If you read the report then several facts become apparent.
1) This was a flight that could have been carried out safely, without loading up the aircraft, even if the fuel gauges were completely unserviceable - I'll explain how later.
2) This was a classic example of someone trying to be too clever by 'supposedly' calculating a fuel load and getting it wrong - like everything in aviation instead of deciding what was needed and then trying to convert it, he should have used the time honoured practice of KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid
He wanted 60USG in the aircraft. In the Seneca that equates to approx 2:45 of flying and certainly isn't round trip fuel Shoreham Sheffield and Return. Where was the contingency fuel? Where was the holding fuel? Where was the Div Fuel? In short - his preflight planning wasn't up to the standard of someone who flies that class of aircraft.
Next - the refuelling itself. Keep it simple like I said. You can't dip the tanks in a Seneca with less than 130 litres (approx) in the tank for reasons stated before. There is however a small rib in the tank just below the filler cap. Instead of asking for a set amount and doing a (wrong) conversion why didn't he do what most people would do and fill it to this step. It gives a visual check that there is fuel on board and, with the fuel up to it on both sides equates to 280 litres of fuel - 3:30 and plenty for the trip with contingency. It's not the refuellers responsibility for ensuring there's enough fuel - it's the aircraft commanders and if this is the only way to make sure there is sufficient then you damn well do it or pay the consequences.
This is an incident that should never have happened - at least hopefully it's something that people will learn from.
Last edited by Chilli Monster; 4th Sep 2003 at 04:59.