Today's Message Index:
----------------------
1. 09:29 AM - Damaged aircraft @ GAI (Ralph E. Capen)
2. 05:08 PM - Sniffle Valve (Paul Rice)
3. 05:48 PM - Unleaded aviation fuel - what are our General Aviation champions doing to make 91/96UL AVGAS available? (was Avgas UL 91 approved by Lycoming for the IO-540-D models) (Carl Froehlich)
4. 08:19 PM - Re: RV10-List: Unleaded aviation fuel - what are our General Aviation champions doing to make 91/96UL AVGAS available? (was Avgas UL 91 approved by Lycoming for the IO-540-D models) (Kelly McMullen)
Message 1
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Damaged aircraft @ GAI |
A friend of mine was doing some night work the other day @ GAI and noticed a small
plane at the approach end of 14 @ GAI.
Later she also saw some deer - thinking they may have been related.
Hopefully all are OK - and the deer are now locked behind the fence again.
Message 2
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
I landed my RV8 the other day and noticed that my engine was idling 100 to
200 rpm higher than normal with the throttle pulled all the way back agains
t the stop. I suspected an air leak somewhere but no one egt was significa
ntly higher than an other. I found that the sniffle valve was leaking air
back into the induction system (not closing under vacuum) leaning out the m
ixture causing a higher idle. Valve is 6 years old. Anyone else had this
happen to them? PaulRV8360 hours
Message 3
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Unleaded aviation fuel - what are our General Aviation champions |
doing to make 91/96UL AVGAS available? (was Avgas UL 91 approved by Lycoming
for the IO-540-D models)
Not really RV related, so delete now if you like.
While Lycoming is taking a much needed step toward a fuel that we can
actually afford, I'm afraid our aviation champions simply reject any option
other than a still non-existent 100LL drop in replacement. Below is an
email I wrote to both the EAA and AOPA last January. EAA did not respond.
AOPA sent a disjointed response about auto fuel availability in Virginia.
Perhaps if we all pinged on AOPA and EAA they may hear us over the turbine
noise.
Carl
I note with interest articles such as in General Aviation on aviation fuel
predictions:
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2013/01/predictions-aviation-fuel-in-2013
/?utm_source=The+Pulse+Subscribers
<http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2013/01/predictions-aviation-fuel-in-201
3/?utm_source=The+Pulse+Subscribers&utm_campaign=6f588e756e-TP2013&utm_mediu
m=email> &utm_campaign=6f588e756e-TP2013&utm_medium=email
After a couple of decades of study and discussion, my evaluation is we are
on a trajectory toward avgas prices that simply end the private pilot aspect
of general aviation. We no longer have the luxury of time to cling to the
only acceptable option for 100LL as a full replacement drop in. I have
reviewed the "70%/30%" argument; 70% of all piston GA aircraft can run on
non-ethanol unleaded premium auto fuel based avgas such as 91/96UL, but the
remaining 30% of the piston GA aircraft that need 100LL consume 70% of the
fuel. This logic has run its course and now needs to be revised in the
light of current realities. I also question if we can rely on this
argument's base assumptions as they are untested by market demand as no
affordable unleaded aviation fuel is readily available, and is a backward
look at the legacy engine/aircraft population, not new engines/aircraft that
would be tailored for a 91/96UL environment.
For the private pilot segment of general aviation, a non-ethanol premium
auto fuel type product like 91/96UL is exactly the right solution and the
market base for the fuel makes it continued availability, at reasonable
prices, assured. While it is not a perfect, the clock is running out on
producing a 100LL replacement fuel. If such a full replacement is ever
delivered, the price for this novelty fuel is already estimated to be $.50
to $1 per gallon more than today's 100LL. The added cost will accelerate
the private pilot death spiral.
Although there are a few FBOs offering non-ethanol premium auto fuel the
market penetration is dismal. I also note little evidence of organized
efforts to promote widespread FBO, engine and aircraft manufacture embracing
of existing unleaded aviation fuel options. I recommend a new strategy. I
believe we have opportunity to bridge this fuel gap by a managed portfolio
of options. Some FBOs may choose to carry both 100LL and the lower octane
unleaded fuel, others may carry only one or the other based on their
customer demand. What is needed is advocacy to establish the required
policies and regulations, and collaboration with fuel suppliers, FBOs,
aircraft and engine manufactures, state and federal agencies. This will
mitigate the primary obstacle for 91/96UL adoption, legal risk.
While continued study of aviation fuel options is needed I believe we are at
a tipping point. $6+ per gallon is not sustainable for the majority of
private pilots paying for fuel out of their pocket. At the very least an
affordable unleaded aviation fuel option would help slow the continued
decline in the number of active private pilots.
Immediate action is needed to make an affordable 91/96UL type aviation fuel
widely available .
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
[mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Whisky
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 2:48 PM
Subject: RV10-List: Abgas UL 91 approved by Lycoming for the IO-540-D models
--> RV10-List message posted by: "Mike Whisky" <
<mailto:rv-10@wellenzohn.net> rv-10@wellenzohn.net>
See press release from today
<http://www.lycoming.com/news-and-events/press-releases/release-4-23-2013.ht
ml>
http://www.lycoming.com/news-and-events/press-releases/release-4-23-2013.htm
l
Not sure what the price difference of UL91 is compared to 100LL.
Mike
--------
RV-10 builder (final assembly)
#511
Read this topic online here:
<http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=399293#399293>
http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=399293#399293
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
http://www.matronics.com/contribution
Message 4
| INDEX | Back to Main INDEX |
| PREVIOUS | Skip to PREVIOUS Message |
| NEXT | Skip to NEXT Message |
| LIST | Reply to LIST Regarding this Message |
| SENDER | Reply to SENDER Regarding this Message |
|
| Subject: | Re: RV10-List: Unleaded aviation fuel - what are our General |
Aviation champions doing to make 91/96UL AVGAS available? (was Avgas UL 91 approved
by Lycoming for the IO-540-D models)
So far testing has not ruled out either the Swift Fuels 100UL, nor the
GAMI 100UL as drop-in replacements.
Since nearly 80% of all 100LL is burned by 20% of the fleet that
requires it, you are unlikely to see any FBOs willing to carry two
grades of fuel, thus a 100UL fuel will be the only choice. As it is,
most of the recip cargo planes are already operating at reduced power
from the 115/145 they were designed for. (Think DC-6, DC-7, etc.) Other
commercial aircraft like C414, C402, C421, PA-31. etc. also require 100
octane minimum. The privately flown lower compression aircraft that can
operate on 96 or lower octane only purchase something less than 20 % of
avgas sold, so are very unlikely to ever have a separate fuel stocked
for them.
When FBOs needed to stock Jet A, that spelled the end of 80/87, as no
one is going to spend the money to have 3 sets of tanks and pumps.
On 4/24/2013 5:48 PM, Carl Froehlich wrote:
>
> Not really RV related, so delete now if you like.
>
> While Lycoming is taking a much needed step toward a fuel that we can
> actually afford, I'm afraid our aviation champions simply reject any
> option other than a still non-existent 100LL drop in replacement.
> Below is an email I wrote to both the EAA and AOPA last January. EAA
> did not respond. AOPA sent a disjointed response about auto fuel
> availability in Virginia.
>
> Perhaps if we all pinged on AOPA and EAA they may hear us over the
> turbine noise.
>
> Carl
>
> I note with interest articles such as in General Aviation on aviation
> fuel predictions:
> http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2013/01/predictions-aviation-fuel-in-2013/?utm_source=The+Pulse+Subscribers&utm_campaign=6f588e756e-TP2013&utm_medium=email
>
> After a couple of decades of study and discussion, my evaluation is we
> are on a trajectory toward avgas prices that simply end the private
> pilot aspect of general aviation. We no longer have the luxury of time
> to cling to the only acceptable option for 100LL as a full replacement
> drop in. I have reviewed the 70%/30% argument; 70% of all piston GA
> aircraft can run on non-ethanol unleaded premium auto fuel based avgas
> such as 91/96UL, but the remaining 30% of the piston GA aircraft that
> need 100LL consume 70% of the fuel. This logic has run its course and
> now needs to be revised in the light of current realities. I also
> question if we can rely on this arguments base assumptions as they
> are untested by market demand as no affordable unleaded aviation fuel
> is readily available, and is a backward look at the legacy
> engine/aircraft population, not new engines/aircraft that would be
> tailored for a 91/96UL environment.
>
> For the private pilot segment of general aviation, a non-ethanol
> premium auto fuel type product like 91/96UL is exactly the right
> solution and the market base for the fuel makes it continued
> availability, at reasonable prices, assured. While it is not a
> perfect, the clock is running out on producing a 100LL replacement
> fuel. If such a full replacement is ever delivered, the price for this
> novelty fuel is already estimated to be $.50 to $1 per gallon more
> than todays 100LL. The added cost will accelerate the private pilot
> death spiral.
>
> Although there are a few FBOs offering non-ethanol premium auto fuel
> the market penetration is dismal. I also note little evidence of
> organized efforts to promote widespread FBO, engine and aircraft
> manufacture embracing of existing unleaded aviation fuel options. I
> recommend a new strategy. I believe we have opportunity to bridge this
> fuel gap by a managed portfolio of options. Some FBOs may choose to
> carry both 100LL and the lower octane unleaded fuel, others may carry
> only one or the other based on their customer demand. What is needed
> is advocacy to establish the required policies and regulations, and
> collaboration with fuel suppliers, FBOs, aircraft and engine
> manufactures, state and federal agencies. This will mitigate the
> primary obstacle for 91/96UL adoption, legal risk.
>
> While continued study of aviation fuel options is needed I believe we
> are at a tipping point. $6+ per gallon is not sustainable for the
> majority of private pilots paying for fuel out of their pocket. At the
> very least an affordable unleaded aviation fuel option would help slow
> the continued decline in the number of active private pilots.
>
> Immediate action is needed to make an affordable 91/96UL type aviation
> fuel widely available .
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com
> [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server@matronics.com] On Behalf Of Mike Whisky
> Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 2:48 PM
> To: rv10-list@matronics.com
> Subject: RV10-List: Abgas UL 91 approved by Lycoming for the IO-540-D
> models
>
> --> RV10-List message posted by: "Mike Whisky" <rv-10@wellenzohn.net
> <mailto:rv-10@wellenzohn.net>>
>
> See press release from today
>
> http://www.lycoming.com/news-and-events/press-releases/release-4-23-2013.html
>
> Not sure what the price difference of UL91 is compared to 100LL.
>
> Mike
>
> --------
>
> RV-10 builder (final assembly)
>
> #511
>
> Read this topic online here:
>
> http://forums.matronics.com/viewtopic.php?p=399293#399293
>
> http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-List
>
> http://forums.matronics.com
>
> http://www.matronics.com/contribution
>
> *
>
>
> *
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Other Matronics Email List Services
These Email List Services are sponsored solely by Matronics and through the generous Contributions of its members.
-- Please support this service by making your Contribution today! --
|