Is EAA Working on an STC for Ethanol-laced MoGas?

A previous poster mentioned an exhibition airplane running on ethanol. I also recall
this bird and it seems I saw it fly at Oshkosh, circa 1997. It seems that
it was a black fabric biplane with green trim?

The State of Illinois flew a yellow and green aircraft around the
airshow circuit to promote ethanol. I always suspected Archer Daniels
Midland was the wizard behind the curtain, but I never saw any credit
claimed in print.

"Paul Stuart" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Weir
Sometimes you carry that EAA chip on your shoulder to truly ridiculous
levels. Mr Lawrence has posted a detailed, informative and totally
understandable reply to the questions raised. He did so on
Thanksgiving Day... If you can't find it within yourself to recognize
that these are actually COMMENDABLE traits in an EAA employee, for
goodness' sake don't go on the attack about it. You really do come
across as a keyboard warrior of the pettiest kind.
Paul Stuart

When he chose to comment, or even if he chose to comment, is no concern to
me, or of anyone else reading the letter. If Thanksgiving was a bad day to
be writing, then he should have waited until a better time.

A person in a position of leadership, in an organization such as EAA, is
accountable to it's members. In this case, the membership and non
membership public reading a letter in an open forum will carry away an
impression directly related to the quality of said presentation. He only
had one chance to make a first impression, and the impression carried away
by members, and the public in this case, could only be one questioning the
competence, ability and intelligence of the person writing the letter.

A typo here and there, or a *few* grammatical errors is not a good thing,
but is somewhat forgivable. The quantity of errors contained in the letter
goes *way* past that level.

Missing the spelling of a key technical term that the author was in charge
of researching, and the obvious total lack of proofreading is past
acceptable, and he deserves admonishment.

That is my opinion, and I would think other's as well. YMMV.
--
Jim in NC
EAA member, also questioning if the research undertaken on ethanol was
supervised in a competent manner.

The book on me has always been that I do not suffer fools graciously.

Thanksgiving is generally capitalized.

Jim




wrote in message
oups.com...
Jim
It is good to see your manners are as good as they always have been.
Happy thanksgiving.
Earl

I can not provide a internet link to the test data, some of the tests
were EAA tests, some FAA tests, other tests have been published in SAE
papers, and still others are published in ASTM research reports

semicolon added ,\; none of
these are available on-line.


The black fabric aircraft you saw
previously was Max Schauck's aircraft in the late 1990's he was running
the aircraft on ETBE and ether made from ethanol.

Run on sentence.

he was running

the aircraft on ETBE and ether made from ethanol.



The aircraft was
flown from show to show on 100LL and then he would do the show using
the ETBE. This was done, the use of 100LL, as you just can not pull up
to the pump at an airport and get ETBE.

These sentences make no sense at all.


But ETBE and
MTBE have no been outlawed in many parts of the US do to concerns of
contaminated water sources from ethers such as MTBE

These sentences make no grammar sense at all. Wanna try again?



the STC tests must cover all know operating conditions.
Earl Lawrence

How about KNOWN operating conditions.

Jim

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Paul Stuart" wrote in message
oups.com...
Mr Weir
Sometimes you carry that EAA chip on your shoulder to truly ridiculous
levels. Mr Lawrence has posted a detailed, informative and totally
understandable reply to the questions raised. He did so on
Thanksgiving Day... If you can't find it within yourself to recognize
that these are actually COMMENDABLE traits in an EAA employee, for
goodness' sake don't go on the attack about it. You really do come
across as a keyboard warrior of the pettiest kind.
Paul Stuart

When he chose to comment, or even if he chose to comment, is no concern to
me, or of anyone else reading the letter. If Thanksgiving was a bad day
to
be writing, then he should have waited until a better time.

A person in a position of leadership, in an organization such as EAA, is
accountable to it's members. In this case, the membership and non
membership public reading a letter in an open forum will carry away an
impression directly related to the quality of said presentation. He only
had one chance to make a first impression, and the impression carried away
by members, and the public in this case, could only be one questioning the
competence, ability and intelligence of the person writing the letter.

A typo here and there, or a *few* grammatical errors is not a good thing,
but is somewhat forgivable. The quantity of errors contained in the
letter
goes *way* past that level.

Missing the spelling of a key technical term that the author was in charge
of researching, and the obvious total lack of proofreading is past
acceptable, and he deserves admonishment.

That is my opinion, and I would think other's as well. YMMV.

It isn't my opinion and I would request you not assume that you speak for
me.

snip
I hope I haven't consumed any methanol today, anyway!g
--
Jim in NC

Not to worry. The antidote for methanol poisoning is grain alcohol.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

"Dave Stadt" wrote

It isn't my opinion and I would request you not assume that you speak for
me.

For my statement to be true, all I have to find is at least one person
sharing my opinion. I think that is safe to say. No, let me rephrase that;
I KNOW it is safe to say.

Furthermore, I would never ASSume to be speaking for you. You seem to be
very capable of ASSuming yourself.

Good day.
--
Jim in NC

That is my opinion, and I would think other's as well. YMMV.

It isn't my opinion and I would request you not assume that you speak for
me.

You guys are wound too tight.
What's wrong, did your football teams lose?
This is aviation, we're allowed to disagree... civilly, of course. ;-))

same as getting it certificated to use that fuel. Certification
testing covers a wide range of conditions that some aircraft may never
see but must be addressed if we are going to let Type certificated
aircraft use the fuel. Remember an STC for a fuel would allow that
aircraft to fly with paying passengers at night, IFR in bad weather, in
the most extreme conditions e.g. Alaskan winter or Saharan Summer, so
the STC tests must cover all know operating conditions.
Earl Lawrence

You mention 10% alcohol, what about 5.7% alcohol as is required in
California Fuels?

Ed
Testing that Cessna completed indicated 3.5% ethanol to be the limit of
acceptable content in conventional gasoline for use in existing Cessna
aircraft. However, my understanding of the tests is that they were
conducted to determine acceptable levels of anti-ice additive in 100LL,
80/87 and 82UL aviation gasoline. The tests were not conducted to
determine what the acceptable level of ethanol in automotive gasoline
would be for use in an aircraft. If you did not know, the anti-ice
additive that is used in gasoline is primarily ethanol. This, the
anti-ice additive, is an acceptable fuel additive listed in some Cessna
aircraft manuals.
For your information California gasoline, with the exception of the
ethanol additive, complies with both the 80/87 and the 82UL aviation
fuel specifications limits. For those of you who do not live in
California, California gasoline must comply with a special CARB
(California Air Resources Board) fuel specification over and above ASTM
and national EPA requirements.
Earl