It's like the gas stations here with underground tanks. They have a monitor well or two and it's placarded "DO NOT PUT FUEL IN HERE."
Misfueled Aerostar
- Thread starter Jmcmanna
- Start date
benyflyguy
En-Route
That is a good question. If the guy is lying a bit then he’s got to live with the guilt of knowing they at least partly contributed to a guy dying.
I don’t expect a line guy to recognize a turbine vs a piston by looking at engine. But they should be able to read a placard and realize if that nozzle doesn’t fit there has to be something f-ing wrong. Wonder how long the guy has been doing that job??
Zeldman
Touchdown! Greaser!
On the other side, I once was at Centennial Airport (APA) and told the CSR that I would like 20 per side of 100LL Avgas. Since I was flying over the Rockies, I wanted to add a little more to the reserve for my comfort.
On my return to the fbo, I looked at the receipt and noticed I had received 100 gallons of 100LL Avgas. Since I was returning solo, weight was not a problem. But that 600 buck fuel bill, not including all other fees, was a problem.
After a chat with the manager they gave me a really good discount on the fuel. He was happy and I was happy so off I went.
I like the FBOs that have a fuel order that the pilot fills out and marks the boxes, either JetA or 100LL and writes in the amount needed in each tank.
On my return to the fbo, I looked at the receipt and noticed I had received 100 gallons of 100LL Avgas. Since I was returning solo, weight was not a problem. But that 600 buck fuel bill, not including all other fees, was a problem.
After a chat with the manager they gave me a really good discount on the fuel. He was happy and I was happy so off I went.
I like the FBOs that have a fuel order that the pilot fills out and marks the boxes, either JetA or 100LL and writes in the amount needed in each tank.
midwestpa24
Final Approach
It seems like light twins are the ones that misfueled more often. On many I can see why, as there may be turbine and piston variants of similar looking models. Often the piston models are turbo charger, and have labels advertising that fact.
However one aircraft has always stood out to me as potentially confusing to the lay person, the Turbo Lance. That cowling looks way too much like a turbine
However one aircraft has always stood out to me as potentially confusing to the lay person, the Turbo Lance. That cowling looks way too much like a turbine
Attachments
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
You're only amazed because you completely disregard the number of twin piston takeoffs every day that DON'T result in an incident.
I'm sure a piston single fuelled with Jet A wouldn't fare any better. And it's happened more than once with the PA-46.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
Amazing
overdrive148
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,903
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
overdrive148
This is the document I made/hung on the wall at my last job showing the different aircraft that are commonly misfueled or mistaken for one another. Free use for any FBO's that come across the page:
Katamarino
Pattern Altitude
Apart from the helicopter, these are all incredibly obvious just by looking at the cowl intakes and exhausts. A line guy who can't tell the difference between a turbine and piston really shouldn't be working unsupervised.
Or just ask the pilot. Takes 2 seconds to ask if they need LL or Jet A.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,998
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
To be fair, the pilot is alleged to have confirmed the jet A selection, multiple times according to the line guy. again this is coming from the line guy, something the deceased is not in a position to refute.
Yep. When I fly, I always tell the line guy to give me 100LL even if it’s obvious. You never know what can happen.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
Yes!
Saying that did not make you a dick. At all. I mean that both ways it can be taken.
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
Yeah, given the nearly flat terrain and thousands of acres of farm fields around OKK (including the one he crashed on), you'd figure that at least limping away was a good possibility.
Right, that was my point. Stall/spins happen in singles on climbout, too to be sure... just had one a couple weeks ago. It just seems like when a twin loses an engine at low altitude it tends to end badly. Looking at the pictures on Kathryn's report, he crashed into a nice big open soybean field. Fuel may have caused the accident, but LOC caused the fatality.
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
I think it takes some time to not only realize, but accept, that you are going down. I know in a couple of unreal situations in my life, I never did accept what was happening until much later; luckily, they didn't involve flying a plane.
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
The insidious part of this accident is he was almost certainly not expecting to lose both engines. Most likely one lost power from detonation before (perhaps just slightly before) the other.
Even with a high fuel load an Aerostar with only one person on board is light enough and would have adequate climb on one engine. He was likely going through that routine when the second engine failed. And that might have been the real surprise.
I fly a comparatively low power, naturally aspirated twin from a high altitude home airport. In most configurations an engine loss on takeoff requires decisively closing both throttles and putting it down wings level, just like a single. And if everything works out, a call to the insurance company follows, to congratulate them on their new purchase. That is not what most twin engine pilot training teaches you to do.
Even with a high fuel load an Aerostar with only one person on board is light enough and would have adequate climb on one engine. He was likely going through that routine when the second engine failed. And that might have been the real surprise.
I fly a comparatively low power, naturally aspirated twin from a high altitude home airport. In most configurations an engine loss on takeoff requires decisively closing both throttles and putting it down wings level, just like a single. And if everything works out, a call to the insurance company follows, to congratulate them on their new purchase. That is not what most twin engine pilot training teaches you to do.
Last edited:
Zeldman
Touchdown! Greaser!
Which is very unfortunate. When I was in flight school we were told to do whatever we can to NOT damage the airplane if forced into an off airport landing.
I always counter pointed that when the airplane fails me, I am doing whatever is necessary to NOT damage the occupants, even if it means totally destroying the airplane. I was even called in for a meeting with the chief flight instructor, the director of operations and the president of the flight school and told I might have to find another flight school if I didn't change my mind.
Very true. My first partial power loss in a single it took me a few seconds to realize that I had a problem that may become serious problem and that the planned flight just changed plans.
I got real nervous one year when I was parked at OWD next to a turbine bonanza. His plane reeked of Jet A and I got real nervous about my plane being fueled. I once had a line guy at GYY offer to put JET A in the Navion.
The Navion is easy to misfuel. I usually watch the fueling or do it myself. If not, I make sure the fueler knows how to do it. The main tank is really both wing tanks with a small accumulator in between. (The stock fuel selector is off/on unlike most low wings). One filler does both sides, so you have to either fill it really slow to give it time to work over to the other side or you have to stop after it appears full (and is really about 10 gallons short) and then after it drains down, top it off again. The baggage tank isn't prone to misfueling, but it gives an unsuspecting lineman a 100LL bath if he doesn't pay attention. The best cue to the tank being full is that there is a sudden gurgling as the fuel starts up the filler neck. If you're doing it slowly, you'll note a few drops coming out the vent line. If you expect your auto shutoff nozzle to save you, you're going to get a faceful of 100LL. I almost always offer to fill that tank myself.
USAIG back before they unceremoniously dumped all Navions from their coverage offered free restrictors for all insured who had tanks that you could fit a JET A nozzle into currently.
The Navion is easy to misfuel. I usually watch the fueling or do it myself. If not, I make sure the fueler knows how to do it. The main tank is really both wing tanks with a small accumulator in between. (The stock fuel selector is off/on unlike most low wings). One filler does both sides, so you have to either fill it really slow to give it time to work over to the other side or you have to stop after it appears full (and is really about 10 gallons short) and then after it drains down, top it off again. The baggage tank isn't prone to misfueling, but it gives an unsuspecting lineman a 100LL bath if he doesn't pay attention. The best cue to the tank being full is that there is a sudden gurgling as the fuel starts up the filler neck. If you're doing it slowly, you'll note a few drops coming out the vent line. If you expect your auto shutoff nozzle to save you, you're going to get a faceful of 100LL. I almost always offer to fill that tank myself.
USAIG back before they unceremoniously dumped all Navions from their coverage offered free restrictors for all insured who had tanks that you could fit a JET A nozzle into currently.
sarangan
Pattern Altitude
- Joined
- Jun 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,904
- Display Name
Display name:
Andrew, CFI-I
I don't allow anyone to refuel my airplane unless I am physically present. FBO's often ask me if they should refuel while I am gone, but I always insist on standing there while they refuel. It would have prevented something like this, if you see a JetA truck pull up to your 100LL airplane.
Per the lineman's story, that's exactly what happened.
hindsight2020
Final Approach
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2010
- Messages
- 6,998
- Display Name
Display name:
hindsight2020
It really should go without saying, but manipulating the fueling mechanics to accommodate a clearly incompatible nozzle to the filler port in use, ought to be an immediate non-starter. Those outlier examples of Piper JetProp conversions running around with turbines bolted on and fuel ports not yet modified for Jet-A nozzle fit, are a straight-up foul imo. Unbelievable they are allowed to operate outside one-time ferry permits.
As to engine recce, my experience with non-metro FBOs out here in W Texas is that most of the critters on the line are boomerang workers between the oil rigs, game lease ranch hands, and general townie unskilled work. These folks aren't aviation enthusiasts in the least, and I wouldn't trust them to recognize a Cessna 150 from an F-16. It's lowest common denominator stuff, which is why you have to go kindergarten on these logistics. Square peg round hole. If peg and hole don't match, sorry bud, we can't fuel it. Sorry for the inconvenience.
That would take care of the stories about your jetprop fuel port "not being converted yet", or you hop around jets all day so you forgot your personal airplane doesn't take it (the case here), or the twin piston and twin turbine cowlings look close enough for a min wage oil rig furloughee to distinguish. But humans are gonna human, and fuel right through the fences. Oh well.
As to engine recce, my experience with non-metro FBOs out here in W Texas is that most of the critters on the line are boomerang workers between the oil rigs, game lease ranch hands, and general townie unskilled work. These folks aren't aviation enthusiasts in the least, and I wouldn't trust them to recognize a Cessna 150 from an F-16. It's lowest common denominator stuff, which is why you have to go kindergarten on these logistics. Square peg round hole. If peg and hole don't match, sorry bud, we can't fuel it. Sorry for the inconvenience.
That would take care of the stories about your jetprop fuel port "not being converted yet", or you hop around jets all day so you forgot your personal airplane doesn't take it (the case here), or the twin piston and twin turbine cowlings look close enough for a min wage oil rig furloughee to distinguish. But humans are gonna human, and fuel right through the fences. Oh well.
Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,634
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
There are two types of line people: those who love aviation and want to be there, and those who cannot get a different job (in some climates being the line guy ain't too glamorous, hence the acceptance of the LCD employee). The second type, of which I've seen at my airport, are scary.
Unit74
Final Approach
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2014
- Messages
- 6,992
- Display Name
Display name:
Unit74
There is an AD on that decal if you can believe it. Hope that's no your plane...
Tarheelpilot
Final Approach
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2010
- Messages
- 7,507
- Location
- North Carolina once again.
- Display Name
Display name:
Tarheelpilot
It’s a question you can’t answer until it has happened to you. Having had two low altitude engine failures in a single I can verify from experience the second one happens slower perceptually. Didn’t feel nearly as rushed or reactionary. More like “crap ... not again.. whatever...” and just fly the airplane on the second one. Never had one happen at low altitude in a twin. Only had precautionary shutdowns at altitude. Not very eventful at all.
FormerHangie
En-Route
How many hours would a line person have to work to afford an hour of dual?
overdrive148
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,903
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
overdrive148
My first line job was $11/hr, second one was $15/hr...
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
so you need to work about 10 to 15 hours to realistically afford an hour of dual.. and that's assuming you're either working 40 hours to sustain other cost of living, or somehow you have free room and housing
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
I'm assuming the fuel filler ports will specifically say on there what it requires though, no? So while they look similar, even a half attentive person should be able to what the fuel fill port saysThe 172 is an exception.
Diesel Skyhawk:
Avgas Skyhawk:
honestly this whole thing to me is like somebody dying from drinking a bottle of Windex strictly because it is the same color as Gatorade
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2015
- Messages
- 9,306
- Display Name
Display name:
Aztec Flyer
The ratio of wages to training costs was probably better then than it is now.
@Pilawt will probably correct me, but my recollection is in the mid-70s those types of jobs paid about $1.50 an hour and it cost maybe $2500 to $3000 to get a private pilot licence at a Cessna Pilot Center (which wasn't always the cheapest place to train). Airplane wet rental prices jumped after the fall of 1973 Arab oil embargo, when the price of fuel climbed dramatically.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 29, 2014
- Messages
- 4,380
- Display Name
Display name:
Kayoh@190
It's definitely a lot worse now. Back in early HS (mid 90s) when I was doing my initial training I'd work about 9 hours at the flight school (desk work, washing planes, etc) on Saturday in exchange for an hour of dual on Sunday. Of course we avoided all the complicated issues like payroll, taxes, and so on.
I also think it was a lot more fun to hang out at the local airport in those days too. I thought nothing of spending all day Sunday as an airport bum after flying the one hour that morning.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
It's no different now, just whiny millennials!
/S
I did the whole lineman thing for a few years to pay for flying way back when
FormerHangie
En-Route
It's definitely a lot worse now. Back in early HS (mid 90s) when I was doing my initial training I'd work about 9 hours at the flight school (desk work, washing planes, etc) on Saturday in exchange for an hour of dual on Sunday. Of course we avoided all the complicated issues like payroll, taxes, and so on.
I also think it was a lot more fun to hang out at the local airport in those days too. I thought nothing of spending all day Sunday as an airport bum after flying the one hour that morning.
There are a couple of developments that have made what you did back then more difficult these days. One is that increasingly it seems that FBOs don't operate flight schools. That may mostly be a big city thing, but when it does happen, that removes the "off the books" possibility. The other thing that I've noticed is that the prices have gone up significantly the last couple of years, I'm guessing because of career training demand. In the Atlanta area, the rental rate for a 172 is now $160 plus, and instruction is going for $60 - $80 per hour.
Tantalum
Final Approach
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2017
- Messages
- 9,250
- Display Name
Display name:
San_Diego_Pilot
That's utter insanity
People might want to get out of all the glitz and glam fancy schools and find a smaller airport somewhere. I understand that a rural airport is not always feasible for someone, but this past weekend I was up at O22 (Columbia, CA) and they had a neat little flying school there with very reasonable rates: http://letsgofly.com/planes-rates
FormerHangie
En-Route
You can find 172s for rent for $135 per hour with instructors for $50 an hour if you go an hour or so outside of the city. Whether or not you can get to them to train on a weekday depends very much on where you live and work. I could get to KPDK in 15 minutes from my office, so it would be easy for me to schedule training on one weekday and one weekend day. At evening rush, I'd have to allow 1.5 hours to get to the closest of the less expensive airports, and two hours for the other two. It'd be dark by the time I got there. I'm sure there are lots of others who are in the same boat as I would be.
sourdough44
En-Route
I guess I’m a ‘lower tier’ flyer, the vast majority of the time I’m at the self-serve pump. Not that my plane is all confusing anyway, though vigilance is always called for.
If I had a plane near the edge, I guess locking caps & being present every time may be called for.
If I had a plane near the edge, I guess locking caps & being present every time may be called for.
Jon Weiswasser
Pre-takeoff checklist
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2019
- Messages
- 126
- Display Name
Display name:
J Weiswasser
My meridian, and I think most SE turboprops, must take Prist per POH.
overdrive148
En-Route
- Joined
- Apr 17, 2013
- Messages
- 3,903
- Location
- Fort Worth, Texas
- Display Name
Display name:
overdrive148
After the Denver fiasco, I applied (among other things) to be a line tech at Signature @ KAPA Centennial. They wanted to pay 10/hr with my aeronautics degree and prior experience. I would have had to drive from the north side of Denver to the south side. No way it would remotely work financially even for rent alone.