Regulating the use of public spaces is a problem? ;-p

Post #413,147 by Another Scott 8/29/16 11:30:58 AM 8/29/16 11:30:58 AM Reply	Regulating the use of public spaces is a problem? ;-p Honestly, I sympathize. But we know, and have known, that lead in gas is bad news. I wouldn't be surprised if there are change-over costs. Thems the breaks. I wouldn't be at all surprised if fossil-fuel-based AV gas is outlawed in the next 50 years (or sooner). It won't kill GA, it'll just mean there's going to be a transition to other fuels and there will be some costs with that - there always are. Cheers, Scott.
Post #413,152 by mmoffitt 8/29/16 12:23:56 PM 8/29/16 12:23:56 PM Reply	You don't know the fleet. Since we have to have Ethanol in our auto gas (which is idiotic - burn 1 gallon of fossil fuel to create a gallon of ethanol with lower energy capacity), there are a whole host of aircraft engines that must be retired. Those are the old airplanes like mine that are still affordable for non-millionaires. To get my airplane to burn unleaded fuel means one of two paths: convince the oil companies to create unleaded fuel without ethanol or replace my aircraft engine. Those are the only two options. My airplane's worth around 25K. Putting a new engine in it - even if that were possible which at present it isn't since there are only two engines approved for my aircraft and they both burn leaded fuel - would run around 30K. Obviously, the cheaper option is to get ethanol out of the gas (and that's still doable and done for some auto gas - racing, off-road, etc - but they jack the price of it up to around AvGas prices). But if you do that, you have another enormously expensive task you have to perform: You have to rip out all the storage tanks at airports currently used to store AvGas. All the supply lines have to be replaced, all the pumps have to be replaced, all the ground and above ground storage has to be replaced because you cannot ever put unleaded fuel into a system (including delivery trucks) that once contained leaded fuel. Why keep using leaded fuel? First and foremost, the use of leaded fuels is an operational safety issue, because without the additive TEL, the octane levels would be too low for some engines, and use of a lower octane fuel than required could lead to engine failure. As a result, the additive TEL has not been banned from avgas. Aircraft manufacturers, the petroleum industry, and the FAA have worked for over a decade to find alternative fuels that meet the octane requirements of the piston engine aircraft fleet without the additive TEL. However, no operationally safe, suitable replacement for leaded fuel has yet been found to meet the needs of all of the piston engine aircraft fleet. ... There are approximately 167,000 aircraft in the United States and a total of 230,000 worldwide that rely on 100 low lead avgas for safe operation. It is the only remaining transportation fuel in the United States that contains the addition of TEL. https://www.faa.gov/news/fact_sheets/news_story.cfm?newsId=14754 And that's from the organization trying its best to keep all of us out of the sky. What you'd be accomplishing by banning lead in AvGas is the elimination of the safe use of 167,000 GA aircraft in this country. That's out of an estimated total of around 230,000, or around 70% of all GA aircraft. It will be the end of affordable GA. For instance, I fly a 1960 Cessna 172A. Cessna still sells "new" 172's and they haven't changed much. A little lower service ceiling in the new ones, a little bigger engine that yields about another 8-10 knots at cruise, more crap in the cabin so you have less useful load - same number of seats, etc. I paid 24K for mine, but you can buy one like mine today for around 25-30K. A new one with almost identical performance costs $307,000. Sure, the 1% will still be able to fly one, but who else? Nobody.
Post #413,156 by Another Scott 8/29/16 1:10:19 PM 8/29/16 1:10:19 PM Reply	Is this guy full of beans? http://www.flyunleaded.com/ Says there is 94M unleaded mogas in 6 airports in Indiana. Myths about mogas. This is all new to me, so maybe I'm missing something. Apparently tetraethyl lead production is being phased out, so something is going to be done (without requiring people to buy new engines and fuel systems). Help me out here? Thanks. Cheers, Scott.
Post #413,158 by mmoffitt 8/29/16 1:55:29 PM 8/29/16 2:00:31 PM Reply	No, he's not. He's referring to Ethanol Free auto gas. Which is no problem EXCEPT that it is not widely available at airports. Look at the map linked at one of your links and see how many of those places where ethanol-free auto gas is available are at airports. Within 100 miles of me, for instance, there's ONE that has it on field and it's a grass strip (so no going there in the winter). Sure, I can haul 4 ten gallon cans to the nearest gas station selling ethanol-free autogas, fill them up, throw them in the back of the car and then haul them into the hangar and fill up my airplane. But what happens when I land somewhere that doesn't have it on the field? How am I going to get home? Am I supposed to haul those 4 empty cans around with me in the back of the airplane (a safety nightmare), land, rent a car, drive to the gas station and then haul 40 gallons of gas back to the airport to fill up again? It's impractical. The reason its not widely available at airfields I've already alluded to: nobody wants to rip out and replace all the stuff they'd have to rip out and replace in order to sell this fuel. If the taxpayer wants to fund that effort, I'm all for it. But you and I know they don't want to do that. The public perception that "Ooooh, he flies his own airplane. He's riiiiiich" is too strong. A few years back, at Purdue, an allegedly 100% compatible lead-free fuel was developed, but I lost track of where that was going (Swift fuel, IIRC). ISTR that it was some kind of bio-mass fuel that you could "mix" with 100LL (not that you'd do that, but it meant no ripping/replacing of existing infrastructure, draining your existing fuel - including unusable, etc.). Since I haven't heard anything about that in years, I imagine its not going too well. My point is that we do NOT at present have a workable, safe replacement for 100LL at airports and until we do, banning it will mean the death of GA for all but the most monied. I'm not against using unleaded fuel at all. I'm not thick enough to hold that lead in the air is "not so bad." But I don't want to see GA harmed anymore than it already has been. If 100LL got banned this year or next, the value of my airplane would disappear and I'd never again be able to truly look down on the rest of the nation. ;0) Edit: "ethanol free auto gas", there is no ethanol in any AvGas for a reason. Edited by mmoffitt Aug. 29, 2016, 02:00:31 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #413,162 by Another Scott 8/29/16 2:17:11 PM 8/29/16 2:17:11 PM Reply	Good points. Thanks.

Welcome to IWETHEY!