10,000 gallons of Mogas

Oooooooo....sorry. Didn't mean to hit a sore spot.

I'm glad you're proud of our military -- so are we (our son is Army ROTC at the University of Iowa) -- but I think we all know how stupid our gummint can be when it comes to regulations.

How 'bout this one, instead: NASA spent millions developing a ballpoint pen that would work in outter space.

The Russians used a pencil. D'oh!

No one argues that -- at some level -- it's safer to fuel on the ramp than it is in the open hangar. It's also safer to walk than to drive, and flying is just crazy-dangerous. Dang things fall out of the sky every day.

I try to find the common-sense way through life. That approach has served me well, thus far.

Nice deflection and dismissal.

I'm not simply "proud of our military."

I served it for 21 years, as an Enlisted member, a Non-Commissioned Officer, and an Officer.

The point was (and remains) -- the US Air Force, the US Army, and the Professional and Volunteer Fire Service do not refuel indoors.

Yet obviously you know better.
 
The point was (and remains) -- the US Air Force, the US Army, and the Professional and Volunteer Fire Service do not refuel indoors.

Yet obviously you know better.

I don't think Jay ever said that. What I believe he is saying is that he has looked at the risks and feels that is one he is willing to take.

At this point, you guys are chasing yourselves around the same tree. Time to let it go.:yes:
 
Better be careful about the local state laws WRT transporting gasoline in bed-mounted tanks in pickup trucks. In Florida, for example, it's a felony (Florida statute 316.80) to transport motor fuel or diesel in any kind of tank that is not D.O.T approved. The inexpensive tanks intended for farm truck use are usually not D.O.T approved. Approved tanks are very expensive since they must meet strict structural integrity and ventilation standards. Beware of tank makers who claim their tanks are "built to DOT standards" but are not actually DOT approved. In Texas if you transport gasoline in any kind of "cargo tank" for anyone other than yourself for your own use, you must get a fuel transport license.

Thankfully, I live in Iowa, where every other farmer's pickup truck has the identical fuel transfer tank set-up. Even though I don't live in a rural area, I still see dozens of identical rigs every day.

It's a very well-built rig, professionally made and installed. There is no room for amateur stuff when you're talking about transporting 360 pounds of gasoline right behind my head. And, again, compared to balancing a 6-gallon plastic jug on your wing (as most people who burn car gas do), it's light-years ahead in convenience and safety.
 
Jay,

Thanks for posting about your fuel truck. I will be copying your idea when I finally get my plane. I plan on building a Sportsman and powering it with a Subaru engine. I hadn't really thought about how to transport Mogas to the airport, but your truck looks like the ideal solution.

Tony
 
Yet obviously you know better.

"Fueling in-doors?"

Really, Dan. You accuse me of "deflection", and then (in the same breath)you tell me I'm fueling "in-doors"?

I think you need to go fly some. All this sittin' in front of a computer is hurting your head...

:goofy:
 
How 'bout this one, instead: NASA spent millions developing a ballpoint pen that would work in outer space.

Nope. The US Space program used pencils originally, but Fisher developed the "Space Pen" on its own nickel and sold them to NASA for $3 each.

http://www.snopes.com/business/genius/spacepen.asp

The Russians used a pencil. D'oh!

And they quit using them in 1968, after developing their own version of the Space Pen.

Pencils in space are a bad idea, as there is no gravity thus the graphite dust goes everywhere. All the electronics uses fans to force air through for cooling, so the graphite dust makes the rounds. There are central air circulation points with filters, but that graphite dust is fairly fine.

And sometimes, of course, the tips of the pencils break off and go floating around...getting aspirated by the astronauts, potentially striking them in the eyes, etc.

Finally, you face the need to develop a space pencil sharpener, if you don't want splinters of wood flying around the cabin as well.

For the clean rooms used for assembling space hardware, not only are pencils banned, ordinary retractable ball point pens are prohibited as well. The "click" mechanisms tend to shed tiny metal and plastic particles.

Ron Wanttaja
 
And you're not doing your local firefighters any favors by concealing that bulk tank and not having any labeling on the vehicle...

FWIW, placards are only required when over 1,000 pounds of gasoline is being hauled. That'd be 166 gallons, and Jay's setup only holds 58.8 gallons - Not even close.

I think people are forgetting that Jay created this system because it's SAFER than the other way (using a bunch of 5-gallon cans).

This, folks, is why a lot of people are afraid to post here. :mad: Give it a rest!
 
FWIW, placards are only required when over 1,000 pounds of gasoline is being hauled. That'd be 166 gallons, and Jay's setup only holds 58.8 gallons - Not even close.

I think people are forgetting that Jay created this system because it's SAFER than the other way (using a bunch of 5-gallon cans).

This, folks, is why a lot of people are afraid to post here. :mad: Give it a rest!
ding..ding..ding--Cool idea Jay, and a hell of a lot safer than most.
 
Given only the '47 V tail is STC'ed for auto gas (and ethanol-free mogas is nigh impossible to find around here) I'll stick to AVGAS out of a grounded, outdoor pump.

That's wonderful....
 
FWIW, placards are only required when over 1,000 pounds of gasoline is being hauled. That'd be 166 gallons, and Jay's setup only holds 58.8 gallons - Not even close.

Actually, my tank *is* placarded "Flammable" in 4" letters, just because I think it ought to be.

This, folks, is why a lot of people are afraid to post here. :mad: Give it a rest!

Thanks for the defense, but remember where I came from: Usenet's "rec.aviation.piloting" -- a group that was completely destroyed by a few very malicious and effective trolls who specialized in personal attacks of the most vile nature. You had to develop a thick skin to survive in that forum for ten years, and I still hop in from time to time, just to remind myself of why I like it here so much more! PofA is like a girl's tea party by comparison -- and I mean that in a *good* way -- so don't worry about me not posting simply because someone disagrees with me...

:p
 
Actually, my tank *is* placarded "Flammable" in 4" letters, just because I think it ought to be.

The placards I'm speaking of are the ones that are diamond-shaped, red, and say "FLAMMABLE 1203" and have to be on all four sides of the outside of the vehicle. ;)

Thanks for the defense, but remember where I came from: Usenet's "rec.aviation.piloting" -- a group that was completely destroyed by a few very malicious and effective trolls who specialized in personal attacks of the most vile nature. You had to develop a thick skin to survive in that forum for ten years, and I still hop in from time to time, just to remind myself of why I like it here so much more! PofA is like a girl's tea party by comparison -- and I mean that in a *good* way -- so don't worry about me not posting simply because someone disagrees with me...

:p

I'm not worried about YOU going away - Just pointing out that there are probably hundreds of lurkers here who do not post because of threads like this. They don't have the Usenet-thick skin. :no: But, I'm sure many of them have valuable insights to contribute, which is why I hate threads that go like this one has.
 
The placards I'm speaking of are the ones that are diamond-shaped, red, and say "FLAMMABLE 1203" and have to be on all four sides of the outside of the vehicle. ;)

Ah, gotcha. Shoot, I wasn't even thinking about those big things...

I'm not worried about YOU going away - Just pointing out that there are probably hundreds of lurkers here who do not post because of threads like this. They don't have the Usenet-thick skin. :no: But, I'm sure many of them have valuable insights to contribute, which is why I hate threads that go like this one has.

Right you are. I was always mindful of that over on rec.aviation, back when it was alive and vibrant. You had to be careful of how vociferous you might become during a discussion, for fear of driving off any newbies who might fear the wrath of rebuttal.

It's funny, and sad -- we used to have long, drawn out threads on just this topic. Now, if you pop into rec.aviation, it's just a few trolls, and a tiny handfull of pilots who are doing little but fight the trolls. Discussion of piloting is almost nil.

It turns out that what we were cautioning against happening in that group was the LEAST of our worries, although we didn't know it at the time.

:(
 
Right you are. I was always mindful of that over on rec.aviation, back when it was alive and vibrant. You had to be careful of how vociferous you might become during a discussion, for fear of driving off any newbies who might fear the wrath of rebuttal.

It's funny, and sad -- we used to have long, drawn out threads on just this topic. Now, if you pop into rec.aviation, it's just a few trolls, and a tiny handfull of pilots who are doing little but fight the trolls. Discussion of piloting is almost nil.

It turns out that what we were cautioning against happening in that group was the LEAST of our worries, although we didn't know it at the time.

:(

And now you're probably getting PM's on this subject. Heck, I am! And according to those PM's, if you fuel a plane in an open hangar, you'll blow yourself up. :rolleyes:
 
If I can be so bold but to post again (yes I am a newbie!), I think one needs to look at the intent of the standards/rules/codes etc. that cover refueling aircraft. IMHO (and how I would interpret the code), there are two reasons, beyond preventing a fire, it says not to fuel inside:

1-A burning airplane inside a hanger is worse than a burning airplane outside a hanger and;

2-There is the greater potential of having an ignition source inside a hanger than outside.

Numer 2 is the key, eliminate ignition sources and your chances of having a fire is minimized greatly. We tend to worry about only static, but it is always going to be there no matter what, including if you bond prior to fueling. (However bonding does reduce the risk of a static spark) If one takes the proper precaution, has adequate ventilation, and waits until introducing potential ignition sources into the hanger, it can be safe. As far as that goes, that should be the rule anytime you open your hanger door. If you get a whiff of fuel (or even if you don't) when opening the door, ventilate prior to introducing an ignition source. Keep in mind that your nose can and does get desensitized to the odor. I would bet that anyone with a Cesnna high wing has had more fuel dumped on the floor from the vent tube than from fueling, however the quantity is so small it is too lean to burn as long as you do not introduce an ignition source right on top of the product.

Also, there is an exception to the NFPA codes for maintenance, i.e. your A&P defueling your plane to work on it. There are rules to cover this, but it is an exception none the less and can be done indoors.

Having said that, if I were the authority having jurisdiction over an airport, I would be inclined to enforce the standard/code as written. (No indoor fueling/defueling) The reason is not Jay or others that take precautions, it is for the guy who decides to fuel his plane from plastic gas cans through a plastic funnel on a dry winter day with his propane powered engine heater running, and doesn't have a step ladder so he uses the steps on the strut of his high wing Cessna. He may not have a problem burning his plane, or himself, but my responsibility is to prevent fires from occuring and/or spreading to other property. In other words, the standard is written to protect you and the other guy from hurting you.

With all of that said, and it was said in an earlier post, one must look at the risk of his actions. If they are acceptable to him, it can be done safe. There is no doubt that if you never fuel inside, you will never have a fire while fueling inside. If you are going go fuel inside, make sure there are no ignition sources and make sure you ventilate before introducing one. All depends on your level of comfort. Even if you do not fuel inside, get into the habit of ventilating (i.e open the door all the way and letting it air out) anytime your plane is inside.

OK, so this newbie just posted in his first controversial subject for the purpose of a) showing everyone I am not scared:eek:, and b) to hopefully add some safety thinking beyond static to those of us that fuel our own planes. That is what I like about this board, it makes me think!

(Well I kinda fibbed, I am a little scared.)

Tim

PS-Jay, I hope you removed your cigarette lighter and ashtray from your "refueling" truck, that is in the standard as well! :D
 
OK, so this newbie just posted in his first controversial subject for the purpose of a) showing everyone I am not scared:eek:, and b) to hopefully add some safety thinking beyond static to those of us that fuel our own planes. That is what I like about this board, it makes me think!

Tim,

Well said and well reasoned.

I agree 100%

Dan
 
OK, so this newbie just posted in his first controversial subject for the purpose of a) showing everyone I am not scared:eek:, and b) to hopefully add some safety thinking beyond static to those of us that fuel our own planes. That is what I like about this board, it makes me think!

Thanks Tim! Excellent post. (Hmmm... Balanced position - no absolutes, excellent information, I'd give you some positive rep points if I could! :D)

(Well I kinda fibbed, I am a little scared.)

Well, you're not THAT new either... so you can probably see why I'm concerned about the real newbies!
 
While folks are going slightly bonkers arguing for and against fueling in a hangar, has anyone stopped to consider that ignition sources are perfectly legal (by uniform building code) in residential garages? That's right, you can have a natural gas fired water heater setting right next to your car.

How does that work you might ask? Research has shown that combustion sources more than 16 or so inches above the floor are perfectly ok.

What does any of this have to do with fueling aircraft? Dunno but it seems to me that gasoline vapors aren't really a problem under conditions commonly found in a residential garage. It also seems to me that a hangar isn't that different from a garage. Hmmmm. How many of us have fueled a lawn mower or even our car in a garage?

I fuel my lawn mower in the garage and definately don't consider that a dangerous action.
 
While folks are going slightly bonkers arguing for and against fueling in a hangar, has anyone stopped to consider that ignition sources are perfectly legal (by uniform building code) in residential garages? That's right, you can have a natural gas fired water heater setting right next to your car.

How does that work you might ask? Research has shown that combustion sources more than 16 or so inches above the floor are perfectly ok.

What does any of this have to do with fueling aircraft? Dunno but it seems to me that gasoline vapors aren't really a problem under conditions commonly found in a residential garage. It also seems to me that a hangar isn't that different from a garage. Hmmmm. How many of us have fueled a lawn mower or even our car in a garage?

I fuel my lawn mower in the garage and definately don't consider that a dangerous action.

An already-fueled machine in a garage is a whole lot different from one being fueled. Fueling involves the displacement of vapors as well as the release of vapors from the fuel stream, and gasoline seems to emit even more vapors when it's agitated. Just shake a jerry can and then open the lid and hear the pressure escape. If you don't believe it, do it again.
I've heard of houses burned down due to gasoline stored near water heaters or furnaces, or by doing things like using contact cement near them. Maybe 'm just old-fashioned, reading all those newspapers over the years.

Dan
 
Hmmm, guess the national building code needs to be revised to conform with Dan's opinion...
 
Back
Top