Any DA-42 misfuelings?

The ramblings of our community of aviators.

Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray

User avatar
Lance Murray
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1163
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2010 11:25 pm
First Name: Lance
Aircraft Type: DA40
Airports:
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 118 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Lance Murray »

Always smell your fuel sample and maybe even rub some between your fingers. Jet-A will feel oily. Also be sure your sample jar isn't stained blue.
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Rich »

TimS wrote:Rich,

I recall the switch to unleaded, but I was learning to drive at the tail end of it.
Most of the hoses and pump handles last only about ten years. How hard from an engineering perspective to make it a fitting that is easy to use and only allows the correct fuel?
Once that is completed, have it apply to new planes...
This problem will be with aviation for the next 50 years, why not solve it for future aircraft?

Tim
The problem is it has to work for legacy aircraft all during this "transition" period as well as accomplish what you want for the "new" ones. Just different sizes doesn't cut it. As I said, this inhibits mis-fueling in one direction only. And there will still likely be 1950's (and earlier) aircraft flying 50 years from now. There are certain aircraft even now that can use 92UL, ethanol-free mogas, or (as with many LSA's), mo-gas with ethanol. At some airports you have that kind of pump sitting right alongside 100LL, so there are many kinds of fuels you would have to deal with. Some of which may not yet exist.

FYI: The average age of US piston-engine aircraft is over 40 years. It used to be that a 30-year-old airplane was considered an "antique". Now it's just an average airplane. We do not have the attrition in the GA market that there is in the automotive market.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Rich »

jeffappleton wrote:... there was absolutely no blending of the fuels in the wing, it was as if they had come from a different place. Prior to this incident, I ALWAYS sump all 6 points and thought that I would quickly recognize a mis-fueling, similar to the way you can see a drop or two of water...clearly this is not the case and this could have been an accident not incident if the line guy didn't fess up. The separation of fuels is something that most people don't know and it likely gives us a false sense of security.
Now that's worth noting. I do know you can get gasoline and diesel fuel to blend, but it takes some stirring. You are correct that just pouring one fuel on top of the other doesn't really do the job. I know this from having s**t detail when in Viet Nam. You'd have to pour some gas in along with the diesel to get the latter to ignite. They didn't magically mix all by themselves, the gas kind of sitting on top, which was fine in my case. in an airplane tank - not so much.

The dynamics of putting the heavier jet fuel into a tank partially filled with lighter gasoline might be somewhat different. One would think the tendency of the jet fuel to sink toward the bottom would promote some mixing and help the effectiveness of sampling. But in the shallow tanks in pretty much any aircraft wing tanks, this might not work well in the real world unless maybe the tank was real low to begin with.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
carym
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 1021
Joined: Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:00 pm
First Name: cary
Aircraft Type: DA42
Aircraft Registration: N336TS
Airports: KTYQ
Has thanked: 37 times
Been thanked: 83 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by carym »

Getting that heavier fuel (or water) to go from an outer tank to the inner tank where you can sump it is also problematic. I had a fuel cap that wasn't tight, and flying through rain (I think) led to a large amount of water getting in to the outer tank. Months later I still sump some water from the inner sump (although not from the engine sump). I wonder how many tank full's of JetA I have to go through before all the water is eventually gone?
Cary
DA42.AC036 (returned)
S35 (1964 V-tail Bonanza)
Alaska adventure: http://mariashflying.tumblr.com
User avatar
Tom Davis
3 Diamonds Member
3 Diamonds Member
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 7:05 pm
First Name: Tom
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N476PS
Airports: KOCW
Has thanked: 63 times
Been thanked: 4 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Tom Davis »

I initially thought that this crash in Atlanta:

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news ... /27575835/

was probably caused by putting jet fuel in a 100LL airplane, but according to this article, at least one witness said that the engine sounded normal, which does not square with my theory.

I have a 2005 DA40 with a regular engine. One advantage is that when I check the fuel to look for water, I can immediately see and smell Jet fuel since it will sink to the bottom.
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Rich »

Tom Davis wrote:I initially thought that this crash in Atlanta:

http://www.citizen-times.com/story/news ... /27575835/

was probably caused by putting jet fuel in a 100LL airplane, but according to this article, at least one witness said that the engine sounded normal, which does not square with my theory.

I have a 2005 DA40 with a regular engine. One advantage is that when I check the fuel to look for water, I can immediately see and smell Jet fuel since it will sink to the bottom.
It still seems possible, as it does seem like a power problem. But I would think if you got jet fuel flowing into the engine, it probably wouldn't run at all.

FWIW, though this surely would not be the cause of the crash, the registration for this aircraft (N5802V ) shows as expired. It's a 38-year old airplane.
Last edited by Rich on Wed May 27, 2015 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
Colin
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 2006
Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2010 8:37 pm
First Name: Colin
Aircraft Type: DA42
Aircraft Registration: N972RD
Airports: KFHR
Has thanked: 319 times
Been thanked: 527 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Colin »

http://www.squawkpoint.com/2014/01/criticism/

Bob Hoover's plane was fueled with Jet Fuel by mistake.
Colin Summers, PP Multi-Engine IFR, ~3,000hrs
colin@mightycheese.com * send email rather than PM
http://www.flyingsummers.com
N972RD DA42 G1000 2.0 s/n 42.AC100 (sold!)
N971RD DA40 G1000 s/n 40.508 (traded)
User avatar
TimS
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 553
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
First Name: Timothy
Aircraft Type: OTHER
Aircraft Registration: N1446C
Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
Has thanked: 94 times
Been thanked: 97 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by TimS »

Rich wrote:
TimS wrote:Rich,

I recall the switch to unleaded, but I was learning to drive at the tail end of it.
Most of the hoses and pump handles last only about ten years. How hard from an engineering perspective to make it a fitting that is easy to use and only allows the correct fuel?
Once that is completed, have it apply to new planes...
This problem will be with aviation for the next 50 years, why not solve it for future aircraft?

Tim
The problem is it has to work for legacy aircraft all during this "transition" period as well as accomplish what you want for the "new" ones. Just different sizes doesn't cut it. As I said, this inhibits mis-fueling in one direction only. And there will still likely be 1950's (and earlier) aircraft flying 50 years from now. There are certain aircraft even now that can use 92UL, ethanol-free mogas, or (as with many LSA's), mo-gas with ethanol. At some airports you have that kind of pump sitting right alongside 100LL, so there are many kinds of fuels you would have to deal with. Some of which may not yet exist.

FYI: The average age of US piston-engine aircraft is over 40 years. It used to be that a 30-year-old airplane was considered an "antique". Now it's just an average airplane. We do not have the attrition in the GA market that there is in the automotive market.
Rich,

You can do more then just size, you can also do shapes. People are trainable. e.g. extreme oval versus round. As long as it is smaller in diameter then the standard gas cap which is about about 2-3 inches, it will continue to work for the existing/legacy fleet.
I would also state there have been a multiple of surveys by the FAA, and fleet data provided by Cirrus, that between 60-80% of the avgas in the country is consumed by planes less then ten years old (the large range depends on assumptions).

Lastly, the newer aircraft are the most active part of the fleet, they also tend to be the models most likely to have Jet-A and 100LL variants. e.g. DA42, PA46, DA40.... So reducing the chance of human error for something that is reasonably simple technically would be a smart thing to do (in my opinion).

Tim
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Rich »

TimS wrote: People are trainable.
Tim
If people were sufficiently trainable we wouldn't be having this discussion :-D
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
User avatar
Rich
5 Diamonds Member
5 Diamonds Member
Posts: 4592
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
First Name: Rich
Aircraft Type: DA40
Aircraft Registration: N40XE
Airports: S39 Prineville OR
Has thanked: 145 times
Been thanked: 1180 times

Re: Any DA-42 misfuelings?

Post by Rich »

Lo and behold I was just reading through an article in Light Plane Maintenance about fueling standards. Neither the FAA nor the NTSB has dominion over this. Worse yet, it stated that turbine and turbo-jet aircraft uses Jet fuel and all piston engines use some sort of gasoline :shock: . Perpetuating the misinformation that got this thread started.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
Post Reply