Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: New engines to go all unleaded

  1. #1
    Member hntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Eagle River
    Posts
    221

    Default New engines to go all unleaded

    I got a e-mail from the FAA that stated that there was discussion between the FAA and Engine manufacturers that they were going to require all new aircraft engines to use unleaded and they were going to phase out leaded gasoline. Anyone else heard about this? How is it going to affect cost of engines, parts, fuel? I would imagine people would at least have to buy fuel additive for lead.

    I was looking at buying a plane this year and I'm wondering if I should hold off to see what happens.

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Alaska
    Posts
    96

    Default

    Invest in something that has a car gas stc, and buy MMO.
    -Out-of-State for school, remembering why I love Alaska so much

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Semi-retired in Florida
    Posts
    483

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hntr View Post
    I got a e-mail from the FAA that stated that there was discussion between the FAA and Engine manufacturers that they were going to require all new aircraft engines to use unleaded and they were going to phase out leaded gasoline. Anyone else heard about this? How is it going to affect cost of engines, parts, fuel? I would imagine people would at least have to buy fuel additive for lead.

    I was looking at buying a plane this year and I'm wondering if I should hold off to see what happens.
    Seems a bit early to worry too much about "discussions" between the FAA and engine manufacturers. If all parties finally do come to terms about it, I'm not sure we'll see the results for many more years. Remember, our gummint doesn't work at warp speeds.

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    East Haddam , Connecticut
    Posts
    111

    Default

    They have been working on a replacement fuel, the problem is that the formulations to date will not give you 100% power due to knocking. And until they do come up with formulation that will not hurt or damage the current engines in service, you have about 13.5 billion dollars worth of aircraft that would be effected. This is not going to go anywhere. Gee's you just spent 600K for a Cirrus or the Corvallis and you don't have fuel for it, its not going to fly. Now RR is has got a turbine engine that will replace the IO-540 type engines, and you then burn Jet A. but its going to cost you about another 600K to go that route. Diesel Engines are something to look at, but, the current models have there own sets of problems. This is nothing but an EPA move. Nothing wrong with the current 100 LL. Other than just one refinery makes it and over all there is not a whole lot of it consumed when you look at total fuel consumption. I don't like car gas in airplanes, I had a 150 with the STC and I had a bunch of problems with that fuel. Then there is the ethanol they put in the car gas, At least in the lower 48, I drive a diesel while I lived in AK. They put ethanol in the car gas in Alaska these days? That junk mixes with water. And water in aircraft is not a good thing.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •