Peeing the turf...

[Passion for flying]

Norwegian internet newsmedia "NETTAVISEN" reported yesterday that a Dreamliner belonging to the airline Norwegian had to abort its departure from Bangkok, due to a severe fuel leakage from its right wing.
The aircraft was returned to the gate and passengers deplaned.
Passengers who took photos and video through the aircraft windows were told by the cabin crew that they should erase their cameras from the offending material.
Luckily, through public disobedience, we can see pictures of the leakage here:

http://www.nettavisen.no/nyheter/article3742767.ece

Norwegian have had a sequence of problems with their new aircraft, stranding people both in Bangkok and New York, during the christmas holidays, with resulting missed connections and days of delays.
Their new Dreamliners seem plagued with various problems, causing massive criticism from passengers.

It was however fortunate that the leakage occurred whilst the aeroplane was still on the taxiway, not in the climbout phase or even worse, underway with long distance to the nearest airport.

[BoeingBobby]

We will have to wait and see what the final determination is, but I am willing to bet the a/c was either over fueled or fueled improperly and what you see is a thermal overflow from expansion in the tanks. It is designed to do that.

B.B.

[Passion for flying]

I was hoping that may be the case, however there are two things that worry me;
one- the story that the pax got told was that they replaced a pump on the aircraft. This may be true or not, it remains to be proven
two- the crew and the refueller must have had a good idea about the fuel status of the aircraft before commencing refuelling. If they had their numbers right, no over-fuelling should have occurred. If they had their numbers wrong, then I guess some of them need to be re-trained. Whether this applies to the aircrew or the ground crew also remains to be seen.
Looking at the amount of fuel that flows out, I am surprised that it keeps p*****g for a while. Actually for the whole duration of the video. There's more than a few buckets on the ground. Where was that fuel while the aircraft sat on the apron, waiting to go?

[BoeingBobby]

I was hoping that may be the case, however there are two things that worry me;
one- the story that the pax got told was that they replaced a pump on the aircraft. This may be true or not, it remains to be proven
two- the crew and the refueller must have had a good idea about the fuel status of the aircraft before commencing refuelling. If they had their numbers right, no over-fuelling should have occurred. If they had their numbers wrong, then I guess some of them need to be re-trained. Whether this applies to the aircrew or the ground crew also remains to be seen.
Looking at the amount of fuel that flows out, I am surprised that it keeps p*****g for a while. Actually for the whole duration of the video. There's more than a few buckets on the ground. Where was that fuel while the aircraft sat on the apron, waiting to go?

The crew or dispatcher gives the fuel load to the ground crew/mechanic/fuel company. What was the temperature when the aircraft was fueled vs when it left the ramp? How level was the ramp vs the taxiway when the fuel started running overboard? From the video, it looks like they are on the taxiway. You would be surprised how little fuel it takes to make a big mess. From what I have seen in the video, it would be my guess that the aircraft was fueled when it was cold and it is a thermal expansion issue, or the taxiway had a significant slope to it.

B.B.

[brianw999]

As Bobby says, nothing particularly unusual. A little fuel goes a long way when it it expands when you consider the percentage vs the total in the tanks. I've seen this myself on a couple of flights.
As for the airline telling passengers to erase all photographic evidence......uuummm.....may I suggest that they rearrange the words "Off" and "Fuck" into a well known phrase or saying !!

[Passion for flying]

OK; so maybe not such a big deal. I will stalk the issue a little to see if any more interesting statements are offered by the airline.
The statement about the pump change has not yet been denied officially by Norwegian, so i´ll wait and see.
*flash* A new statement by Norwegian: "A malfunction of a valve in a fuelling cap (lid) caused the spillage"

Brian, good point *laugh* I would have politely told them to get stuffed. Whats in my camera is my property. Unless the crew has told the pax to shut down electronic equipment there´s no curfew in my book of rules.
Of course, they are not too happy to see themsleves across the front page, but...

Bobby, can you perhaps enlighten us a little about the fuel tanks/overflow mechanism?
Is that the same pipe as used when dumping fuel to reduce weight before a return-to-base when something has gone bad with the 'plane?

Is there not supposed to be a ceratin unfilled space in the tanks, as in a motor-car? In the case of the car, that space is left there for expansion.

[3WE]

...Is there not supposed to be a ceratin unfilled space in the tanks, as in a motor-car? In the case of the car, that space is left there for expansion.

Think about this for a sec...do you really want to PREVENT it from being able to vent overboard...you would PREFER it to stay inside and build up pressure?

Let's also remember that this thing needs to fit inside of a wing- and is not sitting between the frame rails in the rear of the car where where there's space to be wasted for an overfill bump (or whatever it is).

[MCM]

There are spaces left for expansion, and then if it expands even more, it goes overboard.

No, it is not the jettison pipes that it comes out of - there are vents in the wings.

Malfunction of a valve in a cap is a slightly different story.

[guamainiac]

There was a heated debate that was defused by some automotive engineers when someone suggested that in the summer, it was better to buy auto gas in the cool of the early morning or night since the density and expansion during the day gave the consumer less fuel.

One fellow published a lot of numbers that showed the expansion rate or volume of fuel at varied temperatures and the ruling was ... "no factor".

A bit of hissing was to be expected, but unless these tanks were topped to the brim, shook the plane to fill voids and topped again, the expansion theory sounds shaky.

[BoeingBobby]

There was a heated debate that was defused by some automotive engineers when someone suggested that in the summer, it was better to buy auto gas in the cool of the early morning or night since the density and expansion during the day gave the consumer less fuel.

One fellow published a lot of numbers that showed the expansion rate or volume of fuel at varied temperatures and the ruling was ... "no factor".

A bit of hissing was to be expected, but unless these tanks were topped to the brim, shook the plane to fill voids and topped again, the expansion theory sounds shaky.

Just shows what you really know about aircraft fuel systems. I have seen it happen on many occasions. On little airplanes all the way up to the 74.

[BoeingBobby]

Note the Vent surge tanks, they are there just for this reason. There are vents on the bottom of the wings, and the horizontal stab if installed, (These tanks are optional and not all aircraft have them installed) and will vent the fuel overboard (Just like in the video) to prevent damage to the tanks and wings. Also remember I mentioned slope! If the aircraft is fueled on a level surface, and then is towed or taxis to one with a significant slope, the fuel can run from one side of the wing to the other. Lear Jets and MU-2's were famous for it. Many years ago I had a Lear 25 piss 50 gallons out after being towed to a parking spot that had a bad slope on it.

[guamainiac]

I'll take your word for it Boeing. My only line experience was on Guam with the A-3 and I never saw a spill. Big difference may have been the time the fuel sat in the truck so it was equalized.

[EconomyClass]

No passengers lost. Kinda not the biggest deal.