Misfueling close call

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako

Broken Slinky
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 238
Joined: Fri Feb 21, 2014 10:47 am

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Broken Slinky »

A similar incident happened at Mt Tremblant airport a bunch of years ago with a Piper Mirage. Even with a nozzle that was too large for the fill hole it was topped up with Jet A. They ran the engine just figuring it was dirty plugs. Managed to right the engine off with that mistake.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
oldtimer
Rank 10
Rank 10
Posts: 2296
Joined: Mon Feb 16, 2004 7:04 pm
Location: Calgary

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by oldtimer »

Murphy's Law always sides with the hidden flaw. Except in some cases, the flaw is not all that well hidden.
I wonder what is going to happen when we see more Cessna and Piper airplanes with diesel engines. Is there anything other than placards to prevent fueling those airplanes with 100LL Avgas instead of the required Jet A?
I do not think a diesel will run all that long at high power settings on a mixture of 100LL and Jet A.
---------- ADS -----------
 
The average pilot, despite the somewhat swaggering exterior, is very much capable of such feelings as love, affection, intimacy and caring.
These feelings just don't involve anyone else.
Apollo
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 591
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 2:42 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Apollo »

SuperchargedRS wrote:You've never seen a duckbill like this??

The only ones I've seen are ether the duckbills or single points like this

The duckbill is the most common jet fuel nozzle other there.
Nope, like I said I had to google it to see what the duckbill was all about. Single point I've seen before. I've been in the industry for about a decade now too.
---------- ADS -----------
 
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7933
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by pelmet »

Another misfueling that was caught. If the pilot is around, probably best to always ensure that the first thing that is done when the truck arrives is to check the fuel type written on the side of the truck, even before saying hello. To be honest, I didn't even check the pumps at a familiar flight school the other day when getting refueled, but as a policy, I think I will do it anyways, even when it is obvious that there could be no mistake. Then one has the automatic habit. And if you check every time, there should never be a misfueling.

Via Google Translate....

"C-FSUD, an Aero Commander 690B operated by MAG Aerospace Canada landed at the airport
of Maniwaki, QC (CYMW) for refueling. Once the aircraft is parked, the truck
refueling has approached. While the pilot finished filling out documents inside
from the aircraft, ground personnel began refueling. When the pilot left the aircraft, he
noticed the AVGAS lettering on the truck. He immediately asked to stop the refueling,
but 53 liters of fuel had already been poured. A letter has been sent to the company of
refueling to inform them of the differences between an AC690 (turbine engine) and an AC500
(piston engine), 2 models operated by MAG Aerospace Canada and request that the personnel
on the ground confirms with the pilot the type of fuel before starting to refuel. A reminder to
sent to company pilots reminding them that they must supervise refueling and
make sure the fuel type is correct."
---------- ADS -----------
 
Meecka
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 799
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2007 3:03 pm
Location: The other side of sanity.

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Meecka »

Heliian wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:56 am
SuperchargedRS wrote:
goingnowherefast wrote: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.
Not starting anything just giving examples.

Bell 206 B, Bell 205, and Bell 412 I work on will all take the Duckbill no problem.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1976
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Heliian »

Meecka wrote: Mon Jul 20, 2020 9:35 am
Heliian wrote: Sun Jun 19, 2016 4:56 am
SuperchargedRS wrote:
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.
Not starting anything just giving examples.

Bell 206 B, Bell 205, and Bell 412 I work on will all take the Duckbill no problem.
Hi!

They don't work well with the range extenders in 206 series. It's been a while but I don't think they'll fit any older eurocopter products either. Enough that I've never seen one used by a helicopter company. The newer and bigger ones will have a big enough opening and even "single point" systems.

Our main bowser still has a round one and I can honestly say that I don't even look at the nozzle end on the truck, just look to make sure it's the right truck.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Big Pistons Forever
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5953
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2004 7:17 pm
Location: West Coast

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Big Pistons Forever »

From NASA Technical paper 2203
Engine manufacturers generally
allow approximately 10 to 12
percent change in fuel/air ratio
as a detonation margin. If this
detonation margin is applied to
knock limited power curves it will
be found to equate to an octane
loss of 2 to 3 octane numbers.
That is, a loss of 2 to 3 octane
numbers will use up the design
safety margin and theoretically
subject the engine to possible
damage from detonation. Data from
Table #1 indicates that a loss of
2 octane numbers is reached
slightly beyond 2% contamination
of avgas by jet fuel
It does not take much Jet A to really ruin your day.......
---------- ADS -----------
 
trey kule
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4766
Joined: Fri Aug 19, 2005 7:09 pm

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by trey kule »

I wonder what is going to happen when we see more Cessna and Piper airplanes with diesel engines. Is there anything other than placards to prevent fueling those airplanes with 100LL Avgas instead of the required Jet A?
Yes.
1. Stay with the plane at refueling. Confirm the correct fuel Is going in the tanks.
Pay attention.
It is just that easy. :smt040
---------- ADS -----------
 
Accident speculation:
Those that post don’t know. Those that know don’t post
Stubby Phillips
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 14
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2014 4:17 pm

Re: Misfueling close call

Post by Stubby Phillips »

---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”