Based on the G100UL fuel leak thread what's your position?

[Pinecone]

10 hours ago, Marc_B said:

From a post on BT…not my video. 

FYI, also from BT about RHV not selling G100UL:
 

"They stopped temporarily because their fuel truck was empty and they had a mechanical problem with their (long out of service) underground tank when they tried to refill the truck. That was fixed and they started loading their fuel truck and selling G100UL again."

[redbaron1982]

1 hour ago, Pinecone said:

Interesting that he uses PLASTIC containers that are not affected.

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

[Marc_B]

@Pinecone I saw Mr. Braly’s response you quoted above on BT. I just wish he’d comment specifically about the content of the video outside of only commenting about the sign at RHV.

Does he feel this is consistent with what he’s seen in the lab?  Which products did he test in the lab to say this is drop in for almost the entire fleet of airframes and airframe ages?

Which compounds, sealants, and hoses/rubber/o-rings should be avoided or used with caution when implementing G100UL?  What amount of paint damage is “acceptable” as standard practice use of G100UL?

We’ve heard repeatedly “trust the data” but I have yet to see any data from GAMI on the issues we’re discussing.

[redbaron1982]

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.

[Pinecone]

Hmm, Glad food containers are used to sell paint stripper?? 

Interesting that the AOPA Baron had fuel leakage, but not paint coming off.

The Citabria trim tab could be explained by the paint being a basic lacquer or enamel, which is not resistant to solvents.  But the 182 plates were a catalyzed, cross linked paint.  But maybe the attack is on the primer, which could be a non-catalyzed version.

[N201MKTurbo]

G100UL is what it is. It isn’t like George is going to fix it. It seems to burn well in out engines, but eats our paint. 
 

I hope flying with paint stripper in our tanks isn’t our new reality. If it is, we will eventually learn to deal with it. And we will have to pay for the mitigations. Sucks….

[Shiroyuki]

Just now, N201MKTurbo said:

G100UL is what it is. It isn’t like George is going to fix it. It seems to burn well in out engines, but eats our paint. 
 

I hope flying with paint stripper in our tanks isn’t our new reality.

That video also showed damage to o-rings. Now it makes me wonder if it can cause damage to our tank sealant, even brand new tank sealants that’s not 20 years old. Honestly that video raised more issue then just simply stripping the paint.

[N201MKTurbo]

5 minutes ago, Shiroyuki said:

That video also showed damage to o-rings. Now it makes me wonder if it can cause damage to our tank sealant, even brand new tank sealants that’s not 20 years old. Honestly that video raised more issue then just simply stripping the paint.

I’m sure if we changed all the o-rings to Viton, we would be fine. As far as the sealant is concerned, it would be good for somebody to paint a piece of aluminum with sealant and throw it in a jar of G100UL.

It doesn’t seem that G100UL is a drop in replacement.

[Marc_B]

https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2024/november/pilot/unleaded-fuel-what-we-have-learned#
 

I don’t remember seeing this before. But there are pictures around fuel cap that are suggestive. 

[Shiroyuki]

3 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

I’m sure if we changed all the o-rings to Viton, we would be fine. As far as the sealant is concerned, it would be good for somebody to paint a piece of aluminum with sealant and throw it in a jar of G100UL.

It doesn’t seem that G100UL is a drop in replacement.

Now how much labor and material cost it takes to replace all susceptible material in a plane’s fuel system? 
Edit: and this is the problem it should never be advertised as a drop in replacement, neither should gami claim it cause no damage to paint.

Edited December 24, 2024 by Shiroyuki

[gabez]

how does it work if the claim was G100UL is drop in with an STC and then it is not? do they pull the STC? 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 minute ago, Shiroyuki said:

Now how much labor and material cost it takes to replace all susceptible material in a plane’s fuel system? 
 

There isn't that many in the Lycomings. There are some in the fuel selector, some in the fuel pump fittings and a few in the servo. 6-8 hours of labor.

[gabez]

1 minute ago, N201MKTurbo said:

There isn't that many in the Lycomings. There are some in the fuel selector, some in the fuel pump fittings and a few in the servo. 6-8 hours of labor.

what about the continental? 

[N201MKTurbo]

1 minute ago, gabez said:

what about the continental? 

I don’t know them as well.

[redbaron1982]

3 minutes ago, N201MKTurbo said:

There isn't that many in the Lycomings. There are some in the fuel selector, some in the fuel pump fittings and a few in the servo. 6-8 hours of labor.

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.

[Marc_B]

The issue from my perspective is the potential for damage to components has not been publicized and the exact components that don’t play nice with G100UL aren’t listed.  Yet airframes with these components are included in the AML.

Makes it hard to say who should be concerned and who shouldn’t.

I understand that the fuel works in engines. But don’t understand how the AML included every airframe that has components not compatible but yet no STC instructions for ICA and preparation for use??

[redbaron1982]

Just now, Marc_B said:

The issue from my perspective is the potential for damage to components has not been publicized and the exact components that don’t play nice with G100UL aren’t listed.  Yet airframes with these components are included in the AML.

Makes it hard to say who should be concerned and who shouldn’t.

I understand that the fuel works in engines. But don’t understand how the AML included every airframe that has components not compatible but yet no STC instructions for ICA and preparation for use??

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.

[gabez]

6 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

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.

that would open them up for liabilities, ultimately the problems came out in week(s) not years.  

[gabez]

I just talked to the A&P AI at the field that helped GAMI with the paperwork, he is going to reach out to Paul and put this front and center. I also emailed the airport manager  at KWVI. Let's see if they stop selling G100

[toto]

3 minutes ago, gabez said:

I just talked to the A&P AI at the field that helped GAMI with the paperwork, he is going to reach out to Paul and put this front and center. I also emailed the airport manager  at KWVI. Let's see if they stop selling G100

From the video, it seems like they have already stopped selling it (due to an issue with the truck or something)

ETA: I guess you meant stop selling it altogether - the video mentioned they had stopped selling at Reid Hillview 

[gabez]

1 minute ago, toto said:

From the video, it seems like they have already stopped selling it (due to an issue with the truck or something)

that's at KRHV, mine is at KWVI. 

[toto]

1 minute ago, gabez said:

that's at KRHV, mine is at KWVI. 

Yeah, sorry - already edited with my incorrect assumption 

[PeteMc]

On 12/23/2024 at 9:24 AM, donkaye said:

It cannot be corrected with polishing.

What about preventative protection added to the paint?  Be it wax or more likely one of the many spray on products.  Anyone know if you wiped any spills and then did another quick spray and wipe around the fuller for next time if it stops the stains? 

Now I get the leaks and stains around the panels is another issue.  But hopefully there will be a fix for this relatively soon.  

[Pinecone]

26 minutes ago, redbaron1982 said:

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.

Yes, and have been flying in planes without changing the O-rings for those same number of years.

The paint stripping seems to be when there is a slight leak and the fuel is allowed to sit, WET, for periods of time

[Pinecone]

14 minutes ago, toto said:

From the video, it seems like they have already stopped selling it (due to an issue with the truck or something)

ETA: I guess you meant stop selling it altogether - the video mentioned they had stopped selling at Reid Hillview 

Posted already.

They had a problem with their old underground tank.  The problem with the fuel truck was it was empty and they couldn't fill it.

Now fixed, they are back selling G100UL