5 ms·

The problem with the 100LL phase-out is that you have over 70 years of engines and fuel systems designed to work with leaded fuel. In order to complete the pha

by s1dev 6y ago

The problem with the 100LL phase-out is that you have over 70 years of engines and fuel systems designed to work with leaded fuel. In order to complete the phase-out you either need to: force people to put a new $30K+ engine into a <$50K plane, totally replace the fuel system, and get a supplemental type certificate or: Require that the new fuel is a drop in replacement. One would have to show that the new fuel is 100% compatible with 100LL without modifications to the aircraft. The FAA has been attempting the second route for some years, but to date has not been terribly successful. The first route has been done successfully in other regions such as the EU, but I would suspect there is far less legacy general aviation aircraft. I personally look forward to the mainstream introduction of diesel engines into the US market that are able to run on Jet-A

manquer 6y ago
You have a sensible third option which is how automotive changed for the most part. Grandfather in current planes and mandate new models to use new fuel only. Over time, perhaps lot longer than cars(planes do have longer life) you will have changed all of them. Had they started it in 80's and 90's same time as auto-mobiles, most planes would have changed by now. Every industry faces the same challenges to transform technology, they are able to move forward without as much difficulty as aviation ?
- TylerE 6y ago
  No they wouldn't. You're underestimating the age of the fleet. The average GA aircraft is 50 years old, and that is likely to increase in the near-medium term as production of GA aircraft is practically zero. Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2007-01-10/faa-examine-aging-ga-aircraft-fleet#:~:text=The%20General%20Aviation%20Manufacturers%20Association,2020%2C%E2%80%9D%20noted%20the%20FAA https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/20.... (Cirrus, mentioned above, produces about 300 aircraft a year - compare to the 100,000+ Ceessnas on GA fields, almost all of which are over 40 years old.
  - manquer 6y ago
    1980 is 40 years ago now . In another 10 years half the fleet would have changed .. still better than we are now . You could also speed it up by making costlier to run older ones over time . Keeps the industry more active too..
    - TylerE 6y ago
      You're assuming production is constant - it isn't. It vastly dropped off in the early 80s due to increasing liability costs, and has never recovered.
      - _ph_ 6y ago
        Well, one factor would be, that people are happy to fly old planes. If due to the environment regulations, you would have to buy more new planes, demand and consequently production would increase.
        TylerE 6y ago
        That would have to be onerous regulation. The cost difference between new and used is truly immense. A new Cessna 172 starts at around $400,000, and that's before you start checking off things on the options list. Used can be as low as $20,000 for examples for the 1960s. If you thought depreciation on luxury cars was bad... The GA system is already frankly dieing due to ever increasing costs. Your suggestion would just kill it for good.
        HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
        I was working on my Private Pilot license in the mid-90's. I quit just around 40 hours with my only remaining required training maneuver being a Night cross country. I quit for pretty much the reasons you give: while I could have afforded to finish my license, I realized owning my own airplane would have been prohibitive. Sure, I could get a Cessna 152 for around $20k at the time, but then hangar fees, maintenance, insurance, etc. were far more than I could afford. There's a reason the average small plane owners at my airport drove Toyota rustbuckets with the bumper sticker "My other car is an airplane."
dreamcompiler 6y ago
> I personally look forward to the mainstream introduction of diesel engines into the US market that are able to run on Jet-A. Seconded. 50 years ago diesel engines were too heavy for light aircraft, but the weight problem with diesels has been solved.

by s1dev 6y ago

manquer 6y ago

You have a sensible third option which is how automotive changed for the most part. Grandfather in current planes and mandate new models to use new fuel only. Over time, perhaps lot longer than cars(planes do have longer life) you will have changed all of them. Had they started it in 80's and 90's same time as auto-mobiles, most planes would have changed by now. Every industry faces the same challenges to transform technology, they are able to move forward without as much difficulty as aviation ?

TylerE 6y ago
No they wouldn't. You're underestimating the age of the fleet. The average GA aircraft is 50 years old, and that is likely to increase in the near-medium term as production of GA aircraft is practically zero. Source: https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/2007-01-10/faa-examine-aging-ga-aircraft-fleet#:~:text=The%20General%20Aviation%20Manufacturers%20Association,2020%2C%E2%80%9D%20noted%20the%20FAA https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/business-aviation/20.... (Cirrus, mentioned above, produces about 300 aircraft a year - compare to the 100,000+ Ceessnas on GA fields, almost all of which are over 40 years old.
- manquer 6y ago
  1980 is 40 years ago now . In another 10 years half the fleet would have changed .. still better than we are now . You could also speed it up by making costlier to run older ones over time . Keeps the industry more active too..
  - TylerE 6y ago
    You're assuming production is constant - it isn't. It vastly dropped off in the early 80s due to increasing liability costs, and has never recovered.
    - _ph_ 6y ago
      Well, one factor would be, that people are happy to fly old planes. If due to the environment regulations, you would have to buy more new planes, demand and consequently production would increase.
      - TylerE 6y ago
        That would have to be onerous regulation. The cost difference between new and used is truly immense. A new Cessna 172 starts at around $400,000, and that's before you start checking off things on the options list. Used can be as low as $20,000 for examples for the 1960s. If you thought depreciation on luxury cars was bad... The GA system is already frankly dieing due to ever increasing costs. Your suggestion would just kill it for good.
        HeyLaughingBoy 6y ago
        I was working on my Private Pilot license in the mid-90's. I quit just around 40 hours with my only remaining required training maneuver being a Night cross country. I quit for pretty much the reasons you give: while I could have afforded to finish my license, I realized owning my own airplane would have been prohibitive. Sure, I could get a Cessna 152 for around $20k at the time, but then hangar fees, maintenance, insurance, etc. were far more than I could afford. There's a reason the average small plane owners at my airport drove Toyota rustbuckets with the bumper sticker "My other car is an airplane."

dreamcompiler 6y ago

> I personally look forward to the mainstream introduction of diesel engines into the US market that are able to run on Jet-A. Seconded. 50 years ago diesel engines were too heavy for light aircraft, but the weight problem with diesels has been solved.