Leaderboard

Well if motogas really does vaporize or cause vapor lock, boil or whatever then it's still the expensive certification process to blame because all it would take is a tank fuel pump to pressures the fuel ever so slightly at the tank to give a positive charge to the mechanical suction pump. But take a guess why this hasn't happened, because it would cost a bundle to certify!!!!!!!! Why don't we have liquid cooled heads like rotax? On our lsa the rotax dosent even need any oil between 50 hour oil changes and the oil looks great at 50 hours not black like our 40k dollar antiquated engines. The fuel milleage is great to! Oh ya and now rotax has direct injection too! This is damn joke where certified aviation is right now. I agree with the other post to that cirrus and tge other companies who really spent big bucks to certify there equipment but haven't had time to recover there cost would really get screwed if other company's could more easily certify there equipment.

Its not just an engine issue, its the installed engine in the airframe. This is an aircraft level test, not only an engine test. I could be mistaken but I think I remember reading somewhere that the M20 airframe (plumbing) caused the mogas to vaporize under certain conditions. Hence, no STC for a Mooney. If you look here you will not see a Mooney listed. http://www.autofuelstc.com/approved_engines_airfames.phtml

One other thought is the fuel we burn and the government getting in the way. IO360 run just fine on 91 octane no-ethenal. Sure detonation margins are less but with proper cht engine info it can be monitored closely or if the FAA didn't make certification requirements so difficult we could have variable timing that retards ignition upon detecting detonation. There is lots of rvs running mogas with injected lycomings. I don't buy the whole deal that because our planes "suck" gas out of the tanks instead of "pump" it that its going to develop vapor lock and quit at altitude or on a hot day. I bet it just got to expensive for Peterson to get it though the FAA. Why is it LSA and experimental groups get the better, lower cost stuff. Aaron

Here's another measure: Median home price October 1982 --> $69,700k Median home price October 2011 --> $212,300 I'm not sure the lawyers deserve all the blame (and no, I am not a lawyer). The FAA is part of the problem too. A manufacturer can buy insurance to manage the litigation risk, but managing the certification risk is not so easy. Today's requirements for certification and production are more time consuming and labor intensive than ever. This drives up the non-recurring and recurring costs as engineers spend hundreds and thousands of hours working on reports, analysis and tests. Higher costs means higher prices, and ultimately it means fewer aircraft owners and pilots, which further drives up aircraft prices. I am optimistic that the FAA's current part 23 rule making review will directly take on these challenges and implement meaningful rule changes that reduce the cost of certification while improving safety. If we can make flying an airplane as safe and easy as driving a car, and as affordable as owning a home, I think we would be amazed by how many people would take up flying. Peter 82 M20k 231