GAMI Unleaded gets approval

[Will.iam]

It’s like camping out a week before a starwars movie comes out some people think it’s fun. 

[carusoam]

Or long lines at the Apple store before a new release…

Or leaving “I’m first” in the comment section of a YT video…

If 007 is cool… then 0007 is even cooler!

If you had serial number 0007 your plane would be one of the earlier planes of your model….  
29-0007 would be a really early ‘94 Ovation…
 

PP attempted humor only, not a numerologist…

Best regards,

-a-

[Raymond J1]

2 hours ago, carusoam said:

Or long lines at the Apple store before a new release…

Or leaving “I’m first” in the comment section of a YT video…

If 007 is cool… then 0007 is even cooler!

If you had serial number 0007 your plane would be one of the earlier planes of your model….  
29-0007 would be a really early ‘94 Ovation…
 

PP attempted humor only, not a numerologist…

Best regards,

-a-

lyrics of a French song about it :

A beginning of January, if I knew how to count correctly,
Rest of the party or well wishes very supported,
From Ruth or from Moïshé, which one had the idea?
Who cares if I won the race, and among thousands,
We have all been victors even the last of the last,
Once at least the best, we who were born.
In the hollow of our mothers that it is good to mature
And then I saw some light so I went out
And I said
Good idea

 

[Niko182]

On 1/12/2023 at 1:09 AM, ilovecornfields said:

I’m curious how they’re marketing Swift 94UL given a (supposedly) superior product. I was pretty disappointed that the airport I fly into regularly just announced they’re getting the Swift product since I can use it on my Ovation and I don’t see them offering 94UL and 100UL. I get the feeling they’re just going to stop carrying 100LL and tell me I can either buy 94UL or go somewhere else.

Hopefully we can count on the trusty ol’ NOTAM system to keep us updated with the information we need. No way that could ever fail us and leave us stranded with no fuel.

I thought the ovations don't have the ability to run 94UL? is their 100R fuel released yet?

[Pinecone]

11 hours ago, MikeOH said:

All this excitement about being an early purchaser of an expensive STC that entitles you to pay probably $1-$2 more per gallon for fuel you can't even buy yet!

I don't get it???

Excitement that there is a path forward as leaded fuels get banned on the local and state level.   Excitement that there is a fuel that can be supplied by just about any refinery without special handling, special trucks.

Yes, the fuel might be a $1 a gallon more, but the real issue is when there is NO 100LL.  Then it is not $1 more, it is the price for fuel.

Also, for a fuel that will increase the oil change interval (Lycoming already has an SB for longer time between oil changes with UL fuel).  Will increase the life of plugs.  Decrease lead based valve sticking.  Possibly allowing full synthetic oils which will increase efficiency (lower friction), further increase the oil change interval, and lead to longer engine life.

I have followed this since before it started in the old days on AVSIG.

And support for a small company that went outside the box to get a viable unleaded fuel when the big boys and the FAA could not, and even actively blocked them.

[FlyingDude]

On 9/9/2022 at 6:53 PM, jaylw314 said:

I suspect that the majority of Americans are disinterested, apathetic or against supporting our right and privileges to fly Mooney's.  I suspect we're seen as prima donnas and JFK Jr wannabes, and that most Americans believe they receive no direct benefit from having an airport in their locality.  I suspect we're seen as manifestations of the 1%'ers, because most of us, in fact, are, to be able to afford to own and operate aircraft.

If put to a truly democratic vote or referendum, our privileges would have been voted out decades ago.  If government were simply, as you put it, the "servant of the people," we wouldn't be here in the first place talking about Mooney's.  MS would have ended up being a forum of some other financially ruinous activity

Somehow, that government and those regulators have got it in their heads that GA should be supported rather than shut down despite popular opinion.  I, for one, am thankful for that, even if there are pockets of antipathy towards GA.

Spot on!

That's why I never miss an opportunity to point out to people that my plane cost me less than their humongous SUV, which often carries 1 person or is sitting on a parking lot, or their manly truck, which rides with no load, not to mention all the precious land wasted for temples which don't pay any taxes and produce nothing, whereas imagine how many mcmansions you can fit there...

It usually doesn't accomplish anything but if they ruin my day, I should at least share the joy...

[redbaron1982]

Just thinking... having 100 MON UL (Av)Gas, doesn't open the possibility for using it in cars as well? Maybe some of the big companies sees the opportunity of start selling as a premium product this for cars as well, which would result in more volume that (could) result in lower prices.

Off topic, I was surprised for the low prices of 100LL in my (hopefully) soon to be home airport. It's 3.95 for SS. Premium MoGas is around 3.65 in the Houston area, so it's almost at the same price.

[Pinecone]

4 hours ago, Niko182 said:

I thought the ovations don't have the ability to run 94UL? is their 100R fuel released yet?

No and no.

They state they think they will have it this year.   But even if approved, it will take time to roll it out.

I am considering buying their forever STC.  It is only $100, and with the two, I am covering the foreseeable fuels.

 

I wonder if we can get approval for an alternate fuel tank label listing all three (once Swift is approved).

[katzhome]

1 hour ago, Pinecone said:

Excitement that there is a path forward as leaded fuels get banned on the local and state level.   Excitement that there is a fuel that can be supplied by just about any refinery without special handling, special trucks.

Yes, the fuel might be a $1 a gallon more, but the real issue is when there is NO 100LL.  Then it is not $1 more, it is the price for fuel.

Also, for a fuel that will increase the oil change interval (Lycoming already has an SB for longer time between oil changes with UL fuel).  Will increase the life of plugs.  Decrease lead based valve sticking.  Possibly allowing full synthetic oils which will increase efficiency (lower friction), further increase the oil change interval, and lead to longer engine life.

I have followed this since before it started in the old days on AVSIG.

And support for a small company that went outside the box to get a viable unleaded fuel when the big boys and the FAA could not, and even actively blocked them.

For me the 100LL ban is already realized.

I can not purchase fuel for my plane at my nearest two airports today.

So yes, I’m just a little excited, along with all the other reasons mentioned.

[Pinecone]

5 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

Just thinking... having 100 MON UL (Av)Gas, doesn't open the possibility for using it in cars as well? Maybe some of the big companies sees the opportunity of start selling as a premium product this for cars as well, which would result in more volume that (could) result in lower prices.

Off topic, I was surprised for the low prices of 100LL in my (hopefully) soon to be home airport. It's 3.95 for SS. Premium MoGas is around 3.65 in the Houston area, so it's almost at the same price.

It would be a wonder off road (track) fuel.  Currently the common unleaded is 98 AKI, so about 93 MON, or about 94UP level.  I can definitely see a market for a track fuel.   And last time I checked the 98 AKI pump at the track, it was about $8 per gallon.

For road fuel, the issue is if an oxygenate is required in your locality.  If so, they would have blend the (G)100UL with ethanol to meet those requirements.  But that doesn't sound like a huge issue.

Although, IIRC, G100UL is actually 98 or 99 aviation lean grade, but over 145 for the rich rating.  The big warbird guys are really looking forward to this fuel.

[MikeOH]

4 minutes ago, katzhome said:

For me the 100LL ban is already realized.

I can not purchase fuel for my plane at my nearest two airports today.

So yes, I’m just a little excited, along with all the other reasons mentioned.

Hmm, I don’t purchase fuel at my home airport; it’s always too expensive. I just fly to nearby airports for fuel and enjoy the excuse for a flight.

How far do you have to fly for fuel?

[Pinecone]

1 hour ago, MikeOH said:

Hmm, I don’t purchase fuel at my home airport; it’s always too expensive. I just fly to nearby airports for fuel and enjoy the excuse for a flight.

How far do you have to fly for fuel?

Since CA is talking about a state wide ban, he would have to fly to another state for fuel.

[MikeOH]

10 minutes ago, Pinecone said:

Since CA is talking about a state wide ban, he would have to fly to another state for fuel.

Sigh… that’s the future; who knows how far out.

I realize you are a zealous fan-boy, but I’d still like to know how far he PRESENTLY has to fly. Quantify his inconvenience as of today.

[T. Peterson]

4 hours ago, Pinecone said:

Excitement that there is a path forward as leaded fuels get banned on the local and state level.   Excitement that there is a fuel that can be supplied by just about any refinery without special handling, special trucks.

Yes, the fuel might be a $1 a gallon more, but the real issue is when there is NO 100LL.  Then it is not $1 more, it is the price for fuel.

Also, for a fuel that will increase the oil change interval (Lycoming already has an SB for longer time between oil changes with UL fuel).  Will increase the life of plugs.  Decrease lead based valve sticking.  Possibly allowing full synthetic oils which will increase efficiency (lower friction), further increase the oil change interval, and lead to longer engine life.

I have followed this since before it started in the old days on AVSIG.

And support for a small company that went outside the box to get a viable unleaded fuel when the big boys and the FAA could not, and even actively blocked them.

If it works out that way I will salute smartly, but somehow the glossy hype rarely meets expectations. We will see.

[katzhome]

4 hours ago, MikeOH said:

Hmm, I don’t purchase fuel at my home airport; it’s always too expensive. I just fly to nearby airports for fuel and enjoy the excuse for a flight.

How far do you have to fly for fuel?

The 3 nearest airports are 20-30 nautical miles.  I’m not counting SJC because getting in there depends on the commercial traffic.

 

it isn’t that far, and yes a good excuse to fly.  However, when you add up the drive time in traffic, preflight, etc it is 3-4 hours that I currently have to do in daylight on a nice weather day.  Being able to just tootle over to the fuel island after work a weekday evening is much lower stress.  

So again for me, paying the $400 (about 1.5 fillups) and a higher cost for fuel (which I’ve been doing all year, we don’t have $4 Avgas in the Bay Area) is in the long run worth it.  
 

If you don’t need/want it, fine.  If you think flying that distance every couple of flights or having to make a fuel stop before a trip isn’t a big deal, also fine.  Nobody is making anyone purchase the STCs, and I’ll celebrate my first G100UL fill up at KRHV when we hopefully get it here.

[Pinecone]

FYI, this was just posted at BT about the issue with the STC tied to the engine serial number and if you are looking at a new/reman soon--

"As an incentive to adopt the STC before fuel is available, we'd like to offer free replacement engine STCs to the original purchaser for a period of 10 years. That offer is currently set to expire 1 June 2023.

John-Paul"

 

 

[John-Paul]

A few notables:

1) As an incentive to adopt the STC before fuel is available, we'd like to offer free replacement engine STCs to the original purchaser for a period of 10 years.  That offer is currently set to expire 1 June 2023.

2) We are offering a $100 rebate on the first tank of G100UL that you buy for STC purchases made this month (Jan 2023).

John-Paul

GAMI

[ilovecornfields]

10 hours ago, Niko182 said:

I thought the ovations don't have the ability to run 94UL? is their 100R fuel released yet?

Typo. Should have said “can’t” use it on my Ovation.

[MikeOH]

57 minutes ago, katzhome said:

The 3 nearest airports are 20-30 nautical miles.  I’m not counting SJC because getting in there depends on the commercial traffic.

 

it isn’t that far, and yes a good excuse to fly.  However, when you add up the drive time in traffic, preflight, etc it is 3-4 hours that I currently have to do in daylight on a nice weather day.  Being able to just tootle over to the fuel island after work a weekday evening is much lower stress.  

So again for me, paying the $400 (about 1.5 fillups) and a higher cost for fuel (which I’ve been doing all year, we don’t have $4 Avgas in the Bay Area) is in the long run worth it.  
 

If you don’t need/want it, fine.  If you think flying that distance every couple of flights or having to make a fuel stop before a trip isn’t a big deal, also fine.  Nobody is making anyone purchase the STCs, and I’ll celebrate my first G100UL fill up at KRHV when we hopefully get it here.

Thanks; I now get that it works for you.

The key phrase is, “nobody is making anyone purchase the STCs” or fuel…. Right now, anyway.  I’m perfectly happy if that remains the status quo.

My significant angst over this ‘miracle fuel’ (to hear some here rave) is if California and/or the EPA ban 100LL.  That’s when those of us who are perfectly happy purchasing 100LL WILL be FORCED to pay ransom in the form of an STC to GAMI only to receive much higher prices at the pump in exchange for that extortion

 

[John-Paul]

3 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Thanks; I now get that it works for you.

The key phrase is, “nobody is making anyone purchase the STCs” or fuel…. Right now, anyway.  I’m perfectly happy if that remains the status quo.

My significant angst over this ‘miracle fuel’ (to hear some here rave) is if California and/or the EPA ban 100LL.  That’s when those of us who are perfectly happy purchasing 100LL WILL be FORCED to pay ransom in the form of an STC to GAMI only to receive much higher prices at the pump in exchange for that extortion

 

There is an alternative!  You could develop and certify your own fuel.  It only took us 12 years and cost many, many millions of dollars of non-taxpayer money.  Hopefully, the sales of the STC will fund the deployment of the fuel to places that are (wrongly or rightly, you decide) banning or threatening to ban the current fuel.  I'm guessing a ~$500 STC will be much cheaper and easier for you.

John-Paul

[MikeOH]

Just now, John-Paul said:

There is an alternative!  You could develop and certify your own fuel.  It only took us 12 years and cost many, many millions of dollars of non-taxpayer money.  Hopefully, the sales of the STC will fund the deployment of the fuel to places that are (wrongly or rightly, you decide) banning or threatening to ban the current fuel.  I'm guessing a ~$500 STC will be much cheaper and easier for you.

John-Paul

Why would I do that when a lower cost fuel is available?

Oh, yeah… your plan is to provide a heretofore unavailable option to 100LL so that the government ELIMINATES your competition! Then I DON’T have a choice.

Nice HP printer strategy you’re offering up with the “discount rebate”…you are just licking your chops to hose us all at the pump. At least HP had competition. Pretty nice sweetheart deal the Feds gave you.

[John-Paul]

23 minutes ago, MikeOH said:

Why would I do that when a lower cost fuel is available?

Oh, yeah… your plan is to provide a heretofore unavailable option to 100LL so that the government ELIMINATES your competition! Then I DON’T have a choice.

Nice HP printer strategy you’re offering up with the “discount rebate”…you are just licking your chops to hose us all at the pump. At least HP had competition. Pretty nice sweetheart deal the Feds gave you.

The reality is that 100LL is going away, with or without our involvement.  Did the certification of our fuel accelerate that?  Maybe, maybe not.  The EPA has been on the verge of issuing an endangerment finding for years.

Manufacture and deployment of a brand new fuel isn't a cheap or easy prospect, and that money has to come from somewhere.  It's true there are some "cents per gallon" to be made on the licensing of the fuel, but truthfully it probably isn't as much as you think, and it will be years before all the overhead is covered on the vast progress we've made up to this point.   The STC fees pay for some (but not all) of the years of essentially unpaid work, and also pay for the upcoming costs.  Without that, it would still be years before we could get the fuel in the field.  Where would that leave people in places where leaded fuel was banned? Flying their bicycles to work?

My assumption is most pilots would rather pay roughly the cost of filling up the aircraft one time for an STC vs the alternatives one 1) no fuel for your aircraft or 2) having to develop your own alternative fuel.  I could be wrong about all that, though.  Electric airplanes may be right around the corner, and all this fuel conversation may be moot.  

John-Paul

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, John-Paul said:

A few notables:

1) As an incentive to adopt the STC before fuel is available, we'd like to offer free replacement engine STCs to the original purchaser for a period of 10 years.  That offer is currently set to expire 1 June 2023.

2) We are offering a $100 rebate on the first tank of G100UL that you buy for STC purchases made this month (Jan 2023).

John-Paul

GAMI

A friend in the restaurant business used to say that the first sign of a failing restaurant is coupons and incentives.   I don't think this is a good look.   It makes it look like you're trying to get cash up front before people figure out what's going on.

[John-Paul]

Just now, EricJ said:

A friend in the restaurant business used to say that the first sign of a failing restaurant is coupons and incentives.   I don't think this is a good look.   It makes it look like you're trying to get cash up front before people figure out what's going on.

That's a weird way to look at it.  We're trying to incentivize early adoption of the STCs to fund a more rapid deveployment of the fuel.  Remember, this isn't a government program, where we just print whatever money we need.  We're a small aviation R&D company, and those efforts are funded by the sale of our products and services.  When you buy a set of GAMIjectors, tip tanks, G100UL STCs, etc, a generous portion of that money goes to developing some next GA improvement. 

John-Paul

[N201MKTurbo]

It seems that you can get the STC in short order. Why would I buy a license to buy something that nobody is selling?