Representatives of the Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions (EAGLE) initiative visited Alaska recently to gain a better understanding of the unique circumstances faced by operators and fuel distributors in the far-flung state. Piston aircraft (about 7,000 in total) are a lifeline for many communities and individuals in Alaska and the state has the highest per capita use of general aviation in the U.S. so EAGLE says its members heard that a smooth transition to a thoroughly vetted unleaded fuel is vital.
Thatās News - Swift has submitted its fuel to ASTM committee, while it promotes its STC route.
Last I heard, Swift had listed problems with ASTMās standard.
Is it now challenging ASTM to change the standard?
I remind you of serious problems with ASTM āconsensusā committees, from my own experience - as Iāve related in this forum.
Including companies trying to shut innovations out.
Very costly to participate, Swift has other products to help pay the time and travel, perhaps GAMI can fund from sales of its product, delaying payback to George for his time spent inventing a no-lead fuel.
Alright, Keith. You win. Lets replace mules with traveling on foot. It has been done before and since we are well on our way into the past on almost everything else, why not.
It amazes me to see an industry, which has willingly abandoned development of more efficient and environmentally less impactful engines for almost 5 decades try to wind its way out of whats coming.
The thing with consensus standards is that they sound great on paper - the ultimate in ādemocratic governanceā, where everyone involved comes together to agree upon a standard.
Unfortunately, those same processes that are supposed to allow for innovation can also be used to block newcomers from entering the field. This can be accomplished in many ways, such as āagreeingā to unnecessary and burdensome tests that small newcomers might not be able to afford, or an unwillingness to change some processes because āthatās how itās always been doneā.
Mules are special, they arenāt fertile, only created by convincing a female donkey to put up with a male horse. So population is small. They are popular in the dry SW US.
Horses are readily available, but in winter sled dogs may be better - horses are vulnerable to uneven ground under the snow. Of course today the snowmobile is common, but few run on diesel/JetA - the Canadian Military now has a few.
(Being complete I should say āJetAā as there is a more volatile āJetBā which the Canadian military once used in the Arctic, but is less safe. JetA is close to kerosene.)
The Alaska market is probably sizeable as Alaskans are very dependent on aviation, but I doubt as large as California with far greater population (740,133 compared to San Francisco alone of 873,965, ).
Most places in AK want avgas, jet fuel for helos and large fixed wing like Cessna Caravan, and heating oil. Stationary, marine, and automotive diesels can run on jet fuel especially as thin fuel is needed in winter. Heating oil may be closer to summer diesel. (In the High Arctic only one heavy transportation fuel may be brought in and used for stationary, trucks, and aircraft.) And thereās propane, commonly used for heating buildings.
I re-read it three times, looking for any typos, ambiguities, or contradictions. Couldnāt find any.
What parts do you find to be garbled or nonsensical? Can you quote the offending passages? If so, Iād be happy to edit the Wiki article in order to eschew obfuscation.
Why does a couple people in Anchorage think they can speak for the operators throughout the whole state of Alaska?
Alaskans are VERY Resourceful. They will continue to deliver people and products safely with or without the governmentās media releases pushing an anti-GAMI narrative.
EAS is already pushing operators into turbines. High compression piston engines will just go away. Get Over Itā¦ Move On.
