A64Pilot

An airframer or engine manufacturer has zero to gain from testing any non ASTM or other product manufactured under other means, all they have is something to lose, nothing to gain. Now if the Government had approved it under existing protocols, Then Lycoming etc would likely test it to ensure their engine was OK with it just as I’m sure they have tested every possible combination of scenarios just like they have 100LL. An STC is allowable, not required, but apparently California or parts of it maybe?, has made it required. Your beef I think is with California.

I think in truth that in a year or so we will know if in fact there is nothing to see here, or it may go the way the Mobil-1 oil did. But we just won’t know until then at earliest. It could be fine or not.

Most O-rings are available by size in Viton, but you may have to get them from non Aviation sources, while I agree that it’s unlikely in truth that there is a quality difference, but non aviation sources don’t maintain traceability. Aviation sources are supposed to separate by batch etc, while non aviation sources just have a box by part number, they aren’t traceable That may all seem unnecessary but it’s one of those things that are required to have, or at least the suppliers do, if there is an accident caused by something failing and you bought it from AC Spruce for example AC Spruce can supply the birth certificate for that item to the FAA / NTSB etc. Then as has been stated it’s tough to go against the part manual, but if the STC states that you should I think that’s justification to do so. (my opinion) But the work to do so as in finding the exact correct size may not be easy, unless there is a cross reference chart somewhere, if there is then that makes things easier. While not common there are a few special O-rings etc, and how do you determine if what you need is one of these “special” ones as opposed to a common part? But, here’s one rub, I’m pretty sure that at least the Viton I have experience with has a different Durometer, as in it’s stiffer or harder if you will, does that matter? Would it require a higher torque to completely seat? Above my pay grade, I don’t know, then it’s tough to get Stat-O-Seals as it is, are they available from an aviation source in Viton? Its easy to say replace with Viton, but I believe there are many special items that it’s just not possible.

Yes, because everything forward of the firewall has to be replaced then include instrumentation, fuel system etc and I bet the cost to modify an aircraft is likely to exceed the value of the average general aviation aircraft. The “Damn” things can run on pump gas, have always been able to, just We haven’t wanted to burn pump gas. It really is that simple. ADI works, it’s not snake oil, has been around longer than any of us, but for some reason the industry keeps chasing Diesels and now apparently blends of chemicals to make a fuel. Maybe that will change. or maybe it won’t. A LOT has to do with marketing and who is a social influencer etc and what they have to sell. This GAMI fuel has for instance almost spurred a religious furor, some think it’s the anti christ, some think it’s the best thing going and we need it now. Neither side has much if any real experience with the stuff, especially those that decry it, it’s always been that way, the biggest haters of anything usually have no experience with it, never have understood why so many Rednecks in pickup truck hate the Toyota Prius for example. I’m just a risk adverse person, it’s just my nature, what I did for a living for nearly 40 years made me that way.

Ref no slop in controls, I’ve seen as the engine develops power the mounts being rubber allow a little movement, and that pulls the control slightly off of the stops

It appears to be fine, one end of it is held by one of the bolts that was loose though, but it didn’t seem bad. Engine has about 600 since overhaul and all accessories were replaced in overhaul.

No, I know the IA who cared for it, the owner never touched it, that’s what had me wondering if for some silly reason Mooney wrote it to be kept loose, just thought I’d ask before I tightened it.

If it’s that, then it’s K&N oil It’s easy to over oil a filter and it does run out, but it doesn’t hurt anything. Attached pic is of a new K&N filter used on a Thrush turbine, maybe 3 ft square, it came from the factory a little over oiled. The issue with a cotton gauge oiled filter isn’t that they drain oil, it’s that the do flow air very well, they do that by not being a very good filter, the paper filter, filters much finer particles, and I think a Brackett does to, but the bracket is very sticky oil, like glue. I’ve always wondered how well a paper filter does in soaking rain though.

From a paint perspective, when we restarted production of the Thrush, we had many paint issues. I found that the paint we were using was cheap junk, so I started looking for a good paint in the belief that frankly you get what you pay for. In my research I found out that at least back then that Air Force One, The Thunderbirds and Blue Angels all were painted with the same paint, Sherwin Williams Jet-Glo. Under the belief that it’s likely that those aircraft most likely used the best paint available I went with Jet-Glo, and almost overnight our paint problems went away, and yes it was expensive, but our rework went down so much it more than made up the difference. I believe the C-182 panels tested in that Video were painted with Jet-Glo and Jet-Glo was the paint that held up best to agricultural chemicals that we found, it’s good stuff. I don’t think paint is a safety issue, but I do think it may be the Canary in the coal mine, anything that dissolves Jet-Glo is something that’s pretty aggressive I think. If it were a failure of the primer the paint would peel off but the paint look otherwise unaffected, but that video showed it wrinkled, which to means it’s being dissolved

Very many mixtures behave like that, for instance many if the new refrigerants are mixtures of different gasses, some have smaller molecules and are very prone to leak out while others don’t, so over time you end up with a mixture of gasses very unlike what you started with.

I wouldn’t say anything like that, just from my experience with working with them, the primary motivating factor was the question “could this reflect bad on me” If the answer was no, then you got approval, if the answer was possibly then they passed the buck, and if yes, then the answer was no.

My guess is that there are a few in the FAA that are saying Uh-Oh, can this get me in trouble?

Who knows? I had assumed not because surely that was tested, but I thought the same for O-rings too. Anything in my opinion that swells fuel resistant O-rings literally almost overnight is questionable to be put kindly. I don’t what the diaphragms are made of I had assumed Nitrile as it’s sort of been the go to for a long time, but assumptions are just guesses under another name.

Back to two pumps, on different busses, but losing a Mag could also, or a clogged fuel injector or strainer or any number of a great many other issues. I would tell you that the likelyhood of a fuel that causes O-rings to swell is far more likely to cause an engine failure as there are a great many “rubber” and plastic components in an aircraft fuel system. My C-140 would likely be OK as the only plastic or rubber in it is the fuel level indicator floats and maybe a cork gasket where they go into the tank, but my Mooney is full of the stuff from the servo, fuel divider, fuel flow transducer, both fuel pumps, strainer, fuel selector to say nothing of my bladders or everyone else’s sealer. O-rings are I think the least of the possible problems Unless the guy who did the video snuck in MEK or something into his tests those simple backyard tests are enough to keep me away. If I lived where it was the only option I’d pull my fuel trailer to where I could buy 100 LL, sell the Mooney or quit flying Certified aircraft I guess or buy something Certified to burn car gas. I think Rotax are allowed?

It’s been years ago, but when I first started burning car gas in the 140, I did quite a lot of searching for accidents attributed to alcohol in fuel, searching the NTSB database, certain that I would find several as Experimental's can run anything they like and many run car gas even in aircraft without the STC, not everyone tests for alcohol and often alcohol free isn’t available more burn it than we would suspect, same guys likely fly out of annual etc. too. I couldn’t find even one, which really surprised me, I expected several

It’s not a single pump, it’s two pumps on different electrical busses, and there is an ECU to control them, made by Electronics International, not a Chinese sub contractor. I’m certain though that it can’t reduce throttle, that level of control is very difficult to Certify and frankly I wouldn’t want it, I don’t want some box protecting the engine right up to impact. Detonation isn’t by any far stretch of the imagination instantaneous, in fact not that I would but based on experience I’m sure I could run car premium and not detonate, it’s illegal of course and the safety margin isn’t there. 100 LL is required to run 500 deg cyl heads temps, in very hot weather, at maximum oil temp and the worst possible mixture AND have some cushion. However it DOES happen on occasion even with 100 LL, often to one cylinder and that admittedly confuses me But anyway there is plenty of time to make a decision of what to do if both pumps on different electrical busses fail, there are shed loads of single point failure systems we fly with now, ADI wouldn’t be one of them. We can try to denigrate anything, but as 100 UL isn’t apparently simple or one of the major players would have come up with it years ago, I don’t see any reason to not go with ADI, and my preference would be with 100 LL with the lead removed as that way you keep the quality control and nearly unlimited storage life etc that we currently have, just without the lead, it couldn’t cost more that the same product with lead, and there would be no realistic reason to not use the same infrastructure to deliver, store and dispense it. Other than the 20 lb or whatever it is reduction in useful load I don’t see the downside to ADI, it even keeps the combustion chamber and plugs very clean. 9K is steep though, but it is an airplane I guess with some parts you would think that would cost next to nothing costing a lot. But it’s 9K one time whereas I suspect that any replacement to 100 LL will be significantly more expensive at every fill up. BUT, and here to me is what’s important, it’s another option, anytime your the sole source of a needed product (NBS springs come to mind) the opportunity to price gouge is possible, not that I’m saying George would, but he not the producer or seller, but if there are alternatives that helps keep the gouges at bay it helps keep gouging from happening, I don’t like monopolies. (NBS again) Personally I would go with ADI myself as I both trust it, but also I wouldn’t have to have a fuel that in my opinion no one really knows what the long term results will be, but in particular we know 100LL, without the lead it shouldn’t change much, however I think without an additive to prevent it unless we go to hardened seats we will have valve recession from anyones UL, just exactly like we did with cars when we went to UL. I’d say Auto fuel, but it changes often and with the seasons and has storage issues etc. best I think to stick with current Avgas, but having Auto fuel as a back up is nice. I like options

You do know, even back in the day there was a light that came on if water pressure dropped below set point when system was on, I think you got a green light when system was on and you had water flow and a red light when system was on and limited or no flow. I know Rob Roberts owner of EI very well, I’m certain that his “box” monitors pressure and turns on the second pump if necessary and alerts the pilot, but I have not seen the new system. In truth you really can run premium car gas without harm most times, it’s only if you get that stupid high cyl head temp that Lycoming allows that you get detonation, but Cert rightfully so requires a healthy margin Way back in the 70’s I think University of Tennessee ran a C-310 on what then was called Gasahol in one engine for hundreds of hours. Dr Ralph Kimberlin who was my Civilian Test Pilot mentor was part of the program. It may have been a 421 not sure. Without ADI you do have to have a very different Cyl head temp redline though, and I’m sure you don’t have the margin 100LL gives you, but with ADI that margin is even larger that without ADI but running 100LL.

In the 140, it’s was an $85 STC, there are a couple of STC’s Peterson charged $1 per HP I think. I think you’re supposed to have a label by the fuel filler that says MOGAS is OK, but I don’t. In truth most little airplane guys just run it and don’t bother buying the STC No modifications to the aircraft, although some aircraft do require mods. Maule has to have a fuel pump and I think a vent to prevent vapor loc. So it differs by airframe

It’s an extraordinarily simple system, if you have ever played with Nitrous Oxide in cars it’s very similar, simple plate that goes between the carb or servo and intake “four bolts” and one hose that connects to the plate that I’m sure has a spray bar in it, the hose connects to an automotive electric fuel pump that connects to a tank. The “brain” made apparently by EI now monitors two things, cyl head temp and manifold pressure, either or both above set point, pump is turned on. That’s it. Other than not being approved of course I could build one myself in a day. Many Ag guys do it in particularly G6 Garrets, in the Garret it’s EGT that’s the limiting factor, it’s why yiu can’t keep pushing the power lever forward, inject water and yiu get an instant drop in EGT so yiu can push the lever further forward making more power for takeoff. Car guys, ones that run high boost anyway have been doing it for years, apparently they often run windshield washer pre-mix, seems the cheap blue stuff is just the right mix of alcohol and water https://www.dragzine.com/tech-stories/engine/get-schooled-water-methanol-injection-101/ https://www.holley.com/blog/post/the_science_behind_why_water-methanol_injection_works_so_well/

I’ve been burning 87 Octane car gas in my C-140 for years, the 140’s fuel vent system is 2 small holes drilled into the tractor style fuel caps, as such if you fill them up they will siphon fuel out in flight. Both my fuel tank covers that are painted with Jet-glo are stained a yellowish brown, but it will polish out, or did a few years ago the one time I did

As a kid in Albany Ga, Turner Air Force base I used to watch them scramble B-52’s and they would do “wet” takeoffs, that is water injection, I don’t know why, but it did make them smoke like trains

I keep bringing this up, but all this angst of “we must have an unleaded 100 Octane fuel” just isn’t the case, not at least for non forced induction aircraft anyway and I suspect turbo aircraft would be fine too in cruise. It’s been done widespread since WWII, called ADI or anti detonation injection. It’s simple alcohol / water injection, trigger points for injection are often manifold pressure above 25” or cyl head temps above 400F https://www.avweb.com/features/the-return-of-anti-detonation-water-injection-adi/ https://generalaviationnews.com/2012/05/22/adi-bridging-the-octane-gap/ https://www.autofuelstc.com/news.phtml/E2F118E7/anti-detonant_injection With it you burn car gas, no big deal, no melting paint, swelling O-rings etc because people have been burning car gas for decades, I have anyway, but on low compression engines OR just remove the lead from 100LL and burn it with ADI, why not do that?

Actually we were still using Trich we called it up until I retired, mostly cleaning cannon plugs etc.

How many RPM per turn of the screw for I believe a McCauley governor? I need 100 RPM