Smoking next to an aircraft being refuelled.
Summary
Very little risk by smoking near an airplane fueling
except if there happens to be a wind to vaporize the fuel so be sure and hold a balloon with you while boarding to check for a wind
Very little risk by smoking near an airplane fueling
except if there happens to be a wind to vaporize the fuel so be sure and hold a balloon with you while boarding to check for a wind
Since this thread has gone well off topic, allow me to continue....I would be interested in any comments on this...
I was among the passengers bussed out to a KQ E190 at Addis Ababa recently. On arrival at the aircraft, boarding was done with passengers being allowed onto the a/c in groups of max 5 people "because the a/c was being refuelled".
I have never encountered that before, what is the logic? Is that a KQ thing? An Addis airport thing? An ICAO thing ?
I was among the passengers bussed out to a KQ E190 at Addis Ababa recently. On arrival at the aircraft, boarding was done with passengers being allowed onto the a/c in groups of max 5 people "because the a/c was being refuelled".
I have never encountered that before, what is the logic? Is that a KQ thing? An Addis airport thing? An ICAO thing ?
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 474
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fire during fueling
All it takes is a heat source and a fuel spray. The latter is unusual, but I have had fuel spraying out of the fuel vents a few times.
The rules are there for a reason.
All it takes is a heat source and a fuel spray. The latter is unusual, but I have had fuel spraying out of the fuel vents a few times.
The rules are there for a reason.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: England
Age: 65
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lomapaseo,
Taking your remark as somewhat T.I.C., this forum does have a habit of being becoming a de facto reference source. No smoking/Naked lights airside is a pretty universal sanction, certainly in Western Europe and the U.S., for good reason - mitigating risk is why aviation is as safe as it is.
Cannot commend the decisive action taken by the captain enough
Taking your remark as somewhat T.I.C., this forum does have a habit of being becoming a de facto reference source. No smoking/Naked lights airside is a pretty universal sanction, certainly in Western Europe and the U.S., for good reason - mitigating risk is why aviation is as safe as it is.
Cannot commend the decisive action taken by the captain enough
Lomapaseo,
Taking your remark as somewhat T.I.C., this forum does have a habit of being becoming a de facto reference source. No smoking/Naked lights airside is a pretty universal sanction, certainly in Western Europe and the U.S., for good reason - mitigating risk is why aviation is as safe as it is.
Cannot commend the decisive action taken by the captain enough
Taking your remark as somewhat T.I.C., this forum does have a habit of being becoming a de facto reference source. No smoking/Naked lights airside is a pretty universal sanction, certainly in Western Europe and the U.S., for good reason - mitigating risk is why aviation is as safe as it is.
Cannot commend the decisive action taken by the captain enough
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 263
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since this thread has gone well off topic, allow me to continue....I would be interested in any comments on this...
I was among the passengers bussed out to a KQ E190 at Addis Ababa recently. On arrival at the aircraft, boarding was done with passengers being allowed onto the a/c in groups of max 5 people "because the a/c was being refuelled".
I have never encountered that before, what is the logic? Is that a KQ thing? An Addis airport thing? An ICAO thing ?
I was among the passengers bussed out to a KQ E190 at Addis Ababa recently. On arrival at the aircraft, boarding was done with passengers being allowed onto the a/c in groups of max 5 people "because the a/c was being refuelled".
I have never encountered that before, what is the logic? Is that a KQ thing? An Addis airport thing? An ICAO thing ?
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Manchester
Age: 45
Posts: 615
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From a chemistry point of view, yes you could extinguish a naked flame with kerosene, it's got a pretty low vapour pressure and a reasonably high flashpoint.
I wouldn't recommend it though especially if it is atomized.
I wouldn't recommend it though especially if it is atomized.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 412 Likes
on
217 Posts
Point is, fuel in liquid form won't burn. Only the vapour burns.
A full fuel tank contains little vapour, but an empty fuel tank is full of it.
A full fuel tank contains little vapour, but an empty fuel tank is full of it.
You then need to take into account the probability of an ignition source and the probability of sloshing to fill a larger closed area
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An empty tank is full of vapour. When you fill the tank this displaces the vapour which overflows, (heavier than air), falls to the ground to make a puddle of vapour. This could very well be an ignition hazard especially on a calm day.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Cambridge, England, EU
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
There are times my fellow travellers leave me speechless...
https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/20/idiot...lled-10778001/
https://metro.co.uk/2019/09/20/idiot...lled-10778001/
(1) The old Paddy Ashdown joke. He was in a meeting in his HQ in Bosnia, which was next door to a petrol station. His staff were getting all worked up about this being a dangerous location - what if the baddies were to blow up the petrol station?
"Have any of you lot actually tried to blow up a petrol station?" asked Paddy.
"No", they said.
"Well," said Paddy, "I have, and it's bloody difficult."
(2) Marquess of Bristol. Smoking whilst refuelling his chopper at Cambridge. Then took off straight from the pumps, none of this taxying to where ATC told him to or any of that nonsense.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 412 Likes
on
217 Posts
Obviously, to burn, any form of any fuel also needs oxygen mixed with it....if that's what you're getting at?
P.S. do NOT try welding a petrol tank at home, or anywhere else.
Btw, years ago I saw a fire begin in an almost full motorbike petrol tank. Once the (thankfully small) volume of fuel/air vapour above the liquid fuel in the tank instantly burned with a "pop" the fire blew itself out. Thankfully, the person nearest put the fuel cap back on again.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 1,499
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very wrong! By that logic it would be safe to weld a drained petrol tank where there is no atomised fuel spray.
Obviously, to burn, any form of any fuel also needs oxygen mixed with it....if that's what you're getting at?
P.S. do NOT try welding a petrol tank at home, or anywhere else.
Btw, years ago I saw a fire begin in an almost full motorbike petrol tank. Once the (thankfully small) volume of fuel/air vapour above the liquid fuel in the tank instantly burned with a "pop" the fire blew itself out. Thankfully, the person nearest put the fuel cap back on again.
Obviously, to burn, any form of any fuel also needs oxygen mixed with it....if that's what you're getting at?
P.S. do NOT try welding a petrol tank at home, or anywhere else.
Btw, years ago I saw a fire begin in an almost full motorbike petrol tank. Once the (thankfully small) volume of fuel/air vapour above the liquid fuel in the tank instantly burned with a "pop" the fire blew itself out. Thankfully, the person nearest put the fuel cap back on again.
Petrol will catch fire very easily. Jet fuel not.
Again, see the video postet earlier.
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The video posted is a YouTube video that contains many technical errors and the guy clearly does not fully understand what he is talking about (plus anyone who stands over a jar full of petrol and throws a match into it is clearly lacking in brain cells!). The fact is that vapour most definitely does burn! the term "flammable liquid" is technically a misnomer as it not the liquid that burns but the vapour that it gives off when combined in the right proportions with oxygen in the atmosphere. All flammable liquids have a property known as the flash point which is the temperature above which it will give off sufficient vapour for it to ignite if a source of ignition is present. In the case of volatile fuels such as avgas or mogas that temperature is around -45 deg C so they give off flammable vapour at all normal temperatures. JetA1 has a flash point of at least 38 deg C so needs to be heated above that temperature before it will give off sufficient vapour to ignite.
It's worth noting that rules don't normally take into account the type of aircraft or fuel. Sure, smoking while fueling with Jet A or similar is very different than while fueling with aviation gas/petrol. But most airports do both and don't want to be bothered with different sets of rules for different aircraft or fuels.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,573
Received 412 Likes
on
217 Posts
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Age: 79
Posts: 1,086
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Darwin would have something to say on the matter.
