4 ms·

Yes, everything you say is exactly why government action on this would've been appropriate as suggested by the comment I originally defended. Thousands of peop

by nawgz 5y ago

Yes, everything you say is exactly why government action on this would've been appropriate as suggested by the comment I originally defended. Thousands of people and organizations across aviation benefit in terms of retaining the ability to fly more cheaply. This is true across existing infrastructure, vehicles, engines, manufacturing, certification, etc.. Accordingly, it is clear that the industry will not change; "an object at rest"... Instead, because of government inaction on the topic, presumably because of aviation's ties with the military and wealthy folk in general, these thousands of people and organizations retain their benefit at the expense of everyone else. They simply spray poison from the air in a manner which seems, again, one of the most efficient ways to contaminate the environment with this poison. It is clearly not beneficial to anyone except those in the ingroup, which is a vast minority. Why would government action to force this stale industry be inappropriate?

p_l 5y ago
Except it's not that there was government inaction. The very article discussed is FAA making the rounds to cover 70% of powerplants used in general aviation, which isn't just joyriding for wealthy people (and military doesn't give a damn, cause they aren't bound by those limits). The actually wealthy people don't care either, because they can afford turbine engines. In fact despite somewhat higher price at source for G100UL, there's considerable possibility it will lead to cheaper operation thanks to lower maintenance impact compared with leaded fuel, and GAMI is hopeful about it being rated for full power usage even in place of other, even rarer fuels. There are various problems with just banning GA, no matter how wealthy suburbs would love to do it. From impacting training pipeline, to all kinds of operations that would be involved that you might not think of (whether it's connecting random communities in Alaska, where some cargo is still flown on WW2-vintage DC3s, to medical transports).
- nawgz 5y ago
  > Except it's not that there was government inaction. The very article discussed is FAA making the rounds to cover 70% of powerplants ... In the year 2021, over 50 years after the automotive industry had already invented engines which could run on unleaded fuels. I'm sorry, but this is an almost farcical point, "it's not government inaction it's just 50 years late!" > In fact despite somewhat higher price at source for G100UL, there's considerable possibility it will lead to cheaper operation thanks to lower maintenance impact compared with leaded fue Great, so the government could've forced industry's hand 50 years ago and the industry would probably be running for cheaper right now. This doubly shows the importance of government action on the topic - it would've been better for literally everyone in and out of aviation if the switch had been mandated. How about that for a story of inefficient markets? > There are various problems with just banning GA I work in aerospace, do not condescend to me on the topic. The point is that 50 years of inaction results in cases where, like in East San Jose, "2.5 percent of children under 6 years old who were tested had detectable levels of lead in their blood"[0]. "GA" clearly could and should have dealt with the issue of poisoning the masses for their own ends, and the fact you would defend them and the government for not stepping in in such circumstances makes you a fool. [0]: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-was-phased-out-25-years-ago-why-are-n1264970 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-wa...

by nawgz 5y ago

p_l 5y ago

Except it's not that there was government inaction. The very article discussed is FAA making the rounds to cover 70% of powerplants used in general aviation, which isn't just joyriding for wealthy people (and military doesn't give a damn, cause they aren't bound by those limits). The actually wealthy people don't care either, because they can afford turbine engines. In fact despite somewhat higher price at source for G100UL, there's considerable possibility it will lead to cheaper operation thanks to lower maintenance impact compared with leaded fuel, and GAMI is hopeful about it being rated for full power usage even in place of other, even rarer fuels. There are various problems with just banning GA, no matter how wealthy suburbs would love to do it. From impacting training pipeline, to all kinds of operations that would be involved that you might not think of (whether it's connecting random communities in Alaska, where some cargo is still flown on WW2-vintage DC3s, to medical transports).

nawgz 5y ago
> Except it's not that there was government inaction. The very article discussed is FAA making the rounds to cover 70% of powerplants ... In the year 2021, over 50 years after the automotive industry had already invented engines which could run on unleaded fuels. I'm sorry, but this is an almost farcical point, "it's not government inaction it's just 50 years late!" > In fact despite somewhat higher price at source for G100UL, there's considerable possibility it will lead to cheaper operation thanks to lower maintenance impact compared with leaded fue Great, so the government could've forced industry's hand 50 years ago and the industry would probably be running for cheaper right now. This doubly shows the importance of government action on the topic - it would've been better for literally everyone in and out of aviation if the switch had been mandated. How about that for a story of inefficient markets? > There are various problems with just banning GA I work in aerospace, do not condescend to me on the topic. The point is that 50 years of inaction results in cases where, like in East San Jose, "2.5 percent of children under 6 years old who were tested had detectable levels of lead in their blood"[0]. "GA" clearly could and should have dealt with the issue of poisoning the masses for their own ends, and the fact you would defend them and the government for not stepping in in such circumstances makes you a fool. [0]: https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-was-phased-out-25-years-ago-why-are-n1264970 https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/leaded-gas-wa...