Ad-Hoc Meeting Called At Cirrus Migration 8 To Discuss 100LL Replacement

The Cirrus Migration 8, in Dayton, OH offered a convenient place and opportunity for a quickly organized meeting of many of the prominent Pilot/Owner Associations, Aviation manufacturers and trade associations to discuss the path to a future transition from 100 low-lead avgas to some yet-to-be determined lead-free alternative. This meeting was unprecedented in that never before has such a wideranging group of owner advocacy groups and aviation manufacturers gathered to voice their concerns and represent owner/pilots interests on such a fundamental and critical issue such as fuel.

Interest in this issue has exploded in recent weeks after Teledyne Continental Motors released a statement interpreted by many as endorsing 94UL (basically 100LL without the tetraethyl lead additive resulting in 94-octane avgas) as a likely candidate for an unleaded fuel. Following TCM’s announcement, a large number of owner/pilots began to realize that such a solution would not work for operators of higher performance/output engines. While these operators represent about 30% of the general aviation piston fleet, they consume about 70% of the fuel. Curt Sanford of COPA, noted that selection of the wrong fuel (sub 100 octane) would kill about 70% of the GA economy as well – fuel sales, FBO services, maintenance, aircraft values, etc. The resulting devastation of the GA support infrastructure would in turn adversely impact even those aircraft owners whose engines could operate on a lower octane fuel. Also prior to this meeting, AOPA President Craig Fuller had released a statement on the 100LL replacement issue, that the owner groups found encouraging: “The new fuel must operate safely in high-compression and turbocharged engines, and it has to be manufactured, distributed, and sold at a realistic price.” However, the same statement included some ambiguity because in one sentence it included 94UL as one of “several promising unleaded alternatives…”

A report to the Malibu-Mirage Owners and Pilots Association forwarded to ANN indicated that the Future of Avgas Strategy & Transition, or FAST, committee has been working to build consensus among its wide-ranging members on the process and form the 100LL replacement should take. They have done an excellent job of documenting the situation and providing a framework and boundaries for a solution. From the presentations, it became apparent that not only in the transition inevitable, but that the very small relative market that aviation gasoline represents (0.1% of all transportation fuel) will dictate only one unleaded fuel solution, not multiple grades. A dual-fuel approach is not viable. This conclusion is re-enforced by the fact that there is typically only one tank for Avgas at the airport.

The most desirable replacement for 100LL would be transparent in operation for all GA piston aircraft without significant modification, reduction in power output, or more restrictive operating limitations. Realities concerning a transition period would also dictate that the fuel will need to co-mingle with 100LL in both aircraft operation and distribution infrastructure during a transition period.

ASTM’s Coordinating Research Council Unleaded Avgas Group(CRC) has tested more than 200 fuel blends over the past 20 years, looking for a high-octane unleaded alternative. Those that demonstrated adequate detonation resistance were tested further to analyze other fuel properties as defined by the ASTM’s D910 specification for 100LL avgas. Of course, the assumption is that the required innovation can be found within the constraints of the D910 spec, and after looking for it within or near the D910 spec for 20 years, it seems far more likely that the solution will probably be found elsewhere and that an earnest effort outside of the constraints of the D910 spec has not yet been conducted.

Jonathan Sisk, President MMOPA Board of Directors, who shared the document with ANN, said it was his observation that it is most likely that the true solution to a 100LL replacement is going to come from a small innovator rather than a large company. It is problematic that the FAA has so far not been responsive at the ACO or directorate level in allowing GAMI’s STC application to demonstrate compliance with the FAA regulations in the turbo-normalized Cirrus SR22. The FAA has a long standing advisory circular that fully describes in three pages what must be done to qualify a new fuel (AC 20-24B). It would appear that despite the regulatory authority to approve or deny the applicant’s STC based on substantiating testing, the FAA institutionally prefers to outsource the decision making to the ASTM and avoid the issue.

Sisk said the groups requested that AOPA direct its considerable lobbying and advocacy efforts toward influencing the FAA Administrator to, at a minimum, instruct its certification management personnel on the importance of this issue and remove any barriers to any applicant desiring to gain approval of an unleaded high-octane fuel through the STC process.

The groups attending said they plan to re-convene for a follow-up meeting next month at AirVenture in Oshkosh.

FMI: www.mmopa.com