Fly Boomer Posted October 31 Report Posted October 31 17 hours ago, bonal said: What I have read indicates that not all piston aircraft will be able to use the fuel. Crank up your browser. The STC covers “every spark ignition piston engine and every airframe using a spark ignition piston engine in the FAA’s Type Certificate database.” https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fuel-approved-for-all-general-aviation-aircraft/ Quote
EricJ Posted October 31 Report Posted October 31 2 hours ago, Fly Boomer said: Crank up your browser. The STC covers “every spark ignition piston engine and every airframe using a spark ignition piston engine in the FAA’s Type Certificate database.” https://generalaviationnews.com/2022/09/03/gami-unleaded-fuel-approved-for-all-general-aviation-aircraft/ I think the lingering questions are not whether the STC covers everything, but whether it is actually a sufficient drop-in substitute. That won't be known until there is an awful lot more field data. 1 Quote
wombat Posted October 31 Report Posted October 31 If the positions were swapped and we were being forced to switch from G100UL to 100LL right now, the whole pilot community would be up in arms, not even counting the TEL's health effects. Lead fowling in plugs? 100LL is a non-starter! 100LL's performance per volume? 100LL is a non-starter! Can't use modern oils? 100LL is a non-starter! Sure, G100UL isn't perfect and by switching we are trading some flaws for other flaws. (I don't want my paint stained!) But overall I think G100UL is a better solution than continuing to use 100LL. Mostly because of the perception of the health effects of the TEL in airplane exhaust. And we are unlikely to ever have as much data on G100UL as we do on 100LL in terms of engine performance and longevity. Piston powered aviation has passed its peak; even if we magically switched everybody to G100UL now, there will never be as much avgas burned in the future as there has already been burned. Unless someone can state a specific testing metric and threshold that would be sufficient that we have not met, and why the current testing is insufficient, I am not going believe any arguments that 'more testing' or 'more time' is needed. I think this is just resistance to any change. https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/06/20/the-nirvana-fallacy-an-imperfect-solution-is-often-better-than-no-solution/ 3 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.