User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:02:22 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 80 octane leaded gasoline without the lead would have an octane rating less than 80. Maybe 60 (a guess) and therefore prone to detonation in engines that require at least 80 octane. Also, lead has lubricity properties. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Okay. Why did they put it in low octane fuel? 80 octane leaded gasoline without the lead would have an octane rating less than 80. Maybe 60 (a guess) and therefore prone to detonation in engines that require at least 80 octane. Also, lead has lubricity properties. I'm pretty sure that they had 80 octane gas without adding lead, since it went all the way up to 150 octane. 100LL is about 94 octane before they add lead, and it has about three times the lead of old avgas, so I think your guess is pretty low. I'm not disputing what you say, I'm just curios. I agree that it has lubricating properties, but many aircraft engine people will tell you that it does more harm than good, causing valves to stick. A lot of my friends run autogas, or mix it 50/50 to avoid the problems of lead. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:13:06 PM EDT
[#2]
Governmental restrictions , in all things , has caused more problems than they have helped .
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:18:21 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryThat study doesn’t effectively prove that. It’s an agenda driven study that purposefully left out or obfuscated data. Many of the airports they cite in wake county, for instance, are private grass strips with not a single house within 2000m. What children tested high for lead near those airports? They went looking to prove something and manipulated data to get their answer. A better study is one from Reid Hillview airport in Santa Monica. It’s peer reviewed and was done correctly. It, of course, came to the same conclusion. Because that was their agenda. Problem is, they did the study well enough, that it actually proved children living near the airport had no higher lead level than children not living near an airport. They just left that out of the study. To try to bolster their claims they took soil samples. Turns out the soil near the airport was clean too. The first thing I’d ask is this: why do they only use blood tests from children that were taken unrelated to the study? Seems to me, if you wanted to really find out if avgas was a problem, you’d test pilots, maintenance techs, airport employees, etc. I’m at the airport a couple times a week. I’m around raw and burned avgas ALL the time. Why don’t I have elevated lead levels? There’s a reason they’re pushing studies using only children. Now, for the record, I’m excited about G100UL. George is an awesome guy. I already use other tech he’s created. I think it’s great. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 10:51:21 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm pretty sure that they had 80 octane gas without adding lead, since it went all the way up to 150 octane. 100LL is about 94 octane before they add lead, and it has about three times the lead of old avgas, so I think your guess is pretty low. I'm not disputing what you say, I'm just curios. I agree that it has lubricating properties, but many aircraft engine people will tell you that it does more harm than good, causing valves to stick. A lot of my friends run autogas, or mix it 50/50 to avoid the problems of lead. No worries.  I was just an off the cuff guess for illustrative purposes. I'm not saying 80 octane avgas could only achieve that rating by adding lead. Gasoline is more complicated than that with all the distinct hydrocarbons involved (plus additives). My point is tetraethyl lead added to a particular gasoline increases octane rating and removing it from that same particular hydrocarbon blend will decrease octane rating. 80 octane avgas could have simply been a low cost blend of hydrocarbons enhanced (octane rating-wise) by TEL rather than a more expensive blend of hydrocarbons that didn't need lead to meet or exceed 80 octane rating. Plus there's the whole lubricity angle to consider. I've long been fascinated by the fact that TEL was discovered to increase a gasoline's octane rating mostly through random experimentation of additives. For 70 something years we knew it worked, but we didn't know why. It wasn't until supercomputers became powerful enough to model combustion at the molecule level (think 1980's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) that we began to understand the why. The LLNL smart-guys tasked with nuclear weapon development and stewardship studied all things combustion since nuclear bombs do use conventional explosives. Those guys figured out what lead actually does inside a combustion chamber. I have a few papers somewhere. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 11:22:51 PM EDT
[#5]
George is about to get rich.
He's says his study, from a few years ago, shows $0.75/gallon increase over 100LL.  GAMI STC George Braly interview |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 11:24:14 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No worries. I was just an off the cuff guess for illustrative purposes. I'm not saying 80 octane avgas could only achieve that rating by adding lead. Gasoline is more complicated than that with all the distinct hydrocarbons involved (plus additives). My point is tetraethyl lead added to a particular gasoline increases octane rating and removing it from that same particular hydrocarbon blend will decrease octane rating. 80 octane avgas could have simply been a low cost blend of hydrocarbons enhanced (octane rating-wise) by TEL rather than a more expensive blend of hydrocarbons that didn't need lead to meet or exceed 80 octane rating. Plus there's the whole lubricity angle to consider. I've long been fascinated by the fact that TEL was discovered to increase a gasoline's octane rating mostly through random experimentation of additives. For 70 something years we knew it worked, but we didn't know why. It wasn't until supercomputers became powerful enough to model combustion at the molecule level (think 1980's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) that we began to understand the why. The LLNL smart-guys tasked with nuclear weapon development and stewardship studied all things combustion since nuclear bombs do use conventional explosives. Those guys figured out what lead actually does inside a combustion chamber. I have a few papers somewhere. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm pretty sure that they had 80 octane gas without adding lead, since it went all the way up to 150 octane. 100LL is about 94 octane before they add lead, and it has about three times the lead of old avgas, so I think your guess is pretty low. I'm not disputing what you say, I'm just curios. I agree that it has lubricating properties, but many aircraft engine people will tell you that it does more harm than good, causing valves to stick. A lot of my friends run autogas, or mix it 50/50 to avoid the problems of lead. No worries. I was just an off the cuff guess for illustrative purposes. I'm not saying 80 octane avgas could only achieve that rating by adding lead. Gasoline is more complicated than that with all the distinct hydrocarbons involved (plus additives). My point is tetraethyl lead added to a particular gasoline increases octane rating and removing it from that same particular hydrocarbon blend will decrease octane rating. 80 octane avgas could have simply been a low cost blend of hydrocarbons enhanced (octane rating-wise) by TEL rather than a more expensive blend of hydrocarbons that didn't need lead to meet or exceed 80 octane rating. Plus there's the whole lubricity angle to consider. I've long been fascinated by the fact that TEL was discovered to increase a gasoline's octane rating mostly through random experimentation of additives. For 70 something years we knew it worked, but we didn't know why. It wasn't until supercomputers became powerful enough to model combustion at the molecule level (think 1980's Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory) that we began to understand the why. The LLNL smart-guys tasked with nuclear weapon development and stewardship studied all things combustion since nuclear bombs do use conventional explosives. Those guys figured out what lead actually does inside a combustion chamber. I have a few papers somewhere. Yes, I've looked, and there isn't much discussion outside of aviation circles, and the best answer I've found there is that it "cools the flame front", with no further explanation. That doesn't even address the question of detonation, where there is no flame front. I know that someone must have figured it out at some point, but there probably wasn't much interest once it became something to be done away with, rather than exploited further. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 11:28:59 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Ummmm. Octane ratings are a rating of a fuels resistance to detonation. And actually it’s not in aviation fuel for either reason. For some reason I don’t fully understand the valves of aircraft engines are particularly sensitive and leaded fuel is less harsh on them. But hey here’s to hoping opposed piston engines work out soon. Problem solved. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Lead isn't there to boost the octane. It helps prevent detonation. Ummmm. Octane ratings are a rating of a fuels resistance to detonation. And actually it’s not in aviation fuel for either reason. For some reason I don’t fully understand the valves of aircraft engines are particularly sensitive and leaded fuel is less harsh on them. But hey here’s to hoping opposed piston engines work out soon. Problem solved. Is it that the valves are more sensitive, or that the aviation community, for obvious reasons, is simply more obsessive about reliability than anyone else using internal combustion engines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/1/2022 11:38:13 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Blood level testing is a joke. Try a brain tissue biopsy if you want a real number. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: We know that leaded gas is terrible. The question is whether avgas, which is the leading source of airborne lead, is a health risk. People who love and work near GA airfields have higher concentrations of lead in their bodies and there is no safe level of lead exposure. Any proof of this? Even when I worked in a fairly lead exposed environment I never raised my blood lead levels. Blood level testing is a joke. Try a brain tissue biopsy if you want a real number. Here at the lead smelter these days we test every quarter. Used to be every month. High blood people still do. Testing blood is not a joke. It’s quite helpful. But yes, lead will build up in other places which a blood test will not show. This does not mean a blood test is a joke. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:40:04 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 80 octane leaded gasoline without the lead would have an octane rating less than 80. Maybe 60 (a guess) and therefore prone to detonation in engines that require at least 80 octane. Also, lead has lubricity properties. The octane is established by testing, whether 80 octane is leaded or unleaded, it has the same propensity to detonation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:41:23 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Okay. Why did they put it in low octane fuel? Either so they can use even lower cost fuel to get low octane fuel or for the non octane benefits. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:42:33 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it that the valves are more sensitive, or that the aviation community, for obvious reasons, is simply more obsessive about reliability than anyone else using internal combustion engines. Probably for the same reason that old Porsche engines are sensitive to unleaded, because the valves of air cooled engines are more sensitive. Water cooling was developed for a reason. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:42:41 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Is it that the valves are more sensitive, or that the aviation community, for obvious reasons, is simply more obsessive about reliability than anyone else using internal combustion engines. Good question. Sure, the GA community places reliability near the top. Maybe at the top [shrug]. But I offer this: The typical GA engine is of ancient design. Most are kinda like big block versions of a volkswagen beetle powerplant--air cooled apposed 4's or 6's. Some have turbos. Point is, GA engines have evolved/advanced at a snails pace compared to auto engines. It's just a different world. I think it's totally reasonable to imagine the average GA engine has an old school "soft" valve seat. Dunno, maybe they've all been rebuilt with newer tech (harder) seats by now. Maybe. Side-thought: valves don't go up and down only. They rotate as they operate. They don't just "pound" into a seat, they also "grind" through rotation. I'm sure lead deposits help buffer that interface. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:45:49 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The octane is established by testing, whether 80 octane is leaded or unleaded, it has the same propensity to detonation. Yes. I understand that. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:48:16 AM EDT
[#14]
For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced.
Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:49:04 AM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted: That study doesn’t effectively prove that. It’s an agenda driven study that purposefully left out or obfuscated data. Many of the airports they cite in wake county, for instance, are private grass strips with not a single house within 2000m. What children tested high for lead near those airports? They went looking to prove something and manipulated data to get their answer. A better study is one from Reid Hillview airport in Santa Monica. It’s peer reviewed and was done correctly. It, of course, came to the same conclusion. Because that was their agenda. Problem is, they did the study well enough, that it actually proved children living near the airport had no higher lead level than children not living near an airport. They just left that out of the study. To try to bolster their claims they took soil samples. Turns out the soil near the airport was clean too. The first thing I’d ask is this: why do they only use blood tests from children that were taken unrelated to the study? Seems to me, if you wanted to really find out if avgas was a problem, you’d test pilots, maintenance techs, airport employees, etc. I’m at the airport a couple times a week. I’m around raw and burned avgas ALL the time. Why don’t I have elevated lead levels? There’s a reason they’re pushing studies using only children. Now, for the record, I’m excited about G100UL. George is an awesome guy. I already use other tech he’s created. I think it’s great. Quote HistoryQuoted: That study doesn’t effectively prove that. It’s an agenda driven study that purposefully left out or obfuscated data. Many of the airports they cite in wake county, for instance, are private grass strips with not a single house within 2000m. What children tested high for lead near those airports? They went looking to prove something and manipulated data to get their answer. A better study is one from Reid Hillview airport in Santa Monica. It’s peer reviewed and was done correctly. It, of course, came to the same conclusion. Because that was their agenda. Problem is, they did the study well enough, that it actually proved children living near the airport had no higher lead level than children not living near an airport. They just left that out of the study. To try to bolster their claims they took soil samples. Turns out the soil near the airport was clean too. The first thing I’d ask is this: why do they only use blood tests from children that were taken unrelated to the study? Seems to me, if you wanted to really find out if avgas was a problem, you’d test pilots, maintenance techs, airport employees, etc. I’m at the airport a couple times a week. I’m around raw and burned avgas ALL the time. Why don’t I have elevated lead levels? There’s a reason they’re pushing studies using only children. Now, for the record, I’m excited about G100UL. George is an awesome guy. I already use other tech he’s created. I think it’s great. For the record, I'm not saying this disproves anything (nor does it prove), but Reid-Hillview Airport is in San Jose. Kind of a long way from Santa Monica. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:52:06 AM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:07:51 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the record, I'm not saying this disproves anything (nor does it prove), but Reid-Hillview Airport is in San Jose. Kind of a long way from Santa Monica.   Yeah, you’re right. I got it confused with the other whiny bitches at Santa Monica. ?? |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:08:56 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yeah, you’re right. I got it confused with the other whiny bitches at Santa Monica. ?? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: For the record, I'm not saying this disproves anything (nor does it prove), but Reid-Hillview Airport is in San Jose. Kind of a long way from Santa Monica. Yeah, you’re right. I got it confused with the other whiny bitches at Santa Monica. ??  fair enough!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:12:08 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lead isn't there to boost the octane. It helps prevent detonation. I'm somewhat of a scientist myself, holy shit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:17:33 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm somewhat of a scientist myself, holy shit. go easy on him, he's coming around
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:45:33 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Good question. Sure, the GA community places reliability near the top. Maybe at the top [shrug]. But I offer this: The typical GA engine is of ancient design. Most are kinda like big block versions of a volkswagen beetle powerplant--air cooled apposed 4's or 6's. Some have turbos. Point is, GA engines have evolved/advanced at a snails pace compared to auto engines. It's just a different world. I think it's totally reasonable to imagine the average GA engine has an old school "soft" valve seat. Dunno, maybe they've all been rebuilt with newer tech (harder) seats by now. Maybe. Side-thought: valves don't go up and down only. They rotate as they operate. They don't just "pound" into a seat, they also "grind" through rotation. I'm sure lead deposits help buffer that interface. My airplane engine is literally 75 years old. This is an interesting video... Why New Aircraft Engine Ideas Rarely Succeed  Why New Aircraft Engine Ideas Rarely Succeed |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:46:44 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced. Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. Watch the video I just posted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:49:28 AM EDT
[#23]
Lead was a valve stem lubricant also. Put unleaded in old engines and watch the valve guides wear out in no time!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:50:34 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: go easy on him, he's coming around Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm somewhat of a scientist myself, holy shit. go easy on him, he's coming around I honestly didn't know that octane rating was based on the point of detonation alone. I thought there was more to it than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 1:56:42 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Lead was a valve stem lubricant also. Put unleaded in old engines and watch the valve guides wear out in no time! Not true. My 75 year old airplane engine is approved to run unleaded gasoline. Lots of people do it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:02:45 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Hard to say. It did lower IQs and cause crime though. Lead contamination is probably the reason half this country has gone completely nuts and are liberals who can't reason properly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:09:17 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuote HistoryDid you actually read and understand that article? Did you notice anything wrong with it? It reads like it could've been written by James Lindsay. It does nothing to account or control for other factors. It's literally based on proximity to airports that use 100LL. That's it. Interestingly, it made no attempt to compare it's findings to airports that don't use 100LL. And it's findings were a miniscule percentage increase in lead/blood levels for children of a narrow age range. That article is worthless. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:39:07 AM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Watch the video I just posted. 100LL will be banned inside ten years. Your move. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:47:51 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced. Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. Two words = Liability Lawyers |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:48:12 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not true. My 75 year old airplane engine is approved to run unleaded gasoline. Lots of people do it. Whatever you say. I worked in an automotive machine shop. I saw first hand what unleaded did to older engines back in the 70's. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 2:52:48 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I'm pretty sure that they had 80 octane gas without adding lead, since it went all the way up to 150 octane. 100LL is about 94 octane before they add lead, and it has about three times the lead of old avgas, so I think your guess is pretty low. I'm not disputing what you say, I'm just curios. I agree that it has lubricating properties, but many aircraft engine people will tell you that it does more harm than good, causing valves to stick. A lot of my friends run autogas, or mix it 50/50 to avoid the problems of lead. It has to do with production. Straight distilled gas is 70octane, add the lead and its 80. Newer methods of production let them get more gasoline out of a barrel of oil and higher octane ratings |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:05:01 AM EDT
[#32]
Interesting that you can mix the 100ll with 100ul in any fractional amount and it runs fine.
In fact, the 100ul specification says 100ll mixed in, in any amount, is still classified as 100UL. So basically if you add a gallon of 100ul to a 10,000 gallon tank. You now have 10,001 gallons of 100UL. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:10:15 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Two words = Liability Lawyers Then explain why a FADEC doesn’t get Pratt and Whitney bankrupted but would snuff Lycoming. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:10:36 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Agreed. I like the smell. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Leaded gas is best gas. If you really want to find gas with lead in it, think back to the good old days with 115/145. Agreed. I like the smell. Careful. I was working line service for a few years as I learned to fly, and part time to supplement income when I was instructing. I used to love the smell of it, and the exhaust. That was 15 years ago. 11 years ago I was diagnosed with a brain tumor. I’ve been through 3 resection surgeries now. I’m actually only 2 months out from my last surgery. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:30:26 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced. Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. Future? The Germans were flying opposed piston diesel engines around the late 1930s. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:39:17 AM EDT
[#36]
Yeah, that’s part of the Achates founding story.
Try burning out a valve in an opposed piston engine haha. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 3:39:45 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The same with sulfur in diesel fuel. The epa looks at it as forced obsolescence. They see this as a win. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The lead is also a lubricant. If the epa does away with 100ll a lot of older airplanes will end in the scrap pile. With as expensive as aviation is already, older airplanes are only way many can fly. The same with sulfur in diesel fuel. The epa looks at it as forced obsolescence. They see this as a win. Couple decades or so ago, the news media gave a little attention to a study claiming that jet airliners may be causing global warming. Their argument was that trace amounts of sulphur in jet engine exhaust was creating sulphur dioxide in the contrails, resulting in contrails that took longer to dissipate than the contrails that were made of nothing but ice crystals(H2O). The lingering contrails would then contribute to formation of clouds, increasing the cloud cover over the planet and keeping heat from radiating out into space (heating up the planet). They will eventually attack every form of combustion engine and every fuel that is used in combustion engines. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 8:25:46 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced. Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. Current "advanced " engines are needlessly complex and heavy. Weight is the enemy. And lawyers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 9:32:49 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It has to do with production. Straight distilled gas is 70octane, add the lead and its 80. Newer methods of production let them get more gasoline out of a barrel of oil and higher octane ratings Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: I'm pretty sure that they had 80 octane gas without adding lead, since it went all the way up to 150 octane. 100LL is about 94 octane before they add lead, and it has about three times the lead of old avgas, so I think your guess is pretty low. I'm not disputing what you say, I'm just curios. I agree that it has lubricating properties, but many aircraft engine people will tell you that it does more harm than good, causing valves to stick. A lot of my friends run autogas, or mix it 50/50 to avoid the problems of lead. It has to do with production. Straight distilled gas is 70octane, add the lead and its 80. Newer methods of production let them get more gasoline out of a barrel of oil and higher octane ratings Interesting. That makes sense. nope |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 11:06:31 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: For the life of me I don’t understand why the engines aren’t more advanced. Also, opposed piston and Diesel engines are the future. Dupe info. Damnit beat like a rented mule on the 'engine' video. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 12:39:14 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Whatever you say. I worked in an automotive machine shop. I saw first hand what unleaded did to older engines back in the 70's. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Not true. My 75 year old airplane engine is approved to run unleaded gasoline. Lots of people do it. Whatever you say. I worked in an automotive machine shop. I saw first hand what unleaded did to older engines back in the 70's. Maybe what you saw was wrung out, poorly maintained engines that were deprived of what was keeping the stems from leaking. If old aircraft engines had a problem with it, it wouldn't go unnoticed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 4:19:01 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Current "advanced " engines are needlessly complex and heavy. Weight is the enemy. And lawyers. Electronic control barely adds any weight and would save lives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 4:57:32 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Electronic control barely adds any weight and would save lives. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Current "advanced " engines are needlessly complex and heavy. Weight is the enemy. And lawyers. Electronic control barely adds any weight and would save lives. Aviation is afraid of change. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 5:06:39 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Will airports put up another tank/pump for unleaded avgas? For how long? Decades? No. Too expensive, unless the FAA offers up funding for this 98% of small GA airports will just run 100LL until they can no longer buy it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 5:08:03 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Depends on the FBO's and airports. Each airport is it's own bureaucracy. When the EPA forces a complete shutdown of 100LL, only that will finalize the transition. And that transition for most will be to no fuel. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 5:12:19 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Aviation is afraid of change. You misspelled FAA |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 6:04:29 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. Too expensive, unless the FAA offers up funding for this 98% of small GA airports will just run 100LL until they can no longer buy it. FAA could also make a leap of faith and budgeting and declare unleaded to be a replacement for LL, no STC necessary. They won’t. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 6:20:39 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Aviation is afraid of change. I have no problem with change...as long as I don't have to change my ways. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 6:53:16 PM EDT
[#49]
This video addresses a bunch of topics brought up in this thread.
 The Long, Twisted And Slightly Ridiculous Story of Avgas Part 1 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/2/2022 8:00:25 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: PPL that don't like leaded gas probably still wear masks. I run leaded in all my choppers Hi-compression or not and old 390 ford, screw Y'all This ! I run Sunco 110 leaded fuel in my 1971 Pontiac Grand Prix. The lead must be the reason i love the smell of racing fuel .  |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
Attached File