Primers? Why?

[rhurt]

Agree. I would rather remove the primers from my airplane

[JimC]

"If you were to use the manual primers because the electric fuel pump was inop. you would be ILLEGALLY flying"

Devil's advocate - why is this illegal?

I'm not saying it's a good idea, but I don't think it's illegal. 337s don't have MELs.

[mshac]

Jim is probably right - I don't recall "fuel pump" as being on the list of required items for either VFR or IFR flight. I'd compare it to flying NORDO VFR - completely legal in non-controlled airspace, but not recommended. And for the non-airline types, an MEL is a Minimum Equipment List - Everything on the list has to work in order to dispatch the airplane. Things like coffee pots and reading lights are not on the list, but I would imagine fuel pumps would be.

[JAG]

Such a great topic - but maybe not everyone will take interest.

I am not an expert on FAR 23 Certification Standards, but there must be some intent of Cessna for the auxiliary pump to be required equipment; they have put them on separate breakers and stipulate their use in the operating manual to provide fuel flow (HI) in the case of engine driven pump failure, or even vapor elimination in flight.

I can't make a comment if you would be legal or illegal - I don't have enough knowledge on the certification side of things. But my experience would tell me that this is likely required equipment for flight - as the intended use of the auxiliary pump is clearly required in the operating handbook for emergency procedures. For me personally, I would not take off without an aux pump working. I view the use of the pump as a mitigation for a number of fuel related problems - and I prefer to operate the aircraft the way Cessna had designed it.

Regarding MELs (an area I do have expertise in), there actually is a Master MEL published by the FAA for the 336/337. Not required for us to use in private operation, but it is an interesting to read what is, and what is not on it.

Jeff

[skymstr02]

With only two primer nozzles per engine, and they are not on cylinders, I challenge you to start an IO-360 without a boost pump. Look where those nozzles are on the engine
When your engine driven pump fails in flight, how do you propose to keep that engine running?

[JimC]

Originally Posted by JAG

Such a great topic - but maybe not everyone will take interest.

I am not an expert on FAR 23 Certification Standards, but there must be some intent of Cessna for the auxiliary pump to be required equipment; they have put them on separate breakers and stipulate their use in the operating manual to provide fuel flow (HI) in the case of engine driven pump failure, or even vapor elimination in flight.

I can't make a comment if you would be legal or illegal - I don't have enough knowledge on the certification side of things. But my experience would tell me that this is likely required equipment for flight - as the intended use of the auxiliary pump is clearly required in the operating handbook for emergency procedures. For me personally, I would not take off without an aux pump working. I view the use of the pump as a mitigation for a number of fuel related problems - and I prefer to operate the aircraft the way Cessna had designed it.

Regarding MELs (an area I do have expertise in), there actually is a Master MEL published by the FAA for the 336/337. Not required for us to use in private operation, but it is an interesting to read what is, and what is not on it.

Jeff

I agree with all of the above, except for one thing: Regardless of intent (or wisdom) I don't think there's any way Cessna can make it legally required for part 91 without an AD.

I think 91.213 (d) covers it.

23.991(b) says that a backup pump is not required if the fuel injection pump is part of the engine.