View Full Version : Bell 412 fuel leak in Cargolux 747-8F
Ian Corrigible
12th Apr 2017, 11:56
A story from our brethren over in Freight Dogs regarding a Cargolux 747-8F freighter which was stuck in Prestwick for 12 days following the reported leak of "several hundred liters" of Jet-A from a Bristow Bell 412EP. The aircraft finally departed PIK yesterday. "Ya see, Timmy..."
Cargolux 747-8 trashed at Prestwick (http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/593368-cargolux-747-8-trashed-prestwick.html)
Was carrying a helicopter on board which sprung a fuel leak and soaked all the avionics bay with gas. Plane has been on ground about a week with nose open trying to dry it out.
http://i.imgur.com/zSGMWWE.jpg (http://www.airliners.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1359617)
I/C
Bell_ringer
12th Apr 2017, 13:28
Isn't it mandatory to drain fuel?
You can't move an engine without certifying it isn't hazardous by draining liquids..
gulliBell
12th Apr 2017, 13:42
Isn't it mandatory to drain fuel?...
I bet it is next time.
Fareastdriver
12th Apr 2017, 14:51
Never drained fuel when shifting helicopters world wide. Used to take them off, throw the blades on and then punch off to the contract area. Same with cars. The pilot's Ferraris and the engineer's Ladas used to be driven on to the jack lift and straight into customs clearance.
ericferret
12th Apr 2017, 15:14
TDG HAZMAT-NEWS -Shipping Dangerous Goods and Transport News (http://www.hazmat-news.com/)
Don't screw up in a US regulated area the fines are serious. Lucky it was in Europe.
Look at the sample fines listed above.
I think somebody is in for as big bill having the freighter grounded for 12 days alone can't be cheap.
GoodGrief
12th Apr 2017, 15:59
When flying a motorbike on a cargo plane the tank may only be filled to 1/4th of it's capacity max.That pretty much translates into 'just above reserve'.
Isn't it mandatory to drain fuel?
You can't move an engine without certifying it isn't hazardous by draining liquids..
Even totally draining the fuel doesn't mean that the engine or other item isn't classed as dangerous goods.
Unless you can certify that all traces of fuel including any vapours have been totally removed, the engine or other item would have to be shipped as class 9 miscellaneous with a UN code of 3363 (dangerous goods in machinery)
The only reason I know this is that a short while ago I was required to ship a number of aircraft engine fuel control units and even though these had been drained of all fuel, they still had to be shipped as DG.
Ant T
12th Apr 2017, 17:05
Never drained fuel when shifting helicopters world wide. Used to take them off, throw the blades on and then punch off to the contract area.
Pretty sure that when the two S92s arrived in the Falklands at the beginning of 2015 on the Antonov, they each had about 3000 lbs of fuel in the tanks.
albatross
12th Apr 2017, 17:29
Sprung a fuel leak?
Just how did it spring a fuel leak?
John Eacott
12th Apr 2017, 21:00
TDG HAZMAT-NEWS -Shipping Dangerous Goods and Transport News (http://www.hazmat-news.com/)
Don't screw up in a US regulated area the fines are serious. Lucky it was in Europe.
Look at the sample fines listed above.
I think somebody is in for as big bill having the freighter grounded for 12 days alone can't be cheap.
Most of those fines relate to DG transgressions on passenger aircraft. This was a freighter, don't get confused and discuss restrictions not applicable to freight aircraft.
ericferret
12th Apr 2017, 23:34
"Most of those fines relate to DG transgressions on passenger aircraft"
How do you work that out as the only statement appears to be offered "for transportation by air" no mention of what type of carrier.
gulliBell
13th Apr 2017, 07:32
..The only reason I know this is that a short while ago I was required to ship a number of aircraft engine fuel control units and even though these had been drained of all fuel, they still had to be shipped as DG.
This doesn't make sense...if there is no fuel in the component it can't possibly be described as DG.
This doesn't make sense...if there is no fuel in the component it can't possibly be described as DG.
Doesn't make sense?
Drain all of the fuel out of your car petrol tank then drop a match down the filler cap and providing that there is also a bit of oxygen available, you will soon see why it makes sense.
In some cases, a container or casing which has a mixture of oxygen and an inflammable vapour can be more dangerous than a container filled to the brim with an inflammable liquid with no space for air/oxygen.
Do a quick search on Google and you will find plenty of example such as this one:
4 Men Injured When Empty Fuel Tank Explodes | NBC 6 South Florida (http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/4-Men-Injured-When-Empty-Fuel-Tank-Explodes-133900223.html)
gulliBell
14th Apr 2017, 06:30
But it's kerosene, and it's packed in a box. I find it very difficult to believe that an FCU which has been emptied of fuel would present any DG hazard, even if you tried to set it on fire with a match, or sparked any residual vapour.
lowfat
14th Apr 2017, 09:57
There is no common sense applied to Dangerous goods.
Please dont try to over analyze or understand the regulations.
I had to get qualified once and hope never to open that particular tome every again.
Nubian
14th Apr 2017, 10:33
Doesn't make sense?
Drain all of the fuel out of your car petrol tank then drop a match down the filler cap and providing that there is also a bit of oxygen available, you will soon see why it makes sense.
Apples and oranges...
Jet-A has a flashpoint from +38C, gasoline/petrol from -43C.... which makes an enormous difference.
Cargolux is an approved DG carrier, and it is not the first time they shift helicopters. Something tells me they know the regs better than the average Pprune here. Accidents can occur though.
Different rules for passenger and cargo aircrafts...
Apples and oranges...
Jet-A has a flashpoint from +38C, gasoline/petrol from -43C.... which makes an enormous difference.
I realise that but my point was that unless something that once contained an inflammable or explosive vapour can be 100% guaranteed (and certified) to have all traces of that vapour removed then it must be shipped as UN3363.
As lowfat rightly stated. When it comes to DG shipping, there is never any common sense applied. If an appliance or piece of machinery contains, could contain, or did contain fuel then it must normally be assumed that despite it being removed, some still remains and this it has be shipped as DG.
DG in limited quantities, but still DG and any reputable airline who see any used fuel related component that hasn't been packed and certified as DG will refuse to accept it for carriage.
Oldlae
15th Apr 2017, 07:54
Cargolux carried all the Bristow Bell 212's rescued from Iran in 1979.
Hot and Hi
16th Apr 2017, 08:21
"Most of those fines relate to DG transgressions on passenger aircraft"
How do you work that out as the only statement appears to be offered "for transportation by air" no mention of what type of carrier.In those examples of proposed penalties, the goods were incorrectly declared and packaged.
If the goods were correctly declared, and labeled and packaged accordingly, it would then be the carrier's responsibility to choose the correct way of shipping (e.g., cargo only aircraft, etc.).
In other words, the proposer's responsibility ends with the correct declaration and packaging. The carrier then has to decide how the good are to be carried.
212man
12th Jul 2018, 07:17
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-boeing-747-8r7f-lx-vcf
I think the expression "a catalogue of errors" is an understatement!
HeliComparator
12th Jul 2018, 11:22
https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib-investigation-to-boeing-747-8r7f-lx-vcf
I think the expression "a catalogue of errors" is an understatement!
Yes something of a cockup with Bristow not coming out of it well! A case of too many cooks and no-one actually in charge, resulting in an absolutely basic error (and leaving the battery in was a bad idea too). I wonder if anyone will get prosecuted under the DGRs.
SASless
12th Jul 2018, 12:03
Gross Stupidity is a concept that springs to mind!
Signing off Legal Documents you know to be false is frowned upon!
Nigerian Expat Outlaw
12th Jul 2018, 12:07
The shipper/handling agent appear to have been negligent at the very least. Unless I'm drawing the wrong conclusion from the report Bristow simply handed the aircraft over to them for preparation and movement.
Either way it was a potentially very dangerous result and a lot of work to clear up.
NEO
ShyTorque
12th Jul 2018, 12:47
A helicopter flying that high is sure to suffer a nosebleed!
gulliBell
13th Jul 2018, 10:30
So, who is likely liable to pay for repairing the Cargolux freighter?
whoknows idont
13th Jul 2018, 11:12
Notwithstanding the issue of where the contractual commitment for preparation and defuellingof the helicopter lay, the disassembly of the helicopter and preparations for its transporttook place at the seller’s facility and were conducted by its staff, despite a substantialamount of fuel remaining on the helicopter.
That sounds like the blame is with Bristow and the safety recommendation goes in the same direction.
So, who is likely liable to pay for repairing the Cargolux freighter?
The insurance company.
gulliBell
13th Jul 2018, 13:09
The insurance company.
The insurer of the company that prepared the helicopter for transport, or the insurer of the damaged aircraft?
Bell_ringer
13th Jul 2018, 14:54
The insurer of the company that prepared the helicopter for transport, or the insurer of the damaged aircraft?
Any insurer will try recover costs.
Those responsible for cargolux will no doubt go after both the shipping agent and shipper for negligence.
Salusa
13th Jul 2018, 16:41
Yes something of a cockup with Bristow not coming out of it well! A case of too many cooks and no-one actually in charge, resulting in an absolutely basic error (and leaving the battery in was a bad idea too). I wonder if anyone will get prosecuted under the DGRs.
If sealed Lead Acid then no problem leaving it in providing disconnected.
HeliComparator
13th Jul 2018, 18:07
If sealed Lead Acid then no problem leaving it in providing disconnected.
they are normally NiCd are they not?
Salusa
14th Jul 2018, 05:40
they are normally NiCd are they not?
From factory yes, but TSO conversion to Lead Acid available We use Concorde in Bell 412EP. Maintenance free and binned/replaced after two years.
ericferret
14th Jul 2018, 18:12
I think the point is that many items fitted to live aircraft become dangerous goods when they become freight.
Obvious examples are batteries, sqibs, oxygen cylinders,fire extinguishers, in fact any compressed gas cylinder.
In recent years we have shipped numerous helicopters by air,road and sea. Complete defuel is always item one on the to do list.
megan
15th Jul 2018, 03:08
Complete defuel is always item one on the to do list Been involved in delivering two aircraft for international export on a 747Combi, and one aircraft flown onto the wharf for loading on a roll on roll off ship, in all cases they were defuelled.