All Activity

It now has an ASTM standard associated with it that it can claim compliance to. This is relevant to acceptance in the entire production and distribution chain as well as insurability of the various pieces.

No kidding. I'll give it a try after it's been run about 10,000 hours at high MP in big-bore turbocharged engines.

No question about that ! It's fair to say that 100R may have more challenges with "stressed engines" while G100UL seems to have more challenges with "older airframes". I am sure there are various trade-off? I have fuel A that reduce metals wear by 50% (potentially increasing TBO) and reducing spark plugs fouling, prevents pre-ignition and reduces engine maintenance costs, then I have fuel B that reduces my airframe and pipelines wear, preserve paint and does not require rank reseal. Hopefully we will be allowed to mix both depending on what a "consumer" care about? takeoff or cruise?

Yes, the KAS297. I also enter the desired altitude into the GI275 as it offer altitude call outs, alerts, TOD, BOD and what I call the banana on the map to show my both. My navigator is a GTN750. Works great but definitely no Alt. Select or ROC via the GI275.

Because it is an STC, detonation testing is the responsibility of the STC applicant, not the FAA. Swift needs to get a test cell with full instrumentation including knock sensors. Lots of detonation is undetected by the operator without sensitive knock sensors. Equally so the FAA requires a 12% detonation margin. The anecdotal fact that a Cirrus ran, "detonation free" means nothing in certification. The hp/cylinder is equally meaning less. Cylinders have different volumes, head designs, piston tops, intake and exhaust efficiencies. There is a reason why "It's a Hemi" actually has meaning in ME terms. There are few test cells designed to detect detonation and believe it or not, the best test cell in the world is owned by.........GAMI.

Even 2k doesn’t seem bad for a part to keep a ~80k airplane going another 25 years.

Same here, even though I have a spare 20:1 it's important that others have choices and can keep their aircraft flying for years to come. And not having to face the possibility of ending up AOG every 200hr inspection.

I don't have schematics for a M20E, but I looked at the schematics for the 1977 M20J that also used the Dukes and the motor shows only two wires, a red and a black. I don't know what the other two wires would be for unless yours has separate wires for the armature and the field windings.

Correct You can see it better in the pictures that @LANCECASPER posted when selling his seats Articulating Seat Frames or Complete Seats - SOLD - Avionics / Parts Classifieds - Mooneyspace.com - A community for Mooney aircraft owners and enthusiasts

Swift pushed 100R with FAA for C172S STC with company specs (this was a year ago). In parallel, they worked with stakeholders for ASTM approval (this is recent) for their "STC route", now they have an option to get it through PAFI... There are two main routes to get fuel inside aircraft, the "STC route with company specs" (regulatory and airworthiness requirement) and "PAFI route with ASTM specs" (consumer, industry, regulatory requirement), the latter is way more demanding and involve more parties, there is a middle route that is also very demanding is STC with ASTM specs. VPRacing are working on last stage for their "PAFI/ASTM route" It's complicated, hope this graph helps: G100UL is "STC with GAMI company specs" while 100R is "STC with ASTM specs"

I got mine from peerlesselectronics.com

New correct price $650.

I haven't been following this issue because of the poor signal to noise ratio, but the press release says Swift fuels were released under STC. How does that "contrast significantly"?

Were you able to buy directly from Safran? If not, who?

An electric motor is just coils. Coils don't have polarity, just like resistors. These motors are made to switch direction, so the case isn't grounded through one of the wires. On the schematic for my airplane the motor is shown with two wires, and they are lablled 'grey' and 'red'. They connect to the electrical system through relays which switch the polarity based on the gear selector position. So there wasn't a straightforward answer to the question you asked, and I was trying to give you the best, shortest answer that was relevant and would also highlight that (as both an A&P and an EE). Exchanging information productively and reliably requires effort and attention from both sides. Antagonizing those that can help you and that tried to help you is ultimately not in your interest.

I hope they can get it to market for the same price as 100LL. I hope it has less issues than G100UL

I have had good luck with “electronic warehouses” that stock all kinds of old-new parts. Found a microswitch that had been superseded, but the newer one had a slightly different actuator that wouldn’t work. I would possibly expand out past the distributors if needed…

I once called the airport, they referred to the school "who sells it" and they quote the same price as Avgas 100LL, they had bulk order and lot of paperwork, I expect it to get cheaper if they have more volumes and wide usage (as we are told sourcing TEL and associate paperwork is getting expensive). If it's used by an ATO, it's cheaper In Germany, UL91 is 0.3€/L cheaper than 100LL In France, UL91 and 100LL are the same prices

I have had good luck with “electronic warehouses” that stock all kinds of old-new parts. Found a microswitch that had been superseded, but the newer one had a slightly different actuator that wouldn’t work. I would possibly expand out past the distributors if needed…

Indeed, not to forget thousands of volunteers, researcher or non profit players who peer-review most stuff in "open source". Getting through is difficult compared to getting through FAA STC... I imagine FAA has own testing, but I'm not sure how it differs from 100 MON specs requment plus detonation/knock testing as per Avgas ASTM D6424? For UL94, I think UND school saw valve and detonation issues in their Archers as they run their engines on 450F with peak EGT at 75% power, I would never ever do that even with 100LL? you need a monkey flying the aircraft Detonation is rarely a concern for pilots who manage their engines, keep CHT < 380F (we even used auto-fuels in Archer with Petterson STC for 8 years, no issues).

Have you seen the price per L in Europe for it already? Curious if it's the same as normal avgas?

Is this what you need? Dick

Like Jsno above I sourced a gear that will take me to the end of my flying career. I too hold out hope that there will be competition and the price for the 40:1 gear will not be $2k for future Mooney owners.

Is that the point? There are four wires with different colors coming out of the motor. For someone that works with these motors it may be simple simon, but not for someone that does not work with motors and simply connects a black to negative and a red to positive when dealing with batteries. If that was his point it was poorly made. You provided simple clarity. Thank you for that. Using knowledge as power versus educating for the good of members...one way to go. You go Steve.

Yes, I wasn't keen on used since that's what I have now, but I wasn't having any luck on any of the part numbers new. So thanks for the OEM catalog. I didn't know that. I did contact Safran's distributor. They had no stock go the 6041H53 (14v) but will check with the OEM. We'll see.