By DEAN BILLING.
I’m submitting this blog on Feb. 2, 2016, Groundhog Day. I think it is the appropriate date choice for my latest GAFuels topic.
It is the kind of day the FAA should get out its plan for the Piston Aviation Fuels Initiative (PAFI), dust it off and see if there is a ray of hope of finding the 100 octane unleaded fuel holy grail.
Or perhaps they see no light at the end of the tunnel and shelve the project into the dustbin of bureaucracy, hoping nobody notices.
According to PAFI Phase 1 Test Program documentation found here, Phase 1 testing was supposed to be completed in the fourth quarter of 2015, i.e. Dec. 31, 2015.
If you view the overall PAFI schedule on page 4 of the plan, the request for Phase 2 Fuels was supposed to be announced by Jan. 30, 2016. Ironically, that date is a Saturday, last Saturday to be precise.
Does anyone believe the FAA bureaucrats would make an announcement on Saturday? If the announcement is published before this blog is published, please accept my apologies for making light of the fact the FAA missed their deadline. Quite frankly, I expected the announcement in a more timely manner, say last week.
If you commit arcane aviation fuel data trivia to memory, you remember there are four fuels under scrutiny. In a strange twist of fate, two different fuels are from the same company, Swift Fuels, an aviation fuel newcomer; one is from Shell Oil, definitely an oil industry heavyweight; and one is from Total, a European petroleum industry heavyweight. (Strangely enough, if you search the Total website, no mention is made about the PAFI program. According to this article, the submission is actually a consortium effort by Hjelmco, BP and Total.)
In any case, one of these days the FAA should be making an announcement about the Phase 2 winners as outlined in the initiative documents: “Based on this assessment, the FAA TEC will select the two fuels determined to have the lowest impact on the GA fleet and the production and distribution infrastructure for participation in the Phase 2 test program in early 2016.”
Once that occurs, it will only be another two years until the Phase 2 results are announced and we have a 100 octane unleaded aviation fuel. The neatly typed schedule says Dec. 31, 2018.
Of course, whether that winner is a viable commercial solution is another matter entirely. But, for the sake of argument let’s say there is a technically successful solution.
How long will it take to get the new fuel into commercial production and distributed to what is left of our aviation infrastructure? That timeline does not show up in the neatly typed PAFI schedule.
Hope you are not holding your breath. I know I’m not. I buy 91 AKI auto fuel, the three decades old approved unleaded aviation fuel, for my airplanes.
Dear Wylbur, while waiting for a letter from FAA to get my airman’s medical back, having too much time on my hands, having to agree with you. Birds have been flying millions of years; us monkeys been off the ground just over 100 years, still trying to get it right, which is why I have some sympathy and patience for FAA.
OK, Swift Fuels-uspto.gov, patent #8,556,999, copy, paste, print out. Their most recent patent explains what they are selling and how they intend making it. They are offering two versions to test because they are offering a two part synthetic, the ratios can be changed to adjust octane. I watch their website and some other sources. They are actually selling a 94 MON to planes TSC’d for mogas, and to ground based users. They report having a 102/131 UL mix ready to go. We have been cooking avgas from petroleum since 1903. Never gotten above 93 octane strictly on dinosaur juice. I suspect corrupt collusion with Big Oil and the ethanol lobby. Stay tuned, true believers.
Let’s see. Plane crashes took place killing various famous people. Congress told the FAA to do something. They didn’t. Congress gave us what became 135. Keep this in mind.
Congress said there was a plane crash of a twin turbo-prop and you, FAA, need to take some action on this. They didn’t. Congress gave us FOs having to have an ATP.
So drones are coming. Chasing birds will go to drones, right? Flying power line patrols will go to drones, right?
Congress tells FAA to get pictures on certificates. FAA misses that deadline.
Part 23 overhaul is directed by Congress. FAA misses that deadline.
Meanwhile, EPA dictates that lead needs to go. 1975 to 2013(?) before the FAA gets gets into a replacement fuel in a serious way.
I think the FAA is way beyond their TBO, and it is time for this engine to go back to the factory and become a zero time engine, if you get my drift.
And perhaps aviators need to write the GA caucus about a major overhaul?