Is this the death of GA

I never dug deep to find out why. I can only suppose they didn't want
to lose an airplane AND a building.

That's the rule here, too. We can have it parked right in front of the
hangar but no part of the airplane can be across the door threshold. I
assume it is for the reason you state.

Our FBO routinely fuels owner's aircraft in their hangars. Always has.

Ten years ago, when we first moved into a hangar, we would return from a
flight, put the plane away, and flip a little red flapper up on the door.
Next time we came to the airport, the flapper was down, the plane was fully
fueled, and we'd get a bill at the end of the month. God, I miss those
days...

I think gas was, like, $1.74 per gallon -- and we bitched about it!
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in
news:9Gpwj.48454$9j6.9828@attbi_s22:

I never dug deep to find out why. I can only suppose they didn't
want to lose an airplane AND a building.

That's the rule here, too. We can have it parked right in front of
the hangar but no part of the airplane can be across the door
threshold. I assume it is for the reason you state.

Our FBO routinely fuels owner's aircraft in their hangars. Always
has.


He must be some sort of sky god.



Ten years ago, when we first moved into a hangar, we would return from
a flight, put the plane away, and flip a little red flapper up on the
door. Next time we came to the airport, the flapper was down, the
plane was fully fueled, and we'd get a bill at the end of the month.
God, I miss those days...

I think gas was, like, $1.74 per gallon -- and we bitched about it!


You'd bitch about it if it were free.


Bertie

On 2008-02-25, Jay Honeck wrote:
I think gas was, like, $1.74 per gallon -- and we bitched about it!

Yeah. I remember bitching because it cost $8 to fill the tank on my first
car, a 1967 Cadillac Calais, with premium gas.

Where's my cane?
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
http://www.hercules-390.org (Yes, that's me!)
Buy Hercules stuff at http://www.cafepress.com/hercules-390

Jay Honeck wrote:
I never dug deep to find out why. I can only suppose they didn't want
to lose an airplane AND a building.

That's the rule here, too. We can have it parked right in front of the
hangar but no part of the airplane can be across the door threshold. I
assume it is for the reason you state.

Our FBO routinely fuels owner's aircraft in their hangars. Always has.

Ten years ago, when we first moved into a hangar, we would return from a
flight, put the plane away, and flip a little red flapper up on the
door. Next time we came to the airport, the flapper was down, the plane
was fully fueled, and we'd get a bill at the end of the month. God, I
miss those days...

I think gas was, like, $1.74 per gallon -- and we bitched about it!

ELM, which is only 30 or so miles from where I live, lost a maintenance
hangar, 4 airplanes and lots of tools and spare parts due to a fueling
accident with an airplane inside the hangar. With the fuel spreading
across the floor, once it was ignited the hangar went up almost
instantly. Nobody was seriously injured, but even with the airport fire
department literally next door, the hangar was a total loss.

This is one rule that I believe is grounded in common sense.

Matt

This is one rule that I believe is grounded in common sense.

Yep, there's always an example of some catastrophe that happened somewhere
that should make every civilized convenience illegal.

Iowa City is the oldest airport west of the Mississippi still in its
original location. The FBO has fueled aircraft in T-hangars (with the big
door open, of course) since before World War II, by my estimation, without
mishap. It's called "service", and yes, it's a pain in the butt to go to
the hangars, raise the door, and fuel the planes -- but thank God our FBO
hasn't yet used "safety" and "liability" as an excuse to be lazy, as so many
other businesses have.

Is there a slight risk to fueling in an unheated, outdoor hangar with the
big door open? I don't know -- but if you use a grounding strap/cord, and
you use approved fueling techniques and equipment, and you pump the fuel
from a professional-grade tank/pump, can you even *measure* a risk that
small? Has any aircraft self-immolated while being properly fueled? Has
any car?

I grow weary of this country wringing its hands over crap like this, while
the real issues of the day aren't even discussed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

On Feb 24, 11:00*pm, "Jay Honeck" wrote:
This is one rule that I believe is grounded in common sense.

Yep, there's always an example of some catastrophe that happened somewhere
that should make every civilized convenience illegal.

Iowa City is the oldest airport west of the Mississippi still in its
original location. *The FBO has fueled aircraft in T-hangars (with the big
door open, of course) since before World War II, by my estimation, without
mishap. * It's called "service", and yes, it's a pain in the butt to go to
the hangars, raise the door, and fuel the planes -- but thank God our FBO
hasn't yet used "safety" and "liability" as an excuse to be lazy, as so many
other businesses have.

Is there a slight risk to fueling in an unheated, outdoor hangar with the
big door open? * I don't know -- but if you use a grounding strap/cord, and
you use approved fueling techniques and equipment, and you pump the fuel
from a professional-grade tank/pump, can you even *measure* a risk that
small? * Has any aircraft self-immolated while being properly fueled? * Has
any car?

I grow weary of this country wringing its hands over crap like this, while
the real issues of the day aren't even discussed.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

That's a lot of ifs Jay. Is the convenience, in this case really
worth it? Is your insurance company aware of this practice? My guess
is no. I would have to go with Matt on this one, Jay.

Wil

William Hung writes:

That's a lot of ifs Jay. Is the convenience, in this case really
worth it? Is your insurance company aware of this practice? My guess
is no. I would have to go with Matt on this one, Jay.

What percentage of refuelings of this type have ended in fire?

Insurance companies always want zero risk, for maximum profit. They don't
care how much it costs their clients.

On Feb 25, 11:08 am, Mxsmanic wrote:
William Hung writes:
That's a lot of ifs Jay. Is the convenience, in this case really
worth it? Is your insurance company aware of this practice? My guess
is no. I would have to go with Matt on this one, Jay.

What percentage of refuelings of this type have ended in fire?

Insurance companies always want zero risk, for maximum profit. They don't
care how much it costs their clients.

Not exactly.

"Insurance companies" are businesses which must provide a service at a
price some portion of the population is willing to pay. It's called
the intersection of Supply and Demand.

In Capitalism there is a tension between "maximizing profit" and
remaining competitive. This is a Good Thing, and it is the engine that
drives free economies.

But given your ABC Nightly News Level understanding of business, I'm
thinking this is a waste of effort.

Dan

writes:

In Capitalism there is a tension between "maximizing profit" and
remaining competitive. This is a Good Thing, and it is the engine that
drives free economies.

How much competition is there for this type of insurance?

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

William Hung writes:

That's a lot of ifs Jay. Is the convenience, in this case really
worth it? Is your insurance company aware of this practice? My
guess is no. I would have to go with Matt on this one, Jay.

What percentage of refuelings of this type have ended in fire?

Insurance companies always want zero risk, for maximum profit. They
don't care how much it costs their clients.


Ah, so you're singing form the same song sheet as Jay...


Bertie