A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

So what happens when 100LL is gone anyway?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 19th 05, 03:39 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default So what happens when 100LL is gone anyway?

ISTR there's only one company that still makes TEL (I think it's in the
UK?) When they decide the cost isn't worth it, what then? Sure, the
lower HP Lyc's and Cont's can probably run mogas without issue, but the
higher HP turbo'd engines won't be so happy without lead. The FADEC mod
being developed by Aerosance might be a solution for some engines by
computerized ignition retarding, but that's not a cheap fix. Anyone
read anything more about the coming end of avgas?

  #3  
Old July 19th 05, 03:50 PM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
ISTR there's only one company that still makes TEL (I think it's in the
UK?) When they decide the cost isn't worth it, what then? Sure, the
lower HP Lyc's and Cont's can probably run mogas without issue, but the
higher HP turbo'd engines won't be so happy without lead. The FADEC mod
being developed by Aerosance might be a solution for some engines by
computerized ignition retarding, but that's not a cheap fix. Anyone
read anything more about the coming end of avgas?


Don't know about the small airplane folks, but the warbird guys are going
to be mad as hell. We have the power back on a P51 now to 45 inches on
takeoff because of the fuel restriction. Any lower and the damn airplane
will be taking off at cruise power!! :-)
Dudley henriques


  #4  
Old July 19th 05, 04:17 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Interesting.. a month or so ago at the Corsairs over Connecticut
weekend at Sikorsky Airport I spoke to the owner of one of the F4Us
about just that. With 115/130 being long gone they're limited to 50in
on takeoff to keep the engine from making bad sounds.

  #5  
Old July 19th 05, 04:58 PM
Thomas Borchert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

- Diesel/Jet-A as made by Thielert
- Small turbines as made by Innodyn
- Ignition systems as made by Gami (Prism)

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

  #6  
Old July 19th 05, 05:08 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's fine for new production & some retrofits, but what about all the
Navajos/Twin Cessnas/Barons/etc. where re-engining would cost more than
the aircraft?

  #7  
Old July 19th 05, 05:08 PM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That's fine for new production & some retrofits, but what about all the
Navajos/Twin Cessnas/Barons/etc. where re-engining would cost more than
the aircraft?

  #8  
Old July 19th 05, 05:25 PM
TaxSrv
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

wrote:

ISTR there's only one company that still makes TEL (I think it's in

the
UK?) When they decide the cost isn't worth it, what then?


Don't see a problem there. Anything we must have, we will pay for,
until the price becomes so high.... Think addictive illegal drugs and
sex from better than your usual skank entrepreneur. I suspect the
profits of the UK company on this are enormous. It's one company
because of a low volume product and for whatever reason competitors
anywhere can't or don't wish to come in. It's UK (or could be
anywhere else) because of our EPA rules here, but not their similar
rules on exports of such products. The main problem is the EPA keeps
pushing for the big players to come up with a plan. Like a low-cost
way to modify/recertify existing engines.

Fred F.

  #9  
Old July 19th 05, 06:21 PM
Matt Barrow
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


wrote in message
oups.com...
ISTR there's only one company that still makes TEL (I think it's in the
UK?) When they decide the cost isn't worth it, what then? Sure, the
lower HP Lyc's and Cont's can probably run mogas without issue, but the
higher HP turbo'd engines won't be so happy without lead. The FADEC mod
being developed by Aerosance might be a solution for some engines by
computerized ignition retarding, but that's not a cheap fix.


http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/189994-1.html

Motor Head 7: Are We Making It Harder Than It Needs To Be?
June 19, 2005
By Marc Cook,

....
"I have carefully studied the Aerosance-produced FADEC for the Continental
engines -- but, in the interests of full disclosure, have not flown it yet
(more on why later) -- and I believe I have a good understanding of how the
system works. It does a couple of things that I would not do to my own
engine. For one, it strives to set the mixture for best power on takeoff and
climb. That's fine for performance, and I would expect the airplanes powered
by the new FADEC to have slightly better takeoff and initial climb
performance; not by a lot, but it would be noticeable.

The trouble with best-power mixture at high power settings is that it puts
the engine right near the point of highest cylinder pressure and, therefore,
will create very high CHTs. The whole point of running extra fuel during
takeoff -- and why so many savvy owners of big-bore Continental engines
insist that the redline-gauge fuel flow is a minimum not a maximum value --
is to slow down the combustion process and reduce cylinder pressures. The
result is moderated CHTs. Well, shouldn't the computer take care of that?
Sure, it does; but my reading of the specs (confirmed by the published
reports) is that the FADEC doesn't start to respond until one of the
cylinders has reached 435 ºF, when it then starts adding fuel and/or
retarding ignition timing. Unless that installation is dramatically well
cooled for takeoff and initial climb -- thus making it way over-cooled for
cruise and descent -- I'm fairly sure one or more of the cylinders will
reach that threshold in the initial climb and the computer will have to
respond. "

Anyone
read anything more about the coming end of avgas?


http://www.avweb.com/news/columns/182149-1.html

----------------

Lead in the Hogwash

April 27, 2002
By John Deakin

Tetraethyl lead has been gone from automobile gasoline for two decades, and
it's only a matter of time before leaded avgas goes away as well. Despite a
huge amount of industry research, nobody yet has a suitable replacement
fuel, and nobody's yet quite sure what will happen to today's piston-powered
fleet when the supply of 100LL dries up. AVweb's John Deakin dispels a bunch
of myths about TEL, explains what it does and why it's so indispensable in
high-performance recips, and talks about one solution to the coming
unleaded-avgas crisis that actually works
---------
Hopefully this: http://www.gami.com/prism.html

Unfortunately, the page is 3 1/2 years old and still no STC. A year and a
half ago they said they were HOPING for 2nd half of 2005.


--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nothing like a cold splash of 100LL in the face to wake up a pilot Peter R. Piloting 20 October 1st 04 11:25 PM
Future of 100LL? Michael Owning 0 August 2nd 04 09:29 AM
Future of 100LL? Michael Piloting 0 August 2nd 04 09:29 AM
How blue is 100LL? Ben Jackson Piloting 26 May 1st 04 11:10 AM
When was the switch to 100LL? Roger Long Piloting 0 August 21st 03 11:01 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:25 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.