What are the regulations regarding a fuel leak on the ground with PAX still onboard?
 

Hi All,

I haven't posted in a very long time, I'm curious to know if there are any rules regarding leaving passengers on board an aircraft if the aircraft is leaking (I mean pouring out of the wing) fuel whilst on the ground. The reason being my wife and kids were due to fly back from the US on Tuesday night on a 747-400. The flight never took off as the leak happened whilst the aircraft was taxiing to the runway.

The aircraft taxiied out and was about to enter the runway when the aircraft came to an abrupt halt and fuel was seen pouring from the port wing. The aircraft remained stationary for about 20 mins and the passengers were informed that there was a fuel leak.

The aircraft then taxiied back to the apron but not up to the gate, and firecrews etc... arrived outside of the aircraft. The passengers were informed that they needed to stay in their seats with their seat belts on whilst they tried to resolve the issue. Meanwhile a large puddle of fuel was developing beneath the port wing with a circa 5-6m spread. The flight crew and passengers obviously at this point were starting to become somewhat anxious and nervous but had to remain on the aircraft. Passengers were told not to use mobile phones due to the risks.

My wife was then informed by the flight crew that I have to compliment in the way that they looked after the passengers, that they were purging the tank to try and remedy the issue to which a member of the crew said that passengers should not be onboard for and also due to the size of the fuel leak that everyone should be off the aircraft as well.

Once this had been carried out the aircraft once again taxiied out but realising the issue had not been resolved returned to the gate and after further time the passengers where able to disembark the aircraft after over 5 hours sat on the ground.

Does anyone know what the regulations are regarding passengers being onboard an aircraft if there is a fuel leak and if the tanks need to be purged.

Thanks in advance.

It depends on the airline's SOPs in regards to the size of the fuel leak.

I don't know about purging the tank, sorry.

Sounds just like the good ol phuket air 74 in SHJ. The ultimate decision would rest with the captain. Obviously you would not want to evacuate pax into a fuel leak. It has a rather blinding effect. With fire crews at the scene, the flight deck would have been in contact with them. Seems perhaps the tanks were full to the brim and some fuel was coming from the surge vent.
Again evacuating pax into a fuel leak when many would have mobiles on to film to get famous, poses a modern day issue to any commander.

Also, don't forget that Kerosene is not as flammable as petrol. With a fire crew present I would think that the safest place for the passengers would be on board. Evacuation would not be advised.

Only thing I am surprised about is remaining on board with seatbelts fastened. Going by previous experience of loading fuel with passengers on board, they want seatbelts off, to make a possible emergency evacuation easier.

Beat me to it Espada. Only recently I was in an a/c being refuelled and we were told to keep belts unfastened. Perhaps this also depends on individual company SOPs?

Can you tell us which airline was involved here, different rules and SOP depending on the above.

I was on a KLM MD-11 and instructed to undo the seatbelt while the plane was topped up.

(Yes, kerosene / jet fuel is not very flammable; does not produce enough vapour to ignite when under 50 ⁰C. It is reasonably safe to keep the passengers in a leaking plane.)

It was a BA 744 from Houston on Tuesday. Leaving of the belts on puzzled me as if there was further issues you want to vacate ASAP.

It's not unknown for perfectly serviceable 744s vent fuel from the surge tanks in the wing tip area whilst on the ground, stationary or whilst taxiing. You presumably had somewhat more than normal so the flight crew decided to return to the ramp to get it checked out. Having the fire services involved is routine for any fuel spill and the flight crew would certainly follow their advice in their handling of the situation - as others have said, a puddle of jet fuel is not "that" flammable.

There are certainly company Standard Operating Procedures for the handling spills but I'd hazard a guess ;) that at the airline in question they don't demand undoing of seatbelts and/or an immediate disembarkation. It's also worth bearing in mind that once the belts are undone there's a tendency for some/many passengers to get up, go and chat to their mates, get bags out, block the aisles, etc etc so maybe keeping the belts on was done on this occasion to prevent "crowd control" issues.

That sort of comment might earn a := := for the crew member if it got back to the office....At the risk of igniting debate ( pun intended) if you heard this from a member of the cabin crew then it's worth being aware that most of them don't have any significant technical training, since it's not knowledge they need for their job. Also they certainly wouldn't have been privy to the information the flight crew (i.e. pilots) would have been getting from the engineers and fire crew..... i.e. the real experts, may well have recommended keeping you on the aircraft.

Purging the fuel tanks? No idea.

Purging tanks

I have no experience on 747s but on most large aircraft I have worked on if a tank is/has vented you can use the tank booster pump to transfer some fuel into another tank, lowering the level away from the vent line in that tank. I would imagine the tank would be quite full for that type of sector.

Was it warm at your departure airfield? Most fuel is stored in underground tanks and is thus quite cold. Refuelling into a warm airframe can cause the fuel to expand into an already full tank possibly causing a vent. As has been said before, not unusual. You will also be surprised what just a couple of kilograms of fuel looks like on the ramp after capillary action spreads it about!!!!

I would guess that there are no specific rules for leaky planes other than "use common sense" and "fuel spills should be cleaned up". Calling the fire brigade to oversee the clearing of a fuel spill under the wing of your plane seems common sense to me. :8 Kerosene is not that flammable and a starting fire can be easily controlled by someone with a hand-held fire extinguisher.

So, the fuel spill does not pose imminent danger to plane and passengers; there is no need for an immediate evacuation. Having passengers walking near active taxi- and runways would be more dangerous for them then holding them in the plane; at least until an orderly disembarkation (with stairs and buses) can take place.

Rich Tyler

Very slightly off-topic, but many years ago when in Railway Operations I used to work in an area through which we had a main traffic flow of petroleum and other oil-derived products from the refineries to oil terminals and distribution centres/storage areas. These generally passed in trains conveying 12 to 15 large 100-tonne tank wagons.

Obviously from time to time we would have to deal with an incident where for example the consignor had failed to secure a manlid or discharge pipe cover properly, sometimes we had leaks from the pressure relief valves, as well as small discharges from the various discharge pipes if the valves had not been closed properly.

We were thus very experienced at dealing with the emergency response to these trains given by the likes of the Shell, Esso, BP, etc, etc, technical people.

Through this we learnt that the myth of aviation fuel being highly dangerous was wrong.

Loaded aviation fuel tanks never bothered us because the flashpoint was so high and it required as well the fuel to be "misted" into the air through some form of airflow - such as the wagon travelling at speed. Obviously as we brought the train to a controlled stop, this hazard reduced exponentially. Even with say an axle bearing burning away, we were not too worried when it involved aviation fuel, because of, as I have said, the high flashpoint.

One of the staged demonstrations that the BR Fire Service trainers used to do was to try to set fire to a liquid pool of aviation fuel to demonstrate this. It is actually quite hard to do. You should have seen the look on those who were unaware ! :)

Trains with running with petrol tanks however were another thing :eek: