High Fuel Prices

[AH-1 Cobra Pilot]

39 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

FYI, the $600 toilet seats and hammers was due to procurement rules at the time. 

The $600 toilet seat was for the P-3 and included a fiberglass piece the size of the inside of a Port-a-pot.  The price was not so ridiculous as it has been made out to be.

[flyboy0681]

On 5/21/2022 at 2:04 PM, flyboy0681 said:

All of these predictions remind me of the "Little Timmy" thread here on MS from a decade ago, which became so heated that the Administrator abruptly shut it down. There was one poster, ScottFromIowa, who said that by the time he (and I) were ready to collect Social Security in ten years, it will no longer be there. No matter what I said to convince him that the program will survive well into the future, he just wouldn't listen to reason and was thoroughly convinced that by 2021 it would cease to exist. Well guess what, that next decade is here, and the while not exactly solvent, Social Security is still paying 100% of its commitment.

Just my 2₵.

My fellow Mooniacs, it has been called to my attention through a PM that I received that I should apologize for the above post that I made back in May. In it I reminisced about the "Little Timmy" thread from yore where I asked ScottFromIowa whether he believed Social Security would be around for us to collect once we became eligible for benefits (we were of the same age) and he replied that it won't be around for him to collect even though he contributed during his whole working life. Unfortunately that particular comment was removed when all of the ScottFromIowas postings were deleted.

The person who sent the PM thought that it was unfair of me to "misquote" ScottFromIowa since he was not available to defend himself. That said, I am offering up this apology... I am sorry for issuing a post which referenced an online conversation from nearly ten years ago which no longer exists.

Fly safe!

 

 

[Echo]

But the quote DOES exist within the thread and was saved through a quote of ScottFromIowa that I found and posted.  In the quote ScottFromIowa does NOT state what you quoted.  He stated that SS system is pay as you go and there is no guarantee of future payments.  Full benefits are NOT possible past 2035.  Likely sooner with large COLA from inflation.

I just don't like seeing someone misquoted on a public forum.

[Echo]

OK back to discussing fuel prices.

[Pinecone]

Prices are dropping nicely.

A number of places under $5 a gallon.

[Fly Boomer]

4 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Prices are dropping nicely.

A number of places under $5 a gallon.

Downtown Kansas City says $4.89 according to ForeFlight -- not bad.

EDIT:  Found the page I was looking for (https://www.airnav.com/fuel/greatdeals/long?type=1).  Georgetown TX reporting $4.25.  Might be a little out of the way for some.

[A64Pilot]

4 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Prices are dropping nicely.

A number of places under $5 a gallon.

One wonders why the decrease in price, what’s changed?

But what still astonishes me is that in my local area lowest price is $4.49 and highest is over $9 a gl, for 100LL, Orlando of course.

Either the $9 a gl guys don’t want to bother pumping fuel, or more likely are getting $9 a gl, maybe by waving parking fees if you buy X number of gls and some say what the heck go ahead and top off? Bizjets I sort of understand, those guys often just don’t care, but people who burn 100LL aren’t often in the bizjet level of finances.

Has anyone ever seen such huge differences in Autofuel? I’ve not even seen it where the Yachts hang out. They may pay 10c or 20c a gl more but not double.

[Pinecone]

It can depend on when they got their last delivery.

My field is at $6.32.  Where is has been since August.  So I suspect, they are still working on that load of fuel.  The high priced places may be sitting on fuel they bought when it was more expensive, since they pump less due to the price.

When I have the fee waived for fuel, I figure out if it is worth it.  If the price of fuel difference is high enough, the fee is less than even their minimum fuel.

However, some places charge more because they can charge more.  

[A64Pilot]

It seems that 100LL price is based on what was paid for it, but not autofuel, car gas goes up all at once, sure most get deliveries more often than airports, but it’s just an interesting observation.

But when prices change slowly over time like it has been for 100LL that washes out the what I paid for it, and can’t explain huge as in double the price.

Of course they charge what hey can get and should be allowed to, that’s free Enterprise.

Just interesting that aircraft fuel prices can vary hugely and they can get it. For aircraft that have a 100 gl capacity we are talking over $400 for each fill up difference, interesting that I guess some will pay that when people drive across town for 5c a gl difference for 20 gls of car gas, that’s $1, not $400.

It seems that at least some of the “they own an airplane so they must be rich has some basis”

Where as an aircraft owner I think they own a Jet they must be rich  

I’ve seen in Miami the bigger Gulfstream’s pay $20,000 or more for a tank of fuel than just down the road and that just astonishes me.

G650 holds over 6,000 gls of fuel, the ER one over 7,000 gls $4 premium is $24,000 or more

[Pinecone]

Actually, it is combination of what was paid for the fuel being pumped and what the next load will cost.

That is why car gas goes up all at once.  They get word the next tanker load will cost X per gallon, they need to raise the price to cover that.  

Fuel is paid upon delivery, so you have to the money to pay the bill.

And the margin on car gas is very slim.  There is reason that so many stations have a shop with convenience items. 

[T. Peterson]

On 12/15/2022 at 4:25 PM, Echo said:

Went to thread to find where he said as you apparently impropery quoted "It won't be there"...Maybe you shouldn't quote former members that are banned from being able to defend themselves?

I like what Scott from Iowa has to say. How is he banned from being able to defend himself?

[T. Peterson]

On 12/16/2022 at 1:03 PM, flyboy0681 said:

Well, next years military budget about to be signed by the president totals nearly a trillion dollars, so it must be going toward something. Talk about "unfathomable".

Probably sensitivity training.

[flyboy0681]

38 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

This was not the posting that I had with Scott where he stated that the program won't be around when it came time for him to collect. As you can clearly see, it was a response directed to aviatoreb, not me.

[flyboy0681]

13 hours ago, Echo said:

OK back to discussing fuel prices.

$4.40

[T. Peterson]

20 minutes ago, flyboy0681 said:

This was not the posting that I had with Scott where he stated that the program won't be around when it came time for him to collect. As you can clearly see, it was a response directed to aviatoreb, not me.

I don’t know why it looks like I posted that conversation. I had nothing to do with it. I am just curious about why the fellow is supposedly banned from “defending himself “. 
Your point about it not being your conversation is completely understood!

[Echo]

On 12/22/2022 at 12:27 PM, flyboy0681 said:

This was not the posting that I had with Scott where he stated that the program won't be around when it came time for him to collect. As you can clearly see, it was a response directed to aviatoreb, not me.

No, NOT correct.  This is AviatorReb inserting ScottFromIowa quote within his message.  Can you either show the quote you allege or cease and desist as the guy is quoted NOT saying what you allege.  Put up or well you know.

Edited December 23, 2022 by Echo
spelling

[aviatoreb]

7 hours ago, Echo said:

No, NOT correct.  This is AviatorReb inserting ScottFromIowa quote within his message.  Can you either show the quote you allege or cease and desist as the guy is quoted NOT saying what you allege.  Put up or well you know.

That's right - I had said something in reply to ScottFromIowa - but I have no idea anymore what it is that I said - since I dont have perfect recall of every post from almost 10 years ago.

[Hector]

Why is U.S. actively supporting a non NATO country?  Maybe we should NOT have taken Ukraines's nukes?  THEY were a deterrent to the devastating land grab war that has destabilized the world.
Peace, NOT War is the answer.  U.S. has commitment to NATO, NOT to ongoing war in Ukraine.

Neville Chamberlain would have agreed with you completely.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Pinecone]

8 hours ago, Hector said:

Neville Chamberlain would have agreed with you completely.
 

Yeah, that worked so well.