I find this topic fascinating, and thank you, Russ, for letting us know - you may post something that I find uninteresting some day, and I’ll quietly click past it, and wait for tomorrow’s news.
I didn’t realize G100UL doesn’t require grounding the nozzle to the aircraft filler port when dispensing. That’s an awesome safety feature! They must have a proprietary anti static formula.
Being the first to adopt something new with a lot of unanswered questions and possibly expensive liabilities is daunting, but as soon as one or two jump in, the rest will follow. It looks like GAMI may have finally managed to break thru. Hopefully we will see it popping up all over the country and begin to have a large number of real world testers. I still don’t have a dog in this fight, but I look forward to seeing the contenders well-vetted.
We appreciate the reporting and are investigating ways to get unleaded 100 at our airport.
I’m not “excited” about paying more for 100 octane fuel (that my O-320 does not require). For the love of all that is holy quit pushing the one-fuel-fits-all for GA.
GA is dying on the vine. Forcing (yet again) a higher priced fuel is not a solution. Well, it’s a solution to further handicap the roots of GA.
1 reply
The other local airports are selling UL94 for $7.60 and 100LL for $6.20.
So I’d expect that the G100UL will be more costly. ?
I just called Watsonville Airport and they indicated it will be $6.75/gallon and self service only (at least for now) - versus 100LL which is $6.25 and $6.75 for self serve and full serve respectively. I don’t know if that is introductory pricing.
Free STC is neat, hope it’s gonna be a part of their campaign everywhere.
This 100 UL fiasco has literally been going on for decades with no drop in solution as has been promised for decades. So a couple of airports somehow now have 100UL is nothing short of a yawner which is a major understatement. I fail to see the excitement of any announcement regarding 100UL. Like I have said many times in the past, the current status of 100UL is joke. Not until there is 100% universal availability will I even think about getting excited. Someone once said, “the thrill is gone.”
1 reply
The full national roll-out will likely take several years - but it’s got to start somewhere. I imagine many FBOs are waiting to see if any issues pop up before they will consider moving forward, plus the status quo is almost always easier.
Then don’t buy it, and start campaigning FBOs to install a second avgas tank with whatever fuel you would prefer.
Any replacement fuel is initially going to cost more. Even UL94, which supposedly is 100LL without the lead is more. It’s all about volume. If enough places start selling enough of it, prices will come down (though even GAMI admits it will still cost more than 100LL). But it does also have a higher energy content per gallon than 100LL, which can either mean slightly more power or slightly more range, and no more lead fouling and longer oil change intervals, so if prices come down enough, it could balance out in the end.
In my opinion, the second airport adoptiing it was more important than the first because it suggests market acceptance. I doubt we’ll do any more California announcements but the first one outside of California will probably get a mention. I’ve written myself a reminder to tell you when it gets to Ohio:)
1 reply
Russ,
For those of us flying in California, I would like to know when an unleaded fuel is available at other airports here. The aviation websites are slow to update their fuel information.
It’s most important if an unleaded fuel is replacing 100LL.!!
JimH at Yuba County Airport, KMYV.
1 reply
KCGF please … KCGF …
Not really our role, Jim, but I’ll mention it to the fuel companies. Swift won’t be available for awhile but GAMI/Vitol apparently have lots of irons in the fire.
Russ,
I understand, and I appreciate all the reporting that you and Avweb do on the fuels issue.
Regards,
JimH.