100LL Debacle

PaulMillner said:
The good news is that both the FAA's AIR1 and AIR700 were replaced, and the new job holders seem VERY serious about clearing this up. In addition, AIR600, Policy and Innovation (responsible for EAGLE) were interfering... and that guy no longer works for the FAA.

GAMI's George Braly met with Lirio Liu, the new AIR1, head of aircraft certification, before Airventure opened Monday July 26 in Oshkosh. She agreed to send an FAA team to Ada, OK to meet with GAMI's folks to work through the objections raised by the FAA's 8th review of the GAMI fuel project, the so-called Technical Advisory Board (TAB) for whom I served as as fuels consultant. There were questions about fuels, but there were many other questions as well in the TAB.

That three-day meeting occurred this past Wednesday, Thursday, Friday in Ada, and I was AOPA's observer, with the consent of both the FAA and GAMI, and was able to assist by addressing some specific refinery-process, fuel-blending issues that arose. There's a two-week timeline for AIR700 to get back to GAMI with either go-forward, or specific questions. And the AIR700 incumbent, Mel Johnson, further committed to two-week or less turnaround to any GAMI response, should there be specific questions.

AIR700 is Compliance and Airworthiness Division (AIR-700). The Compliance and Airworthiness Division issues all design approvals for both domestic and foreign manufacturers as well as production and airworthiness certificates, executes Continual Operational Safety processes, and provides flight test support.

Anyway, George Braly credits AOPA with being instrumental in making this come-together meeting happen... and we certainly intend to hold Mel Johnson to his promise to get back in two weeks or less. Fingers crossed for a rapid resolution of these outstanding questions.

Paul
Click to expand...
I’ll suggest that you contact Paul Bertorelli at AvWeb with this info (if the terms of your participation permit it). He has a big megaphone to hold the FAA up for scrutiny if the promised FAA actions don’t happen.

Thanks for the insight. Hope you are right.

Cheers
 
schmookeeg said:
Wouldn't their gripes be a legitimate complaint against AOPA mismanaging their optics?

IF the people paying the dues can't tell what the dues are doing, there's a problem with comms somewhere.
Click to expand...
That’s a legitimate point.
 
MauleSkinner said:
I’d like to quit paying taxes, but I don’t know that it’d be worth the hassle in the long run.
Click to expand...

If AOPA could force members to pay dues under threat of incarceration like those Congress critters they lobby with, they'd probably do it, lol.
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
I do agree with others that we are just one manufacturing plant spill, fire, bankruptcy, merger, or politicians pen (here or UK) from having no more 100LL.
Click to expand...

It's a good sound bite, but I don't think it's that dire. GAMI got the 172 STC about 2.5 weeks ago, the Thursday of Oshkosh and Swift's 94UL already covers most engines up to IO-540s, although not every airframe.

There are fuels out there and more coverage is coming all the time. 90% of what we fly could keep flying, they just need to work out the supply chain for the fuel.
 
bflynn said:
It's a good sound bite, but I don't think it's that dire. GAMI got the 172 STC about 2.5 weeks ago, the Thursday of Oshkosh and Swift's 94UL already covers most engines up to IO-540s, although not every airframe.

There are fuels out there and more coverage is coming all the time. 90% of what we fly could keep flying, they just need to work out the supply chain for the fuel.
Click to expand...

I don't think we are necessarily disagreeing.

  • None of those fuels are 100LL. If TEL goes away, so does 100LL and the others will need to be substituted.

  • All of them will take significant time to scale up and distribute.

  • It will be chaotic and expensive during that time. Many / most airports won't have tank storage GAMI, Swift, and whatever blend Eagle comes up with. Aircraft that aren't able to run all of them (or don't have the paper to do so) will need to ensure they stop to refuel only at appropriate airports. More X-country fun to be had.

  • Prices will be stupid crazy until supply catches up with demand.
 
OneCharlieTango said:
So, instead of “anemic” handling of those issues, you’ve decided not to handle them at all. A couple of questions:
What are you doing with $89 a year that supports GA better than AOPA?

What would a non-anemic AOPA be doing differently with respect to AVGAS and airport closures?

Why did you renew EAA?
Click to expand...
I've decided to give it to AOPA so they could buy another Extra 300 so the executives don't have to fight over just one 300k airplane for safety.

Seriously, it's not an invalid point but when you have a MEMBERSHIP organization shouldn't the membership have a say? EAA used to be way more that way until it became over-commercialized. Now, I pay EAA to goto AirVenture because I still enjoy it despite the faults.

The faults always fall to the red-tape.
 
Here's an unpopular opinion, but a real one. Small GA is going to die off. Not enough new people, not enough resources. Part 135 will remain. Uber rich will remain. The rest will die, pistons, small town airports. I love the industry, but there's no saving it, only prolonging the agony (and complaining about everyone)
 
NordicDave said:
EAA appears more directly active with supporting the GA community, and I'm sticking with them as a member. AOPA leadership goes through cycles over the years empathizing with regulators over GA pilots and back again when membership drops.

I give MORE money than this to https://www.savereidhillview.org plus donating time this group for campaigning.

Why don't you join us to save KRHV? We are actively fighting at the tip of the lance for the 100LL battle and an airport closure. The front lines of the battle are formed here in San Jose California.

We are engaged constantly with local and national politicians and administrators. EVERY public meeting, committee hearing, campaign rally, etc. AOPA is no where to be found except for a a couple of letters and platitudes.
Click to expand...

Off topic and maybe out of line, but your description sounds familiar - in NYRPA compared to NRA. It was NYRPA that facilitated taking things to the Supreme Court, not NRA. Officially, they work together, but unofficially the national group seems to be pretty useless. I don't think I'm nieve, and I don't think you are either. Grass roots, local groups matter.
 
FPK1 said:
Here it comes. We can't wait to 2030...

"Doctors ask Jefferson County officials to take action on leaded aviation gas"
https://coloradosun.com/2022/08/15/rocky-mountain-airport-lead-gas-doctors/
Click to expand...

The signees, mostly doctors and nurses, have four demands included: to not increase operations at the airport until a study by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is done, increase testing of blood lead levels in children under the age of 6, offer unleaded fuels to the aviation community and to adopt a “comprehensive and forward-thinking strategy which focuses on both the needs of aviation users and the health of the surrounding communities.”

I'm not sure that I disagree with anything they've demanded.
 
How about a biggie.....validate and provide proof of the source of lead. Lot's of soil is contaminated from auto fuels and paints.
schmookeeg said:
The signees, mostly doctors and nurses, have four demands included: to not increase operations at the airport until a study by the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment is done, increase testing of blood lead levels in children under the age of 6, offer unleaded fuels to the aviation community and to adopt a “comprehensive and forward-thinking strategy which focuses on both the needs of aviation users and the health of the surrounding communities.”

I'm not sure that I disagree with anything they've demanded.
Click to expand...
 
MichiPilot said:
Here's an unpopular opinion, but a real one. Small GA is going to die off. Not enough new people, not enough resources. Part 135 will remain. Uber rich will remain. The rest will die, pistons, small town airports. I love the industry, but there's no saving it, only prolonging the agony (and complaining about everyone)
Click to expand...
Sounds like a hazardous attitude to me. ;):D
 
MichiPilot said:
Here's an unpopular opinion, but a real one. Small GA is going to die off. Not enough new people, not enough resources. Part 135 will remain. Uber rich will remain. The rest will die, pistons, small town airports. I love the industry, but there's no saving it, only prolonging the agony (and complaining about everyone)
Click to expand...
********. You are clearly far too removed from aviation to give a valid opinion if that's what you believe. Just look at the attendance of Oshkosh, across the board, from plane owners to attendees, I would say the under 40 crowd almost rivalled the over 50 crowd. As an instructor - this is absolutely the trend. People have been predicting the death of GA for as long as I've been a pilot and the industry has only grown. Short of a massive regulatory blunder, GA will outlive me.

The reality is just that the younger people are not where you are. They are on social media sharing aviation just as it's been shared for the past 100 years, just on a different medium.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
Plus the fact that Mogas formulation can’t be controlled to ensure it remains usable.
Click to expand...

It CAN me. Racing mogas is.

But then expect prices to be similar to be higher than 100LL

Last time I bought racing fuel at the track, Sunoco GT100 (98 AKI, so about 93 on the avgas scale), was $8 a gallon, when street pump gas was about $4 for premium.
 
Mtns2Skies said:
********. You are clearly far too removed from aviation to give a valid opinion if that's what you believe.
Click to expand...
Sadly, that is the state of most older folks. It was the state of older folks when I was a kid, and it will be your state when you get to be an old fogey. I'm around young people all the time, so I like to think I'm a bit more clued in but I'm probably just deluding myself.
 
In addition to all the vitriol surrounding leaded av gas, there are people that cannot comprehend a properly rated container can hold mogas in a hangar safely with less chance of spilling than the fuel being stored in the airplane, a lot of these people occupy airport authority boards.
 
bflynn said:
It's a good sound bite, but I don't think it's that dire. GAMI got the 172 STC about 2.5 weeks ago, the Thursday of Oshkosh and Swift's 94UL already covers most engines up to IO-540s, although not every airframe.

There are fuels out there and more coverage is coming all the time. 90% of what we fly could keep flying, they just need to work out the supply chain for the fuel.
Click to expand...

If GAMI got the STC, then why was Braly complaining to Congress about not getting the STC?
 
Last edited:
schmookeeg said:
Wouldn't their gripes be a legitimate complaint against AOPA mismanaging their optics?

IF the people paying the dues can't tell what the dues are doing, there's a problem with comms somewhere.
Click to expand...

OneCharlieTango said:
That’s a legitimate point.
Click to expand...

That's exactly the point I was making earlier after getting flamed for "leaving the fight" for 100UL. All I see from AOPA is corporate planes, glossy website, their weekly video show occasionally showcasing meetings with the FAA and annual show pony appearances at some house sub-committee hearing that goes no where.

I lost faith in AOPA several years ago when they closed the Red board forum in favor of spending a good 6 figures on a custom hosting platform that's difficult to participate. Kept paying dues anyway for several years, until now.

Ground zero for banning 100LL and airport closures is here in San Jose California. AOPA should have a real presence here to help. Instead it's platitudes and honorable mentions.

Consider https://www.savereidhillview.org instead. Your annual $89 for AOPA instead goes directly into a 100% volunteer organization actually fighting to save GA. The precedent for closing all airports and unilateral banning of 100LL is this fight.
 
MichiPilot said:
Here's an unpopular opinion, but a real one. Small GA is going to die off. Not enough new people, not enough resources. Part 135 will remain. Uber rich will remain. The rest will die, pistons, small town airports. I love the industry, but there's no saving it, only prolonging the agony (and complaining about everyone)
Click to expand...

It may shrink some more, but I signed up three more people for our airport association at last night's meeting, all of them on the younger side. I just got a call yesterday that a group of 8 scouts want to do the Aviation merit badge with me next month. I'm not so pessimistic, and I'll continue to put GA's best foot forward.
 
I've noticed flight training and E-AB building activity steadily increase over the past 10 years where I am. Lots of younger people getting involved compared to 10 years ago, it seems.
 
DaleB said:
I've noticed flight training and E-AB building activity steadily increase over the past 10 years where I am. Lots of younger people getting involved compared to 10 years ago, it seems.
Click to expand...


Are many of them buying airplanes?

We’re complaining about the potential demise of personal, small plane aviation, but all the recruiting done by AOPA and EAA is aimed at young people who may seek airline careers.

If we really want to help personal flying, we should aim recruiting efforts at the 45-and-older crowd whose kids are grown and who have some disposable income.
 
Half Fast said:
Are many of them buying airplanes?

We’re complaining about the potential demise of personal, small plane aviation, but all the recruiting done by AOPA and EAA is aimed at young people who may seek airline careers.

If we really want to help personal flying, we should aim recruiting efforts at the 45-and-older crowd whose kids are grown and who have some disposable income.
Click to expand...

Here’s something we can 100% agree on. There’s a lot of focus on demographics, with no attention paid to financial wherewithal.
 
Like it or not, the use of leaded fuels needs to be phased out, for a variety of reasons that threaten to disrupt GA:
  1. Unjustified "lead hysteria" is being used disingenuously by political and business interests to close GA airports. Not that TEL isn't toxic, but airborne lead from aircraft emissions isn't the most concerning source public lead exposure.
  2. There is only one TEL manufacturer left, and due to the extreme hazard of manufacture, it is not clear if large scale manufacture will be economically sustainable forever.
  3. TEL complicates avfuel transportation and distribution because of its potential to contaminate fuels that MUST be lead-free. This increases cost of delivery.
Getting to 100UL should be a solvable issue. It's been dragging on too long. Initially the cost or 100UL will be higher, but as volume comes up and it supplants 100LL, prices will become more competitive.
 
Half Fast said:
Are many of them buying airplanes?

We’re complaining about the potential demise of personal, small plane aviation, but all the recruiting done by AOPA and EAA is aimed at young people who may seek airline careers.

If we really want to help personal flying, we should aim recruiting efforts at the 45-and-older crowd whose kids are grown and who have some disposable income.
Click to expand...
A number of them are building, and more are buying shares in clubs and partnerships. Some are bound for airline and other aviation careers, but there seem to be plenty who are doing it for recreation. The over-45 crowd seems to be mostly already set on golf and other pursuits. I know, I'm one of them, and have been unsuccessful at persuading a single one of my peers to even consider taking up flying.
 
DaleB said:
A number of them are building, and more are buying shares in clubs and partnerships. Some are bound for airline and other aviation careers, but there seem to be plenty who are doing it for recreation. The over-45 crowd seems to be mostly already set on golf and other pursuits. I know, I'm one of them, and have been unsuccessful at persuading a single one of my peers to even consider taking up flying.
Click to expand...
I got my PPL at 55. Of course, I hate golf. :)
 
mcdewey said:
I got my PPL at 55. Of course, I hate golf. :)
Click to expand...
I was 52. Note the lack of the word "ALL" in my post... :) I don't golf either, but flying was a lifelong goal for me. If you're going to spend time and energy trying to attract people to flying, I would suggest that younger is better.
 
I was 14 when first introduced to flying in a small aircraft. I got my pilot cert when I was 28.

I never was interested in golf.
 
Our EAA Chapter has just graduated our Third Ray Scholar as a Private Pilot. We have always had several applicants each year who must be 15-19 yrs old. The first is currently flying Apaches for the US Army.

Cheers
 
chemgeek said:
Like it or not, the use of leaded fuels needs to be phased out, for a variety of reasons that threaten to disrupt GA:
  1. Unjustified "lead hysteria" is being used disingenuously by political and business interests to close GA airports. Not that TEL isn't toxic, but airborne lead from aircraft emissions isn't the most concerning source public lead exposure.
  2. There is only one TEL manufacturer left, and due to the extreme hazard of manufacture, it is not clear if large scale manufacture will be economically sustainable forever.
  3. TEL complicates avfuel transportation and distribution because of its potential to contaminate fuels that MUST be lead-free. This increases cost of delivery.
Click to expand...

You left off this one:

100LL is bad for our engines, causing fouled plugs, deposits on valves, etc.


Best selling point to parents with kids interested in GA: "If they're flying, they'll never have money for drugs."
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Best selling point to parents with kids interested in GA: "If they're flying, they'll never have money for drugs."
Click to expand...


But with the right set of short and rough field skills, it could open up related employment opportunities.


56a6adf158c3238d008b5110
 
PaulMillner said:
You misunderstand the concern. Tetraethyllead isn't fatal unless you are exposed to the undiluted additive, typically in the manufacturing plant or in the refinery where it's being blended. A number of folks died before we figured that out.

The impact on children is stunting of intellectual development... that's manifested by difficulties learning, lower IQ by five points or so depending on exposure, poor impulse control and propensity for violence, and potentially greater chance of cancer later in life. That's probably why you and I are where we are today... survivor phenomenon!

Paul
Click to expand...

I find the "no safe level of lead exposure" standard curious, considering that I suspect decades ago when lead was ubiquitously present in many products and processes there was a detectable level of the substance in a good portion of the US population. Were there generations produced with suppressed IQs but the effects prevented anyone from realizing it, or is the standard a bit ridiculous?
 
3393RP said:
I find the "no safe level of lead exposure" standard curious, considering that I suspect decades ago when lead was ubiquitously present in many products and processes there was a detectable level of the substance in a good portion of the US population. Were there generations produced with suppressed IQs but the effects prevented anyone from realizing it, or is the standard a bit ridiculous?
Click to expand...
In my work experience the safety/environmental/health people really aren’t smart. The coursework in university is shallow and not that rigorous. Most of them are grandstanding alarmists that add little to society. Initially they had a benefit for correcting some of the gross miscarriages of environmental justice but now they’re just hanging on, looking for relevancy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top