Is it normal to...?

[SkySista]

Two questions here:

Is it normal procedure in an aircraft (large jet) to:

a) Taxi the aircraft with a cargo door open (when re-positioning/parking on the ramp)

and b) add fuel to the tank while there are pax on board. (In this case extra was needed as original amount was insufficient)

I was always under the impression that it was against regs to refuel/top up while pax are on board, due to possibility of many casualties in a mishap.

Ta for any info.

Sky

[sanket_patel]

Hey Sky

A) I guess it depends what aircraft it is but I'm not to sure. But I've never seen an aircraft taxi with any type doors open to repostition the a/c, actually I've never seen an aircraft larger than a Navajo using it's own engines to reposition itself in the airport, just to expensive to do that, they use a tug which is a lot cheaper, saves money and fuel.


B) Here in Canada, it is normal to to refuel the aircraft while PAX are on board however Fire Fighting services must must be on stand by near the aircraft as the aircraft refuels and I believe the passengers must be advised not use any type of electronics and ofcourse the no smoking rule must be reiterated. Here in Montreal, P.E.T. Int'l where I work part time, I see fully loaded A340's being fueled with PAX on board very frequently as the capt'n needed more juice. Very normal...

Hope that helped.

[SkySista]

That anserws the fuel question. Though I thought it was different in OZ.... Hmmm.......

As for the first question, I should have said towed rather than taxi , as the a/c in question was definitely being towed. I'm up too late :)

And the a/c was a 737.

Sky

[cortilla]

Can't exactly say whether it is normal or not, i've only experienced it once. It was a flight from the uk to europe (a european airline) and we were refuelling on stand. The pax were told what was happening, and were told not to put our seatbelts on until refuelling was completed, and told where the emergency exits were several times (as more pax were boarding) The door also stayed open during the whole procedure.

[FlyingForFun]

For the first question, you might want to read this thread (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=119843) in the Tech Log forum, which asks a similar question about the B767. The opinion seems to be that this is not normal, but is not a problem.

Re-fuelling is covered by JAR-OPS 1.305:Refuelling/defuelling with passengers embarking, on board or disembarking (See Appending 1 to JAR-OPS 1.305)

An operator shall ensure that no aeroplane is refuelled/defuelled with Avgas or wide cut type fuel (e.g. Jet-B or equivalent) or when a mixture of these types of fuel might occur, when passengers are embarking, on board or disembarking. In all other cases necessary precautions must be taken and the aeroplane must be properly manned by qualified personnel ready to initiate and direct an evacuation of the aeroplane by the most practical and expeditious means available.Since a 737 doesn't run on Avgas nor on wide cut fuel, refuelling with passengers on board is legal as long as precautions are taken. Appendix 1 to JAR-OPS 1.305 describes the required precautions in more detail:Refuelling/defuelling with passengersembarking, on board or disembarking

(a) An operator must establish operational procedures for re/defuelling with passengers embarking, on board or disembarking to ensure the following precautions are taken:

(1) One qualified person must remain at a specified location during fuelling operations with passengers on board. This qualified person must be capable of handling emergency procedures concerning fire protection and fire-fighting, handling communications and initiating and directing an evacuation;

(2) Crew, staff and passengers must be warned that re/defuelling will take place;

(3) ‘Fasten Seat Belts’ signs must be off;

(4) ‘NO SMOKING’ signs must be on, together with interior lighting to enable emergency exits to be identified;

(5) Passengers must be instructed to unfasten their seat belts and refrain from smoking;

(6) Sufficient qualified personnel must be on board and be prepared for an immediate emergency evacuation;

(7) If the presence of fuel vapour is detected inside the aeroplane, or any other hazard arises during re/defuelling, fuelling must be stopped immediately;

(8) The ground area beneath the exits intended for emergency evacuation and slide deployment areas must be kept clear; and

(9) Provision is made for a safe and rapid evacuation.FFF
---------------

[redsnail]

Skysista,
In Oz it is illegal to refuel with pax onboard if you are using Avgas, no such problem with Avtur (aka Jet A1 etc) so long as you follow precautions. (Not too dissimilar to the JAR requirements). I don't have access to the CAR's and CAO's so I can't quote the reg.
The main difference between the 2 liquids is the risk of flammability. Petrol aka Avgas is highly inflammable and the vapour is explosive if an ignition source is around. Avtur aka Jet A1, kerosene, parrafin etc isn't nearly as flammable and the vapour isn't nearly as explosive. (Note, this is a very simple explanation)

About the towing? No idea but I can't see it being a problem unless there was a risk of damage. I would presume the engineers had a good reason to do so.
:D

[SkySista]

Thanks people!

It all makes sense given the info there, sounds reasonable. I don't know whether I'd like the idea of being refuelled while on the plane though. :ugh: As far as I could see, there wasn't any fire equipment directly near the plane, but it was close enough if needed.

It had piqued my curiosity as I hadn't seen this done before.

Thanks again for the help! PPRuNe rocks! :p

Sky

[tom24]

About 10 years ago. Departed Malta in a Caledonian 757. Got to 3,000ft. Then dumped tons of fuel, 180'd and landed back in Malta (with an almighty thump!). Taxied to stand, became surrounded by fire engines and had the aircraft refuelled whilst remaining on board.

And all because....a lady missed the flight, but her bags had managed to be put on!

How much would have that cock up cost the airline....

[FlyingForFun]

SkySista,

Have a read of the JARs as I copied+pasted them a few posts back, and note that there is no requirement to have fire equipment near the aircraft.

I'm confused about why you don't know whether you like the idea or not. Presumably you're happy to refuel a car when passengers are on board? But petrol is far more flammable than Avtur, the passengers are quite likely sitting much closer to the fuel tank than they would in an airliner, the person operating the fuel pump has most likely never received any training in how to use it, and there is no one nearby with any training in how to evacuate the car. The passenger may well have his/her seatbelt fastened during the refuelling. Hopefully he/she will have extinguished cigarettes beforehand.... but the driver quite likely won't have checked to ensure that the car is parked sufficiently far away from the pump to enable all the doors to be opened fully. Yet millions of people do this every single day..... Re-fuelling an aircraft seems extremely safe in comparison.

FFF
--------------

[You splitter]

Flying for Fun,

I agree there is no requirment for RFF personnel to be in attendance under JAR-OPS.
However local regulations at some airfields do not allow Fuelling whilst pax are on board, or if they do, the Fire Service must be in attendance. Mind you they charge for that so a cinical person may draw their own conclusions as to why it is necessary for them to be there!

YS

[Bealzebub]

Hard to say Tom, however the 757 has no facility for "dumping fuel" and it can be landed overweight up to its take off weight if necessary.

Fuelling with passengers on board is not at all unusual provided the statutory, local, and company precautions are observed.

[Jetsearch]

I have no idea, if there is something written somewhere about taxi with cargo door opened. Honestly, we never really thought about it and never did it.

Refuelling with PAX onboard should be described in the manuals. For us, it is allowed, if seat belt sign is off and a fire fighting car is beside the aircraft. Sometimes, it is very useful, especially on busy airports.

[Smeagol]

Slight thread hijack but.....

To elaborate on Flying For Fun's comments on refuelling of cars in petrol stations, it is interesting to note a couple of points.

The immediate vicinity of gasoline pumps is a Zone 1 in terms of Area Classification i.e 'a flammable atmosphere is likely to occur in normal operation', and as such the types of electrical equipment allowed to operate there are strictly controlled. It is potentially a very dangerous place and the average user has no concept of what could happen if safety rules regarding smoking, operating electrical equipment (such as mobile 'phones) or even running spark ignition engines, are ignored.

Kerosine, however, can be generally treated as a non-hazardous fluid.

Maybe, as F for F says, SkySista should be a great deal more worried about being in a car at a petrol station being refuelled than on a commercial aircraft undergoing refuelling.

[SkySista]

Well, haven't you guys made me feel dumb now :p

Yes, I agree, being at a petrol station is much more risky than being on a refueling plane. I didn't intend to make it sound I thought refueling aircraft with pax was dangerous.

It's just a "thing" I've had since I was a kid, I was scared to death of petrol pumps from about the age of four as there was a large explosion (I don't know what from) near our house and a neigbour commented it seemed to be at the servo down the road.

It's a stupid phobia, sure, but I'm always a bit weird about anything to do with filling up chemicials or petrol. Same thing with those tanker trucks. I hate em!!! :p

Again, it was purely my curiosity which prompted this post. I'll have to see whether anything in my local airport's own rules says anything about this.

Sky

PS - F for F, the part about equipment being on standby was from sanket_patel's comment. I had that in my head when composing my reply. I believe I have seen this referred to at Australian airports but I'm not 100% sure on it.

[ROB-x38]

Aswell as the precautions listed above, there is a requirement in OZ that AVTUR can only be loaded with pax onboard so long as it contains an anti-static additive.

This helps to reduce the hazardous effects of the static electricity generated in these high flow-rate refuelling systems (which can be around 3000 L/min and up to 50 psi (a/c and fuel type depending)).

[amanoffewwords]

Do the JAR rules apply world-wide - just asking 'cause a few days ago I was in JBurg boarding a 747-400 back to LHR while refuelling was being carried out - no announcement was made about it and no-one stopped me strapping in after I sat down. It was close to take-off time so I guess they were late starting the process.

amofw

[Amelia_Flashtart]

Have often been on regular commercial flights that have been refuelled with pax onboard. Usually there has been an announcment - pax told to ensure belts are unfastened, and crew members check the cabin throughout refuelling. Usually also an announcement when refuelling has completed.

I believe Australian and other international regs require F/A's and at least one tech crew to remain on board during the exercise to direct and assist in case of an emergency.

[bafanguy]

re: fueling with pax on board. I'm surprised at the amount of discussion on this topic and the references to "legalities". These considerations must be a non-USA issue. Maybe I've been sleep walking through the last 35+ years of flying air carrier jets, but I don't recall any discussion of not refueling with pax onboard or not having their seatbelts fastened if refueling is being done. The only time I've seen refueling stopped was when TRW's were in the area for fear of a lightening strike ( a legitimate fear ). But then...maybe I did sleepwalk !!!