GAMI G100UL STC available now

Bell206 said:
FYI: The STCs are needed for the simple reason there is no type certificate that lists G100UL as an approved fuel.
Click to expand...
I hope George Braly and all the others involved become filthy rich. They deserve it. But if an STC is required, I think it should be free. They can make all the money they want by adding a few cents to the price of the fuel. I wouldn't complain about that (too much). But I don't relish the thought of having to buy multiple STCs if any of their competitors get their product to market and some FBOs sell one brand and other FBOs sell other brands.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
most of these guys aren't interested in visiting their local burn ward (don't google "defenestration"
Click to expand...
de·fen·es·tra·tion
/dēˌfenəˈstrāSHən/

noun
  1. 1.
    FORMAL•HUMOROUS
    the action of throwing someone out of a window.
    "death by defenestration has a venerable history"

  2. 2.
    INFORMAL
    the action of dismissing someone from a position of power or authority.
    "that victory resulted in Churchill's own defenestration by the war-weary British electorate"

I think you meant "debridement". Or maybe "immolation". Both of which might make a person want to throw themselves out of a window.
 
Mongoose Aviator said:
would the insurance company have a solid footing for refusing payout based on the aircraft being out of compliance?
Click to expand...
It would depend on the policy terms and the state laws involved. While claims are denied based on whether the AWC is in effect or valid, they are not as common as some people think. However, any blatant disregard for the rules only makes things easier for the insurer and not the owner.
JOhnH said:
But if an STC is required, I think it should be free.
Click to expand...
And that's solely up to the STC holder. There are a number of STCs out there that are free but there is usually a tangible kit involved to charge for vs a couple decals. Now wanting to charge for a separate STC when replacing an engine on the same airframe I think is a little too much and they should allow transfers to the replacement engine. Then again I didn't spend millions getting the approval. What will be interesting is if a new industry fuel standard is created or the old one is revised to include G100UL which will then make all STCs moot and not required similar to what happened with the 1st multi-grade oils STCs.
 
Jim K said:
I think you meant "debridement". Or maybe "immolation". Both of which might make a person want to throw themselves out of a window.
Click to expand...

Oops, too early in the morning, coffee isn't processed yet. Debridement is what I was thinking...
 
JOhnH said:
They can make all the money they want by adding a few cents to the price of the fuel.
Click to expand...

The point I made earlier though is that they can't rely on that for their only income, because a competitor fuel might be approved within only a few years. They have a ton of sunk costs at this point, and they need to spend a ton more to get the fuel to market. Unless they have an incredibly patient venture capitalist behind them, waiting 10 more years to break even isn't a great business plan.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
Oops, too early in the morning, coffee isn't processed yet. Debridement is what I was thinking...
Click to expand...
I love pedantry in the morning :D

I once got a chemical burn. They had to debride the mushy skin in the doctors office; that was the most painful thing I've experienced to date. Then I got to do it myself every day for the next few days. Fun stuff.

Defenestration is one of my favorite words, hard to use in conversation though :D. I think it tickles that part of my brain that remembers the 4 years of German I took. Die Fenster is one of the few words that stuck.
 
What’s the point? It costs more to run and I don’t see any benefit remotely worth the cost


I don’t see this fuel being able to succeed in the free market, alas government will probably mandate and do what they do sadly
 
Jeff Oslick said:
The point I made earlier though is that they can't rely on that for their only income, because a competitor fuel might be approved within only a few years. They have a ton of sunk costs at this point, and they need to spend a ton more to get the fuel to market. Unless they have an incredibly patient venture capitalist behind them, waiting 10 more years to break even isn't a great business plan.
Click to expand...


This is all true, but it’s not a sales argument. It may demonstrate that GAMI has a weak business case, but it does nothing to persuade a potential customer to purchase the STC.

While I appreciate all GAMI has done and I don’t believe their price to be excessive, they still have a rocky road ahead and it isn’t reasonable to expect me to pay to pave it, especially when it will likely be years before I can get their fuel.
 
Half Fast said:
it isn’t reasonable to expect me to pay to pave it, especially when it will likely be years before I can get their fuel.
Click to expand...

They aren't expecting you to pay to pave it. You live in a region that might take longer for adoption - though possibly not if the numerous Florida flight schools realize how much nicer it is to not have to deal with all the negative operational and maintenance issues associated with 100LL.

There is nothing that obligates you to get the STC until you either choose or need to use their fuel. For those of us who know we are in the firing line for the death of 100LL availability, there is a more incentive to pay up front.
 
Sundancer said:
How are guys with Mogas STCs fueling? I wouldn't be big on driving around with eight 5 gal jugs of high explosive/flammable liquid. Or buying a portable tank and pump, either. Are many GA airports "friendly" to folks lugging in their own fuel? Are Mogas pumps at all common on GA airports? I don't recall seeing them in MD/VA/PA/WV when I was flying up there, and not around here in NC now - then again I usually fuel at my home-drome, so maybe I just didn't notice?
Click to expand...

SC has one location with Mogas (that I'm aware of) but they want more for the Mogas ($6.30) than the 100LL ($5.69). I've tankered Mogas from a nearby station but lately my plane has been getting the 100LL. I'd really like to get the lead out ...
 
Jeff Oslick said:
They aren't expecting you to pay to pave it. You live in a region that might take longer for adoption - though possibly not if the numerous Florida flight schools realize how much nicer it is to not have to deal with all the negative operational and maintenance issues associated with 100LL.

There is nothing that obligates you to get the STC until you either choose or need to use their fuel. For those of us who know we are in the firing line for the death of 100LL availability, there is a more incentive to pay up front.
Click to expand...
Lol. Yeah, the schools do something special because of lead in 10LL. Right.
 
SamSES said:
I don’t see any benefit remotely worth the cost
Click to expand...

I'd say the most pressing benefit is not being reliant on the existence of a single tetraethyl lead production plant for the availability of our fuel.
 
SamSES said:
What’s the point? It costs more to run and I don’t see any benefit remotely worth the cost


I don’t see this fuel being able to succeed in the free market, alas government will probably mandate and do what they do sadly
Click to expand...
Disagree.

Besides the obvious health and environmental benefits, unleaded fuel will actually be better for the engines (and less time cleaning underneath the nacelles).

I, for one, can't wait for unleaded fuel to get to my airport. Having said that, I probably won't buy the STC until I know I'll need it to fill up. But I will probably buy it before the June date that @John-Paul Townsend said was the deadline for purchase and free transfer to new engines.
 
Salty said:
Lol. Yeah, the schools do something special because of lead in 10LL. Right.
Click to expand...

Do you think flight schools don't have to deal with fouled plugs and delayed/cancelled flights because students don't remember to lean on the ground?
 
Half Fast said:
The school where I trained switched to mogas. Not much incentive for them to switch from that to GAMI-gas.
Click to expand...

You sort of just contradicted yourself. Yes, they did do something special, they converted to mogas.

I bet their planes sometimes still have to refuel at other airports that only have 100LL.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
You sort of just contradicted yourself. Yes, they did do something special, they converted to mogas.

I bet their planes sometimes still have to refuel at other airports that only have 100LL.
Click to expand...
Not because of lead.
 
"Obvious environmental benefits_ - are there any? Not trolling, I just don't know - are 100LL burning GA airplanes doing much damage?
 
Sundancer said:
"Obvious environmental benefits_ - are there any? Not trolling, I just don't know - are 100LL burning GA airplanes doing much damage?
Click to expand...

Even if you think that the distributed use of 100LL over a large area is essentially harmless, the fact that it is dangerous in high concentrations handled during production can't really be argued.
 
Uhhh. . .a lot of stuff is dangerous to handle during production. . .like ALL fuels. And a zillion chemicals used in industry. Not really to the point of my question: Does burning 100LL contribute any meaningful damage?
 
Sundancer said:
How are guys with Mogas STCs fueling?
Click to expand...
Don't have an STC, but I schlep fuel in 5 gallon cans from the corner gas station.
Metal can bonded to the aircraft on account of what I don't want to burn my airplane down.
Never had an issue due to the alleged instability of auto fuel.



Now, if someone doesn't want to shell out for the GAMI STC, one could just wait for the FAA and EAGLE to come through.
 
Sundancer said:
"Obvious environmental benefits_ - are there any? Not trolling, I just don't know - are 100LL burning GA airplanes doing much damage?
Click to expand...

Sundancer said:
Does burning 100LL contribute any meaningful damage?
Click to expand...

It depends on if you believe the studies. If you do, then yes, it is harmful. If you don't, then there's nothing anyone is going to say that will change your mind.

I've posted studies online to people who are adamant that there's zero harm from burning leaded gas, and their response is typically "FAkE SciEnCe! tHaT'S AlL PolITicAl Bs! iT's JusT a ConSPirACy fRom ThE LiBtaRDs." They don't even read the reports. Common in the current age of "opinions trump facts."

I exit the conversation at that point.

I especially love it when they say "I've been around leaded gas my whole life and I'm okay!" Sure you are, buddy!

The plural of "anecdote" is not "data."

Here's just one study from the NIH.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3230438/
 
Not having to wash that gray sludge off the belly while on a creeper is enough reason for me.

Ability to add o2 sensors without lead fouling, less plug maintenance, longer duration on oil changes. Not having to worry about the only source of TEL being forced to shut down.

Someone smarter can probably answer this. But it's my understanding the stc is needed as g100ul doesn't adhere to the astm standard. The poh on the pa32 calls for "Fuel, Aviation Grade (min octane) 100/130". It doesn't say anything about 100LL. So, while this won't happen... couldn't they change the astm standard and the stc not be needed?
 
Jeff Oslick said:
You sort of just contradicted yourself. Yes, they did do something special, they converted to mogas.

I bet their planes sometimes still have to refuel at other airports that only have 100LL.
Click to expand...


Where did I contradict myself? I never said they didn’t do something special; I said they switched to mogas.
 
Sluggo63 said:
Disagree.

Besides the obvious health and environmental benefits, unleaded fuel will actually be better for the engines (and less time cleaning underneath the nacelles).

I, for one, can't wait for unleaded fuel to get to my airport. Having said that, I probably won't buy the STC until I know I'll need it to fill up. But I will probably buy it before the June date that @John-Paul Townsend said was the deadline for purchase and free transfer to new engines.
Click to expand...

Obvious?

There was one study done in crazy California, they couldn’t get the numbers they wanted so they violated their own polices and put the sniffers right behind the run up area, by the studies own guidelines it became worthless

I have seen nothing to show 100ll is causing any actual quantifiable damage

Seems like ethanol fuel and paper straws, just another scam based on dubious nonsense

But the right people will get paid, some folks will virtue signal and feel better about themselves, and Main Street will just be a little more poor

Death by 1000 papercuts
 
Sluggo63 said:
Disagree.

Besides the obvious health and environmental benefits, unleaded fuel will actually be better for the engines (and less time cleaning underneath the nacelles).

I, for one, can't wait for unleaded fuel to get to my airport. Having said that, I probably won't buy the STC until I know I'll need it to fill up. But I will probably buy it before the June date that @John-Paul Townsend said was the deadline for purchase and free transfer to new engines.
Click to expand...
Me too and I plan to buy this month for the 23+% discount as I am gambling GAMI is the UL fuel in our future...

IMHO GAMI forged new roads and their main competitor is following the old school processes which means more companies involved thus we will all pay more per gallon.

As for EAGLE, what a waste of tax payer dollars. Again.
 
Racerx said:
The poh on the pa32 calls for "Fuel, Aviation Grade (min octane) 100/130". It doesn't say anything about 100LL.
Click to expand...

I would think that G100UL is an aviation grade fuel of minimum octane 100. How forward-thinking of Piper to include that :D
 
Sundancer said:
Uhhh. . .a lot of stuff is dangerous to handle during production. . .like ALL fuels. And a zillion chemicals used in industry. Not really to the point of my question: Does burning 100LL contribute any meaningful damage?
Click to expand...

Yes via public perception, at least.
 
It is also interesting, as time goes on and we do all this stuff to make everything so safe and healthy

I see less independent thought and more strange allergies, people who get fat and instead of eating less and exercise its a “disease” or “lifestyle choice”, I see parents who can’t raise their own offspring but medicate them into compliance, vs taking them outside and playing with them


If 100ll, incandescent light bulbs, red meat and all that was so bad for us, how come people become less self sufficient and more useless and weak generation after generation?

Just look at the freedom of GA, it’s not getting better as time goes on
 
Yup, I don't have any inside info....but I have nothing to lose by waiting till fuel makes to my pumps.
Bell206 said:
... What will be interesting is if a new industry fuel standard is created or the old one is revised to include G100UL which will then make all STCs moot and not required similar to what happened with the 1st multi-grade oils STCs.
Click to expand...
 
John-Paul Townsend said:
As someone else said, it was similar to how the mogas STCs used a HP based pricing. I'm not sure why, maybe it was just inertia. The idea of fuel capacity is one we thought about. The idea was that you would have a one time fee equal to about what you'd pay for filling your plane up one time (at $5-6/gal, which is what fuel was at the time). It turns out the two formulas came to about the same amount for a wide variety of aircraft, so we left it as it was.

Jpt
Click to expand...


So essentially, the formula pricing is traditional?

Yeeesh. I guess I just don't see a need to have a formula for pricing in the first place. But whatever....
 
SamSES said:
Obvious?

There was one study done in crazy California, they couldn’t get the numbers they wanted so they violated their own polices and put the sniffers right behind the run up area, by the studies own guidelines it became worthless

I have seen nothing to show 100ll is causing any actual quantifiable damage

Seems like ethanol fuel and paper straws, just another scam based on dubious nonsense

But the right people will get paid, some folks will virtue signal and feel better about themselves, and Main Street will just be a little more poor

Death by 1000 papercuts
Click to expand...
I can tell you're mind is made up. "I have seen nothing to show 100LL is causing any actual quantifiable damage." Of course you haven't. Because you probably haven't cared to read any of the published data.

It's obvious you didn't read the study in the link I posted, because if you did, you would have seen that that study was done in North Carolina, not "crazy California." I purposely did not link to the RHV study, but you wouldn't know, because you didn't read it.

Here's one from the UK.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.12.22277256v2.full.pdf

Lead has been known to be harmful, even in small quantities, since at least the 1400s, probably earlier. It's not political. It's science.

Edit: had two users confused. Apologies.
 
Last edited:
Sluggo63 said:
Yes you are.

Exactly. You don't know. But based on this quote from you:
I can tell you're mind is made up. "I have seen nothing to show 100LL is causing any actual quantifiable damage." Of course you haven't. Because you probably haven't cared to read any of the published data.

It's obvious you didn't read the study in the link I posted, because if you did, you would have seen that that study was done in North Carolina, not "crazy California." I purposely did not link to the RHV study, but you wouldn't know, because you didn't read it.

Here's one from the UK.

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.12.22277256v2.full.pdf

Lead has been known to be harmful, even in small quantities, since at least the 1400s, probably earlier. It's not political. It's science.
Click to expand...

I made it to page two before I closed it, her crazy enviro bias bleeds through

Sadly academia is mostly made up of the same…political/social demographics, as was illustrated by James Lindsey



How much lead does it take to do real damage? If I have been damaged but in such a small way I’ll never know, why do I care?


I fully support GL gas, just in a real free market, put it right next to 100ll and let the market decide, the problem is people like that woman who wrote that “study” don’t want to allow us to make the choice, they know better than we do and think they can run our lives better than we can, they also know their activism can’t hold up in a free market or free world, thus they rely on pushing on gov to enforce their will, I can’t abide that
 
Last edited:
Sluggo63 said:
Yeah, I'm sure they will come up with something else. But if for years all they did was use leaded fuel as their excuse to close the airport (which I agree with... not the airport closure, but the harmful effects of lead), then when the lead goes away and they pivot all of a sudden to something else, it really casts a dim light on their motivation. Not that that will stop them, of course.
Click to expand...
They already pivoted. In previous closure attempts, before they came up with the lead narrative, one of the excuses was safety, which was debunked when the county commissioned a study that found the airport to be a safer use of the land than other planned uses. This time, they were careful to select a study vendor who would give them the result they wanted.

I have seen no evidence of consequences for the pivot, by the way.
 
Jeff Oslick said:
They aren't expecting you to pay to pave it. You live in a region that might take longer for adoption - though possibly not if the numerous Florida flight schools realize how much nicer it is to not have to deal with all the negative operational and maintenance issues associated with 100LL.

There is nothing that obligates you to get the STC until you either choose or need to use their fuel. For those of us who know we are in the firing line for the death of 100LL availability, there is a more incentive to pay up front.
Click to expand...
I agree in general, although it will also be necessary to consider whether 100LL will be available at the destination and any planned fuel stops along the way.
 
Salty said:
Lol. Yeah, the schools do something special because of lead in 10LL. Right.
Click to expand...
I've heard that the leaded fuel requires more frequent spark plug cleaning or replacement than will be the case with unleaded. Not sure how big a factor that is, though.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top