A 330 FUEL LEAK PROCEDURE

[JABBARA]

After Air Transat Incident, Airbus made many changes at FUEL LEAK QRH procedure. However I guess still there is a missing point.

Here is the last part of FUEL LEAK [CASE 1] procedure [PRO-ABN-28 P 17/26]:


If leak continues (after engine shutdown):
If the inner tank fuel quantity of the affected side continues to decrease, a leak from the wing may be suspected.
ENGINE RESTART................................................CONSI DER
FUEL LOSS REDUCTION proc................ ................CONSIDER
Refer to PRO-ABN-28 FUEL LOSS REDUCTION.

Question: Since Wing Tank Leakage is suspected, there should have been another Step, why the following step is not there?

INR TK SPLIT (Effected side).................................ON

Any comment?

[JABBARA]

Dear Airbus Gurus,
More than 72 hours but no reply.

Am I right?
Am I wrong?
Is it too confusing?
No idea?

Regards

[clark y]

JABBARA,

Someone will know why the splits are not mentioned, but I certainly don't.

[DutchOne]

Hello JABBARA,


It would like the most obvious thing to do, but I think I found the reason.
In thet CASE 1 there are two options:
1) Fuel leak stops after engine shut down
2) Fuel leak continues after engine shut down


For option 1 there is no INR TK SPLIT needed. As the engine is shut down and the fuel stopped decreasing.


For option 2 it would only make sence if the leak is in the inner side of the SPLIT. However you do not know unless you try and this takes time. The inner tank is isolated so you might just as well use as much as fuel through the engine and land than use half of it and have the other half go through the leak.


You might even try to use as much as possible from the leak side tank by feeding both engines, but for this you do need to monitor it correctly and change at least the unaffected side bk to its onside engine before the affected tank is empty.


Hope it makes a bit sence because it is nowhere written. It is just trying to put logic together.


Kind regards

[JABBARA]

Thank you DutchOne for your post, but I did not understand the explanation:

For option 2 it would only make sence if the leak is in the inner side of the SPLIT

I guess you mean INR TANK SPLIT...ON (=SPLIT VALVE CLOSE=INNER TANK OUTBOARD AND INBOARD SECTIONS ARE ISOLATED) is only logical if the leak is in the INBOARD SECTION of Inner Tank.

1. Why does it make sense ( or is logical) to isloate these sections if leak is at the INBOARD SECTION of Inner Tank?

2. Why it does not make sense to isloate these sections if leak is at the OUTBOARD SECTION of Inner Tank?

3. Regardless at which side the leak is, either inboard or outboard section,
What would be wrong if these sections are isolated as they have their own fuel pumps (Stby and Main Pumps)?

4. Would it be a chance that Airbus forgot to write this step?

Regards

[DutchOne]

Hey JABBARA


Your Questions 1-2:
Think about it. if the leak is in the outer tank (is higher than inner tank) and you split it you do not allow the fuel to go to the inner tank (which is lower and possibly under the leak). Other way around if the leak is in the inner tank and you split it you keep the fuel away from the leak and use it through the stby pump.


Question 3:
Consider your question again while reading my above answer.


Question4:
Possible but not likely!

[JABBARA]

Thankyou DutchOne

Your explanations are all Plausible

I will remodel my way of thinking

All the best