100UL and Us
Moderators: Rick, Lance Murray
- TimS
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
- First Name: Timothy
- Aircraft Type: OTHER
- Aircraft Registration: N1446C
- Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 97 times
Re: 100UL and Us
There will not be two fuels for long. There is just not enough incentive for the refineries to continue with TEL.
Tim
Tim
- perossichi
- 3 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 188
- Joined: Tue Sep 18, 2018 4:05 am
- First Name: Peter
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N925RH
- Airports: KVNY
- Has thanked: 31 times
- Been thanked: 75 times
Re: 100UL and Us
The problems in NW may be related to lack of fuel truck drivers and use by fire fighting aircraft. Apparently there is a huge shortage of drivers for ha arduous cargo
Sold 2002. Powerflo, Hartzell composite two blade, 530W/430, 345 transponder.
- dant
- 4 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2021 4:45 am
- First Name: Dan
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N787DM
- Airports: KPAE
- Has thanked: 49 times
- Been thanked: 59 times
Re: 100UL and Us
Regarding the boutique fuel nature, is there any difference between the fuel 'stock' used prior to the addition of TEL or the GAMI fairy dust?
In my limited understanding what would be super cool is if the additive could be done at the airport sites off of commodity gasoline, expanding the possible delivery vectors.
I agree that two fuels can't last long economically. However I suspect the EPA will be loath to ban it as long as a pathway exists for them to be sued in wrongful death cases because someone thinks the fuel change was why a plane crashed. So who knows. Might have to be people like us indicating our excitement for it.
In my limited understanding what would be super cool is if the additive could be done at the airport sites off of commodity gasoline, expanding the possible delivery vectors.
I agree that two fuels can't last long economically. However I suspect the EPA will be loath to ban it as long as a pathway exists for them to be sued in wrongful death cases because someone thinks the fuel change was why a plane crashed. So who knows. Might have to be people like us indicating our excitement for it.
- TimS
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 553
- Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2010 1:10 am
- First Name: Timothy
- Aircraft Type: OTHER
- Aircraft Registration: N1446C
- Airports: 6B6 Stowe MA
- Has thanked: 94 times
- Been thanked: 97 times
Re: 100UL and Us
I am no means an expert and this is way outside my field.
From what I have read, in general 100LL is usually made with mid grade fuel stock.
While the GAMI fuel is based on a premium fuel stock.
Due to the nature of TEL, it has to mixed at the refinery, it has something to due with the nature of TEL itself.
While GAMI stuff is by design, is designed to be added to the fuel stock at standard distribution points while the fuel is added to the truck.
Most additives are shipped by tanker truck to the distribution points, which GAMI will also do. No special handling/requirements outside of standard hazmat. The super majority of the additives GAMI uses are already part of the standard set used gas companies. Some distribution points actually may have to add storage tanks, but that is the limit of the potential capital investment, however these are standard tanks, and overall it is not a large investment for the system. Otherwise, the savings are significant, fuel stock can be delivered by pipeline to local truck distribution points. No equipment reserved for TEL only, no special cleaning of equipment... This is why GAMI is predicting a small net increase only.
Tim
From what I have read, in general 100LL is usually made with mid grade fuel stock.
While the GAMI fuel is based on a premium fuel stock.
Due to the nature of TEL, it has to mixed at the refinery, it has something to due with the nature of TEL itself.
While GAMI stuff is by design, is designed to be added to the fuel stock at standard distribution points while the fuel is added to the truck.
Most additives are shipped by tanker truck to the distribution points, which GAMI will also do. No special handling/requirements outside of standard hazmat. The super majority of the additives GAMI uses are already part of the standard set used gas companies. Some distribution points actually may have to add storage tanks, but that is the limit of the potential capital investment, however these are standard tanks, and overall it is not a large investment for the system. Otherwise, the savings are significant, fuel stock can be delivered by pipeline to local truck distribution points. No equipment reserved for TEL only, no special cleaning of equipment... This is why GAMI is predicting a small net increase only.
Tim
- Rich
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 4592
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
- First Name: Rich
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N40XE
- Airports: S39 Prineville OR
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1180 times
Re: 100UL and Us
Excerpt from the press release:
Braly said the price of the new fuel will be “60-85 cents/gallon more than 100LL as the fuel leaves the producer’s facility and begins to enter the stream of commerce.” As with other petroleum products, the price will vary with the price of crude oil.
So we're banking on savings downstream.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
- pietromarx
- 4 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2016 2:52 am
- First Name: Peter
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: NZZZ
- Airports: KWHP
- Has thanked: 29 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
Re: 100UL and Us
I had a nice visit with the GAMI folks on this at EAA Oshkosh. My (semi-professional) opinion is that the CARB / AQMD / SCAQMD folks in California are going to be very interested in this. Having a drop-in unleaded replacement for AVGAS is going to be very popular for a lot of people inside and outside of GA. Assuming it works, I doubt we will see 100LL within a year or two. If it doesn't work, well, we're all hosed ...
This is long overdue.
This is long overdue.
- Rich
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 4592
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
- First Name: Rich
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N40XE
- Airports: S39 Prineville OR
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1180 times
Re: 100UL and Us
An updated engine (not airframe) AML for the GAMI fuel just showed up on AOPA and AvWeb. Lots of carburetor Lycomings but so far only 1 "IO-", the L2A. The O-360-A4M used in the DA40F is on the list. Some "IVO-" (whatever those are) are on the list.
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5
- pietromarx
- 4 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 433
- Joined: Fri Oct 07, 2016 2:52 am
- First Name: Peter
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: NZZZ
- Airports: KWHP
- Has thanked: 29 times
- Been thanked: 156 times
Re: 100UL and Us
I note that the comments section on this piece in Ars Technica today focus upon general aviation rather strongly. https://arstechnica.com/science/2021/12 ... comments=1
For those who may not be aware, Ars is perhaps the most popular tech and general science publication out there and has a reasonably good community (especially compared with most things out there). For them to focus on GA does not bode well for public sentiment in a few years.
For those who may not be aware, Ars is perhaps the most popular tech and general science publication out there and has a reasonably good community (especially compared with most things out there). For them to focus on GA does not bode well for public sentiment in a few years.
- mhoran
- 4 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 476
- Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 11:56 pm
- First Name: Matt
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N269RB
- Airports: KLDJ
- Has thanked: 121 times
- Been thanked: 244 times
Re: 100UL and Us
Sounds like some good progress has been here but the FAA is currently dragging their feet: https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all ... ck-engines. The next update from the FAA is due on May 1.
- Rich
- 5 Diamonds Member
- Posts: 4592
- Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 12:40 pm
- First Name: Rich
- Aircraft Type: DA40
- Aircraft Registration: N40XE
- Airports: S39 Prineville OR
- Has thanked: 145 times
- Been thanked: 1180 times
Re: 100UL and Us
I sent this off to GAMI, relevant to those of us with Surefly or Electro-air:
Numerous aircraft engines have been modified with electronic ignitions (in whole or part) which advance the spark beyond the fixed value of the original, traditional magnetos. Will there be restrictions on the use of the spark-advance feature of these components?
Numerous aircraft engines have been modified with electronic ignitions (in whole or part) which advance the spark beyond the fixed value of the original, traditional magnetos. Will there be restrictions on the use of the spark-advance feature of these components?
2002 DA40-180: MT, PowerFlow, 530W/430W, KAP140, ext. baggage, 1090 ES out, 2646 MTOW, 40gal., Surefly, Flightstream 210, Orion 600 LED, XeVision, Aspen E5