Air Tindi

[Frozenwhirlybird]

I'm late to the bash fest but has a fuel leak been ruled out? it seems really odd to me that they were that short.

The president of Air Tindi flat out stated the plane left without sufficient fuel. I’m surprised he used such a strong statement. To me that statement does not allow that option.

[Spandau]

My response is born out of about 7000 hrs of Twin Otter time in essentially the same neighbourhood as this accident.

Twin Otter fuel gauges are famously reliable. As a rule they either work perfectly or not at all. I have no idea what happened here, but one night, many moons ago I departed Yellowknife for Snowdrift, 115 pay miles away. About thirty minutes into the flight one of our passengers stuck her head in the cockpit and said “We smell fuel”. My co-pilot got out of his seat, went in the back and came back up a moment later and said “Holy shit - it’s higher than a kite back there”. We turned around and headed back to YZF and naturally the wx had gone in the toilet. Hay River was the alternate but by now we could smell fuel in the cockpit. Something was seriously wrong, and I dared not head for our alternate across 120 miles of October lake because I didn’t know how much fuel we had access to.

Long story short we got in, but I busted minimums to do it.

Maybe these guys fucked up and maybe they didn’t, but it’ll come out. Until then, let us at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

[pelmet]

My response is born out of about 7000 hrs of Twin Otter time in essentially the same neighbourhood as this accident.

Twin Otter fuel gauges are famously reliable. As a rule they either work perfectly or not at all. I have no idea what happened here, but one night, many moons ago I departed Yellowknife for Snowdrift, 115 pay miles away. About thirty minutes into the flight one of our passengers stuck her head in the cockpit and said “We smell fuel”. My co-pilot got out of his seat, went in the back and came back up a moment later and said “Holy shit - it’s higher than a kite back there”. We turned around and headed back to YZF and naturally the wx had gone in the toilet. Hay River was the alternate but by now we could smell fuel in the cockpit. Something was seriously wrong, and I dared not head for our alternate across 120 miles of October lake because I didn’t know how much fuel we had access to.

Long story short we got in, but I busted minimums to do it.

Maybe these guys fucked up and maybe they didn’t, but it’ll come out. Until then, let us at least give them the benefit of the doubt.

It is an interesting scenario that reminds me of the ASRS publication where they sometimes give several scenarios, as written by the pilot reports, and then for each one say…….What Would You Do? Then in a separate section, they publish what the reporting pilot actually did(which the ASRS publication states is not necessarily what would have been the most appropriate action).

I was asking myself the same question in this situation and wondering if it would it help to unlatch the most forward of the rear doors and then open or partially open a cockpit window to see how it affects the fume situation.

[Spandau]

I remember that I briefly opened my window but that was a mistake. If I did it again I'd open the right hand rear door and see if that helped. It probably would have. After we landed I never even turned off the generators, I just pulled the fuel levers, left everything turned on and got out last through the back. I was afraid that turning something off might cause a spark.

The co-pilot and I were a little stoned on fuel fumes after we got out and got some fresh air, and when the engineers lifted up the floor one of them exclaimed "Let's make paper boats!" I forget the details but a connection between fuel cells had come apart. Which one I don't remember.

[pelmet]

I remember that I briefly opened my window but that was a mistake. If I did it again I'd open the right hand rear door and see if that helped. It probably would have.

Interesting. An airliner with its increasing curvature will definitely have a lower pressure outside the cockpit making an opening likely to bring smoke forward (like happened in the the UPS crash) but I thought a slab- sided Twin Otter might be different.

[co-joe]

I remember that I briefly opened my window but that was a mistake. If I did it again I'd open the right hand rear door and see if that helped. It probably would have.

Interesting. An airliner with its increasing curvature will definitely have a lower pressure outside the cockpit making an opening likely to bring smoke forward (like happened in the the UPS crash) but I thought a slab- sided Twin Otter might be different.

You say that but the 737 FCTM says you can open the window in flight if you depressurize the aircraft first, it goes on to say that wind isn't the issue, but that the noise in the flight deck will make communication difficult. It doesn't mention if it pulls air out or pushes it in so no idea what effect it would have on smoke or fumes. You'd have to be in a real bad situation to want to try it.

[pelmet]

I remember that I briefly opened my window but that was a mistake. If I did it again I'd open the right hand rear door and see if that helped. It probably would have.

Interesting. An airliner with its increasing curvature will definitely have a lower pressure outside the cockpit making an opening likely to bring smoke forward (like happened in the the UPS crash) but I thought a slab- sided Twin Otter might be different.

You say that but the 737 FCTM says you can open the window in flight if you depressurize the aircraft first, it goes on to say that wind isn't the issue, but that the noise in the flight deck will make communication difficult. It doesn't mention if it pulls air out or pushes it in so no idea what effect it would have on smoke or fumes. You'd have to be in a real bad situation to want to try it.

Good point. Varies by aircraft and location of opening. I think the 737 may be only for fumes sourced on the flight deck when opening the window to suck them out. Sorry about the thread drift. Back to the subject of the thread.

[co-joe]

Don't be sorry at all. It got me thinking about the aircraft I currently fly and this situation that may or may not have been caused by a fuel leak.

If you want an "I learned about flying from that" story, I have a relatable one. I flew a King Air out of YYC a good 10 years back and got rushed in departing, we had 4 aircraft departing at once, there were pax all over the ramp, and multiple fuel trucks. We piled into the machine, and fired up, got a clearance in a rush, got thrown ahead of bigger jets on the taxi, cleared immediate takeoff, and literally on climb through mid altitudes I realised we hadn't been fuelled. Brutal. Totally unacceptable.

Lots of emotions went through my head. How did I let this happen to me? I'm better than this. I have good skills, and good experience. I have a dedicated team of professionals behind me, how did they let me make this dumb mistake. You realise very quickly that there is only one person to blame here and it's you.

So here's a question for the Avcan hive mind; What were our options at that moment? give me a list. Tell me what you would have done had you found yourself in an aeroplane without IFR gas? I will say we were lucky enough to have enough gas to spend a few minutes thinking about the situation, we weren't on fumes, but we had a heck of a lot less gas than we wanted.

[Spandau]

So here's a question for the Avcan hive mind; What were our options at that moment? give me a list. Tell me what you would have done had you found yourself in an aeroplane without IFR gas? I will say we were lucky enough to have enough gas to spend a few minutes thinking about the situation, we weren't on fumes, but we had a heck of a lot less gas than we wanted.

I'll chip in:

There's a couple of ways to handle this. You could just up and confess "Ya, Departure, we forgot to refuel so we'd like to return" but there's going to be a lot more embarrassment to go around than just your own (but you don't count because you deserve it all, Stupid!) You'll embarrass the Company, and that might just kill a lot of business or cause people to rethink inking that big contract... so you can't really go this route.

You could blame it on Maintenance but that's not going to make you any friends, plus they'll make sure that the truth gets out so that everyone knows now a) that you're stupid because you took off without enough gas and b) you're a liar because you tried to blame Maintenance for it.

The one time it happened to me I was vfr on floats and the flaps weren't even up yet when we caught it. I said something unprintable and then we just did a quick circuit and went back to the dock. We were "highballing" on floats and it just got missed. That night I bought a couple of flats of beer for the waterbase fridge and that was the end of it.

If your situation happened to me I'd probably just tell Center that "we've been requested to return" and leave it at that. After landing I'd go see the Chief Pilot, confess that I'm stupid, double check the fuel caps and be on my way.

[pelmet]

Don't be sorry at all. It got me thinking about the aircraft I currently fly and this situation that may or may not have been caused by a fuel leak.

If you want an "I learned about flying from that" story, I have a relatable one. I flew a King Air out of YYC a good 10 years back and got rushed in departing, we had 4 aircraft departing at once, there were pax all over the ramp, and multiple fuel trucks. We piled into the machine, and fired up, got a clearance in a rush, got thrown ahead of bigger jets on the taxi, cleared immediate takeoff, and literally on climb through mid altitudes I realised we hadn't been fuelled. Brutal. Totally unacceptable.

Lots of emotions went through my head. How did I let this happen to me? I'm better than this. I have good skills, and good experience. I have a dedicated team of professionals behind me, how did they let me make this dumb mistake. You realise very quickly that there is only one person to blame here and it's you.

So here's a question for the Avcan hive mind; What were our options at that moment? give me a list. Tell me what you would have done had you found yourself in an aeroplane without IFR gas? I will say we were lucky enough to have enough gas to spend a few minutes thinking about the situation, we weren't on fumes, but we had a heck of a lot less gas than we wanted.

Not really enough info to make a decision such as the weather that day, possible route modifications, ability to make an enroute stop, etc.

We had a crew that didn't check their notams and went to a nearby destination expecting to fuel when no fuel was available. They were able to continue on and returned with VFR fuel.

[co-joe]

I'll chip in:

There's a couple of ways to handle this. You could just up and confess "Ya, Departure, we forgot to refuel so we'd like to return" but there's going to be a lot more embarrassment to go around than just your own (but you don't count because you deserve it all, Stupid!) You'll embarrass the Company, and that might just kill a lot of business or cause people to rethink inking that big contract... so you can't really go this route.

Absolutely, declaring an emergency if required, and executing a 180 was definitely on the table first and foremost. It was the first option that came to mind, it was the first one we discussed as an option, and initially it was the only option my FO thought was a good one. Fortunately for us we had enough gas to get to destination, but we definitely did not have IFR gas. I can't remember the exact numbers but I'm not ever sure we had VFR reserves. We did have time to spend 5 minutes talking about it.

[co-joe]

Not really enough info to make a decision such as the weather that day, possible route modifications, ability to make an enroute stop, etc.

We had a crew that didn't check their notams and went to a nearby destination expecting to fuel when no fuel was available. They were able to continue on and returned with VFR fuel.

Also fantastic, thank you for bringing a fuel diversion up. It's not a structured approach to decision making if you only consider the first solution. Unless you're out of gas, then I suppose you are down to your only choice. But we had time to at least discuss it as a crew. Turning around and going to a busy airport like YYC would mean a minimum 2 hour delay, and that's if I didn't get fired while there, and assuming the pax were still willing to forgive me and come for a second plane ride. You have to fly a STAR arrival, possible long taxi, wait for fuel truck. Unless you squawk 7700, but then that comes with it's own set of problems.

The weather that day was not a major factor. We were in VFR weather, and were expecting to stay that way at destination and alternate. I can't exactly remember the destination but it was somewhere small and uncontrolled so likely GFA weather no TAF, and likely an auto station. Rocky Mountain House, or Drayton Valley maybe? Red Deer as the alternate I'm guessing since they have a TAF.

You also brought up going VFR. That's a tough thing to get en route when you initially filed IFR. You can't cancel the IFR till below 12 500', and not till you have the field in sight. So technically we would have been breaking the law for the en route portion. You could call the FIC, file a VFR flight plan, and then ask centre to close the IFR one and open the VFR plan but they are going to ask questions. It's just not a normal thing to do.

There's one more option we discussed that we ended up taking that not only solved our problems, but did not compromise safety in any way (IMHO). There's probably lots of options I haven't even thought of as well.

[pelmet]

Not really enough info to make a decision such as the weather that day, possible route modifications, ability to make an enroute stop, etc.

We had a crew that didn't check their notams and went to a nearby destination expecting to fuel when no fuel was available. They were able to continue on and returned with VFR fuel.

You also brought up going VFR. That's a tough thing to get en route when you initially filed IFR. You can't cancel the IFR till below 12 500', and not till you have the field in sight. So technically we would have been breaking the law for the en route portion. You could call the FIC, file a VFR flight plan, and then ask centre to close the IFR one and open the VFR plan but they are going to ask questions. It's just not a normal thing to do.

FSS can open your VFR flight plan, if one is filed.

As for center, I wonder if they would accept Controlled VFR as it might avoid a descent.

[co-joe]

...

FSS can open your VFR flight plan, if one is filed.

As for center, I wonder if they would accept Controlled VFR as it might avoid a descent.

Good question. I've actually never used CVFR, but I suspect it only applies in Class B airspace, once you get above FL180 I'm pretty sure that's Class A airspace, so IFR only I believe. The King Air 200 needs to be around 180-230 ish to get decent TAS/ fuel burn.

Speaking of that, any student pilots on here? Anybody do Exercise 10 recently and want to suggest an alternative solution to my fuel problem (likely Air Tindi's problem just to stay on track for the thread)

[pelmet]

...

FSS can open your VFR flight plan, if one is filed.

As for center, I wonder if they would accept Controlled VFR as it might avoid a descent.

Good question. I've actually never used CVFR, but I suspect it only applies in Class B airspace, once you get above FL180 I'm pretty sure that's Class A airspace, so IFR only I believe. The King Air 200 needs to be around 180-230 ish to get decent TAS/ fuel burn.

Speaking of that, any student pilots on here? Anybody do Exercise 10 recently and want to suggest an alternative solution to my fuel problem (likely Air Tindi's problem just to stay on track for the thread)

I suspect the Tindi guys discovered their problem too late. But if close to equi-distant from airports and have a chance of making it, they might want to consider the winds and shutting down an engine to extend range.

If no chance of making it, perhaps head toward smoother terrain for the off airport landing. If terrain is similar in either direction, I would prefer to be heading toward rescue and medical facilities although weather should be considered as well.

[TeePeeCreeper]

...

FSS can open your VFR flight plan, if one is filed.

As for center, I wonder if they would accept Controlled VFR as it might avoid a descent.

Good question. I've actually never used CVFR, but I suspect it only applies in Class B airspace, once you get above FL180 I'm pretty sure that's Class A airspace, so IFR only I believe. The King Air 200 needs to be around 180-230 ish to get decent TAS/ fuel burn.

Speaking of that, any student pilots on here? Anybody do Exercise 10 recently and want to suggest an alternative solution to my fuel problem (likely Air Tindi's problem just to stay on track for the thread)

Range and endurance wouldn’t have helped them much if they weren’t doing fuel checks to begin with. I think that periodically monitoring ones fuel state (I jott mine down every 20 minutes or when crossing a way point which ever comes first) might have prevented this.

TPC

[co-joe]

Range and endurance wouldn’t have helped them much if they weren’t doing fuel checks to begin with. I think that periodically monitoring ones fuel state (I jott mine down every 20 minutes or when crossing a way point which ever comes first) might have prevented this.

TPC

You're probably right, In my case it saved my day. The King Air 200 trues out at 240-260, and in my time flying them you always ran best speed. This day, I passed control to the FO, reached under his seat, and pulled out the AFM. I found range power for our altitude, weight, and temperature and set it. It was a way lower power setting than I had thought. I think it was around 1000 'lbs, instead of the normal 2300 we would be setting at a mid altitude. The fuel burn difference was huge, somewhere around 400 Lbs/ hour instead of the normal 700 lbs/ hour you'd get a best forward speed. The drop in TAS was definitely noticeable but not anywhere near as much as the fuel burn difference, I think it was around 205 ktas. So basically a 43% reduction in fuel burn, for a 20% reduction in TAS give or take a bit.

The difference gave us full IFR fuel again. I ran the numbers twice, had the FO confirm them. Even still, CRM wise I had to sell it to him. I think he had basically decided we were going with plan A of an emergency return. Now originally we had planned to depart with return fuel, but now we had to fill up at destination. Once I confirmed in the CFS that fuel was available we had to ask for the lower TAS from centre. They actually asked if everything was OK. So one SMS report later, and a rather uncomfortable meeting with the chief pilot, I was back on line with a much better respect for procedures.

Shutting an engine down to stay airborne can work, but that's a hail Mary attempt. If you ever get yourself into that position, you're probably also praying out loud. I heard a story of a Dash 8 crew in Northern Quebec saving the day by shutting an engine down.

[pelmet]

Range and endurance wouldn’t have helped them much if they weren’t doing fuel checks to begin with. I think that periodically monitoring ones fuel state (I jott mine down every 20 minutes or when crossing a way point which ever comes first) might have prevented this.

TPC

Shutting an engine down to stay airborne can work, but that's a hail Mary attempt. If you ever get yourself into that position, you're probably also praying out loud. I heard a story of a Dash 8 crew in Northern Quebec saving the day by shutting an engine down.

It is something that is done when the alternative is crashing, which was nowhere close to your case. However, It may not work for all types.

[co-joe]

It is something that is done when the alternative is crashing, which was nowhere close to your case. However, It may not work for all types.

You're totally right. If crashing is a likely outcome from your current situation, shutting one down to save gas is absolutely an option to consider. That's thinking outside the box and I've never heard of a written procedure for it. The Boeing has an Eng Out cruise page on the FMC that tells you a bunch of information like drift down altitude with max continuous thrust, what power setting that is, and you can go to the prog page and see your fuel at destination and see if it changes, and by how much. If it showed you landing with more fuel and you knew you were in deep trouble it gives you more options to run through that structured decision making model.

In the Twin Otter, you just have to know your plane, know what single engine fuel burn and TAS look like. Almost guaranteed this crew's training was "on wing" so they should have had a pretty good idea of those numbers. That all only helps if you are paying attention and realise you are low on gas. Situation awareness is key here.

[pelmet]

It is something that is done when the alternative is crashing, which was nowhere close to your case. However, It may not work for all types.

You're totally right. If crashing is a likely outcome from your current situation, shutting one down to save gas is absolutely an option to consider. That's thinking outside the box and I've never heard of a written procedure for it. The Boeing has an Eng Out cruise page on the FMC that tells you a bunch of information like drift down altitude with max continuous thrust, what power setting that is, and you can go to the prog page and see your fuel at destination and see if it changes, and by how much. If it showed you landing with more fuel and you knew you were in deep trouble it gives you more options to run through that structured decision making model.

In the Twin Otter, you just have to know your plane, know what single engine fuel burn and TAS look like. Almost guaranteed this crew's training was "on wing" so they should have had a pretty good idea of those numbers. That all only helps if you are paying attention and realise you are low on gas. Situation awareness is key here.

I thought I read it in a Twin Otter manual but it might have been a different type. Remember reading it somewhere but couldn't find it again years later.

Not sure it would work too well in a jet with higher increased fuel burns and performance shortfalls.

Bottom line, I don't have any evidence to prove my point. Would welcome it if anybody has some.