Gopher] Cracking Open and Controlling a 747 Fuel Gauge
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Cracking Open and Controlling a 747 Fuel Gauge
        
       Author : zdw
       Score  : 52 points
       Date   : 2023-06-08 17:21 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bikerglen.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bikerglen.com)
        
       | RcouF1uZ4gsC wrote:
       | From the drawing in the article, the fuel capacity is 47,210
       | gallons. Also from the article the weight of fuel is 6.7 - 6.8
       | pounds per gallon.
       | 
       | Thus, a fully loaded 747 has 316,000 pounds of fuel.
       | 
       | To put this in context, the maximum takeoff weight of a 737-700
       | is 154,000 pounds.
       | 
       | A fully fueled 747 has 2x the maximum weight of a 737 just in
       | fuel!
        
         | sokoloff wrote:
         | The 747 _horizontal stabilizer_ has an area of 136.6 m2, while
         | a 737 _main wing_ has an area of only 102m2 to 127m2.
        
         | selectodude wrote:
         | The engine nacelles on a 777-300 are the same diameter as the
         | entire fuselage of a 737. The big planes are very, very big.
        
           | Melkman wrote:
           | I really like this picture that demonstrates this size
           | difference:
           | https://www.flickr.com/photos/ramonkok/27081197680
        
       | adhesive_wombat wrote:
       | Man, I need to think of any reason I can spec a 0.06% linearity
       | potentiometer without having the BOM guy put a hit out on me.
        
       | kloch wrote:
       | If you want to see a bunch of these classic steam gauges in
       | action this is a great video (starts right before spool up):
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/JSKYoqVPtWw?t=86
       | 
       | Here's a video of a 747-100 from 2001 that has run through of the
       | flight engineers console but low-def:
       | 
       | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x00ta8xC4oc
       | 
       | Then there is this amazing video that captures the sound of the
       | 747 classic "buzzsaw" sound better than any other (due to
       | microphone placement and the 747SP having engines closer to the
       | cockpit):
       | 
       | https://youtu.be/3lhHwKK-6ms?t=313
        
         | esaym wrote:
         | I guess I've never heard the "classic" 747 engines. But reminds
         | me of the GE TF39 used on the c5 galaxy.
        
       | formerly_proven wrote:
       | Much more of this
       | https://m.youtube.com/channel/UC4Kz0sEXSqNkfi7W1PBKyMg
        
       | seabass-labrax wrote:
       | The centre tanks are so much larger than the outboard wing tanks.
       | I would be very interested to know if the rate at which the fuel
       | can be pumped up from the centre tank to the wing tanks exceeds
       | the rate at which the engines consume it. If so, is fuel
       | transferred on multiple separate occasions during the flight, or
       | is it instead pumped continuously throughout the flight at a rate
       | approximately matching the rate of consumption by the engines?
        
         | readyplayernull wrote:
         | The rate at which fuel can be pumped from the center tank to
         | the wing tanks does exceed the rate at which the engines
         | consume fuel, so fuel transfer can occur continuously
         | throughout the flight.
         | 
         | The actual rate of fuel transfer and the frequency of transfers
         | will vary depending on the specific flight conditions, such as
         | the weight of the airplane, the distance of the flight, and the
         | amount of fuel remaining in the tanks. The fuel management
         | system on the 747 is designed to optimize fuel usage and ensure
         | that the airplane remains balanced throughout the flight.
        
           | sokoloff wrote:
           | There are two possible interpretations of GP's question. I
           | took the opposite one of the one you did. "Can the fuel be
           | transferred more quickly than engines consume it, such that
           | there is a risk of the wing tanks becoming overfilled from
           | the center tank?" is the one I took. You took "Can the fuel
           | be transferred fast enough such that there is no risk of
           | engine fuel starvation?" which is also valid.
        
             | kayodelycaon wrote:
             | Fuel tanks have vents to prevent overfilling from damaging
             | them. From one of the Boeing documents I found, the
             | 767-400ER will vent tanks into the fuel dumping system,
             | passively pushing the excess overboard.
        
               | sokoloff wrote:
               | That fuel was presumably loaded for a reason. Pushing it
               | overboard still represents a risk to the flight.
        
         | esaym wrote:
         | The fuel pump rates are very extreme. A plane can take off
         | heavier than it can land. So if it is fully fueled and shortly
         | after take off it needs to land due to emergency, it will need
         | to dump thousands of pounds of fuel in minutes. The typical
         | design and workflow of a larger jet like this is the engines
         | are feed by the fuel tank nearest them. The flight engineer is
         | on constant duty to continuously pump fuel from the center tank
         | and/or other fuselage tanks to the tanks feeding the engines.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-06-08 23:01 UTC)