The co-chair of the Eliminate Aviation Gasoline Lead Emissions (EAGLE) is reminding fuel handlers at Reid-Hillview Airport in San José, California to guard against misfueling aircraft now that they have a new product to sell. Reid-Hillview has become the first airport to offer GAMI's G100UL unleaded avgas for sale and Curt Castagna, speaking as the president of the National Air Transportation Association, which represents fuel distributors and sellers, says it poses additional risks for which NATA offers prevention training. What follows is Castagna's full statement.
This is why i fuel up the aircraft i fly manually. However, i cannot be responsible if someone beforehand put the wrong fuel in the airports on-site tanks.
A fuel tester may or may not pick up the color difference, depending on how much was mixed.
I always do my own fueling, because of possible errors by employees.
BUT; this bit of nonsense is just nonsense!
The GAMI is undoubtedly a superior fuel, who would want to mix it with 100"LL"?
However, it is compatible with 100LL.
So; no hazard is present in the case of mixing. (except less life for your engine)
Well, it is good in general to caution flyers about putting wrong type of fuel into aircraft, BUT…
What is the other fuel being dispensed at that airport?
Putting kerosene into a piston-engined airplane may be fatal. (Aviation kerosene - JetA.)
Most helicopters have turbine engines, perhaps fewer of them at a small airport where R22s and such may operate.
Mis-fuelling of similar looking aircraft might occur, I’d especially watch R44 vs R46 helicopters. Large placards needed. (I’m not up on nozzle-socket sizes.)
But if the airport in question here provided only 100LL avgas and is adding G100UL avgas is NATA’s message worthwhile? If not it should be addressing airports where there is a mix of octanes and fundamental types of fuel.
I’m waiting for the TSB of Canada to produce substantive information from its investigation of the crash of a BAE Jetstream at Fort Smith NWT in January 2024.
The turbine-powered airplane lost height soon after liftoff and crashed hard.
TSB says there is video of the fuelling but does not say what fuel was normally in the specific above ground tank, nor if a fuel sample was obtained from the wreckage. (Jet A would be popular there in the Arctic.)
Airplane was in hanger, snow falling after taken out to prep for flight, wings checked by more than one person. (Temperature was well below freezing.)
NATA’s guidance does point to Diesel Exhaust Fluid as a serious risk that has been realized several times - mistaken for fuel icing inhibitor additive.
DEF is used in many diesel automotive engines these days.
At least for now, G100UL will only be dispensed from a dedicated county truck at Reid Hillview by a county employee, so risks are small, though it is a legal issue of fuel dispensed into plane without GAMI STC. And if that should occur and pilot does something dumb, then here come the lawyers… Will be interested to see if there is follow-up press release to announce how many STC’s sold for free at RHV this weekend, with included free 337 signoff and free gas.
Wow, talk about saber rattaling! You can mis-fuel my piston aircraft any day of the week with G100UL, the only thing I would at risk for is a STC violation….my airplane won’t care!!
Now keep Jet-A away from my plane, that would be true mis-fueling!!
In the days of 80/87 and 100/130, a mix was supposed to be a black tint. Since 100LL took over the blue color of 90/96, and the new UL fuels are purple for the 96UL if I remember correctly (I don’t know about 100UL), are the mixed fuels still a black tint?
*It can be mixed in any percentage with 100LL, so if a pilot wants to top off a fuel tank that already has 100LL with G100UL, there will be no problem. “The fuel in the plane will still retain its spec and integrity and there will be no degradation in performance,” Roehl said.
( George Braly and Tim Roehl -owners of General Aviation Modifications Inc. (GAMI)
I believe the only avgas with a compatibility issue is the 94UL ( cant be mixed with G100UL) and the new swift G100R, their version of high octane unleaded
It seems worthy of each and EVERY 100UL supplier provide every aircraft owner fueled with the ‘new fuel’ a simple chart that identifies compatability of their formulation with every! existing current fuel. It should be a requirement for marketing new fuels to update a clear, simple, easily read compatabily matrix.
It MUST NOT!!! be the responsibility of each individual pilot to determine the compatability of new fuels as they come on the market.
You all realize this fuel will make an awesome auto fuel. The higher octane should allow the modern computer equiped cars to run really far lean of peak on highway, i think increasing mpg by probably 15%
Also good for warbirds because they can go back to running higher manifold pressures.
Creating this hype over 100 UL Fuel is seriously ridiculous. This is a fuel that you can put in any airplane accidentally and there would be no accident. You could even put it in a jet powered airplane and it would work. No accident would follow, but if you misfuled by putting jet fuel in your piston powered airplane it would probably result in a catastrophic incident.