https://www.avfuel.com/Fuel/Alternative ... -Avgas#FAQ

It’s a overpriced replacement for the non issue of 100LL. Seems like a step further to more regulation and higher prices for GA, IE a step towards making our beautiful GA scene much more like the elites only type thing you’d find in Europe.

America has always been where the farmers kid could afford to have a cub in the back 40, so to speak, well now the cub is six figures, so a champ, well now the champ...

Or maybe I’m reading too much into this.

As I read this, we will have to pay for and STC (price not yet announced), then pay 60- 80 cents a gallon more for fuel. The plus side is less spark plug deposits and maybe/eventually a full synthetic oil available (I remember the clusterf*** of Mobile-1 synthetic oil). I hate to say it, but I expect the Peoples Republic of California to require this as soon as possible because we all know leaded gas is evil and killing people every day.

If CA is for it that seals the deal it’s not good

Of course this was going to happen, we deserve it for cheering it on. No I wasn't cheering it on but the aviation journocommunity was. While I do not know the people behind any of this when a legacy product is outlawed due to a 'greener' new product hitting the market it is the company with the new product lobbying to kill their established competitors. Not the fault of misguided politicians, just politicians taking 'advice' from lobbyists.
Lots and lots of pilots buy into the nonsense, nonsense is expensive.

My take is that 100LL is under threat of extinction. Not only due to pressure from Enviromental extremists, but because there was only one processor left in the world producing the lead additive. This development provides us with a backstop. The developers will profit, but I’m not expecting them to resort to nefarious means to kill the competition. That has been happening for several years already.

I won’t like paying higher prices for this product, but I will if I can’t find 100LL at a cheaper price.

I think we need to keep pressure on AOPA and the like the push back against this, at least if you’re a peasant like me and you don’t make 7 figures and still want to be able to fly in the Kings sky’s

We small Ag operators, back in the 70s, went through the same thing with 100LL. We didn't like the extra lead fouling plugs and we couldn't afford it anyway. We got our fuel at the local gas station. We were able to do that because we didn't insure hulls anyway. Being on the really poor end, unable to afford insurance, wasn't so bad so far as gas went. Without gravity feed, however, we had to keep the fuel boost pump on to prevent vapor lock.

Unfortunately I didn't inherit money until I no longer had a medical. I'm still not sure I would buy something so expensive that I couldn't afford to operate without hull insurance.

Having enough money to maintain properly and afford insurance is considered good judgement. I just didn't have it.

I agree with Pinecone. As he noted, there’s only one company making the lead additive used in 100LL, and they could go under for any of a wide variety of reasons.

If and when that happens, we are SOL, unless there’s some form of approved replacement product.

Lead is bad stuff, and has been high on the radar of most environmentalists. Frankly, I’m surprised we’re still able to buy leaded fuels.

Anyway, I’m hopeful that SOME replacement fuel will become available and soon. And, frankly, I suspect that the current distributors of 100LL will fairly quickly switch to this new product.

MTV

I agree, I just hope we can get more than one additive so to avoid monopoly level prices. Not sure why we feel the need to keep reinventing the wheel though, 100LL works and pollution wise it’s a no factor when you look at where the damage is coming from.

For the planes that can fly safely on mogas, the ongoing challenge in most places (but not here where I live) is finding fuel without EtOH. I have been wondering whether there are materials in the plane that could be retrofitted to make the EtOH blends safe for aircraft operations. I assume the answer is yes, clearly it can be run through cars, so is it just too many tubes, fittings, and seals to make economic sense? Because if that is the issue, then the economic sense is eventually made by the rising difference between approved aviation fuels and the readily available mogas alternatives, at some point.

Random musings from my sitting in a chair on Saturday morning mind.

I personally think this fuel is DOA. It might pickup a small market within driving distance of the people who are invested in it's success financially, but going across the country - Difficult to start marketing something by saying its substantially more expensive and does not work in all engines. Why on earth would all the FBO's buy a third tank?

I often read 15, 20, 25, and 30 year old aviation magazines all about "The death of 100LL" but it doesn't ever seem to happen. There is a real need not for the gasoline, but for pilots to be trained. And nearly all pilots train using 100LL, across the country. I think they will keep making it.

Now if this new fuel was going to be 10% cheaper than 100LL It might have a chance!

Does anyone else remember all the hurrah about "82UL" avgas?
Some years ago, it was gonna be the big thing--
I think EAA & Petersen even amended their mogas STC's & accompanying placards to include it.
But it just kinda fizzled out.

I suppose at some point they will outlaw it, but they have been talking about outlawing 2 stroke motors forever, and yet they keep making them. Somewhat different due to the technology being tossed at the 2T problem, but still.

GB wrote:Of course this was going to happen, we deserve it for cheering it on. No I wasn't cheering it on but the aviation journocommunity was. While I do not know the people behind any of this when a legacy product is outlawed due to a 'greener' new product hitting the market it is the company with the new product lobbying to kill their established competitors. Not the fault of misguided politicians, just politicians taking 'advice' from lobbyists.
Lots and lots of pilots buy into the nonsense, nonsense is expensive.

It wasn't just the aviation journocommunity, it was our alphabet groups as well. Back when our local airport association was fighting against rigged air monitoring at our airport, we were totally on our own. AOPA and NBAA were not interested. PAFI had just been established (about 8 years ago). 94UL was about to be rolled out. Between the possible vulnerability of the supply of TEL and the uphill battle against fear and ignorance about airborne lead exposure, they made a practical choice. We'll have to see how the economics play out, but George Braly is expecting it to be more expensive at the pump.

And, regardless, the NIMBYs, developers, and enemies of aviation aren't going away even if 100ll disappears overnight. Noise has been, and will continue to be the main point of attack. The FAA recently released a draft noise study that concluded, among other things, that more people are more annoyed by noise now than they were thirty years ago, and that people are more annoyed by noise from aircraft than they are by the same level of noise from other sources in the neighborhood. This is the kind of thing that, if unchallenged and unchecked, can lead to curfews and closures. It's not at that point in the process. Yet.

The battle over lead is lost. The shenanigans and bogus "science" that happened along the way are now history, but we need to be vigilant and watch for similar tactics being used on other issues going forward.

My $.02

CAVU

CAVU wrote:

GB wrote:Of course this was going to happen, we deserve it for cheering it on. No I wasn't cheering it on but the aviation journocommunity was. While I do not know the people behind any of this when a legacy product is outlawed due to a 'greener' new product hitting the market it is the company with the new product lobbying to kill their established competitors. Not the fault of misguided politicians, just politicians taking 'advice' from lobbyists.
Lots and lots of pilots buy into the nonsense, nonsense is expensive.

It wasn't just the aviation journocommunity, it was our alphabet groups as well. Back when our local airport association was fighting against rigged air monitoring at our airport, we were totally on our own. AOPA and NBAA were not interested. PAFI had just been established (about 8 years ago). 94UL was about to be rolled out. Between the possible vulnerability of the supply of TEL and the uphill battle against fear and ignorance about airborne lead exposure, they made a practical choice. We'll have to see how the economics play out, but George Braly is expecting it to be more expensive at the pump.

And, regardless, the NIMBYs, developers, and enemies of aviation aren't going away even if 100ll disappears overnight. Noise has been, and will continue to be the main point of attack. The FAA recently released a draft noise study that concluded, among other things, that more people are more annoyed by noise now than they were thirty years ago, and that people are more annoyed by noise from aircraft than they are by the same level of noise from other sources in the neighborhood. This is the kind of thing that, if unchallenged and unchecked, can lead to curfews and closures. It's not at that point in the process. Yet.

The battle over lead is lost. The shenanigans and bogus "science" that happened along the way are now history, but we need to be vigilant and watch for similar tactics being used on other issues going forward.

My $.02

CAVU

I agree

This is why you NEVER concede a inch with these people, they are playing a zero sums game, they want GA gone.

Honestly look at Europe and other elitist places, it’s a freedom thing, the gov is naturally going try to limit it, and the elites feel less elite when peasants can fly too. Easy to say tax it up the wazoo when you make more money than god, paying twice as much for fuel is more money, but big picture not a factor for then, vs small GA folks who already sacrifice so they can fly.

And what is freedom, being able to travel, protect yourself, provide by making money and starting a biz, same folks who don’t like GA are normally anti 2a, for more regulations on biz, higher taxes etc, folks need to look at these types as what they are.

Sadly AOPA is really the NRA of aviation. Wish we had more grassroots organizations to put these elitists on blast.
Find the names and their social media posts, I’m sure they have something in this cancel culture that wouldn’t sound good.


[stepping off my tundra tire soapbox]

NineThreeKilo wrote:
I agree

This is why you NEVER concede a inch with these people, they are playing a zero sums game, they want GA gone.

Honestly look at Europe and other elitist places, it’s a freedom thing, the gov is naturally going try to limit it, and the elites feel less elite when peasants can fly too. Easy to say tax it up the wazoo when you make more money than god, paying twice as much for fuel is more money, but big picture not a factor for then, vs small GA folks who already sacrifice so they can fly.

And what is freedom, being able to travel, protect yourself, provide by making money and starting a biz, same folks who don’t like GA are normally anti 2a, for more regulations on biz, higher taxes etc, folks need to look at these types as what they are.

Sadly AOPA is really the NRA of aviation. Wish we had more grassroots organizations to put these elitists on blast.
Find the names and their social media posts, I’m sure they have something in this cancel culture that wouldn’t sound good.


[stepping off my tundra tire soapbox]

LIKE

When the six months left on the annual of my $1,350.00 bank repossession Ercoupe was up in 74, I put it in the shop in Williams, AZ. I was burning a couple quarts per hour by then. I was quoted $1,500 for a top or way more if it needed a major overhaul. I told the mechanic I had the $1,500 for the top, but wouldn't be able to do a major. Some months later I received a letter that my airplane would be sold at a sheriff's auction if I didn't pay the bill of $5,000. No work had been done on the engine. So I found another airplane still in annual for $2,500.

You peasants are talking about that kind of money, right? Just kidding, I feel your pain. The solution for poor folks is $20,000 airplanes. They are not pretty, but they will fly until annual is due. If young, the military is a good solution.

contactflying wrote:When the six months left on the annual of my $1,350.00 bank repossession Ercoupe was up in 74, I put it in the shop in Williams, AZ. I was burning a couple quarts per hour by then. I was quoted $1,500 for a top or way more if it needed a major overhaul. I told the mechanic I had the $1,500 for the top, but wouldn't be able to do a major. Some months later I received a letter that my airplane would be sold at a sheriff's auction if I didn't pay the bill of $5,000. No work had been done on the engine. So I found another airplane still in annual for $2,500.

You peasants are talking about that kind of money, right? Just kidding, I feel your pain. The solution for poor folks is $20,000 airplanes. They are not pretty, but they will fly until annual is due. If young, the military is a good solution.

In this country if you don’t make 7 figures and have a few senators personal cell numbers on your phone, you’re “poor”. You ain’t in the club



Also look what ADSB did, large upgrade for a 20k airplane for many who were required to install this mandated government surveillance tracker on their plane.

Even if you move your decimal over on the planes price tag, and you burn more fuel, these draconian regulations with hollow marketing, it will make a notable dent in your operating budget, and for what?

Thinking these 100LL replacements are about “the environment” is right up there in thinking the S in ADSB is for safety

In "Great Expectations" the noble main character's friend Pip is asked, "How are you kept?" "I look about me," is his answer. We have historically been a multicultural nation of Pips who look about themself for ways to get along in the system. We are a nation of First Sergeants who know how to work around bureaucratic inefficiency, or use it against itself. In aviation this concept has been more regulated to crop dusting, early bush operations, mom and pop FBSs, and such. If the manual is really thick, Pips can usually find something to support what they want to do anyway. In Vietnam, we young officers learned to listen to older and more experienced sergeants. Shake and Bake Sergeants seemed to work against that, but not really. They learned to listen to older and more experienced privates.

Not having a common enemy like war for survival, cold war, bureaucracy, big government, FAA, etc. puts a damper on morale. Government, democratic or otherwise, survives on the unifying effect of a common enemy. Sometimes the common enemy is poorly contrived. Sometimes it is real.