redbaron1982

You're are right, my bad. Just edited my message.

How about changing the offer to visit your experiment to also including discussing other possible experiments that could be better aligned to real life scenarios. Such us a panel subject to wet/dry cycles? That could help dissipate any "gossiping".

How come that this is hard data and the AP that did the YouTube video is not? Also, the YouTube video already showed this, but also showed that letting the fuel dry and then reapply several times did the most damage.

I know an STC is a looooot of work, but I wonder why we are not seeing more Diesel engines in general aviation. Delta Hawk seems to have a pretty nice line up of engines: https://www.deltahawk.com/engines/ The weight is about 40lb heavier than an IO360. And there is a version that goes up to 235HP. How cool would it be to have a J model with a 235HP turbocharged diesel engine?! No more lead, better fuel economy, no sparkplugs. There is definitely the water cooling system, which is another thing to look after, but when it comes to road motors, diesel are usually way more reliable than gasoline.

I have relatively little experience with 100LL (2 years / always same airport), but I haven't seen any permanent deterioration of my J paint by exposing it to LL. My J paint is quite bitten up and it's original (1985). My LH wing wipes LL from the sump drain, and after two years it really got stained with the blue dye, but it quickly came off rubbing it with some fresh LL. So, at least in my airport, LL formulation is not harsh to paint at all.

Are these the stains you cannot remove with polishing?

I'm not sure how the supply chain works with GA avgas, but I'm quite sure that most, as in 99.9% of airports, don't have the infrastructure to dispense two different fuel types. So the key would be to have multiple formulations that can be mixed together so airports can switch from one to the other without major issues. I don´t know how this works with 100LL, is there a free (as in beer) spec that any fuel manufacturer can follow? Or each fuel manufacturer have their own proprietary formulation that meets certain specs?

Yeah, right, I also read that GAMI recommends G100UL right before a paint job, as it is going to give you a head start on stripping the paint. I can´t find now the link to that...

Can you provide the link to such information?

It looks like GAMI is acknowledging now that nitrile o-ring may swell if soaked in G100UL. https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/gami-says-all-high-aromatic-gasolines-are-hard-on-paint/

How do you know they haven´t changed o-rings?

And I want to reiterate: there is no chance, not in a million years, that GAMI was not aware of this. They have been experimenting with this stuff for more than 10 years, I'm sure they have all the information, but they decide which to share and which to keep for themselves.

enough for G100UL not to be a drop-in replacement. If (that's a big if) the FAA is responsible enough, they should amend the STC to indicate that it requires replacing all nitrile o-rings before using G100UL and generate an AD for all aircraft that already have the STC.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/california-mechanics-tests-show-g100ul-paint-nitrile-o-ring-damage-under-some-circumstances/ What a hot mess! I'm sure George will come up with some justification for this, such as unusually high solar activity or improper fuel dispensing techniques that resulted in an abnormally high concentration of some paint stripper.

Yeah, amazing right? I am sure it's all part of the same conspiracy that sells paint stripper in plastic containers.

There is absolutely no chance that GAMI was not aware of this. They have been working with this nasty stuff for more than a decade. It makes sense now why they insisted so much with "fueling hygiene". Maybe they were dreaming about everyone following their procedures without error and that all airplanes would have perfectly sealed tanks and no one would notice this.

I'm from Argentina too (I assume you're!), that's a fantastic trip! Looking forward to a PIREP! A friend recently flew from Houston to Sanfer in a Cessna 210T, but he went down through the Pacific coast, which is not a good option for us with NA engines.

well, yeah, I was thinking of 100LL staining that can be easily removed, and worst case some polishing would fix it.

More over, I would differentiate staining from stripping. Paint staining is not that "bad", and most likely can be corrected with some polishing. The pictures that @gabez looked more stripped paint.

I have a dual mag that was IRAN around 70 hours ago by Kelly, I have had no problem so far, but my understanding is that Kelly is one of the shops to avoid. I had some ignition issues around 20 hours ago and Savvy recommended sending the mags over to http://aeroacc-vny.com/ and they were amazing, they test bench the mags, and everything checked out so they returned them without charging anything but the shipping. Just for the service and transparency, I will send them over to Aero Accessories at Van Nuys if I ever have to do any work on the mags.

I'm not questioning if the STC route is correct or not, I have no idea which other routes exists either. What I'm saying is that only a small percentage of piston engines airplanes can legally use G100UL. If a state or the federal government bans 100LL with the current state of things they would be forcing the whole fleet to pay Mr George for the STC and then on top of that grant monopoly over the fuel supply. It's hard for me to see how that could be ok. I think the STC shouldn't be required or it should be free, and also wait for at least two alternatives (G100UL and Swift?) before baning 100LL.

Most of legal and regulatory stuff are distinctions without differences...

I'm quite sure that these statements are false. The correct statement would be "100% of all airplanes that use spark ignition piston engines can be modified through an STC to use G100UL". Technically only a small amount of airplanes are approved to use G100UL, only those with the STC.

As long as we are not forced to use paint stripper as fuel ...

All this sounds like a communist country (or at least state). Forcing a market to switch to a monopoly is the perfect recipe for corruption, abuse, and kill competition. Lucky for us, it looks like Swift 100R might be relatively close (2025?) to be an alternative, with ASTM cert. Maybe G100UL is just a bleep in the transition to unleaded fuel.