AvGas Rotors Running Fuelling

[Dieselpower]

Hi All

I recently saw a S300 refuelling rotors running and a small airfield the other day.

Fairly sure this is strictly "prohibit" according to the flight manual!

Has there been a change that I have missed recently?

Regards

DP

[krypton_john]

Hmmm, atop a ladder over high mounted tanks, rotors spinning inches above.

Highly volatile fuel splashing about with hot exhausts below.

What could possibly go wrong?

[Fark'n'ell]

Highly volatile fuel splashing about with hot exhausts below.

What could possibly go wrong?

A common occurrence thirty or so years ago.
We didn't "splash" fuel around ,so nothing went wrong.

[mtoroshanga]

Crop spraying with a Bell47G5 it was standard practice to refuel with a jerry can on top of a rickity ladder in the middle of a cotton field about ten times a day.

[Chopper Doc]

There is nothing in the Pilot's flight manual that actually says you can't refuel with the rotors running but the way the fueling section is written it is very clear that they do not ever envisage people trying to refuel the helicopter with the rotors running.
If you were in that much of a hurry would it not be simpler to just bite the bullet and buy a helicopter that is capable of a 100 knots instead of pootling about in a 300 at nearer 60 kts.

[GoodGrief]

Gentlemen,
situational awareness comes to mind...

Middle of nowhere, you know for what ever reason your battery is dying on you and, if shut down, you know you would be stuck.

Far fetched? Maybe, maybe not.

If everything is in proper working order I'd be with Chopper Doc.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Well, maybe, just maybe, but only if there's a war on.

Otherwise, I think this is a rhetorical question.

Madness!

[Winnie]

To Chopper Doc,

It might be a case of having to conduct a job?
Our company (In Canada mind) do crop-dusting of various kinds, fuel loads are limited, and one must fuel after every other pass or so, this might SEVERLY restrict our operational tempo no?

AS long as you have it specified in your local operations manual and approved by the Authorities, then I see no probs...

Cheers
H.

[vaibronco]

It's not a matter of speed. In Italy it's a compromise with payload, fuel, performance and costs in multi fractioned vineyards.(Or rice fields for mosquito fighting). A turbine machine would not help. Some of the fields take about 20 seconds to be sprayed, some take 5 minutes and very often they are not one close to each other. We use to refuel few liters with the hose at each landing, depending on type of nozzles, terrain, moving very often the truck to optimize the job. It is not the scenario with thousands of acres all in the same property and field to be sprayed following the GPS.
If all 300s doing AG spraying in Italy had to shut down and startup for refueling all the times they did, this branch of our little helicopter industry would have disappeared much faster.
We use to refuel with jerrycans only during pipeline patrol and after full stop.

[Whirlygig]

I'm not the tallest but I've never needed a ladder to refuel a 300.:confused:

Admittedly I've also never needed to do it from jerry cans. :}But then the OP doesn't state it was from jerry cans. If it was a small airfield it would more likely be a bowser.

Cheers

Whirls

[FSXPilot]

300 may be easier to refuel with jerry cans then an Enstrom or a Robinson but still don't fancy it with the rotors running. With a left hand only fuel tank the risks are slightly lower as the exhaust is the other side but the engine is still hot and if you spill any which is always possible you could have an interesting time of it.

[waragee]

In Aus there is an allowance for hot refueling, haven't got it in front of me but I think its CAO 20.11
I am pretty sure it has to written up in the Ops Manual as well. I daresay private operators can do what they please.

Its something like.

1 Pilot has to remain at controls
2 2 x fire extinguishers at the ready
3 measured amount of fuel
4 all radios off

I have seen a lot of hotrefueling in the bush from drum stock and I reckon the last place I would want to be is strapped into the front.

We used to hear of an occasional Bell 47 and Hughes 300 catching fire while hot refueling years ago but I have never heard of it happening to a Robinson R22, grass fire yes but from hot refueling no.

[Twinstar355]

In The Netherlands it is prohibited to refuel with spinning rotors. If the CAA catch you doing so, you have to pay 1500 euro's. This all due to an accident where a refueling hose came into the rotor and caused some serious damage.

[Hans K.]

I've done it hundreds of times , never fill the tank ( watch for a wave from the pilot ). Low flow pumps are more controllable . Some make a cap filler , like a single point fuel fitting . Its all risk VS benefit . Hot fueling ,,,, some aircraft are better setup for this . All turbine Bells and MD 500s . HK

[Bravo73]

FYI, Hans, the thread is about rotor running refuels with AVGAS. AvTur is a different proposition.

[Hans K.]

Yes 300s and 47s avgas is what I meant , the 1500 euro guy said all machines with blades turning . I gave the turbines as an example with less issues .

[imabell]

waragee,

i have been hot refuelling for thirty years and have yet to hear of any machine catching fire, 47's or anything else, not even occasionally, in australia.

300's burnt to the ground because of their exhaust systems, not due to refuelling.

[EBCAU]

Same as Imabell. Seen plenty spilled on hot exhausts too. Pfffftttt...gone. Never heard of a 300 burnt this way but it probably has happened. As someone else said it's a matter of weighing up risk versus need. I know it's hard for someone in the UK or Europe to imagine any need to do this but believe me there are plenty of times it is the only practical solution.

[jonwilly]

Quite normal in the AAC of the 60's/70's.
Experienced men and of course a fire extinguisher on hand.
Done it from Bowsers, Preferred and by 'B' type filter with Jerry cans.
When the Sioux went the practice ceased.

john
And yes I know Avgas did not come in Jerry Cans, but that's another story.

[toptobottom]

It's the avgas vapour that burns, not the avgas itself and to make that happen you need an ignition source such as a spark or flame. Super-heating avgas on a hot exhaust pipe will increase its flash point, but won't autoignite it; it does create more fumes though - quickly!

[cjbiz]

Whether or not its been done safely for years in other countries, in the UK if you refer to CAP 748 - Aircraft Fuelling and Fuel Installation Management it states:

3.2 The fuelling of helicopters with engines or rotors running should be prohibited when
fuelling with:
a) gasoline or with wide-cut turbine fuels not containing an antistatic additive; or
b) kerosene or wide-cut turbine fuels containing an antistatic additive if the fuel inlet
is positioned so that the exhaust system is at the same height or lower, or if it is
on the same side of the helicopter.

If I was the aerodrome licencee/owner I would have jumped all over that crew.

Biz

[Hans K.]

This is fine for a flight school or military operation . But a small operator would be "so safe " shutting down every refuel it would cause him to fold . Its different when you actually have to be profitable and not gouging students or on the tax dole . http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

[John R81]

I see a "should" in that quote. Not mandetory then?

[Gemini Twin]

Well in this case it didn't burn to the ground but it was pretty close. Before I go on I must say that things were differant in NZ then and everything, everywere was a bit carefree in the 70's.
I will never forget when one of our pilots was self refueling, on a farm site, in a 300C with the engine running. His loader was on the way in the Holden so he was by himself. We had a small tank trailer that went from site to site towed by the ute.
It had a hand pump and a long hose so that it was well away from the helicopter.
My pal took the hose out to the helicopter and jammed the valve open with the tank cap then went back to the tanker to begin pumping. Unfortuneatly the tank wasn't as empty as he thought and it overflowed quickly filling the drip pan and spilling onto the exhaust. The reaction back at the tanker was to rip the hose away from the helicopter this was accomplished but unfortunately the cap flew away with the filler. Meanwhile the fire heated up the drip pan and the tank, expanding the fuel inside which helped to feed the fire. The first task was to plug the flow but precioius seconds were wasted trying to locate the tank cap in the surrounding grass. Once recovered our pilot, whose helicopter was his livelihood, bravely dashed into the flames and after a little toasting stopped the flow. Then the small extinguisher in the helicopter was used to put out the fire.
It was quite a save, resulting in a sagging panel on the right rear side of the canopy and general sooting around the tank and support. The helicopter was flown back to Hamilton and after a new plastic panel installed, went back to work.
Good lessen and something you would only do once... hopefully never.

[SuperF]

Hot refueling is no probs, as long as your CAA law allows it. Looking at the recommendation from the UK, I would say they would not want you to do it with a Jet Ranger, as it could be argued that the exhaust is on the same 'side' as the refueling point... Stupid but...

While avgas may not come in jerry's nothing stopping you from putting it into them for your job. Same as jeta1 can be transferred, and I have transferred thousands of litres from bowser to Jerry into machine in my time. Throw a can or two of gas into the machine every load or 3 or 4 to keep the load at max and fuel low to increase productivity and$$$$$ up. Hard for people who haven't been paid by the acre/hectare/kg/lb/ton/load etc to understand that sometimes you need to keep fuel to a minimum.

[TunaSandwich]

Standard practice on Tuna boat Ops. Not saying I particularly enjoyed the procedure but never had any issues. There have been a lot of disasters out there in the Pacific but never heard of one related to hot fueling.

[Hughes500]

Can often look like a 300 is being hot refueled from a distance as the blades can take ages to stop. I can quite happily run the engine down, turn off,put 70 litres in and then restart engine without blades stopping

[Twinstar355]

Yes 300s and 47s avgas is what I meant , the 1500 euro guy said all machines with blades turning . I gave the turbines as an example with less issues .


Well like I said, these are the rules in The Netherlands. If it is applicable in other countries, I don't know. I'm also wondering if this is applicable for turbine helo's in The Netherlands.........:ooh:

[JimL]

The FAA have just issued a safety alert for operators (SAFO) about hot refueling/loading following this accident:
Background: On May 30, 2009, a Bell 47G-2 helicopter operating under part 137 was being refueled with the engine running (hot fueling) when the ground crew spilled fuel onto the engine while trying to untangle a kink in the hose. The helicopter quickly caught fire and the pilot sustained serious injuries as a result.The document can be found here:

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/safo/all_safos/media/2010/SAFO10020.pdf

It appears to mirror European policy (JAR-OPS and EASA OPS) on hot fuelling with volatile fuel; as this is addressed in ICAO Annex 6, it is somewhat surprising that the FAA have only just felt compelled to issue a safety notice (not exactly proactive).

The reference (in the document) to FAR 91.9 is bizarre; it appears to limit hot refuelling only when there is a limitation in the Flight Manual. How many Flight Manuals have you ever seen that contain such a limitation. Once again, this is the FAA attempting to regulate operations from within a certification code!

Jim

[rubberband]

Hot refueling, is there another way to refuel on the job? I've hot refueled a Robbie for 20 000hrs plus and only once had a fire. The engine earth straps were broken and I can only assume a spark on the earthing side ignited the overflowing fuel. Noticed flames on the ground so had a peek in the hatch under aux fuel and it was like a stream trains firebox, quickly shut hatch and then used extingusher to put out fire.Other then flying with no instruments the scariest part was after take off all the extingusher powder blew back thru the console at about 100ft and 50kts, almost scared the poop out of me.
I wonder can anyone tell me why the engine runs rough when you overflow the aux tank. Is it fuel entering the air inlet and flooding engine or is it fuel shorting mags out.
Real interested in Imabells or Topendtorques ideas, obviously after they get the rightchessness out of the way

[fly911]

Not too sure if I remember correctly, but doesn't the 300 tanks have an overflow scupper to direct spilled fuel to a drain line?

[waragee]

Rubberband I believe the rough running is caused by the fuel rich air from where the aux has overflowed changing the mixture momentarily. I have seen something similar happen in the opposite sense using a grader up close to a fire front putting in a break when the engine started running rough because the oxygen in the local parcel of air was getting consumed by the fire and changing the mixture.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Noticed flames on the ground so had a peek in the hatch under aux fuel and it was like a stream trains firebox, quickly shut hatch and then used extingusher to put out fire.Other then flying with no instruments the scariest part was after take off

This has to be the scariest thing I've read on this rather worrying thread so far. It may be a cultural thing, but why, how, does anyone, ever, even contemplate flying an aircraft after a fire? And to do so with no instruments which merely confirms what would be anticipated anyway, ie serious damage? Over here that would be considered a hanging offence, and suicidal insanity to boot.

My mind is well and truly boggled.


Re the Jetranger point, the filler is almost 2 metres below the exhaust so no significant hazard. On the Gazelle RR refuelling is a complete no-no due to the proximity of the filler to the intake.

It would seem that both paras above are amply covered by that increasingly rare commodity previously known as "Common Sense".

[rubberband]

Agaricus, sometimes commonsense should prevail, but job pressure sometimes overrides. At the time I'd just spent close to 11 hours stacking up a couple thousand head of cattle and theres only 15 more minutes before they are in the holding paddock, its 30 minutes back to camp and about an hour left of daylight, and I'm in the middle of woop woop. Mags checked fine, if you can't tell what the rotor speed should sound like with 20 000 hours then maybe you may not be on, or even near the ball, the machine was well maintained so everything had been working up until then, except the broken earth straps obviously.
Today I'd kick any young fellas bumpart if he even thought of doing what I did. And in hindsight I'd kick my own.

[SuperF]

Agaricus, i agree that commonsence says no problem refueling a JR "hot", however it would only take a very smart, "overpaid" lawyer, with some self appointed "experts" to take someone to task. And I was simply repeating what the CAP said. It simply states, or if it is on the same side of the helicopter...

From my experience with lawyers and CAA, commonsence has nothing to do with it, it comes down to how they can twist what is a perfectly reasonable sounding recomendation to have a go at someone they don't like...

re the 22 flying after a fire, not sure i'd do it, but the most mustering i'v done is a couple of hundred head of cattle in the Arawhata, down south westland, other than trying to put the odd animal back into a paddock that i just scared them out of.:ugh:

Have a couple of good pictures of hot refuelling 47's from jerrys, smoke hanging out of mouth, pump pouring chemical at the same time, blades/stab bar a couple of inches from the hand... := during the 70's, so we have increased our risk analysis since then....:E