Cost of gas is beginning to hurt

On Apr 19, 7:29 pm, ArtP wrote:

Have you tried getting mogas lately? Even auto gas is becoming
unusable because of all of the alcohol. I suspect for aviation diesel
will be the solution for a while.

Ethanol has nothing to do with this. Why 100LL doens't have ethanol
in it? Because the oil company doens't blend it when it's loaded into
the truck.

It's very simple for oil company to produce an unleaded *aviation*
gasoline with AKI similar to 91/96 avgas that would cost about the
same as Premium autofuel, transported via the normal pipeline system.
The only reason this is not happening is the aviation industry has its
head in the sand and continues to produce *new* airplanes requiring
100LL instead of 91/96. It prevents the market for the 91 unleaded
avgas to develop, and the industry suffers as a result because of the
ever lowering number of GA hours flown.

"M" wrote in message
oups.com...

What's really strange is all those new 4 seaters are designed with
engine requiring 100LL, instead of 91/96.

It part of a big bore engine.

True, but IO-470J/K can run on 80/87.

80/87 is leaded fuel. That's even a worse problem than 100LL.

I'm sure they'll do fine on
SR-20 airframe. It also won't be very hard for TCM engineers to
reduce the compression ratio a bit and make IO-550 run on 91/96.

My point is the aircraft manufacturers are short sighted. Relying on
a fuel that's going to be increasingly more expensive than automotive
fuel doesn't do GA much good.

You better dig into things before making such a statement. You're speaking
from a vacuum.

"M" wrote in message
ups.com...
On Apr 19, 7:29 pm, ArtP wrote:

Have you tried getting mogas lately? Even auto gas is becoming
unusable because of all of the alcohol. I suspect for aviation diesel
will be the solution for a while.

Ethanol has nothing to do with this. Why 100LL doens't have ethanol
in it? Because the oil company doens't blend it when it's loaded into
the truck.

Geez...anothe Mxmaniac.


It's very simple for oil company to produce an unleaded *aviation*
gasoline with AKI similar to 91/96 avgas that would cost about the
same as Premium autofuel, transported via the normal pipeline system.
The only reason this is not happening is the aviation industry has its
head in the sand and continues to produce *new* airplanes requiring
100LL instead of 91/96. It prevents the market for the 91 unleaded
avgas to develop, and the industry suffers as a result because of the
ever lowering number of GA hours flown.

Read, butthead: http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182149-1.html

80/87 is leaded fuel. That's even a worse problem than 100LL.

My information (granted, many years old) is that while 80/87 is
nominally leaded, it actually has less lead than 100LL.

Is this still true?

Jose
--
Get high on gasoline: fly an airplane.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

wrote in message
oups.com...
On Apr 18, 12:45 pm, "Peter R." wrote:
On 4/18/2007 1:12:25 PM, wrote:

Just wait until they jack up the fuel tax to $0.70 a gallon and then
listen to the complaints! There will be a lot more planes parked on
the ramp and fewer in the air once this tax increase goes through.

If this tax does go through, expect the number of unfilled Angel Flight
missions (failure of a volunteer pilot to accept the flight) to sharply
increase.

--
Peter

Saudi Arabia must have some nice GA fields funded by the "tax" they
impose on us.


Canada and Mexico should, since we buy more from them than Saudi Arabia

On Fri, 20 Apr 2007 14:10:14 GMT, Jose
wrote:

80/87 is leaded fuel. That's even a worse problem than 100LL.

My information (granted, many years old) is that while 80/87 is
nominally leaded, it actually has less lead than 100LL.

Is this still true?

Jose

Yup.

100LL has 2.0 grams of lead per gallon
80/87 has (had?) 0.5 grams of lead per gallon
FYI Regular (unleaded) mogas has 0.1 grams of lead per gallon.

The EAA STC (I suspect the Peterson is the same, but mine is from EAA)
says to mix 3/4 mogas with 1/4 100LL and you will get approximately
the same lead content as 80/87 (which should keep your engine happy if
it was designed to run on 80/87).

Quite frankly, I'm a bit surprised there isn't an AD out on all
aircraft with engines designed to run on 80/87, said AD warning that
running 100LL through these engines exclusively will likely lead to
plug fouling and stuck valves. If you don't use TCP or use other
methods to get rid of the excessive lead in 100LL, it'll only be a
matter of time before the fouled plugs and stuck valves manifest
themselves.

Bela P. Havasreti

Matt Barrow wrote:
What's really strange is all those new 4 seaters are designed with
engine requiring 100LL, instead of 91/96.

It part of a big bore engine.

It has nothing to do with the bore, and everything to do with the
compression ratio.

John Galban=====N4BQ (PA28-180)

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200704/1

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

Read, butthead: http://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182149-1.html

I notice that Avweb now requires registration and none of the bugmenot.com
listings would work. Too bad, it was a good site.

C J Campbell wrote:

(snip)


We have another gas tax hike coming in July here in
Washington, but that was decided by a Democratic controlled legislation
in Olympia.

Actually...the autofuel tax increase in Washington that kicks in July 1
was passed by the Republican-controlled legislature in 2005.

Al
1964 Skyhawk
KSFF
Spokane, WA

On 2007-04-20, ArtP wrote:
On 19 Apr 2007 17:38:00 -0700, M wrote:

I suspect for aviation diesel will be the solution for a while.

Exactly. Leaving 100LL for unleaded is half-assed. When fuel prices
match the prices in Europe, consumers will be going straight to
diesel, and Jet A will supply them.

I also agree w/ M. Aircraft makers are short-sighted. Consider the
small fraction of single engine diesels available. More manufacturers
should have already been on that by now.

Out of curiosity, what's to stop the GA pilot (in terms of FAA law)
from making their own batch of biodiesel from waste oil to get rock
bottom prices, and sidestep the avgas tax entirely?

Accounting for the cost of raw material, the yield would be ~$1/gal,
which would make the fuel costs of flying cheaper than that of driving
a typical car. And (IRS aside) what kind of FAA approval process
would enable a GA pilot to do that? Or is that scenario pure fiction?

--
PM instructions: do a C4esar Ciph3r on my address; retain punctuation.