This can't be good. . . .

more likely to need to drop the LL in 100LL... it's a matter of time now that there are products being field tested.
 
Their problem is that they define CO2 as a pollutant. If so, then life = pollution.

The EPA has gone rogue.
 
petrolero said:
Their problem is that they define CO2 as a pollutant. If so, then life = pollution.

The EPA has gone rogue.
Click to expand...

No problem man, we'll all have to get permits to breath. Anyone desiring children will have to get new source permits and utilize best available technology to control emissions. New sources in non-attainment areas will require modeling prior to obtaining a permit. All new source permits will require a thirty day public comment period.
 
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
Click to expand...

Maybe, but the EPA doesn't know the first damned thing about safe aircraft operation, and I doubt they really care. On the other hand, a pilot whose life depends on my aircraft to work properly, I do.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
Click to expand...

Except, if I recall correctly, that was California's environmental laws, not the Federal laws.
 
VWGhiaBob said:
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
Click to expand...

This kind of absurd thinking just makes me ill. We have the cleanest air and water of any civilized nation on earth but it's never good enough for these ridiculous wackos...:mad2:

"Are you sure you want to add VWGhiaBob to your ignore list?" Yes, HELL YES! :yesnod::yesnod::yesnod:
 
Folks, lets try and keep this out of Spin Zone
 
Clark1961 said:
No problem man, we'll all have to get permits to breath. Anyone desiring children will have to get new source permits and utilize best available technology to control emissions. New sources in non-attainment areas will require modeling prior to obtaining a permit. All new source permits will require a thirty day public comment period.
Click to expand...

And, most importantly don't forget the new permit fees!!!
 
VWGhiaBob said:
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
Click to expand...
And yet California's economy thrives.:rofl:
 
VWGhiaBob said:
For those who don't think the EPA has worked wonders, visit LA. In the 70's, we had on average 100 smog alerts per year, and the air was thick brown 1/2 the time. Amid the many protests and "it will ruin our economy", the EPA forged ahead.

Fast forward...can't remember a smog alert for a few years. More often than not it's clear where I work (Burbank), an area that used to have some of the worst smog of all.

We have a long way to go, and I support efforts to clean up our fuel, just as we have done for automobiles.
Click to expand...
Wow I guess I didn't realize how bad it was back then. I was supposed to solo out of the old Grand Central Airport in Glendale in April 54 on my 16th birthday. It was IFR for 4 days due to smog. I remember getting out of California primarily due to the terrible smog.

I guess I won't complain as much about smog checks.

Paul
 
The beef I have with the EPA is they seem to always go the route that's most painful for people.

For GA aircraft for example, if they would work with the FAA to untie some regulatory knots maybe we could get things like electronic ignition/fuel injection systems. Perhaps encourage the availability of mogas at more fields. But instead they'll probably ban 100LL and give us an iffy substitute that costs $7-8/gallon.
 
cowman said:
The beef I have with the EPA is they seem to always go the route that's most painful for people.

For GA aircraft for example, if they would work with the FAA to untie some regulatory knots maybe we could get things like electronic ignition/fuel injection systems. Perhaps encourage the availability of mogas at more fields. But instead they'll probably ban 100LL and give us an iffy substitute that costs $7-8/gallon.
Click to expand...

Leaded gas is bad for PEOPLE, not just the environment. Lead destroys kids nervous systems. People who live near busy airports have a significant increase in lead in their homes.

Plus lead is bad for aircraft engines too.

It's one of the grand hypocrisy's that flyers are fine with leaded gas. It's inexcusable.
 
cowman said:
For GA aircraft for example, if they would work with the FAA to untie some regulatory knots maybe we could get things like electronic ignition/fuel injection systems.
Click to expand...

Do you know what happens when your car's electronic ignition or fuel injection malfunctions?

Not appropriate for a single in current form. Removing the hoops will result in much more frequent engine failures. Electronic ignition failures are not rare at all.

Unleaded fuel can be designed for. With a camshaft and hardened valve seats. Drop-in replacements that do not require those are in evaluation. Let's hope that works.
 
MAKG1 said:
Do you know what happens when your car's electronic ignition or fuel injection malfunctions?

Not appropriate for a single in current form. Removing the hoops will result in much more frequent engine failures. Electronic ignition failures are not rare at all.

Unleaded fuel can be designed for. With a camshaft and hardened valve seats. Drop-in replacements that do not require those are in evaluation. Let's hope that works.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe century old magnetos and carburetors are any more reliable than proven solid state technology? I would argue they might very well improve safety along with efficiency.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Not really. I guess it depends on your definition of thrive. I think it is more appropriately defined as survives.
Click to expand...

Just reading yesterday, of the economies of 50 states, it ranks 11th best as of July 31.
"California added 27,700 jobs in July — the second-highest number in the nation.
However, its unemployment rate was also high, at 7.4%.
The average annual wage for a Californian in 2013 was $57,121."

"California's economy is so huge that is surpasses both Russia's and Italy's economies"

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-the-50-us-state-economies-2014-8?op=1#ixzz3CrAri8wJ
 
I know I can get one mag replaced with an electronic ignition module on my lycoming 0-360 but I can't see how you could get the advantages in ignition timing with the mag on the other side still in operation
 
PPC1052 said:
Maybe, but the EPA doesn't know the first damned thing about safe aircraft operation, and I doubt they really care. On the other hand, a pilot whose life depends on my aircraft to work properly, I do.
Click to expand...

To the EPA, you're a hobbyist - you're right, they don't care.
 
MAKG1 said:
Do you know what happens when your car's electronic ignition or fuel injection malfunctions?

Not appropriate for a single in current form. Removing the hoops will result in much more frequent engine failures. Electronic ignition failures are not rare at all.

Unleaded fuel can be designed for. With a camshaft and hardened valve seats. Drop-in replacements that do not require those are in evaluation. Let's hope that works.
Click to expand...

In 30 years of driving I have never had an electronic ignition failure.
 
Morgan3820 said:
In 30 years of driving I have never had an electronic ignition failure.
Click to expand...

You've been lucky. I've had half a dozen. Some could be identified by a visual (but do you remove the cowling on your aircraft during preflight?), some happened without warning or any visible marker.

Only one vehicle is anywhere near as old as the rental aircraft fleet.

And if any vehicle has ever pinged, you have had a mild electronic ignition failure. That's accompanied by reduced power and, if severe, permanent oil consumption, so it's a bit more serious for an airplane.
 
cowman said:
Why do you believe century old magnetos and carburetors are any more reliable than proven solid state technology? I would argue they might very well improve safety along with efficiency.
Click to expand...

Because they have many fewer wires to fail. Wiring is the Achilles heel of electronic engine management.

I would agree with you if these aircraft had points, coils, condensers, vacuum advance and centrifugal weights, but they don't. That mags are self contained and totally independent of the rest of the electrical system is a BIG deal.
 
eaglepilot said:
Just reading yesterday, of the economies of 50 states, it ranks 11th best as of July 31.
"California added 27,700 jobs in July — the second-highest number in the nation.
However, its unemployment rate was also high, at 7.4%.
The average annual wage for a Californian in 2013 was $57,121."

"California's economy is so huge that is surpasses both Russia's and Italy's economies"

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/ranked-the-50-us-state-economies-2014-8?op=1#ixzz3CrAri8wJ
Click to expand...

I don't know what they mean by "best." If they say it has the 11th largest GDP, that's pretty dismal for our most populous state. 27,000 new jobs? What is that as per capita, and how does that per capita job creation compare to other states? Also, what type of jobs?
 
PPC1052 said:
I don't know what they mean by "best." If they say it has the 11th largest GDP, that's pretty dismal for our most populous state. 27,000 new jobs? What is that as per capita, and how does that per capita job creation compare to other states? Also, what type of jobs?
Click to expand...

I for one left california for vegas. 30K more a year in IT, no state income tax, and cheaper gas. I was driving 2 hrs each way to work to be able to live in a decent neighborhood with good schools and was barely making ends meet.
 
I guess nobody read the OP's link...the regulation discussion is about commercial aviation and airliners, not Cessnas and Pipers.

:rolleyes2:
 
3393RP said:
I guess nobody read the OP's link...the regulation discussion is about commercial aviation and airliners, not Cessnas and Pipers.

:rolleyes2:
Click to expand...
You assume that, but nothing says the regs will be so limited. Just because there is a picture of a shiny jet doesn't mean there won't be regs aimed at us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top