Narrative:

We arrived with a total fuel onboard of 11;100 pounds. Even though it is not a formal procedure; I requested the gallons added from operations and learned that there had been 2905 gallons of fuel pumped aboard the aircraft. I used an average fuel density of 6.7 pounds/gallon and multiplied our gallons added of 2905 gallons by this figure and learned that our weight pumped in fuel equaled 19;464 pounds. With this figure added to our arrival fuel of 11;100 pounds; I got a sum on 30;564 pounds. At pushback from the gate; our gauges showed a total fuel on board of 31;500 pounds (our requested amount) which differed by 936 pounds from our calculated uplift. Even though according to my calculations we pushed with nearly 1;000 pounds less fuel than what the gauges read; I was willing to accept that amount of possible error since we did have some extra fuel aboard. As a rule; I'm willing to accept +/- 1;000 pounds of error until further information comes to light to prove there is indeed an actual problem and not just a miscalculation. Enroute to ZZZ whenever I added the sum of the two fuel used totalizers to the total fuel remaining on the fuel quantity gauge; I discovered a sum that was consistently almost 1;000 pounds less than the sum of our fuel onboard at pushback from the gate of 31;500 pounds. Upon arrival at the gate in ZZZ the airplane was written up for possible fuel gauge errors. The arrival fuel on block in at ZZZ was 7;500 pounds and the total fuel burned according to the left fuel used totalizer was 11;559 pounds and the total fuel burned according to the right fuel totalizer was 11;382 pounds for a combined sum of 22;941 pounds. When this sum was added to the arrival fuel of 7;500 pounds; I got a total that was 1;059 pounds less than pushback fuel from the gate. According to what I was told by ZZZ maintenance control; the airplane went to the hangar where water was drained from both fuel tanks while sumping fuel. I've been with this air carrier many years and ever since I've worked here a fuel slip has always been a requirement prior to departure. After 9-11; the fuel slips suddenly disappeared after a security directive came out requiring that fuelers be security screened prior to boarding aircraft. After that point in time; the fuel slips suddenly were eliminated overnight with no explanation whatsoever for the fuel slip elimination. In spite of the fact that fuel slips are no longer provided to our flight crews; there's still a spot on the company flight plans that has a spot for 'gals added' to be recorded. Since the fuel slips have been eliminated; I've found several airplanes that have had fuel gauge errors that were confirmed by a maintenance technician. Fuel gauge errors for reference are aircraft nxxxy in sept; 2002 for a flight which was found to have a 1;000 pound error to the low side in the center fuel tank. This error was caught and trapped by performing a verified uplift calculation. The most serious error to date that I've caught was aircraft nxxxz in jan; 2004 prior to departure of flight and that airplane had a fuel gauge error of 6;500 pounds to the high side that was confirmed by a maintenance technician. Had we departed on that flight we would have taken off exceeding our maximum structural taxi; takeoff; and landing weights! The main defense management uses for not performing a verified uplift calculation is that the self-test feature of the fuel gauges will detect and report any such error. In the case of aircraft nxxxz; despite the fact that we were well aware of the fuel gauge error; the captain decided out of curiosity to perform a test of the fuel gauges; and amazingly the test came back with a report of no error codes! This seems to clearly contradict any claims by management that the self-test feature of our fuel gauges will trap gauge errors. I've complained to management ever since the fuel slips were eliminated and expressed my concern over what I think is a decrease in safety without the fuel slip. According to research that I've done; this air carrier is one of only a few airlines that do not perform some sort of verified uplift when fueling theiracft. Pilot group recently did some of their own research among carriers in march 2007 and from information that's been conveyed to me; this air carrier is the only carrier not performing a verified uplift when fueling. Despite what seems to be a clear-cut case for a verified fuel uplift after each fueling; this air carrier's management still insists that we do not have a problem with our fuel gauges. Accomplish a verified uplift for all fueling events in order to prevent possible gauge errors.

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN MD80 PLT RPTS FUEL QTY DISCREPANCIES ON THREE OF HIS ACR'S ACFT. NO PRE-DEP FUEL UPLOAD RPT IS GIVEN TO FLT CREW.

Narrative: WE ARRIVED WITH A TOTAL FUEL ONBOARD OF 11;100 LBS. EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT A FORMAL PROC; I REQUESTED THE GALLONS ADDED FROM OPERATIONS AND LEARNED THAT THERE HAD BEEN 2905 GALLONS OF FUEL PUMPED ABOARD THE ACFT. I USED AN AVERAGE FUEL DENSITY OF 6.7 POUNDS/GALLON AND MULTIPLIED OUR GALLONS ADDED OF 2905 GALLONS BY THIS FIGURE AND LEARNED THAT OUR WT PUMPED IN FUEL EQUALED 19;464 LBS. WITH THIS FIGURE ADDED TO OUR ARR FUEL OF 11;100 POUNDS; I GOT A SUM ON 30;564 POUNDS. AT PUSHBACK FROM THE GATE; OUR GAUGES SHOWED A TOTAL FUEL ON BOARD OF 31;500 POUNDS (OUR REQUESTED AMOUNT) WHICH DIFFERED BY 936 LBS FROM OUR CALCULATED UPLIFT. EVEN THOUGH ACCORDING TO MY CALCULATIONS WE PUSHED WITH NEARLY 1;000 LBS LESS FUEL THAN WHAT THE GAUGES READ; I WAS WILLING TO ACCEPT THAT AMOUNT OF POSSIBLE ERROR SINCE WE DID HAVE SOME EXTRA FUEL ABOARD. AS A RULE; I'M WILLING TO ACCEPT +/- 1;000 LBS OF ERROR UNTIL FURTHER INFORMATION COMES TO LIGHT TO PROVE THERE IS INDEED AN ACTUAL PROBLEM AND NOT JUST A MISCALCULATION. ENROUTE TO ZZZ WHENEVER I ADDED THE SUM OF THE TWO FUEL USED TOTALIZERS TO THE TOTAL FUEL REMAINING ON THE FUEL QUANTITY GAUGE; I DISCOVERED A SUM THAT WAS CONSISTENTLY ALMOST 1;000 LBS LESS THAN THE SUM OF OUR FUEL ONBOARD AT PUSHBACK FROM THE GATE OF 31;500 LBS. UPON ARRIVAL AT THE GATE IN ZZZ THE AIRPLANE WAS WRITTEN UP FOR POSSIBLE FUEL GAUGE ERRORS. THE ARR FUEL ON BLOCK IN AT ZZZ WAS 7;500 LBS AND THE TOTAL FUEL BURNED ACCORDING TO THE L FUEL USED TOTALIZER WAS 11;559 LBS AND THE TOTAL FUEL BURNED ACCORDING TO THE R FUEL TOTALIZER WAS 11;382 LBS FOR A COMBINED SUM OF 22;941 LBS. WHEN THIS SUM WAS ADDED TO THE ARR FUEL OF 7;500 LBS; I GOT A TOTAL THAT WAS 1;059 LBS LESS THAN PUSHBACK FUEL FROM THE GATE. ACCORDING TO WHAT I WAS TOLD BY ZZZ MAINT CTL; THE AIRPLANE WENT TO THE HANGAR WHERE WATER WAS DRAINED FROM BOTH FUEL TANKS WHILE SUMPING FUEL. I'VE BEEN WITH THIS ACR MANY YEARS AND EVER SINCE I'VE WORKED HERE A FUEL SLIP HAS ALWAYS BEEN A REQUIREMENT PRIOR TO DEP. AFTER 9-11; THE FUEL SLIPS SUDDENLY DISAPPEARED AFTER A SECURITY DIRECTIVE CAME OUT REQUIRING THAT FUELERS BE SECURITY SCREENED PRIOR TO BOARDING ACFT. AFTER THAT POINT IN TIME; THE FUEL SLIPS SUDDENLY WERE ELIMINATED OVERNIGHT WITH NO EXPLANATION WHATSOEVER FOR THE FUEL SLIP ELIMINATION. IN SPITE OF THE FACT THAT FUEL SLIPS ARE NO LONGER PROVIDED TO OUR FLT CREWS; THERE'S STILL A SPOT ON THE COMPANY FLT PLANS THAT HAS A SPOT FOR 'GALS ADDED' TO BE RECORDED. SINCE THE FUEL SLIPS HAVE BEEN ELIMINATED; I'VE FOUND SEVERAL AIRPLANES THAT HAVE HAD FUEL GAUGE ERRORS THAT WERE CONFIRMED BY A MAINT TECHNICIAN. FUEL GAUGE ERRORS FOR REFERENCE ARE ACFT NXXXY IN SEPT; 2002 FOR A FLIGHT WHICH WAS FOUND TO HAVE A 1;000 LB ERROR TO THE LOW SIDE IN THE CENTER FUEL TANK. THIS ERROR WAS CAUGHT AND TRAPPED BY PERFORMING A VERIFIED UPLIFT CALCULATION. THE MOST SERIOUS ERROR TO DATE THAT I'VE CAUGHT WAS ACFT NXXXZ IN JAN; 2004 PRIOR TO DEPARTURE OF FLT AND THAT AIRPLANE HAD A FUEL GAUGE ERROR OF 6;500 LBS TO THE HIGH SIDE THAT WAS CONFIRMED BY A MAINT TECHNICIAN. HAD WE DEPARTED ON THAT FLT WE WOULD HAVE TAKEN OFF EXCEEDING OUR MAXIMUM STRUCTURAL TAXI; TAKEOFF; AND LNDG WTS! THE MAIN DEFENSE MANAGEMENT USES FOR NOT PERFORMING A VERIFIED UPLIFT CALCULATION IS THAT THE SELF-TEST FEATURE OF THE FUEL GAUGES WILL DETECT AND RPT ANY SUCH ERROR. IN THE CASE OF ACFT NXXXZ; DESPITE THE FACT THAT WE WERE WELL AWARE OF THE FUEL GAUGE ERROR; THE CAPT DECIDED OUT OF CURIOSITY TO PERFORM A TEST OF THE FUEL GAUGES; AND AMAZINGLY THE TEST CAME BACK WITH A RPT OF NO ERROR CODES! THIS SEEMS TO CLEARLY CONTRADICT ANY CLAIMS BY MANAGEMENT THAT THE SELF-TEST FEATURE OF OUR FUEL GAUGES WILL TRAP GAUGE ERRORS. I'VE COMPLAINED TO MANAGEMENT EVER SINCE THE FUEL SLIPS WERE ELIMINATED AND EXPRESSED MY CONCERN OVER WHAT I THINK IS A DECREASE IN SAFETY WITHOUT THE FUEL SLIP. ACCORDING TO RESEARCH THAT I'VE DONE; THIS ACR IS ONE OF ONLY A FEW AIRLINES THAT DO NOT PERFORM SOME SORT OF VERIFIED UPLIFT WHEN FUELING THEIRACFT. PLT GROUP RECENTLY DID SOME OF THEIR OWN RESEARCH AMONG CARRIERS IN MARCH 2007 AND FROM INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN CONVEYED TO ME; THIS ACR IS THE ONLY CARRIER NOT PERFORMING A VERIFIED UPLIFT WHEN FUELING. DESPITE WHAT SEEMS TO BE A CLEAR-CUT CASE FOR A VERIFIED FUEL UPLIFT AFTER EACH FUELING; THIS ACR'S MANAGEMENT STILL INSISTS THAT WE DO NOT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH OUR FUEL GAUGES. ACCOMPLISH A VERIFIED UPLIFT FOR ALL FUELING EVENTS IN ORDER TO PREVENT POSSIBLE GAUGE ERRORS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.