The U.S. House Appropriations Committee last week approved funding to support continued research into the transition to unleaded avgas for piston-engine aircraft.
In the May 15, 2014 EAA Hotline email there was an interesting article in the Member Benefit Spotlight section. It reported the results of a Fuel Survey purportedly taken in March by the Experimental Aircraft Association with 13,000 replies by members. The findings were rather interesting: 87% of members are using primarily 100LL and 12% are using autogas.
As I digested this finding, a pertinent question came to mind: If 12% of members are tenacious enough to use mogas when only 3% of our airports carry mogas, why didn’t EAA ask the membership: “How many members would use mogas if it was as available at the 3,000+ airports that carry 100LL?”
Less than one month after a U.S. District Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must have sufficient time to prepare a report on the public health effects of lead emissions from general aviation (GA) aircraft, environmental groups have filed a petition seeking to overturn the decision and force the early release of that data.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Three environmental groups filed a petition April 22 asking the Environmental Protection Agency to take action against the continued use of leaded aviation gasoline.
Earlier this year I gave several state IA renewal seminars. I always enjoy these because I get to greet many old friends and find out what is going on in the industry. I also get a lot of excellent information from people who are actually doing the work, along with some great questions.
One of the questions was a version of one I receive at almost every session: “Why can a Rotax with 9:1 compression ratio run knock free on 91 R+M/2 auto gas and a 8:1 compression ratio Lycoming need 100LL with an R+M/2 of around 104+?”
On Jan. 19 your bloggers posted a rebuttal to an article in EAA’s Sport Aviation titled “Avfuel Takes on Fuel Challenges” by J. Mac McClellan that deals with the never-ending saga of a replacement for leaded avgas. We did our best to correct the fallacies in the article. Judging from the numerous positive comments we received, most of you agree with the facts that we presented.
In the immortal words of then-candidate Ronald Reagan during the 1980 debate with president Carter, “There you go again.” Incredibly, the February issue of Sport Aviation included a new article (“Fueling the Future of GA” on page 10) that contained even more misleading statements on aviation fuel that demand correction.
100LL is now available at Ian Fleming International Airport (MKBS), Jamaica’s newest jetport, located in Boscobel.
A recent story by Michael Mooney, who is an aviation fuels supplier, states that the reason that no major oil company is supplying mogas to end users is because of liability.
When it was posted, several people commented that the liability issue is a myth and that they have been selling mogas in Europe with no liability problems. Well, it is not a myth and comparing European liability laws to the US system is like comparing basketball to football. They are both sports played with a ball, but there are significant differences, like contingency cases.
GAfuels reader Pete Howell of the Minneapolis area recently posted an article in the newsletter of the Minnesota Wing of Van’s Air Force describing his experiences burning mogas in his Lycoming O-320 – powered RV-9A. Here is an excerpt:
“Why would anyone want to burn anything other than aviation fuel? [Read more...]