PA30 pilot has fuel starvation and lands at aus.

Attributes
ACN	566651
Time
Date	200211
Day	Thu
Local Time Of Day	1201 To 1800
Place
Locale Reference	airport : aus.airport
State Reference	TX
Altitude	msl single value : 6500
Environment
Flight Conditions	VMC
Light	Daylight
Aircraft 1
Controlling Facilities	tracon : aus.tracon tracon : p80.tracon
Operator	general aviation : personal
Make Model Name	PA-30 Twin Comanche
Operating Under FAR Part	Part 91
Flight Phase	cruise : level
Flight Plan	None
Person 1
Affiliation	other
Function	flight crew : single pilot
Qualification	pilot : multi engine pilot : commercial pilot : instrument
Experience	flight time last 90 days : 12 flight time total : 499 flight time type : 266
ASRS Report	566651
Person 2
Affiliation	government : faa
Function	controller : approach
Events
Anomaly	aircraft equipment problem : critical non adherence : far
Independent Detector	other flight crewa
Resolutory Action	controller : provided flight assist flight crew : diverted to another airport flight crew : landed as precaution
Consequence	faa : reviewed incident with flight crew
Supplementary
Problem Areas	Aircraft Flight Crew Human Performance
Primary Problem	Flight Crew Human Performance

Narrative:

Flight was from hdc to ZZZ. While transitioning austin class C airspace, the right engine lost power. After checking fuel selector was on main tank and auxiliary fuel pump switched on, engine was eventually shut down and propeller feathered. A call to approach was initiated declaring an urgent need to divert to austin for a precautionary landing. The landing was completed without further incident. Upon examination of engine, it was determined that fuel starvation was the cause of the loss of power. Fuel was added and engine was ground run and checked ok. Fuel requirement for this leg was obtained during preflight planning. However, my calculations of fuel on board prior to departure were miscalculated. My original fuel calculations were being confirmed during the flight by reference to main tank fuel quantity indicators. It is now obvious that the indicators have a significant error in the readings. Upon departure from hdc, I carried 30 gallons in the auxiliary tanks and calculated 25 gallons in the main tanks, for flight endurance of 3.6 hours at a fuel burn of 15.2 gph. My preflight planning was for 3 hour flight to ZZZ. Mains are 60 gallon capacity with 54 gallons usable. The causes of this fuel mismgmnt incident are several in this chain of events and are as follows: 1) I had varying amounts of fuel burned out of the main tanks from 3 previous flight legs. This caused my fuel calculations to have a significantly higher degree of error of actual fuel burned when I calculated my fuel on board for the flight leg in question. Needless to say, I did not keep an actual written fuel log and I could only estimate fuel burned prior to departing hdc. 2) I had significantly inaccurate fuel quantity indicators that only reaffirmed my now miscalculated fuel on board. 3) I had a marginal fuel on board versus fuel requirement situation with no added safety margin. In the future, I will pay more attention and conduct a more thorough preflight plan. I will add a greater safety margin to my fuel requirements. I will keep a more accurate and written log of fuel burned for each flight leg. I will not attempt to calculate or estimate fuel burned from several previous flight legs. I will pay more attention to recognize a marginal situation and act in a safe and prudent manner so as to complete the flight safely.

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: PA30 PLT HAS FUEL STARVATION AND LANDS AT AUS.

Narrative: FLT WAS FROM HDC TO ZZZ. WHILE TRANSITIONING AUSTIN CLASS C AIRSPACE, THE R ENG LOST PWR. AFTER CHKING FUEL SELECTOR WAS ON MAIN TANK AND AUX FUEL PUMP SWITCHED ON, ENG WAS EVENTUALLY SHUT DOWN AND PROP FEATHERED. A CALL TO APCH WAS INITIATED DECLARING AN URGENT NEED TO DIVERT TO AUSTIN FOR A PRECAUTIONARY LNDG. THE LNDG WAS COMPLETED WITHOUT FURTHER INCIDENT. UPON EXAMINATION OF ENG, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT FUEL STARVATION WAS THE CAUSE OF THE LOSS OF PWR. FUEL WAS ADDED AND ENG WAS GND RUN AND CHKED OK. FUEL REQUIREMENT FOR THIS LEG WAS OBTAINED DURING PREFLT PLANNING. HOWEVER, MY CALCULATIONS OF FUEL ON BOARD PRIOR TO DEP WERE MISCALCULATED. MY ORIGINAL FUEL CALCULATIONS WERE BEING CONFIRMED DURING THE FLT BY REF TO MAIN TANK FUEL QUANTITY INDICATORS. IT IS NOW OBVIOUS THAT THE INDICATORS HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ERROR IN THE READINGS. UPON DEP FROM HDC, I CARRIED 30 GALLONS IN THE AUX TANKS AND CALCULATED 25 GALLONS IN THE MAIN TANKS, FOR FLT ENDURANCE OF 3.6 HRS AT A FUEL BURN OF 15.2 GPH. MY PREFLT PLANNING WAS FOR 3 HR FLT TO ZZZ. MAINS ARE 60 GALLON CAPACITY WITH 54 GALLONS USABLE. THE CAUSES OF THIS FUEL MISMGMNT INCIDENT ARE SEVERAL IN THIS CHAIN OF EVENTS AND ARE AS FOLLOWS: 1) I HAD VARYING AMOUNTS OF FUEL BURNED OUT OF THE MAIN TANKS FROM 3 PREVIOUS FLT LEGS. THIS CAUSED MY FUEL CALCULATIONS TO HAVE A SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER DEG OF ERROR OF ACTUAL FUEL BURNED WHEN I CALCULATED MY FUEL ON BOARD FOR THE FLT LEG IN QUESTION. NEEDLESS TO SAY, I DID NOT KEEP AN ACTUAL WRITTEN FUEL LOG AND I COULD ONLY ESTIMATE FUEL BURNED PRIOR TO DEPARTING HDC. 2) I HAD SIGNIFICANTLY INACCURATE FUEL QUANTITY INDICATORS THAT ONLY REAFFIRMED MY NOW MISCALCULATED FUEL ON BOARD. 3) I HAD A MARGINAL FUEL ON BOARD VERSUS FUEL REQUIREMENT SIT WITH NO ADDED SAFETY MARGIN. IN THE FUTURE, I WILL PAY MORE ATTN AND CONDUCT A MORE THOROUGH PREFLT PLAN. I WILL ADD A GREATER SAFETY MARGIN TO MY FUEL REQUIREMENTS. I WILL KEEP A MORE ACCURATE AND WRITTEN LOG OF FUEL BURNED FOR EACH FLT LEG. I WILL NOT ATTEMPT TO CALCULATE OR ESTIMATE FUEL BURNED FROM SEVERAL PREVIOUS FLT LEGS. I WILL PAY MORE ATTN TO RECOGNIZE A MARGINAL SIT AND ACT IN A SAFE AND PRUDENT MANNER SO AS TO COMPLETE THE FLT SAFELY.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.