Aircraft owners/operators based at either KRHV or San Martin Airport (E18), who purchase the GAMI STC before midnight November 1, will receive a full refund for the STC cost. On top of that, GAMI will sponsor a licensed aviation technician with Inspection Authorization (IA) onsite at KRHV on Saturday, November 2, to sign off the FAA-required Form 337 for the STC at no charge to the aircraft owners. They must appear in person at the G100UL rollout ceremony that day from 9:00 am to 6:00 pm local time.
This is GREAT!! Thank you GAMI! Very smart move. I’m rooting for you, and the replacement of leaded fuel. Your years of hard work are a benefit to the whole piston GA community. Thank you!!
“GAMI has not forgotten those “early adopters” who have already bought and paid for their STC. They will receive a credit voucher for 50 gallons of G100UL avgas at KRHV. “The voucher must be used by November 23, 2024,” according to GAMI.”
Over a decade ago, a group of volunteers including me helped this airport find a supplier of Mogas and a low-cost fuel system. We determined that over 70% of all piston aircraft based there could have operated with Mogas under STCs or they had modern engines (Rotax) that are designed to operate best on mogas. The airport management killed the idea. It could have saved pilots a fortune in fuel costs and kept the enviros at bay. Perhaps the solution was too simple and actually had the interests of sport aviation in mind. No wonder so many owners of light aircraft are moving away from government-owned airfields onto private, and self-fueling these days.
At Swift Fuels, our $100 STC for aircraft using our unleaded avgas at KRHV is backed up by an ASTM International aviation gasoline fuel specification. Our fuel is also backed up by a $50 million product liability insurance policy for all our fuel sold and used at all US airports and customer sites. These factors are interrelated. The standards and quality of the fuel, the measures taken by all the industry participants to handle it properly, and the insurance / risk management industry all back-up our unleaded fuel products before the fuel enters the commercial marketplace. Furthermore, at “branded” airports nationwide, our insurance may be coupled with large well-known “branded” fuel distributor’s insurance policy who collaborate with us. However, at Reid Hillview there is no longer a branded fuel distributor in place. In effect, the Santa Clara County Airport Commission has basically assumed that role. Compared to many airports in California, the Reid Hillview arrangement is an anomaly. Nevertheless, to support our avgas customers at KRHV, Swift Fuels continues to carry our AM-Best rated $50 million product liability insurance for the airfield’s use of our proprietary unleaded fuel.
Also be advised, Swift Fuel’s risk management policies impose stipulations that do not allow intermixing our industry approved fuels with any fuel product that contains aromatic amines. G100UL reportedly contains between 2% to 7% (weight) meta-toluidine, known to be an aggressive solvent.
Swift Fuels will not indemnify any claims that stem from the use of, or intermixing of, any aromatic amines with our fuel. The Santa Clara County Airport Commission and our airport customers across California are aware of these stipulations of use.
The tank sealant issue when mixed with G100UL that came to light in certain aircraft fuel tanks several months ago - as reported by GAMI/Tylor Hall - is an incident which triggered compatibility concerns, and I believe has since led to the Cirrus SA24-14 advisory.
The bladder/wing tank leak and subsequent paint staining / stripping issue from using G100UL as reported by GAMI on the Baron flown by AOPA to Oshkosh in July ’24 has led to further industry concerns.
I believe incidents such as these are likely to continue from the use of G100UL until such time as proper fuel testing has been vetted by the broader industry.
As described herein, unapproved intermixing of aromatic amines with Swift Fuels’ products that lead to a tort or contractual claim – now or in the future – are likely the liability of the aircraft owner.
For all the complainers that are not based at Reid Hillview or San Martin Airport claiming that giving away an STC isn’t fair, come back to me when your tyrannical county government bans 100LL fuel, leaving you with no fuel options. This is a miracle for those of us with engines that need higher octane.
It would be smart of GAMI to continue to offer these types of incentives when their fuel is introduced in a new region. I have no relationship with them, but they are in the product/market promotion business now, perhaps more so than in the past…
Chris, you are rapidly losing ALL credibility from us owner / pilots! You’re continuing spreading false rumors and blatant self-serving warnings about G100UL is part of the disgusting mob preventing solutions to 100LL. Hiding behind the charade of “ASTM certification” which Avweb has repeatedly ridiculed as an attempt by industry to pick the winner and then warning about the AOPA Baron bladders, which has subsequently being refutted, and stating your own self-serving “Swift Fuel risk management policies do not allow intermixing” hahaha - all of this makes you look like a fool or someone who believes that pilots / owners are stupid on this issue. Fortunately, this time you actually stated your role in your post - CEO, Swift Fuel.
After following your writings and positions for the past year, I will NEVER be a Swift Fuel customer. How about you stop your BS and actually help promote acceptable UL solutions to those of us that have 300+hp piston engines. And if you believe you have a solution, then focus on why your fuel is best.
There was a big announcement made from AvFuel back when G100UL got the first STC that they would “…providing its distribution expertise for the engineering company’s high-octane unleaded avgas: G100UL…” Why aren’t they shipping this stuff around? Why is GAMI having problems getting G100UL shipped?
AvFuel doesn’t control the shipping infrastructure. If the shipping infrastructure is threatened by more powerful interests…those interests will prevail.
If Santa Clara County is the distributor, doesn’t that mean that effectively the taxpayers of Santa Clara County are insuring things? The county’s GDP is like $400Bn…I think they’re good for it.
Art, thanks for pointing out the that KRHV is about 2000 miles from NC. Keith missed that item in his post. I get it that GAMI is focused on California right now because that’s where all the pressure to drop 100LL is coming from. And I get that there’s a lot of work that needs to be done with fuel suppliers other than AVFuel. Titan is the main supplier in my area. My post was just a plea to GAMI not to forget us early adopters on the other side of the country when they offer incentives like this. I would love to see them remove the STC requirement and offer G100UL to all piston aircraft. That would greatly accelerate its adoption. I read about the AOPA aircraft issues that Chris raised but it was determined that there was a leak in the bladder tank not caused by G100UL. It’s troubling that Lycoming (my engine manufacturer) hasn’t come out with an okay to use G100UL but I understand that this is all tied up in politics and economics, not science.
Kent, I’ve run into exactly this problem at my based airport. When I moved in 2008, they had a mogas tank but the FBO, with the airport management’s blessing, elected to discontinue it. I had been based at a small grass strip before this and we had a small mogas fuel farm for the 8 aircraft based there, coop style. My current base refused to reconsider, even though most of the aircraft could and did use it. The new FBO even protested (and is still trying to hobble us) when we brought our own mogas to the field. The FBO’s recalcitrance will bring up an interesting quandry for them when someone from the very liberal town nearby brings up Pb in the fuel issue. So far it hasn’t happened yet, but it will.
Andrew, We just got Titan at my base in southern Indiana only 100LL and I don’t like burning it because my engine is cold blooded and fouls the lower plugs. I just put the ElectoAire ignition system in it and that has helped when I’m forced into 100LL and saves a bunch of fuel to boot.
Like you, I hope that GAMI or whomever doesn’t forget about the outposts when all the mainstreams have their respective fuels, but out in the sticks we have a way of being forgotten.
I agree that the STC issue is a big one. I had fuel bladder leaks too, but then they were OEM and 20 years old when I bought the airplane and run on nothing but AVGAS 80. The new tanks have been in for 34 years without an issue on mostly mogas. No leaks.
In the fuel debate, there appears to be little but politics, economics, innuendo and the like. Much like the mogas criticism I used to get in the '90s when the red juice went away. Half the mechanics I used swore by it, the other half at it.
We know of cases where the established Avgas suppliers, in particular Titan and AVFuel, have threatened FBOs to pull supply of Avgas if they brought mogas onto the field. In some cases, they claimed mogas was not a legal fuel, preying on the ignorance of airport managers. Another bogus argument against it was the lack of ethanol-free fuel, which is total nonsense. Pure-Gas.org shows tens of thousands of sellers. All fuel terminals have ethanol-free gasoline since ethanol may not be pumped through underground pipelines due to it being highly corrosive. Then there is the argument of the expense of a 3rd fuel tank, also baloney, since there are many low-cost systems available, see Ufuel.com. Airports could also welcome private investors to install and operate the system, in exchange for a cut of the revenue. Until any of this happens, more aircraft owners will self-fuel, meaning airports will collect exactly zero in aviation fuel taxes. Better yet for pilots, in some states such as mine (NC), the department of revenue will reimburse you 100% of state highway fuel taxes for mogas purchased for an airplane. In NC, all I have to do is fill out a single page form. They do not even require to see receipts, which I keep of course in case of an audit. There are a lot of very stupid people in the aviation industry. Sport Aircraft owners however will do what it takes to keep things affordable, and no airport can stop this. With a few acres of cleared land, nearly anyone can make his own airfield.