Misfueling close call

[pelmet]

Used google translate with no corrections.

2016-06-02

"C-GDBK, a Piper PA-31 Navajo operated by the Aviation Training Centre Québécois
(CQFA) CEGEP de Chicoutimi, QC, on a flight from Chicoutimi / St-Honoré, QC (CYRC) to
Islands destination De-La-Madeleine, QC (CYGR), with a stopover in Gaspé (Michel Pouliot), QC
(CYGP) for fueling. After take-off on runway 28 at CYGP, the pilot
observed that the 2 engine performance parameters deteriorated during the rise
initial. The crew declared an emergency and requested an immediate return to CYGP. The aircraft
initiated a turn to the left to rewind the track 10. After landing, the crew
observed that the engine produced only very little power and showed signs of
significant overheating. The engines were stopped emergency and the occupants evacuated
the device. The instructor pilot and three student pilots were not injured.
The information obtained after the event confirmed that the aircraft was fueled with
JET fuel A. When refueling, a crew member confirmed with the avitailleur
required type of fuel (100LL) and all crew members retreated to the terminal.
No abnormalities with engines was"

"C-GDBK, un Piper PA-31 Navajo exploité par le Centre Québécois de Formation Aéronautique
(CQFA) du CEGEP de Chicoutimi, QC, effectuait un vol de Chicoutimi/St-Honoré, QC (CYRC) à
destination des Îles-De-La-Madeleine, QC (CYGR), avec escale à Gaspé (Michel Pouliot), QC
(CYGP) pour l'avitaillement en carburant. Après le décollage sur la piste 28 à CYGP, le pilote a
observé que les paramètres de performance des 2 moteurs se dégradaient lors de la montée
initiale. L’équipage a déclaré une urgence et a demandé un retour immédiat à CYGP. L’appareil a
amorcé un virage vers la gauche pour un retour rapide sur la piste 10. Une fois au sol, l’équipage a
observé que les moteurs ne produisaient que très peu de puissance et montraient des signes de
surchauffe importante. Les moteurs ont été arrêtés d'urgence et les occupants ont évacué
l'appareil. Le pilote-instructeur et les 3 élèves-pilotes n’ont pas été blessés.
L'information obtenu après l'événement a permis de confirmer que l'appareil avait été avitaillé avec
du carburant JET A. Lors de l’avitaillement, un membre d’équipage a confirmé avec l’avitailleur le
type de carburant requis (100LL) et tous les membres d’équipage ont retraité vers le terminal.
Aucune anomalie avec les moteurs n’a été décelée lors du démarrage et de la circulation au sol."

[dirtdr]

Wow.

[Eagerotter]

Never trust full serve...

[pdw]

Pilot's responsibility ?

[praveen4143]

I thought Jet A fuel trucks had the 'Hoover' nozzles which prevented piston aircraft from receiving the wrong type of fuel?

[ChrisEvans]

Absolutely Pilots responsibility.

More over - if you especially fly an aircraft that is available in Piston or Turbine -
you should be extra cautious about refueling, and again, especially if your at a
FBO unfamiliar to your aircraft.

A close friend was the fatality in this incorrect fueling accident;

https://aviation-safety.net/database/re ... 19840109-0

Visiting St Louis from Toronto on a freight run (Skycraft DC-3) during winter on a cold night.
My friend was at the aircraft when the refueling truck pulled up, confirming it was avgas truck.
He then went inside to stay warm.

The refueling person was only 90 days on the job with zero aviation background.

Due to the cold - as he was refueling - the truck kept stalling. So in the middle of refueling he took the truck back, and came back with a JetA1 truck and finished refueling.

He then took the stamped ticket from the avgas trucks meter - though the numbers didn't add up, he wrote in the full amount of avgas and JetA1.

Aircraft started fine, but on takeoff roll - it was aborted due to engines misfiring.

They contacted the FBO to confirm they had been fueled with Avgas.

The girl checked the fuel metered ticket to confirm that indeed the avgas truck had been used, again nobody checked the meter start/finish - or they would have realized something was wrong.

Confirming they had the correct fuel - the took off - only to have both engines quit - they attempted a landing on the freeway - but due to cars - they crash landed beside freeway.

[ahramin]

I thought Jet A fuel trucks had the 'Hoover' nozzles which prevented piston aircraft from receiving the wrong type of fuel?

This aircraft was fuelled from pumps, not a fuel truck, but yes the Jet A pump should have had the larger nozzle. Unfortunately there is one type of turbine plane out there (can't remember which) that will not take the large nozzles. End result is rather than changing the nozzle on the Jet A hose back and forth all day some fuellers tend to leave the smaller nozzle on after the first switch of the day.

[sstocker31]

It would be interesting to know if it had the big 100ll stickers that go around the fuel caps as a last warning before getting fueled with the wrong stuff.
With so many incidents like this repeatedly happening, it's amazing anyone flying a piston pounder isn't more diligent with fueling procedures.

[SuperchargedRS]

I thought Jet A fuel trucks had the 'Hoover' nozzles which prevented piston aircraft from receiving the wrong type of fuel?

This aircraft was fuelled from pumps, not a fuel truck, but yes the Jet A pump should have had the larger nozzle. Unfortunately there is one type of turbine plane out there (can't remember which) that will not take the large nozzles. End result is rather than changing the nozzle on the Jet A hose back and forth all day some fuellers tend to leave the smaller nozzle on after the first switch of the day.

Don't think I've ever seen a jet fuel nozzle that wasn't a duck bill, or single point one.

[goingnowherefast]

Airports frequently visited by helicopters and aircraft with turbine conversions are danger spots. Turbo otters, beavers, etc. all have the standard avgas fuel openings, and don't fit the Jet A duck bill nozzles.

[SuperchargedRS]

Airports frequently visited by helicopters and aircraft with turbine conversions are danger spots. Turbo otters, beavers, etc. all have the standard avgas fuel openings, and don't fit the Jet A duck bill nozzles.

Perhaps that should be part of the conversions, being a pain in the arse for a few conversions is nothing compared to one misfuel, if I owned a FBO I would stick to standard nozzles.

Our company has a ton of choppers, all use normal duck bills or single points.

[goingnowherefast]

It absolutely should be part of the conversion. The only one arguing is the cheap bush operators who's turbine conversion would be $1000 more expensive. Or the $3000 AD to fix all the aircraft already converted. The sooner it happens the better, but until then, we all need to be extra careful.

[crazyaviator]

How many minutes and how much intellect would it take for a fuelling company to show pictures of turbine engine exhausts (( big)) as compared to recip exhausts ((small)) cowling differences, PLACARDS on filler neck areas and many other obvious differences between the 2 types ? Do pilots ALWAYS question ATC instructions? Fuelling companies FAIL pilots FAIL people FAIL. NO excuse to blame 1 segment of the industry.

[Heliian]

Airports frequently visited by helicopters and aircraft with turbine conversions are danger spots. Turbo otters, beavers, etc. all have the standard avgas fuel openings, and don't fit the Jet A duck bill nozzles.

Perhaps that should be part of the conversions, being a pain in the arse for a few conversions is nothing compared to one misfuel, if I owned a FBO I would stick to standard nozzles.

Our company has a ton of choppers, all use normal duck bills or single points.

what kind of helicopter would that be? The majority won't take a flat nozzle.

Helicopters and conversions are at almost every airport on the planet. Get over it.

It absolutely should be part of the conversion. The only one arguing is the cheap bush operators who's turbine conversion would be $1000 more expensive. Or the $3000 AD to fix all the aircraft already converted. The sooner it happens the better, but until then, we all need to be extra careful.

It's not that cheap to modify a fuel system. Maybe on some tin but most would be over 10 times that then factor in design costs.

Moral of the story here is to pay attention to what goes in your aircraft. Don't be johnny cool pilot and walk away while the blades are still turning telling some random fueler to fill er up.

[SuperchargedRS]

Airports frequently visited by helicopters and aircraft with turbine conversions are danger spots. Turbo otters, beavers, etc. all have the standard avgas fuel openings, and don't fit the Jet A duck bill nozzles.

Perhaps that should be part of the conversions, being a pain in the arse for a few conversions is nothing compared to one misfuel, if I owned a FBO I would stick to standard nozzles.

Our company has a ton of choppers, all use normal duck bills or single points.

what kind of helicopter would that be? The majority won't take a flat nozzle.

Helicopters and conversions are at almost every airport on the planet. Get over it.

It absolutely should be part of the conversion. The only one arguing is the cheap bush operators who's turbine conversion would be $1000 more expensive. Or the $3000 AD to fix all the aircraft already converted. The sooner it happens the better, but until then, we all need to be extra careful.

It's not that cheap to modify a fuel system. Maybe on some tin but most would be over 10 times that then factor in design costs.

Moral of the story here is to pay attention to what goes in your aircraft. Don't be johnny cool pilot and walk away while the blades are still turning telling some random fueler to fill er up.

Larger twins and newer bells.

The plane I fly is a turbine and my personal plane is a piston amphib which I always fuel myself.

As for getting over it, I got no dog in this flight, I'm still going to have lunch the next day. Now if I owned a FBO I wouldn't be putting avgas nozzles on jet fuel, ether put the right ports on your conversion or figure your own way to fit that square peg into that round hole.

[justwork]

It would be interesting to know if it had the big 100ll stickers that go around the fuel caps as a last warning before getting fueled with the wrong stuff.
With so many incidents like this repeatedly happening, it's amazing anyone flying a piston pounder isn't more diligent with fueling procedures.

It probably did, just not in french.

[ahramin]

Wouldn't 100ll in French be 100pp (peu de plomb)? Close enough that there shouldn't be a misunderstanding.

[justwork]

Wouldn't 100ll in French be 100pp (peu de plomb)? Close enough that there shouldn't be a misunderstanding.

The OQLF should be investigating this incident.

[ahramin]

I dunno, I was part of a panel for them a couple of years ago and aviation didn't really seem to grok with their mental model of the world.

[justwork]

is there a sarcasm smiley face thing anywhere? I think I need that.