Jet a1 vs kerosene 28sec
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
I think those rules only apply to licensed airfields and not to private sites.
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
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.
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.
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.petroleumhpv.org/docs/ker...es%20final.pdf
For those that like a read
www.inverenergy.co.uk/Userfiles/MaterialSafetyDataSheet-Kerosene.pdf
http://www.petroleumhpv.org/docs/ker...es%20final.pdf
Last edited by 500e; 19th May 2011 at 10:39.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: New Zealand
Age: 52
Posts: 395
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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....
I'm sure that all the heaters around the place won't worry about getting jet instead of heating oil....
Crabby ...feeling chippy ?? Of course i was only joking , but its a bit like fishing ....you can almost always get a bite on pprune
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 .
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 .
you can almost always get a bite on PPRuNe
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Aporto
Age: 72
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: engineer at large
Posts: 1,409
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
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.
Good for the bowser
We found on bes.co,uk
about £12.00
The 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.
We found on bes.co,uk
about £12.00
The 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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where it rains a lot .....
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mmmmmmmmm
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
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
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Stockport
Age: 68
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Last edited by avturboy; 22nd Aug 2011 at 00:43.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: here, there, everywhere
Posts: 279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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...)
- 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...)
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
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!
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!
Last edited by ShyTorque; 22nd Aug 2011 at 10:23.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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 ?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Ask your insurance company!
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.
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.
Guest
Posts: n/a
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.
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.
Last edited by puntosaurus; 22nd Aug 2011 at 13:18.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.