DENNY wrote:This STC might help the high compression types in the future. https://www.avweb.com/features/the-retu ... ction-adi/.
DENNY

NineThreeKilo wrote: So the best argument is there is only one place who sells it, seeing I have yet to remember a shortage, that’s cool, but maybe open a few others up

NineThreeKilo wrote: Per cowering to the green extremists,

NineThreeKilo wrote:100ll doesn’t need methanol water injected nonsense, it just works


So the best argument is there is only one place who sells it, seeing I have yet to remember a shortage, that’s cool, but maybe open a few others up


Per cowering to the green extremists, no, that’s the ONE thing you DONT do, AOPA is the NRA of aviation, they should be spinning up lawyers and attacking anyone who tries to mess with GA

But seeing their lack of action on ADSB, I’m not holding my breath, maybe EAA COPA etc could all pick up here AOPA fails?

If AOPA lobbied and filed lawsuits I’d actually give them some money

GB wrote:AOPA took money to push ADSB and AOPA is taking money to kill 100LL and push the new stuff. While asking for pilots for money, taking payoffs making flying more expensive and giving themselves awards for doing so. Coming next year from AOPA 'The sensible pilots guide to putting a catalytic converter on your J-3' (PS it's going to be required and we pushed for it behind closed doors.)

NineThreeKilo wrote:100ll doesn’t need methanol water injected nonsense, it just works


So the best argument is there is only one place who sells it, seeing I have yet to remember a shortage, that’s cool, but maybe open a few others up


Per cowering to the green extremists, no, that’s the ONE thing you DONT do, AOPA is the NRA of aviation, they should be spinning up lawyers and attacking anyone who tries to mess with GA

But seeing their lack of action on ADSB, I’m not holding my breath, maybe EAA COPA etc could all pick up here AOPA fails?

If AOPA lobbied and filed lawsuits I’d actually give them some money

mtv wrote:

GB wrote:AOPA took money to push ADSB and AOPA is taking money to kill 100LL and push the new stuff. While asking for pilots for money, taking payoffs making flying more expensive and giving themselves awards for doing so. Coming next year from AOPA 'The sensible pilots guide to putting a catalytic converter on your J-3' (PS it's going to be required and we pushed for it behind closed doors.)

NineThreeKilo wrote:100ll doesn’t need methanol water injected nonsense, it just works


So the best argument is there is only one place who sells it, seeing I have yet to remember a shortage, that’s cool, but maybe open a few others up


Per cowering to the green extremists, no, that’s the ONE thing you DONT do, AOPA is the NRA of aviation, they should be spinning up lawyers and attacking anyone who tries to mess with GA

But seeing their lack of action on ADSB, I’m not holding my breath, maybe EAA COPA etc could all pick up here AOPA fails?

If AOPA lobbied and filed lawsuits I’d actually give them some money

Sorry, but I think your tin foil hat got a little tight there….you may wish to run for political office.

MTV

Oregon180 wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote: Per cowering to the green extremists,

Come on man. It's hardly an extremist position to think lead isn't good. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any source that thinks lead in any amount is good for anyone. We've complained for decades that the FAA wouldn't approve an alternative to 100LL. Now they have. It might be a while before it's regularly available, and it might be a bit more expensive, but it's clearly a step in the right direction.

Battson wrote:

Oregon180 wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote: Per cowering to the green extremists,

Come on man. It's hardly an extremist position to think lead isn't good. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any source that thinks lead in any amount is good for anyone. We've complained for decades that the FAA wouldn't approve an alternative to 100LL. Now they have. It might be a while before it's regularly available, and it might be a bit more expensive, but it's clearly a step in the right direction.

Completely agree, well said.

While the extra cost of G100UL is the last thing we need in aviation, a greener image must definitely be high on our collective agenda. Right up there with flying neighbourly.

NineThreeKilo wrote:

Battson wrote:

Oregon180 wrote:

NineThreeKilo wrote: Per cowering to the green extremists,

Come on man. It's hardly an extremist position to think lead isn't good. I think you'd be hard pressed to find any source that thinks lead in any amount is good for anyone. We've complained for decades that the FAA wouldn't approve an alternative to 100LL. Now they have. It might be a while before it's regularly available, and it might be a bit more expensive, but it's clearly a step in the right direction.

Completely agree, well said.

While the extra cost of G100UL is the last thing we need in aviation, a greener image must definitely be high on our collective agenda. Right up there with flying neighbourly.

My 185 gets 9.2mpg

The work plane, the one that puts food on my table, it gets 3mpg

A 172 gets 12.6mpg

A PA18 gets 13mpg

A few pro big gov states want to even outlaw the 40mpg economy clown cars, NO gas car sales after X date

We will NEVER be green enough, we will never appease them, they will not compromise, the only answer, it isn’t image, it’s laughing at them, treating them like a drunk person rambling, and lawsuits when they overstep, and not giving a inch, history shows this

mtv wrote:Oh, my Gawd!! You mean the sky really is falling? Chill out Dude, and enjoy what you got.

MTV

CAVU wrote:I get the outrage, but it's about 15 years too late.

Friends of the Earth petitioned the EPA to ban lead in avgas back in 2006, then sued EPA in 2012. That resulted in a seriously-flawed program by EPA to come up with evidence about airborne lead concentrations around airports. It will be interesting to see what EPA can come up with now that they are doing the endangerment evaluation, but there's no doubt about what they will conclude. The same people are still running the air division show.

Those of us who fought to keep EPA honest quickly discovered that the Alphabet groups were, at best, lukewarm in opposing EPA's sham air monitoring study. They were all committed to PAFI instead. In the meantime, the "lead = bad, so avgas = rich guys poisoning children" narrative has prevailed.

Maybe it was always a losing battle. There are other practical reasons to move away from lead. As history, it's a good cautionary tale. But railing against the illogic and lack of evidence now is just pissing in the wind.

My $.02

C180_guy wrote:Agree with Nine Three Kilo. Regarding AOPA and lawsuits, they do not file lawsuits. They told me years ago they are a lobbying group, not a lawsuit-filing group. They didn't do crap about Meigs Field and they embraced AD-BS. So I parted ways with them years ago. I support organizations that file lawsuits like the country's oldest civil rights group (although they are having some recent problems - can you hear me Wayne?).