Refuel today at a well known european GA airfield.
They put Jet A1 instead of Avgas.
I saw it just after the second tank was fully completed, having a distracted eye on the bowser.
It’s a lifetime lesson. Double, triple check and more, that they give you the good fuel.
I don’t tell which airfiled it is because I don’t want that someone suffers the consequence.
I saw it, it was solved (full tank drain, sump drain and engine checks) I will be able to leave tomorrow as planned (no, it’s not with the Cessna 182).
Fly safe !
Happy second birthday LimaVictor! Good that you noticed it, because if not prob is quite high that you wouldn’t be writing any more.
>> Happy second birthday LimaVictor! Good that you noticed it, because if not prob is quite high that you wouldn’t be writing any more.
Really? Even assuming no run-up, I would image the taxi fuel needed is more than what is in the lines/sump. So the jet a reaches the engine before takeoff?!
Did anyone study this/are there accidents connected to mid-fueling with jet-a?
LimaVictor wrote:
I don’t tell which airfiled it is because I don’t want that someone suffers the consequence.
As long as you’ve written an incident report…
LimaVictor wrote:
They put
I’ve been an owner for many years, but have yet somebody else refuel any of my babies… which still doesn’t mean a mistake couldn’t happen 🙈
HBadger wrote:
Really? Even assuming no run-up, I would image the taxi fuel needed is more than what is in the lines/sump. So the jet a reaches the engine before takeoff?!Did anyone study this/are there accidents connected to mid-fueling with jet-a?
One of my instructor, a long time ago, made the experiment of shutting off the fuel valve, I think it was just after engine run-up, and he managed to taxi and accelerate down the runway before he stopped the experience before being airborne. His conclusion was that he would have been able to take-off and would lost power just after that. This was on a Robin D400 – 120. In the case of having Jet-A1 instead of 100LL in your tanks, I don’t know how that would work, but from a quick search on ‘the Internet’ :-) the density of Jet-A1 is higher than for 100LL so you could expect that Jet-A1 would get to the bottom of the tanks and get to the engine quickly, so your engine would first receive 100LL (from what’s in the fuel lines which does last a little while) then a mix of and then only Jet-A1, at what point does it stops, I wouldn’t want to try :-)
Yes you can certainly get airborne with the fuel shut off, in some types, and especially if you don’t do the run-up properly.
With a Jet-A1 fill in an avgas plane I would disconnect the hose from the carb or fuel servo and drain avgas all the way through (into a bucket). Then I would overhaul the said component, unless there is a specified draining procedure for mis-fuelling.
No idea how one would clean the fuel tanks; probably takes a bit of work to get it all out.
There are stories of refuellers seeing a “turbo” stickers and thinking it is “turbine” and then putting Jet-A1 in.
I would expect the opposite to happen more often – putting 100LL instead of Jet-A1 into aircrafts with piston-diesel engines. When refuellers see small aircraft they automatically think of 100LL…
HBadger wrote:
Really? Even assuming no run-up, I would image the taxi fuel needed is more than what is in the lines/sump. So the jet a reaches the engine before takeoff
The most well-known piston aircraft misfueling incident happened with Bob Hoover in 1978. His Commander ran out of power at about 300 feet AGL.
With a Jet-A1 fill in an avgas plane I would disconnect the hose from the carb or fuel servo and drain avgas all the way through (into a bucket). Then I would overhaul the said component, unless there is a specified draining procedure for mis-fuelling.
One could debate whether disassembly and reassembly of the carb or fuel servo would be more likely to create a (maintenance induced) engine failure than e.g. pulling the drain plug from a float bowl and running fuel from the tank to wash it out.
