4 ms·

We're near a small airport and I think of this every time they fly over (which is quite frequently). Essentially hobby aviation is completely stuck in the 1970

We're near a small airport and I think of this every time they fly over (which is quite frequently). Essentially hobby aviation is completely stuck in the 1970s and getting the engines modernized would be "cost prohibitive". Since wealthy people still want to play around in planes they get to rain lead on our heads.

base698 5y ago
Unless you live on the airport in a hangar it's not going to be in concentrations high enough to worry about. The wealthy are in jets or turbo props which don't use leaded gas.
londons_explore 5y ago
If I were in government, I would tax avgas at $100/gallon this year, $1000/gallon next year, and $10,000/gallon the year after. Then the super-rich can continue to fly, paying the nation for the economic and health effects they're causing, but regular hobbyists will have to ground their planes till unleaded avgas is available. Should be easy-ish to enforce, because planes and flight plans are registered, and anyone paying no tax and flying a lot ought to be easy to catch.
- andrepd 5y ago
  Why not phase-out completely then, rather than allow a few thousands to buy an exception?
- outworlder 5y ago
  Good thing you are not in the government. 'Hobbyists' have been waiting for lead free avgas for decades. You should just crush their planes while you are at it. While the super rich do whatever they want? By the way, if you are super-rich, you are probably burning Jet-A anyway, not AVGAS. The real fix is to just issue the damn regulation and provide some incentives. Engines have to be overhauled and replaced periodically anyways. Make it easier to recertify aircraft, provide a path for aircraft that no longer have the original manufacturer around. Give incentives for small airports to stock on whatever the proposed avgas replacement is until the demand catches up. > flight plans are registered No they aren't. No requirement for flight plans in VFR. If you are proposing such harsh legislation, you should at least try to learn something about the subject matter.
  - kloch 5y ago
    The real fix is better battery technology
    - outworlder 5y ago
      Indeed. Electric engines would be outstanding. Cheaper to buy and maintain, no 'turbocharger' shenanigans to fly at high altitudes, more reliable, less noisy.
- bluejellybean 5y ago
  As a side effect, this would completely destroy the pipeline for commercial aviation (think big jet) pilots. Pretty much everyone starts on small crafts and then proceeds to burn hundreds of hours of avfuel in the process of getting to their commercial licenses. Considering the scale and importance of the aviation sector, as well as the ongoing shortage of trained pilots in the field today, the results of your policy would be catastrophic. The industry is rapidly trying to move to do two things, 1. remove lead from the fuel, this is noted by other commenters. And 2. Pushing for more electric GA. Pilots don't exactly like getting their hands covered in lead when they check fuel, much less dumping it into the atmosphere when they fly, but it's still an unfortunate fact of life. Times are absolutely changing though, and the future looks bright.
  - outworlder 5y ago
    > Pilots don't exactly like getting their hands covered in lead when they check fuel, Or having their spark plugs fouled by the same lead.
  - Scoundreller 5y ago
    North America has gotten off easy by pushing the training onto pilots themselves. If banning leaded gas leads to qualified pilot shortage, the industry only has itself to blame for failing to train the people it needs. Lufthansa at least (and maybe most big euro flag carriers?) runs its own “ab initio” training, where it takes non-pilots and makes them into pilots with a job. Lufthansa has warned cadets they won’t need to hire for a few years: https://www.businessinsider.com/in-crisis-lufthansa-restructures-pilot-training-loss-coronavirus-flight-training-2021-3?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/in-crisis-lufthansa-restruct... Not sure if there’s a shortage of skilled pilots today as flight counts are still down like 20% in USA vs 2019, and generally a sharper decline elsewhere.
    - Eugr 5y ago
      ... and one of the biggest Lufthansa training facilities is in Arizona, where they train in 100LL burning Cirri (used to be Beech Bonanzas).
jeffbee 5y ago
The 1970s would be a great leap forward for civil aviation. The widespread aircraft that are only certified to run on leaded fuel are all derivatives of World War 2 designs. The engine of a Cessna 172 has been in continuous production since 1955 and has parts that are interchangeable with engines back to 1939.
FearlessNebula 5y ago
It’s not just wealthy people, it’s predominantly student pilots. Wealthy pilots are burning diesel or Jet A in newer luxury planes like the Cirrus Vision.
- gengelbro 5y ago
  I've seen this asserted elsewhere, but I'm wondering what evidence exists that flight hours on leaded planes are _predominately_ due to student pilots?

base698 5y ago

Unless you live on the airport in a hangar it's not going to be in concentrations high enough to worry about. The wealthy are in jets or turbo props which don't use leaded gas.

londons_explore 5y ago

If I were in government, I would tax avgas at $100/gallon this year, $1000/gallon next year, and $10,000/gallon the year after. Then the super-rich can continue to fly, paying the nation for the economic and health effects they're causing, but regular hobbyists will have to ground their planes till unleaded avgas is available. Should be easy-ish to enforce, because planes and flight plans are registered, and anyone paying no tax and flying a lot ought to be easy to catch.

andrepd 5y ago
Why not phase-out completely then, rather than allow a few thousands to buy an exception?
outworlder 5y ago
Good thing you are not in the government. 'Hobbyists' have been waiting for lead free avgas for decades. You should just crush their planes while you are at it. While the super rich do whatever they want? By the way, if you are super-rich, you are probably burning Jet-A anyway, not AVGAS. The real fix is to just issue the damn regulation and provide some incentives. Engines have to be overhauled and replaced periodically anyways. Make it easier to recertify aircraft, provide a path for aircraft that no longer have the original manufacturer around. Give incentives for small airports to stock on whatever the proposed avgas replacement is until the demand catches up. > flight plans are registered No they aren't. No requirement for flight plans in VFR. If you are proposing such harsh legislation, you should at least try to learn something about the subject matter.
- kloch 5y ago
  The real fix is better battery technology
  - outworlder 5y ago
    Indeed. Electric engines would be outstanding. Cheaper to buy and maintain, no 'turbocharger' shenanigans to fly at high altitudes, more reliable, less noisy.
bluejellybean 5y ago
As a side effect, this would completely destroy the pipeline for commercial aviation (think big jet) pilots. Pretty much everyone starts on small crafts and then proceeds to burn hundreds of hours of avfuel in the process of getting to their commercial licenses. Considering the scale and importance of the aviation sector, as well as the ongoing shortage of trained pilots in the field today, the results of your policy would be catastrophic. The industry is rapidly trying to move to do two things, 1. remove lead from the fuel, this is noted by other commenters. And 2. Pushing for more electric GA. Pilots don't exactly like getting their hands covered in lead when they check fuel, much less dumping it into the atmosphere when they fly, but it's still an unfortunate fact of life. Times are absolutely changing though, and the future looks bright.
- outworlder 5y ago
  > Pilots don't exactly like getting their hands covered in lead when they check fuel, Or having their spark plugs fouled by the same lead.
- Scoundreller 5y ago
  North America has gotten off easy by pushing the training onto pilots themselves. If banning leaded gas leads to qualified pilot shortage, the industry only has itself to blame for failing to train the people it needs. Lufthansa at least (and maybe most big euro flag carriers?) runs its own “ab initio” training, where it takes non-pilots and makes them into pilots with a job. Lufthansa has warned cadets they won’t need to hire for a few years: https://www.businessinsider.com/in-crisis-lufthansa-restructures-pilot-training-loss-coronavirus-flight-training-2021-3?IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/in-crisis-lufthansa-restruct... Not sure if there’s a shortage of skilled pilots today as flight counts are still down like 20% in USA vs 2019, and generally a sharper decline elsewhere.
  - Eugr 5y ago
    ... and one of the biggest Lufthansa training facilities is in Arizona, where they train in 100LL burning Cirri (used to be Beech Bonanzas).

jeffbee 5y ago

The 1970s would be a great leap forward for civil aviation. The widespread aircraft that are only certified to run on leaded fuel are all derivatives of World War 2 designs. The engine of a Cessna 172 has been in continuous production since 1955 and has parts that are interchangeable with engines back to 1939.

FearlessNebula 5y ago

It’s not just wealthy people, it’s predominantly student pilots. Wealthy pilots are burning diesel or Jet A in newer luxury planes like the Cirrus Vision.

gengelbro 5y ago
I've seen this asserted elsewhere, but I'm wondering what evidence exists that flight hours on leaded planes are _predominately_ due to student pilots?