GAMI 100 UL

[A64Pilot]

55 minutes ago, Will.iam said:

Wow that was a long read but information rich. Would gave been nice to see how gami fuel differs in comparison. 

As I understand it, it’s supposed to be identical to 100LL, but in truth I don’t think we really know, and won’t until it’s been used in a significant number of aircraft for an extended interval.

I have a theory that isn’t’ worth anything and could be way off, but my theory is that our cam and lifters may be affected by cylinder blow by, and maybe part of what’s going on with them may be because of the difference between 100LL and the legacy fuels. 

Worthless theory I admit and not based on any real facts, but I think there can be more effects from a fuel other then detonation resistance, and those effects if they do exist may take a long time to surface.

But you know on the other hand, maybe the Gami fuel could fix the premature valve train wear, or may make plug fouling almost non existent or other good things.

We may begin to get an idea after it’s widely used for a few years.

At the time I thought removing lead from automotive fuel was a terrible idea, but in actually it’s turned out to be about the best thing that ever happened to automotive engines, so I was definitely wrong then.

[toto]

I know there's a lot to digest here, and we'll probably spend the next 12 months poring over all available data to determine whether the GAMI product is right for us.

I don't know an aromatic from a switchgrass, and the studies from Oz are certainly eyebrow-raising, but I still think this whole thing is freaking awesome.  My entire aircraft-owning life has been under the shadow of this looming lead disaster, where we would have to sell a plane for pennies on the dollar, or spend $100k on a diesel replacement that isn't available, or try to get a mogas STC or whatever.  But the mere fact that the FAA has stamped approval on a drop-in 100LL replacement is amazing, even with the current caveats, and I'm very optimistic in a way that I haven't been with any of the previous UL avgas announcements.

[Hank]

4 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

At the time I thought removing lead from automotive fuel was a terrible idea, but in actually it’s turned out to be about the best thing that ever happened to automotive engines, so I was definitely wrong then.

And after several generations of engine development, it may turn out to have been great for airplane engines, but your great grandchildren will be doing something else . . . .

[A64Pilot]

39 minutes ago, Hank said:

And after several generations of engine development, it may turn out to have been great for airplane engines, but your great grandchildren will be doing something else . . . .

I’ve always thought that for all intents and purposes that we will be the last generation to fly GA. But I didn’t think it would be fuel that closed the coffin lid, I figured it would be increasing regulation and cost.

Sure it may continue and be around in 30 years or so from now, but it will be like cave diving, not mainstream at all and the average person won’t be able to afford whatever is left. Every year the population shrinks.

Most of GA aircraft would be unaffected even if we had to burn 100LL without the lead which I think becomes 94UL.

The ones that couldn’t are the very high performance turbo motors most often found in twins, and I believe they could if timing and boost were restricted, so they would lose some power, probably lose some useful load, but they could still fly.

 Performance at altitude should remain the same for most.

I didn’t think it likely that the Friends of the Earth could get the Avgas burning fleet grounded, and I thought we would always be able to get 100LL, until or unless a suitable substitute became available.

It seems now that there is, and my concern is that I will be forced to use it, whatever it cost, and that’s my concern, what will it cost?

I know what has happened to a lot of parts prices when there is only one source, what’s a single source fuel going to cost?

If you wanted to get rid of the lead and not kill off GA completely, then the logical thing would be to offer 94UL at a reasonable cost, but tax the snot out of 100LL, make it more costly, but that’s never done, in 1973 or whenever it was when unleaded auto gas came out people misfueled cars left and right because leaded gas was less costly, if unleaded cost less, the people would have misfueled cars meant to burn leaded gas.

Same for ULSD, when it came out it cost far more than normal Diesel.

So my concern is now that a substitute is available, the sale of 100LL will cease, and we will be forced to pay whatever the new fuel costs.

Time will tell.

Edited August 14, 2021 by A64Pilot

[mhrivnak]

8 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

I know what has happened to a lot of parts prices when there is only one source, what’s a single source fuel going to cost?

FWIW we already depend on Innospec as the only producer of tetraethyl lead, and that single-source dependence has been seen for many years as a risk. If they stop making it whether by choice, by regulatory force, or natural disaster, it's unclear how 100LL could continue to be produced. It's good that we have another viable option emerging.

[toto]

5 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

How many here remember the introduction of Mobil AV-1? 

For whatever it's worth, I had a very positive experience with AV-1 in a NA four-banger. Most of the problems were with turbo big-bore motors, but it was a fantastic oil for some of us. 

I do think that GAMI is trying to head off an AV-1 scenario by testing with a wider array of engines before announcing the STC, even though the STC itself is pretty narrow. As you say, time will tell

[A64Pilot]

I still don’t understand the need for an STC. If it’s a direct replacement that meets all standards, what’s the STC for?

There was no 100LL STC, it was the new standard replacement fuel that replaced 100/130 and 80.

[A64Pilot]

54 minutes ago, toto said:

For whatever it's worth, I had a very positive experience with AV-1 in a NA four-banger. Most of the problems were with turbo big-bore motors, but it was a fantastic oil for some of us. 

I do think that GAMI is trying to head off an AV-1 scenario by testing with a wider array of engines before announcing the STC, even though the STC itself is pretty narrow. As you say, time will tell

Synthetic can be run in aircraft engines, unfortunately Mobil picked the wrong synthetic and my guess is there just isn’t enough money in it to pay for R&D of a new oil. 

‘Why did Exxon get out? I thought they had an excellent oil, no problems, my guess is that there wasn’t enough money in the small amounts sold.

[aviatoreb]

When I bought this airplane about 12 years ago, I did have thoughts of getting something even newer and fancier at maybe 200% or 250% of my purchase price, but I was nervous that if 100LL would go away that I would be stuck with a big paper weight and a complete hull loss financially.  So I got this 1981 Mooney (which I love more than I had expected even!).

So still all this time I have been kind of worried that we are all in danger in GA of a major problem if 100LL would be legislated away due to the lead, without an immediate replacement or solution.

So honestly, I am a bit relieved to see this 100UL stuff getting certified. I think it is insurance for GA to continue longer into the future and takes the pressure off a bit.

[Cruiser]

The only reason this STC was issued is because the FAA special committee to replace 100LL failed.

100UL will take off like wildfires in the west very soon as the environmentalist renew their attack on lead emissions 

[A64Pilot]

1 hour ago, Freemasm said:

It is not a direct replacement as it  does not meet/(exceed, where relevant) all parts of the original. The mere fact that the SG is greater cements this. Reference post ~ 1/2 way down page two. 

OK, that sort of clears it up, I think, but specific gravity differs in approved Jet fuels too whatever that’s worth, JP4 had a lower SG than JP8, but oddly the engines burn rate was predicated off of SG, so when we switched to JP8. we got a range boost, and as out capacitive fuel quantity indicating systems correctly measured the more dense fuel and correctly reported its weight difference the fuel burn in lbs remained the same or all of our performance planning would have gone out the window.

If it doesn’t meet all Specs, then I’d assume we can’t be offered only it, unless of course the Friends of the Earth are successful with their lawsuit, if it’s still even ongoing.

That’s my only concern, I think alternate unleaded fuels are great, so long as 100LL is available until we are certain the alternate is safe.

In a crazy way similar I guess to Covid vaccines, they aren’t yet approved, but are available.

[toto]

4 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

‘Why did Exxon get out? I thought they had an excellent oil, no problems, my guess is that there wasn’t enough money in the small amounts sold.

Dunno. I ran Exxon Elite for many years as the replacement for AV-1, but it was *really* hard to find at FBOs on the road. Always had to plan ahead and bring any oil that would be needed for the trip. My best guess was that Exxon just didn’t have the oil distribution network that Aeroshell has. I had no problem at all finding Aeroshell 15w50, but Elite was basically impossible to find. 

[toto]

4 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

My point wasn't the engine so much as the long-term effect on the fuel tanks and delivery system, long term storage, etc.  There is no substitute for time..... 

Yep, understood. I wasn’t around for the introduction of 100LL, but I assume that there was a certain amount of infrastructure stress at that point too?

[A64Pilot]

3 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Do you really think that small or even medium sized airports will be installing duplicate tanks and duplicate self-service pumps so that flyers will have the luxury of choice?  Or that FBO's will be investing in duplicate fuel trucks?  The result being double the infrastructure selling the same small volume of fuel in total.  With the cost and permitting involved I suspect that it will be one way or the other - all in.

I think places like California will outlaw it at the State level and prohibit it in California, and a few others will follow suit.

However I do admit that California has more power than they should, I’ve been enjoying CARB compliment gas cans that spill for years thanks to them, and other things I’m sure.

I hope that most of the rest of the Country will let free enterprise function, and I’d expect to see 100LL continue, unless the Fed steps in and bows to the Friends of the Earth etc. After all the media can easily sell it as only the toys of the rich need it anyway, while the rich won’t care as they don’t burn it.

I’d expect that in most of the country availability of the Gami fuel will be like Mogas is, I’ve heard that some airports sell it, but I’ve never seen it, but I rarely buy fuel at airports, and then only small ones with cheap fuel, I have my own tank and the truck comes around once a month and fills it.

My assumption is whatever the Gami fuel is, it’s not anything special, give someone a sample and they could make it too, but I bet it’s proprietary, so they have to buy a license, because they can’t surely spool up production fast enough without licensing.

The Government would be creating a monopoly if they outlawed 100LL, wouldn’t they? 

Edited August 15, 2021 by A64Pilot

[Mooney Dog]

31 minutes ago, A64Pilot said:

The Government would be creating a monopoly if they outlawed 100LL, wouldn’t they? 

Somehow i dont think the gov cares about that these days. 

 

As far as cali having to much power, i think thats a large mix between good and bad regulations that come with having a huge majority of population. That and the fact that if you have to do something different for one state, you might as well make every state like that type thing. 

Either way, they're still going to shut down more GA airports in cali for whatever reason because they want the land to build houses  the children are in danger. 

[A64Pilot]

I just hope that Free Enterprise will be allowed to rule the day, by that I mean if an FBO can make money on the new fuel, then they will purchase it.

if it’s a drop in replacement, then it can be put into the same tanks.

‘We all have probably heard for example that E10 for cars is a drop in replacement, but apparently it’s not, I used to be ETH free on the local jobber that supplied the local farms etc.,apparently the Ethanol is blended at the jobber, it’s nto pumped though the pipeline. according to him he wasn’t going to supply E10 to the farms etc as to do so meant the tanks had to be emptied and cleaned or replaced, hoses had to be replaced etc as Ethanol is a solvent and it would scrub off any old residue and cause problems and I guess it takes special Ethanol resistant hoses too.

As someone else has already said, what will this new fuel due to tank sealants etc over time, I’m sure it’s been tested of course, but once in a blue moon the tests didn’t run long enough etc to find out, ref the Mobil 1 oil for example.

I hope the stuff is as cheap as 100LL, and it works as well or better than 100LL and comes with some benefits like less plug fouling etc, I want it to work.

However I believe I would be better off with 94UL, maybe that will become an option? I wonder what that was never offered?

Edited August 16, 2021 by A64Pilot

[Geoff]

19 hours ago, Mooney Dog said:

Somehow i dont think the gov cares about that these days. 

 

As far as cali having to much power, i think thats a large mix between good and bad regulations that come with having a huge majority of population. That and the fact that if you have to do something different for one state, you might as well make every state like that type thing. 

Either way, they're still going to shut down more GA airports in cali for whatever reason because they want the land to build houses  the children are in danger. 

In your opinion is the reverse then true?  That if there was magically now lead in avgas that Cali would stop shutting down GA airports or even build new ones?

[Mooney Dog]

1 hour ago, Geoff said:

In your opinion is the reverse then true?  That if there was magically now lead in avgas that Cali would stop shutting down GA airports or even build new ones?

Sadly i dont think we're going to ever get new GA airports. 

 

And as i said, if its no lead, its the airplane noise, or my kid ran onto the runway and almost got hit by a plane, or they're spying on me in my backyard. 

[Hank]

59 minutes ago, Mooney Dog said:

Sadly i dont think we're going to ever get new GA airports. 

 

And as i said, if its no lead, its the airplane noise, or my kid ran onto the runway and almost got hit by a plane, or they're spying on me in my backyard. 

Or they might crash into the school. Or I saw one while I was relaxing in my back yard and it scared me.

[A64Pilot]

On 8/16/2021 at 3:48 PM, Mooney Dog said:

Sadly i dont think we're going to ever get new GA airports. 

 

And as i said, if its no lead, its the airplane noise, or my kid ran onto the runway and almost got hit by a plane, or they're spying on me in my backyard. 

At Ft Rucker we had Stage Fields. little remote airports if you will where students and their instructors would go to practice approaches etc. No tower and no real infrastructure, just usually four parallel runways

Someone moved down from up North and bought some land, and immediately started complaining about the noise, and got the Stage field shut down that had been in use since Vietnam.

Locals don’t mind the helicopter noise as it supports the majority of the local economy. After Retirement I lived in Ozark, Hooper stage field is in the city, the local Mayor responded to noise complaints from some new residents by saying “I don’t know what your complaining bout, it sounds like money to me”

 

Edited August 18, 2021 by A64Pilot

[GeeBee]

My predictions about RHV were correct.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/can-unleaded-avgas-stop-efforts-to-close-reid-hillview-airport/?MailingID=697&utm_source=ActiveCampaign&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Unleaded+Avgas+for+Reid-Hillview%2C+Chaos+in+Kabul&utm_campaign=Unleaded+Avgas+for+Reid-Hillview%2C+Chaos+in+Kabul%2C+Wednesday%2C+August+18%2C+2021