Jet a1 vs kerosene 28sec

[nellycopter]

What is the difference ?
It would seem they run turbine helicopters on this in africa,
And someone made a comment that it all comes fro the same pipe !
What I really need to know is it it really the same ?
Will a turbine run on it ? If not why not ?
And how come it seems to work in other Countries if not ours ?

Manual says kerosene 50 sec, among lots of other specs.....

Anyone clued up on this .

Many thanks

Nelly

[nellycopter]

It's not my trade!
The machine is a toy !

[nellycopter]

Ok so lots of number and pretty tables,
Does anyone have a straight answer by pm ? Please ?

[[email protected]]

Is it a toy as in model heli or toy as in big boys and a real one?

The 28 vs 50 sec is a measure of viscosity so 50 sec would be thick and gloopy compared to 28 sec.

The short answer is that you can run a turbine on all sorts of fuel but what it does to the engine can range from sooting it up, corroding it, leaving gummy deposits, failing to lubricate key parts of the fuel control system, burning too hot etc etc. Put in the best fuel you can would seem to be a sensible dogma, especially if your life is going to depend on that engine running well.

PS, just seen from another thread that you have bought a well looked after EC120 - put Jet A-1 in it, if you can afford a 120 you can afford proper fuel;)

[nellycopter]

Hi crab,

I can afford the real fuel,
I am looking for a bowser for home and someone (fellow pilot) said you already have 1000gall of kerosene on site for your heating ! Use that !
So I was just wanting clarification that's all !

I wouldn't risk putting it in unless I could obtain further info that it would be ok !

See your point, back to looking for another bowser then.

Cheers

[nessboy]

Way up north here both come from the same storage tank.

[206 jock]

Ex-military machines are usually set up to run on a wide variety of fuel types. The Wasp would run on just about anything they could find in the field.

Don't think your 'fellow pilot' was doing you much of a favour. It wouldn't even occur to me to run my machine on heating oil. If you're tempted by a site bowser and running your machine on heating oil...remind me never to buy your machine when you're done with it.

My bowser has water traps and filters to make sure that the fuel that comes out of the end is reliable. My central heating tank has none of these:ouch:

[Peter-RB]

Nellycopter,

Please dont take this in the wrong vane, but I am staggered at your total lack of ability to know the answers to fuel types needed to run your turbine, the question you indicate, is that your pal said you could use heating oil, why do you think its called heating oil, it is full of things that would cause you great problems if airborne with it, you would not use that in a Ferguson Tractor, and you are supposed to be talking about fueling a Turbine heli,

Like the previous posters have said, you need that very complex turbine to create a lot of power to keep your un-informed backside in the air, shortcut fuel quality and we will be reading about you in the Redtops.

Correct fuel.
Enough to do the trip,
enough to divert
ensure daily test before flying,
always purchase away fuel from a reliable source
Keep records and samples
Dont use single skin tanks
dont use Mild steel pipe's
check Static tank Filter very often
Unless using floating suction pick up dont refuel after delivery's for at least 8 hours.

simple pain in the ares rules that will keep you breathing, you cannot be too cautious with any fuel(s).

Fly Safe, land safer.

Peter R-B

[nellycopter]

Ok I think I get the drift here,
I asked what I thought was a sensible question.
Heating oil is kerosene 28sec
Turbine fuel is KEROSENE 50 sec

I didn't intend filling the tank with a rusty old bucket,
And the guy further up is not the first to say that heating oil and jet a1 comes from the same tanks at the fuel storage depot !
If you must know my pilot mate is pilot part time and tanker driver day job and he assures me he know what he is delivering to airfields where you lot, and me now fill our aircraft !
And there have been occasions when he has delivered to an airfield and then 500 gall to a farm for heating oil ! Out of the same tank on the same truck !
Before someone says trucks have separate tanks within them !
I am sure the tanker driver knows his job !
I am only telling you what he has told me !
And thought this forum may be a good place to obtain confirmation.

So let's leave it there and all continue to fill up at the airfield with what we assume is jet a1, when in fact it could just be heating oil KEROSENE 28sec.

[[email protected]]

Ultimately Nellycopter, your mate is right - it is all kerosene and there probably is no difference between what goes in your heating tank and what goes in your aircraft.

The only issues are storage, handling and pre-use checks so a proper bowser would be a far better option than sucking it out of your heating tank.

[nellycopter]

Now that I have heard all these horror stories I think I will just go to the airfield and buy their heating oil !
I would have spent the time effort and money setting up the correct filtration and water traps but won't bother now ! As can't get anyone to confirm for fact that it is actually the same stuff !

[EN48]

when in fact it could just be heating oil KEROSENE 28sec.


Not likely. Jet A and I assume other jet aircraft fuels often contain additives which I doubt are in kerosene or heating oil. One of these is an antimicrobial agent to prevent flora from sprouting in your fuel system - a very expensive proposition and a possible safety hazard. Another is an anti icing agent (Prist is a common brand name); some helicopters require this and others do not so it is often added as the acft is fueled. There may be others as well. Life is complicated - go with it! :eek:

[welsh_Gareth]

i may sound silly here but how do you know your friend didn't deliver Turbine fuel to the air field and farm? im sure the oil burner wouldnt be fussy with that it has. im guessing that the turbine fuel would be more expensive to produce so why would the fuel depo deliver this to the farm, but maybe the tanking costs outweighed the additional costs of the turbine fuel?

[EN48]

that's really the sort of answer you ought to expect when you ask this sort of question.

Umm...,

Thanks for posting these links - a most useful education! :D

[onetrack]

The simple answer is that kerosene and JetA1 are refined to different fuel standards. The refining standards are set by the ASTM in the U.S., and by other local fuel standard agencies in other countries.

Aeronautical fuels such as JetA1 have very important additives to prevent fuel or engine problems that can develop under aviation operating conditions.
These additives are typically (but not limited to)... rust preventatives, anti-foaming additives, anti-bacterial additives, anti-icing additives, lubricity improvers...

In addition, refining standards and handling procedures, are much tighter for aviation fuels, than for common ground-use fuels. Standards for contamination in both refining and handling, are very much lower for aviation fuels.

Regular Kerosene and heating oils never leave the ground, and any problems with contamination and lack of additives in these fuels, in their designed use areas, doesn't rate a mention.

However, indulging in flying, using these ground-based fuels, could leave you wishing you had used the fuel specifically recommended by the manufacturer of your aircraft... particularly when the ground is rushing up to meet you at an alarming rate... as result of using a grade of fuel not designed, or refined, for aviation use. :ugh:

[outhouse]

Discussion on fuel use away from approved type and specification is fine, actual use is not in my view.
I won't go into problems that result, from using various crap options from loss of power, inability to achieve needed NG, needed adjustment to fuel flow devices and the problems that occur, inability to achieve power margins and damage to the engine mainly found by the poor sod flying the machine after the event.*
If you can't afford it or don't have it don't fill up.*
Any one having experience a total engine failure caused by crap fuel use will confirm.:confused:

[EN48]

Any one having experience a total engine failure caused by crap fuel use will confirm


And after the accident, the CAA/FAA/etc, your insurance company and the plaintiff's attorneys will have a field day. :{

[[email protected]]

Um..lifting's link to the exxon site highlights that jet A1 doesn't contain Fuel System Icing Inhibitor (FSII) as specified in Brit Mil standards for F34 which we put in our aircraft by choice.

It doesn't matter if we refuel at a civvy site and take Jet A1 but we have to log it. Since Jet A has a freeze point of minus 40 deg C and Jet A-1 is minus 47, I don't suppose it is much of an issue for most helicopter operators, except in the Arctic circle.

It would be interesting to get a definitive answer to your question Nellycopter - we might all be surprised:ok:

[Gordy]

Crab:

Fuel System Icing Inhibitor (FSII) as specified in Brit Mil standards for F34 which we put in our aircraft by choice.

Just out of interest....why? I did not think you operate in the arctic.

I am told to not use it unless needed as it causes some issues sitting in the tank---not sure what and my DOM is off today, but will attempt to find out.

[EN48]

Just out of interest....why?


Question not directed to me but I'll provide an answer to a slightly different question: because the RFM "requires" it for all operations. In the case of my E480B, the certification testing was done with fuel that contained Prist, so even though most agree that it is not necessary, the FAA says you must have Prist (or equivalent). RFM also requires an antimicrobial agent.

[birrddog]

I stand to be flamed or to be corrected...

When I did some flying in remote areas in Southern Africa (B407) I was told in a pinch (read emergency situation) that I could use diesel, though this needed to be logged and the TBO for the engine would be reduced by 25%, I believe this is in the maintenance manual, though fortunately i never had to confirm.

[EN48]

I was told in a pinch (read emergency situation) that I could use diesel


Not sure about this, but in a pinch, it is my understanding that very limited use of aviation gasoline is approved, but with maintenence implications.

[[email protected]]

Gordy - the short answer is because it is a mil standard suitable for use in any mil aircraft anywhere in the world.

The FSII also has anti-bacterial properties which helps fight fungal growth in the fuel. I don't know if it is a separation issue if it sits in the tank too long but that isn't usually an issue for us - it may be a corrosion factor in a steel tank, ours are rubber.

[Gordy]

Crab

Got it....over here most places give you the option of having it added. It is added at the nozzle and normally costs more. The anti-bacterial qualities are what I believe cause some problems---but again not sure exactly what, but will find out tomorrow.

[jackx123]

in the "old" days in the military we could run on a 20/80 petrol/diesel mix perfectly ok in a lack of proper fuel situation. BUT it would soot up the wheels a lot quicker and thus, due to maintenance, it was only in emergency.

use the correct fuel :ok:

[FlightPathOBN]

According to Conoco Philips....

Product Name: Aviation Kerosene
Synonyms: Aviation Jet Fuel A-1 (civilian)
...............Avtur
...............NATO F34, F35 (military)
...............Regular Burning Oil (RBO)
...............28 Second Heating Oil
Safety Data Sheet Number: 814650
Intended Use: Aviation Turbine Fuel
Manufacturer: ConocoPhillips Ltd, Humber Refinery
South Killingholme, North Lincolnshire DN40 3DW

http://apollofuels.co.uk/p7spepper/img/kero_msds.pdf

[EN48]

From the RR 250-C47B (B407) Operation and Maintenance Manual (Sep 09): Fuel Specifications

"(2) Emergency

Operation on ASTM D-910 AVGAS, all grades, is permitted for a maximum of six hours for each turbine overhaul period if aircraft boost pumps are available and turned on."

No mention of diesel or other non aviation fuels. Avgas containg TCP is not permitted. Likely would run on diesel but would probably become unairworthy from a regulatory standpoint if done, requiring at least an inspection and possibly an overhaul (not to mention possible liability issues). So if its REALLY an emergency, might be worth it!

[EN48]

it may be a corrosion factor in a steel tank, ours are rubber.

My understanding is that if the FSII concentration is too high, it can attack the rubber bladder and other rubber fuel system components leading to fuel system contamination.

[EN48]

It is added at the nozzle and normally costs more.


In the U.S., FSII is sometimes added by the FBO to his tank farm and all fuel sold by such an FBO has FSII whether you want it or not. In other cases, FSII is added by a system on the fuel truck as fuel is pumped into the aircraft, or (now rarely) from a spray can as fuel is pumped. Fuel that is not pre-blended with FSII may or may not have an additional antimicrobial agent added by the FBO. As far as I have been able to determine, most FBO's add the antimicrobial to their tank farm if the fuel does not contain this agent from the wholesaler.

[ShyTorque]

The way to find out what (if any) maintenance penalty is incurred by using a different fuel from the normally available type is to read the Fight Manual.

The requirements for different aircraft/engine installations can vary. Putting forward a "one size fits all" answer is incorrect.

However, if the fuel type in question doesn't appear in the aircraft documentation then don't try to use it.

[SASless]

We ran a Jet Ranger, Long Ranger, and three MD-500 E's on #1 Clear Diesel for years without any problems what so ever.

[jonwilly]

The recommended fuel is used for a reason.
Simply it's the Best for the engine.
Emergency use of 'Anything' that is liquid and will burn was only for when Ivan was coming over the horizon and now't else was available.
As was mentioned the Wasp could be run on 'Anything' but life of the primative donkey was shortened drastically, down to about 10 Hrs if Avgas was used.

john:)

[EN48]

We ran a Jet Ranger, Long Ranger, and three MD-500 E's on #1 Clear Diesel for years without any problems what so ever.


What am I missing here? For the B407 (and I assume other FAA certified acft), approved fuels appear in the Limitations section of the RFM and are all aircraft jet fuels (no diesel, kerosene, Irish whiskey, etc). The use of ANYTHING else would seem to raise multiple serious questions unless the Limitations are amended accordingly. Perhaps different with other aviation authorities outside the U.S. :confused: No doubt these turbine engines will run on other types of fuels but the use of such fuels would seem to violate regulations, void warranties, create liabilities, etc. (Civil acft only - military make their own rules)

[Senior Pilot]

The recommended fuel is used for a reason.
Simply it's the Best for the engine.
Emergency use of 'Anything' that is liquid and will burn was only for when Ivan was coming over the horizon and now't else was available.
As was mentioned the Wasp could be run on 'Anything' but life of the primative donkey was shortened drastically, down to about 10 Hrs if Avgas was used.

john:)

john,

Are you sure that wasn't the time limit for use of Avgas, rather than engine life? We could use diesel in Alouettes for a specific number of hours within an overhaul period with a TOT of about 50C higher than with JetA1. As already stated, most Flight Manuals will list approved fuels and any limitations associated with their use: that would be the first 'port of call' for consideration of what fuel to use on your helicopter :ok:

[EN48]

Let's say you operate a western engine in the former Soviet bloc


OK - I see where you're headed. The B407 RFM fuel Limitations does state that fuels listed in the RR Operation and Maintenance Manual may also be used in accordance with any RR limitations (but no Irish whiskey there either!)

[birrddog]

OK - I see where you're headed. The B407 RFM fuel Limitations does state that fuels listed in the RR Operation and Maintenance Manual may also be used in accordance with any RR limitations (but no Irish whiskey there either!)

That is because the use of Irish whiskey is in the Pilots Operating Manual (though a good Single malt Scotch, or Rye Whiskey also approved) :ok:

[nellycopter]

Flightpath has clearly pointed out that it is actually the same fuel produced at the refinery yet no-one has made comment ?
Has he added the 28 sec in red, or highlighted it ?

Still not going to use it , but the question I asked has defiantly given a good debate !

[Scattercat]

Pratt & Whitney Safety Bulletin PT6T-72-5144 allows for "Automotive Diesel Fuel (Regular Grade)" to be used without penalty. With this limitation: "Shall not be used below +40 °F (+5 °C) ground OAT"

We often use Diesel as an alternate fuel in our B412's.

[ShyTorque]

Flightpath has clearly pointed out that it is actually the same fuel produced at the refinery yet no-one has made comment ?

It was actually covered by a poster earlier in the discussion. With regard to aircraft fuels, it's not only the actual composition of the fuel that's the important thing. What is also very important is how it is cared for between leaving the refinery and getting into the engine.

Similar argument/ discussions go on about the pros and cons of the use of MOGAS in aircraft piston engines.

One good piece of aviation advice given to me many years ago: "Think what the Board of Inquiry might have to say about it". These days I would also add a rider: "And the insurance company".

[chopjock]

ShyT,
One good piece of aviation advice given to me many years ago: "Think what the Board of Inquiry might have to say about it". These days I would also add a rider: "And the insurance company".I suppose that would only apply if the accident was fuel related. Clearly if an accident was cfit for example, and the engine was running perfectly, then surely it would not be a factor.
One of my engineers tells me three of his gazelles and two of his allouettes have been running on heating oil for years with no problems.

[ShyTorque]

I suppose that would only apply if the accident was fuel related. Clearly if an accident was cfit for example, and the engine was running perfectly, then surely it would not be a factor.
One of my engineers tells me three of his gazelles and two of his allouettes have been running on heating oil for years with no problems.

Hopefully so. I'm not a lawyer or an insurance man. But I have been around long enough to know what can be involved in the aftermath of aircraft accidents. In 1992, my best mate (then the father of three young kids the same age as mine) was killed in a flying accident following engine failure. His student was very badly injured and disfigured/seriously disabled for life. I know exactly what my mate's wife was put through by "the system" for some time afterwards, because as close friends she chose myself and my wife to be her shoulders to cry on.

Insurance companies are in it for the money and they obviously hate expensive aircraft accidents. If you think they don't go over AAIB reports with a fine tooth comb looking for a let-out, think again. Using aircraft fuel from an unauthorised/unapproved source would be manna from heaven; irrespective of whether the fuel was actually good or otherwise. N.b. the accident I referred to above was not fuel related; it was a mechanical issue.

When the chips are down, it can be down to the individual, or even worse, the deceased relatives, to argue the toss, or at least to get an expensive lawyer involved to sort it out. I'd rather not put my family in that position, if the worst ever came to pass, but each to his own. :)

[onetrack]

nellycopter - An MSDS sheet, with the description "synonyms"... pointing out other words that are interchangeable for Jet-A1... is not the same as defined ASTM refining standards.

ASTM D396 - refining standard for heating oils... http://westcoastcollaborative.org/files/BBG/enduser-appendix/ASTM%20D6751_O7a%20B100%20Diesel%20and%20Heating%20oil%20Sta ndards.pdf

ASTM D1655 - refining standard for Jet-A1... Astm d1655 (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/7583834/Astm-d1655)

There are differences in how these fuels are tested, with some tests that apply to one fuel, not being applied to the other. Typical is that heating oil is only tested for pour point (lowest temperature at which the product will flow), as compared to Jet-A1 being subject to a freezing point test.
Note that pour point for heating oil is around -6°C, the freezing point for Jet-A1, is -45.6°C.

[cockney steve]

Kerosine/ paraffin / 28sec. heating-oil is apparently all the same stuff (leastwise, on the UK DOMESTIC market.

I was informed that "premium paraffin" was ordinary Kero. that had been re-refined to remove traces of lube-oil,petrol and other sundry distillates.

Thus , (for us oldies) Aladdin pink, Regent Green and Esso Blue all burnt with a very low odour in paraffin-heaters.

Try to run a diesel car on it and it will run fine until the fuel-pump siezes up through lack of lubricity in the fuel.

35 sec. heating-oil/red-diesel/gas-oil/road-diesel are all the same stuff as each other but they are basically "dirty" paraffin...so they lubricate the innards of pumps,valves and injectors and contain lubes, paraffin and petrol.

Sometimes the marketing men and profiteers will con you into believing that you must ONLY use product "X" -or you'll invalidate the warranty.

Rolls Royce cars- "use only RR363 brake-fluid" .....but USA legislation forced them to show that it was ordinary DOT3 brake fluid with a 50% price-hike.
Same situation with Citroen and Total LHM green hydraulic fluid (but hidden in the small print, it was OK to use auto-transmission fluid "in an emergency"

There's a hell of a difference in the risk-factors, Aviation V Motoring.

Everyone knows Aviators have big wallets and they all want a piece of the action:E I think i'd pay the premium for peace of mind,as laybys are a bit scarce if you conk-out up there!

[jonwilly]

"Are you sure that wasn't the time limit for use of Avgas, rather than engine life? We could use diesel in Alouettes for a specific number of hours within an overhaul period with a TOT of about 50C higher than with JetA1. As already stated, most Flight Manuals will list approved fuels and any limitations associated with their use: that would be the first 'port of call' for consideration of what fuel to use on your helicopter http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif"

You could well be right.
40 years does not improve the memory, however while Avcat, Avtur or Avtag could be used fully interchangeable, use of diesel and certainly 'Petrol' of any type was a major limiting factor.
Memory say all 'Petrol's' have same high calorific value and it would give a high TOT.
But I will stick with the if Ivan is coming over the hill, use anything that is liquid and will burn.

john

[EN48]

I had dinner tonight with a representative of one of the larger RR engine overhaulers in North America. I raised the question of operating these engines on unapproved fuels. He said," We see a lot of this. You'd be amazed at what the turbine wheels look like and probably would refuse to fly in a helicopter with an engine in this condition. They will run on many unapproved fuels but its not a good idea."

[birrddog]

" We see a lot of this. You'd be amazed at what the turbine wheels look like and probably would refuse to fly in a helicopter with an engine in this condition. They will run on many unapproved fuels but its not a good idea."
Probably a matter of perspective....

As said earlier - if Ivan, Mad Bob or the like are charging in your general direction, I think it would be a very good idea, if it was the only option! ;)

I don't believe anyone was proposing this for regular Part 135 ops, though as cited there are many legitimate scenarios where alternate fuel types need to be used and are workable, subject to approvals and limitations, as applicable.

Needless to say, not to be done by those who are not fully aware of what they are doing, and the consequences...

[lotusexige]

I was reading something about the nuts and bolts of turbine engines a while back and I seem to remember that the burner needed the correct fuel to ensure that the actual flame did not come into contact with any physical part of the engine. Could tie up with the post above saying that turbine wheels had been damaged by using the wrong fuel.
Having said that I seem to remember that the PT6 in the Brittan Norman ag plane was in fact cleared to use ag diesel. I wonder though if the burners were designed for it, possibly at some cost in efficiency when using normal turbine fuels over that of burners optimised puerly for turbine fuels.

[jetdriverbr]

I was told a story about an operator who used off-road diesel in his ag plane with a Walter turboprop. When the hot section was overhauled the wheels and stators were ruined, at low time, from deposits and corrosion. The maintenance station was concerned the owner was going to balk at the repair cost, because of the additional parts required. Instead he calculated the operating savings using diesel over jet A and figured he was well ahead! I believe he is still using diesel to this day. Of course the disclaimer would be he was the sole operator of the single seat ag plane, so the risk was limited.

[Rotorgoat8]

Can someone give me a short course on the SEC numbers? Looking at the Exxon/Mobil charts the figures under Viscosity make no mention of SEC. In Nellycopters first post he said the manual states 50 SEC. Was he referring to the aircrafts manual? One of the other fuel distributors shows the Jet A-1 as SEC 28.

[nellycopter]

Well ! At least I have given you lot somet to talk about !
It's the same
It's not the same
It's ok so long as you don't use a rusty old bucket to fill the aircraft
If you were being chased by the enemy then the thing will run on dog s**t.
In the Uk it all comes from the same tank, the tanker driver (although I don't think they would hold the correct qualification) adds what's needed for aviation.
The difference between 28sec and 50 sec is MONEY ! And TAX !
And when all said and done all I asked is -is it the same stuff ?

Think I will stick with the overpriced airfield heating oil, pumped from a 1940 rusty old leyland truck tank.

Cheers guys I really do like reading the 'banta,

Nelly.

[[email protected]]

Determination of the Viscosity of Oils - Redwood Viscometer.

Object
To determine the viscosity (in 'Redwood seconds') of a liquid hydrocarbon and also the effect of temperature on the viscosity. The viscosity of a hydrocarbon can be expressed as the number of seconds taken for the collection of 50ml. of the liquid when flowing under standard conditions through a jet of standard dimensions. The equipment specified is the Redwood Viscometer.
Apparatus
The viscometer consists of an oil cup furnished with a pointer, which ensures a constant head of oil, and an agate jet, which is drilled with a central hole. The upper end of the agate jet is closed with a ball, which is lifted to allow the flow of oil during the experiment. The outer jacket which is for maintaining the oil at a constant temperature, is electrically heated and normally contains water, though if a higher temperature is required, cylinder oil is used. The temperature is maintained at a uniform level by rotating the stirrer. A wire stirrer is also provided for mixing the oil samples.
Viscometer No.1 or No.2 is used depending on whether the time of flow of the oil at the desired temperature, is greater or less than 2000 seconds. The difference between the two viscometers is the diameter of the orifice.
Redwood No. 1 Capillary diameter.1.62 mm, length. 10.0 mm Redwood No. 2 Capillary diameter. 3.5 mm, length. 5.0 mm This means there is a factor of ten between the two viscometers, i.e. a liquid that takes 100 seconds to flow through a No1 viscometer will take
10 seconds in a No2 viscometer.

MethodThe sample of oil, filtered if necessary, is transferred to the container cup of the viscometer until the pointer just breaks the surface of the oil. It is most important that the test is always started with the pointer just emerging through the liquid surface. This ensures that the head of oil above the orifice is always the same and therefore that the pressure forcing the oil through is the same in each test using the same oil.

Whilst slowly rotating the jacket stirrer, the water in the jacket is heated to a temperature of 41°C. When the sample of oil in the cup reaches 40°C, the ball is lifted and at the same time a stop-watch is started. Allow oil to run through into the collecting flask until the 50 ml mark on the flask is reached, at which point the clock should be stopped and the ball pushed back onto the orifice to halt the oil flow.
The time taken for the passage of 50 ml of oil through the jet into the collecting flask, in seconds, should be noted. That seems nice and simple doesn't it;)

[nigelh]

Nelly , I just love the way you were shot down at the beginning of this thread by typical Pprune " experts" .... Don't worry some of them just have an inferiority complex . Funny that they keep their mouths shut when someone like Sasless comes to your rescue !!!!!! Like you I would be v keen to use 28 sec if I were certain of the facts ( I have only used it when landing at home on empty and put in 20 gal to get to airport ... No change in power/temps ). Let's hope we get definitive answer !!

[nellycopter]

Nigelh,

Notice you are from yorkshire, where a bouts ?
Pm me ?

[nigelh]

Look for the A109 flying at 140kn @ 50ft over the moor with a gun sticking out the window .... That might be me !!

[ShyTorque]

Look for the A109 flying at 140kn @ 50ft over the moor with a gun sticking out the window .... That might be me !!

Ooh look, a self confessed cowboy...

[[email protected]]

Nigel is a successful businessman therefore rules don't apply to him and he is immune to the sort of human failings mere mortals suffer in aircraft.

Funny how many people who are talented in one area of their lives believe it just reads across to everything else, especially flying - see C McRae RIP and others for details.

[nessboy]

As i said the fuel here is shipped in by sea from the mainland and the JetA1 and the home heating oil is the same and stored in the same storage tank at the Depot.

[ShyTorque]

CAP 393 Air Navigation: The Order and the Regulations
Section 1 Part 27 Page 6
Aviation fuel at aerodromes
217 (1) Subject to paragraph (3), an aviation fuel installation manager must not cause or permit any fuel to be delivered to the installation unless satisfied that:
(a) the installation is capable of storing and dispensing the fuel so as not to render it unfit for use in aircraft;
(b) the installation is marked in a manner appropriate to the grade of fuel stored or if different grades are stored in different parts each part is so marked; and
(c) in the case of delivery from a vehicle or vessel, the fuel has been sampled and is of a grade appropriate to that installation and is fit for use in aircraft.
(2) Subject to paragraph (3), an aviation fuel installation manager must not cause or permit any fuel to be dispensed from the installation to an aircraft unless satisfied as the result of sampling that the fuel is fit for use in aircraft.
(3) Paragraph (1) does not apply to fuel which has been removed from an aircraft and is intended for use in another aircraft operated by the same operator as the aircraft from which it has been removed.
(4) The aviation fuel installation manager must keep a written record for each installation of which they have the management, which record must include detailed information about:
(a) the grade and quantity of aviation fuel delivered and the date of delivery;
(b) all samples taken of the aviation fuel and of the results of tests of those samples;
and
(c) the maintenance and cleaning of the installation.
(5) The aviation fuel installation manager must:
(a) preserve the written record required under paragraph (4) for 12 months or such longer period as the CAA may in a particular case direct; and
(b) within a reasonable time after being requested to do so by an authorised person, produce such record to that person.
(6) A person must not cause or permit any aviation fuel to be dispensed for use in an aircraft if the person knows or has reason to believe that the aviation fuel is not fit for use in aircraft.
(7) If it appears to the CAA or an authorised person that any aviation fuel is intended or likely to be delivered in contravention of any provision of this article, the CAA or that authorised person may direct the aviation fuel installation manager not to permit aviation fuel to be dispensed from that installation until the direction has been revoked by the CAA or by an authorised person.
(8) In this article:
(a) 'an aviation fuel installation manager' means a person who has the management of any aviation fuel installation on an aerodrome in the United Kingdom;
(b) 'aviation fuel' means fuel intended for use in aircraft; and
(c) 'aviation fuel installation' means any apparatus or container, including a vehicle,
designed, manufactured or adapted for the storage of aviation fuel or for the
delivery of such fuel to an aircraft.
14 April

I can't see how the use of heating oil in an aircraft turbine engine can fit in with the above rules.

[chopjock]

ShyT

I can't see how the use of heating oil in an aircraft turbine engine can fit in with the above rules.

I think those rules only apply to licensed airfields and not to private sites.:ok:

[RetiredSHRigger]

Read Def stan 91-91, this is the definitive standard for Jet A1 or nato spec F-35 which is one and the same. here is the link, hope its helpful. http://www.dstan.mod.uk/standards/defstans/91/091/00000700.pdf
cheers:ok:

[ShyTorque]

I think those rules only apply to licensed airfields and not to private sites.

Well, CAP 748 states the following:

CAP 748 Aircraft Fuelling and Fuel Installation Management
Chapter 1 Page 1
Chapter 1 General
1 Introduction
1.1 Negligence or errors made in the receipt, storage and handling of fuel can endanger an aircraft and the lives of all on board. It is essential that the correct grade and quantity of fuel is supplied and that it is in a condition fit for use in aircraft.
1.2 Licensees of aerodromes that have facilities for the storage of fuel are required under the Air Navigation Order (ANO) 2000 Article 103 to include, within the Aerodrome Manual, procedures to ensure that, throughout the processes of receiving, storing, managing, and distributing fuel, it is at all stages fit for use in aircraft.
1.3 Unlicensed aerodromes where there is a facility for the storage of fuel, are not subject to ANO Article 103, but are subject to Article 112. The CAA recommends that managers of those aerodromes, and those responsible for the reception, storage, distribution and handling of aviation fuel there, consider the guidance offered in this CAP and similarly produce procedures to ensure that aviation fuel used at the aerodrome is in, and remains in, a state fit for use by aircraft.

[puntosaurus]

Nellycopter, why don't you get a sample of this 28sec heating oil, and send it to one of the fuel testing labs eg. Intertek (http://www.intertek.com/petroleum/testing/jet-fuel/).

I've no idea what it would cost, but that seems to be the only way to get the answer you want. From the look of the Defence Standards document, you'd also need to ask the supplier what additives had gone into their mix, because the additives are not assayed.

If the sample you send matches the spec for the fuel listed in the RFM, then surely you're good to go. After all if it looks like a duck, and it walks like a duck, and it quacks like duck, then it must be a duck.

[500e]

Still surprised at the lack \ poor filters on a lot of installations.
For those that like a read
www.inverenergy.co.uk/Userfiles/MaterialSafetyDataSheet-Kerosene.pdf (http://www.inverenergy.co.uk/Userfiles/MaterialSafetyDataSheet-Kerosene.pdf)

www.petroleumhpv.org/docs/kerosine_jetfuel/2010_sept21_Kerosene_Jet%20fuel%20robust%20summaries%20final .pdf

[SuperF]

Maybe on the island, where ever he lives, they actually just ship jet over and call it heating oil. It's cheaper to have one facility, and pump all the fuel from one tank into all the different tanks around the place.

I'm sure that all the heaters around the place won't worry about getting jet instead of heating oil....

[nigelh]

Crabby ...feeling chippy ?? Of course i was only joking , but its a bit like fishing ....you can almost always get a bite on pprune:ok:
Nelly .... West of Leeds and London .....i have just bought a tank and will wait for the outcome before i fill it !! Will you send a sample ? I am sure a few here would chip in if its expensive .

[[email protected]]

you can almost always get a bite on PPRuNe yes and I did:ok:

[BLEED-AIR]

Fifteen years ago I sent to a lab in Sunderland a sample of Conoco supplied Jet A1 and a sample of 28 Second Heating Oil . The result proved very surprising the sample of 28 Second Heating Oil was identical in composition but contained less water than the Jet A1 sample.If you propose to use 28 Second Heating Oil it is imperative you fit a Facet VFG 21-609 Fuel Filter fitted with a I P Monitor Cartridge.( About £300.00 ) Check the drains daily and run a water test. Enjoy the flying :ok:

[FlightPathOBN]

BA,

That seems reasonable, according to the COP specs, they deliver the same fuel, the 28 second Kero likely has a faster turnover, thus less absorption time.

Another valid option is to place a filter on the storage tank vent...

I would also recommend that the storage tank have the pickup at no less that 15% capacity, that the tank has a min slope of 1% with a bleed valve at the low point. Bleed the water off daily until you get fuel.
http://www.flowlink.nl/athena/site/image_database/20964776984c9c5b6c7f5fe.jpg

Storage tanks, and even the fueling trucks have floating suction pickups that dont allow delivery when the tank is below 10% capacity to prevent water delivery.

[500e]

Good for the bowser
We found on bes.co,uk
about £12.00

http://www.bes.co.uk/products/graphics/20375.gifThe oil tank dryer sits inside the tank and comes with a 2.3m cord and fixing clip. It absorbs water out of kerosene, diesel, petrol and biofuels up to B100. The dryer can absorb up to 350 ml of water and we suggest the dryer is checked every site visit and replaced when it is full. Can be used in hydraulic tanks, storage tanks, transfer tanks and saddle tanks with a 2" diameter or larger opening.
Dimensions: 590 mm x 42 mm.

[nellycopter]

I see new redhill notam
Jet a1 fuel currently supplied without AL48

Maybe this is one of the additives that HAS to be in the fuel for use in a turbine as described above many times.

Or maybe it's just 28sec kerosene

Mmmmmmmmm

[Hughes500]

Well the aga runs on jet fuel really nicely and it is cheaper than heating oil !

[500e]

Shhh they will all want it know

[avturboy]

Jet A1 and heating oil have some similar properties but are different products. In the UK they do not come from the same tank.

Every last litre of Jet A1 (F-35) supplied in the UK is traceable back the the refinery from which it came .... and beyond that it can be traced to the crude from which it was refined.

Jet A1 specification can be found in the document Defstan 91 - 91, the current version is revision 7 which is effective from Feb of this 2011.

Jet A1 with FSII (F34) is not produced at refineries, it is produced when Jet A1 has certain additional additives present; these additives can be added in the distribution chain, the first point they can be added is when Jet A1 is loaded onto road tankers at distribution depots. The next option is an airfield fuel bowser which can add FSII as Jet A1 is delivered to an aircraft. The last option is to dispense FSII from an aerosol directly into aircraft tanks at the same time Jet A1 is being delivered.

In recent times the content of FSII from aerosols has been identified as being a health hazard so you may find the refuelling operatives are no longer willing to assist with the use of these products.

The delivery documentation which accompanies a fuel delivery is a legal document, under normal circumstances no one gives a jot about it. However following an incident this document can become extremely significant, it clearly documents the precise standard of the the fuel supplied.

This is the point where the difference between Jet A1 and 'any alternative' fuel would become evident. The quality control systems applied to Jet A1 up to the point where it is delivered to the airfield are extremely demanding, on airfield they should also be demanding to the the minimum requirements of CAP 748. However you should expect to find the fuel system operator is able to demonstrate that they meet/exceed these requirements.

The use of alternative fuels is entirely a matter for the aircraft operator themselves. The powerplant manufacturer will have the final say on what is (and is not acceptable). I know of a recent 'misfuelling' incident where Avgas was delivered into a turboprop aircraft. The aircraft was eventually allowed to fly with a known mix of Jet A1 and Avgas; this was recorded in the tech-log and certain additional maintenance requirements were made within a particular number of flying hours after the incident.

[Stuck_in_an_ATR]

Just out of curiousity (as, unfortunately I don't own anything that I could pour kerosene into):

- what are the respective prices of Jet A-1 and the heating oil in the U.K.?

- is using the heating oil as "propulsive" fuel legal from the fiscal point of view? I am asking, because where I live putting the (way cheaper) heater oil in cars can get you a hefty fine, as it is considered tax evasion. (which is very unfair by me - if it's the same stuff, the price should be same and it shouldn't be the taxman's business where I put it...)

[ShyTorque]

Just re-read this thread.

I can't understand how anyone in their right mind would contemplate running an aircraft with anything other than the correct aviation fuel.

The comments by "avturboy" are well worth taking note of. In the event of an accident, if it was discovered that the fuel was not from a correct aviation source, the aircraft insurance cover may well be deemed invalidated.

If third parties were involved in a claim, the perpetrator would quite likely to be held personally liable. I certainly wouldn't risk my financial well being, (and that of my dependents) for the sake of a few miserable quid!

[puntosaurus]

But the point is that fuel is defined by a specification. If heating oil matches the specification of aviation fuel, then it IS aviation fuel. As long as you get each batch of your fuel assayed by a reputable laboratory, and you store it according to the legislation that AVTURBOY lives by, then how could an insurance company object ?

[ShyTorque]

Ask your insurance company!

[toptobottom]

I wouldn't want to have that 'discussion' with an insurance company's legal dept! Heating oil may benefit from the same spec, but quality control will not be superior when compared to that of aviation fuel - why take a risk?!

In the event of a claim where an aircraft used 'non-approved' fuel and unless that fuel was a material consideration in the case e.g. contaminated, I'm not sure the insurer could successfully rely on that to defend itself.

[puntosaurus]

What would I ask them, and why ? Is it OK if I use fuel of the required specification in my aircraft ? You couldn't possibly ask them the question 'can I use 28sec heating oil instead of AVTUR' because their answer would obviously be No, on the basis that they don't know and and are not interested in doing the research to find out the answer. If as an owner operator you are willing to do that research then there's nothing more to ask the insurance company.

I think there's only one question here - do I as the owner/operator of the aircraft and the user of the fuel think it's safe to do this. If not or if unsure, don't. If yes, then do. If you've used fuel of the right spec, and followed all the required legislative procedures for handling the fuel, how would the insurance company ever know ? And if they did know, how could they object ?

Of course there is always the possibility of unknown and unassayed contamination, but that risk exists even when it comes with the 'right' label on it.

In practice though, I'm pretty sure that the oil companies have a lock on this one. As AVTURBOY points out, one of the key elements of the DEFSTAN in post #67 is traceablility, which is evidenced by certificate from the refiners. The oil companies presumably do nicely out of charging more for AVTUR than 28sec heating oil, so would be unlikely to issue certificates for the latter. Without the certificate it's not AVTUR, even if the assay results are the same.

[rjsquirrel]

This thread brings to light the entire question of quality assurance, and its cost. When a slug of impurity passes into your household oil burner, the flame distupts and you lose heat for a few seconds/minutes. If that slug enters your diesel car's injectors, your engine stumbles and you pull to the side of the road. When it passes into your fuel control on your helo, you autorotate into the sea.

The quality of the entire product chain is critical to flight safety, and worth what we pay. Bogus parts, cheap fuel, unproven modifications, and experimental helos to carry your loved ones - not the way to "save" money, IMHO.

[ShyTorque]

Puntosaurus,

Looking at your profile, I'm surprised you are asking these questions, unless you are fishing for a bite. Insurance companies aren't in the charity business. .

Deliberately operating an aircraft outside the terms of the flight manual, by using an unapproved fuel? It's a no-brainer. If you are responsible for insuring an aircraft I politely suggest that you read the small print or ask the question.

[puntosaurus]

I guess I was mildly fishing for a bite.

Many posts ago, someone asked the question can I use cheaper heating oil rather than Avtur. No-one really answered the question, although a lot of useful information emerged.

It turns out the answer is that the term Avtur covers a multitude of things, the physical spec, the provenance, the additives, and the way it's handled after you get it. Perhaps the most revealing post was the one from someone who had actually assayed heating oil, and in respect of the water content at least, had found it to be a better match for the spec of Avtur than Avtur itself, largely because of the greater turnover of heating oil.

I would say this issue isn't quite dead yet because no-one has taken it all the way and pushed an oil company to provide all the elements that would allow a user to classify heating oil as Avtur. But I am much better informed about what that would entail !

And whilst I admit to fishing slightly, you should ask yourself whether righteous indignation is appropriate. I have no doubt whatsoever that the price differential between Avtur and 28 sec heating oil is wildly unjustifiable in terms of the cost differential of managing it's provenance. It's a pure profitability issue rather than one of quality or safety.

[ShyTorque]

you should ask yourself whether righteous indignation is appropriate.

As this is a professional pilots' forum discussing a serious safety issue - I think safety considerations should be taken seriously by professional pilots.

In my opinion, "righteous indignation", if you prefer to call it that, is appropriate.

I'm happy to fly on any fuel that meets the required aviation standards for manufacture, storage and handling. If it doesn't then I'm not. Simple enough?

[puntosaurus]

That's precisely the point raised by the original poster - whether this is a genuine safety issue or a profitability issue.

Unanswerable I suspect, although I have my suspicions as you'll have gathered from my last post.

Nevertheless, since I don't own an aircraft I wouldn't dream of putting anything other than official juice in one that belongs to someone else. And even if I did own an aircraft, I'd do a lot more research before I took such a step.

[FlightPathOBN]

I would say this issue isn't quite dead yet because no-one has taken it all the way and pushed an oil company to provide all the elements that would allow a user to classify heating oil as Avtur. But I am much better informed about what that would entail !

Read post #28....

you dont have to push anyone..its all there if you ask....

http://operationsbasednavigation.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Capture021.jpg

http://www.peakoil.co.uk/pdf/KEROSENE.pdf

[puntosaurus]

That's a data safety sheet, not a spec. It's grouping together products which have a similar safety treatment.

The issue we're dealing with is whether these classifications are significant for engine operation, not dealing with spills.

The link (http://www.dstan.mod.uk/standards/defstans/91/091/00000700.pdf) in Post #67 is more relevant, although I wonder if there is a civilian spec which is more applicable and maybe less onerous on provenance.

[FlightPathOBN]

This fuel can be sold under and meets many different applications, and this kerosene also can meet specs for Aviation Jet Fuel A-1 (civilian)
Avtur, NATO F34, F35 (military), Regular Burning Oil (RBO), 28 Second Heating Oil

It is up to the individual supplier to quantify and meet or exceed the spec you want...
in regards to legal applications, it is the specification and the meet/exceeds that counts....

In developing countries like yours, bulk shipments of fuel always have multi-purpose uses.

[Rigidhead]

For all,

I only post here once in a while, but have been an avid reader for years.
At the risk of being forceful: Anyone, and I mean ANYONE, who contemplates saving a couple of $,Pounds,Euros, Naira or Conch Shells from using home heating oil as a fuel, or skipping inspections, or overhauls or any other aspect of care and maintenance of their aircraft should immediately rip up any licence they may have the dubious distinction of holding, and promptly throw it in the trash with the Cracker Jacks box it came in and take up bicycle riding where, at worst you can only hurt yourself.
I find it hard to fathom that this discussion has gone on for 5 pages.
Like the tone of the Bell 206 TT Strap topic, it boggles my mind that after retirement times for components have been set based on previous LOSS OF LIVES that some figure it is all just a cash grab from the manufacturers.
Perhaps that is more a fuction of short memories or a lack of historical knowledge?
I am fully aware of the cost of helicopters and their operation. If it is such a surprise to some,again, perhaps they should take up some other "hobby"
End of rant.

Sincerely,

Rigidhead

[ShyTorque]

Rigidhead, You put it so well :D

[212man]

Rigid, why speak in riddles? Say it how it is :D:D:D:D:ok:

[puntosaurus]

Oh for goodness sake, get over yourselves. To quote from the Defstan

Jet fuel is a complex mixture of hydrocarbons that varies depending on crude source and manufacturing process. Consequently, it is impossible to define the exact composition of jet fuel. This specification has therefore evolved primarily as a performance specification rather than a compositional specification. It is acknowledged that this largely relies on accumulated experience, therefore the specification limits jet fuels to those made from conventional sources or specifically approved synthetic processes.

In other words this specification does not describe the content of the fuel, but rather how it performs. And therefore anything that performs in the same way (subject to the caveat about normal refining processes) meets the specification. So nobody is talking about putting something unauthorised in the tank, we are simply speculating about whether 28 sec heating oil meets the spec.

That is a legitimate question, and one which has not yet been answered.

[ShyTorque]

So nobody is talking about putting something unauthorised in the tank, we are simply speculating about whether 28 sec heating oil meets the spec.

Read the thread from the beginning.

[nellycopter]

well it gave us all something to talk about anyway.......
again ..... i did send a sample of both to our sampling lab labelled 'a' and 'b' so as not to give anything away,
as it says a bit further up in a post - the result came back with Jet a 1 (b) showing more water content but other than that the same as (a) heating oil....
it was just a simple question at the beginning, which as always on here blew up into sh*t storm........ i now have 1000gall heating oil on site to keep the house warm and a 500 gall bowser full of lovely Jet A1 ( with extra water content) for me nelly......
who really knows - what you lot are buying when you uplift from an airfield just because they have a piece of paper saying a particular delivery was certified jet a1, do you get a certificate of authenticity EVERY time you fill up ???
i think not /.......
take a sample and send it off - wouldnt your ar*e fall out if it came back as 28sec heating oil ???? ha ha...........

nelly ........

[gibb2329]

Just browsing thro' and came across this website. Reading this particular topic under discussion is quite interesting as I was involved in offshore helicopter travel (as a passenger) and also heavily involved with offshore/onshore Operational Plant Process Integrity and Maintenance including design and installation of Jet A1 refueling facilities at various middle east airport locations. I am somewhat puzzled why one would willingly want to run a helicopter on kerosene 28sec fuel, with the perceived risk of engine damage or failure.
To ask a purely hypothetical question but in reverse - namely - can one run a home heating oil fired boiler on Jet A1 ?

[212man]

To ask a purely hypothetical question but in reverse - namely - can one run a home heating oil fired boiler on Jet A1 ?

Yes you can.

[chopjock]

I run my helicopter on kerosene or Jet A1, no problem! :ok:

[md 600 driver]

More importantly most of us know if it's from conaco humberside it's the same stuff ,but if you buy it as kerosene and your POH allows kerosene you can put it in , if your POH says you can only use jet A1 that's all you can use
My POH says JET A1 ,kerosene ,28second and a host of other fuels as alternatives ,some like avgas have ramifications to engine life but most are acceptable

[SASless]

We ran two Hughes 500E's, a Bell Jet Ranger L4, and a Cessna 208 using #1 Clear Diesel with no problems at all. We used a good filter system with a water blocking filter and flew thousands of hours and saw no difference in inspections or performance. We did see a great reduction in both cost and avaibility.

[albatross]

In a lot of places in northern Canada your choices were Arctic Diesel or Arctic Diesel.
I miss Jet-B!


.

[LRP]

Blast from the past...

[vfr440]

Post #40 is germane to this discussion. A very, very long time ago when I was working in E Africa with a J/R on survey work, my pilot and I were nearly caught out with a low fuel light, head wind, night rapidly descending and all that stuff. We made base - just. :eek: On the back of this experience and a visit to (then) DDA in Indianapolis, I found out a lot of detail on 'Illuminating kerosene' as sold locally to the rural people without access to electricity. The alternative fuel as FP has shown was confirmed by the OEM as exactly the same spec, just that the Quality control was not so tight; they even offered a very attractive package to the Company for a commercial trial.


The CAA were happy with this but the fly in the ointment was Insurers, they would NOT buy the idea, despite my introduction of a mandatory procedure about only sealed containers, funnel with chamois, visual inspection and records etc. Lots of sympathetic noises but I was cross at the lack of pragmatism. :* (Needless to say, when push came to shove in the back-woods of Ethiopia, no surprises where our 'reserve fuel' came from!!)
VFR :D