Matronics Email Lists :: View topic - Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists

Get Email Distribution Too! FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Register

Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)
Goto page 1, 2 Next

Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author Message

robin1(at)mrmoisture.com
Guest

Posted: Thu Nov 29, 2007 11:14 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Kelly, Deem,  

You can categorize this under too little too late but I negotiated with my engine builder to run my engine a total of 3 hours on the dyno instead of their standard 1.5 hours. I did this BEFORE I sent in my deposit for the engine. I originally thought we agreed on 4 hours but my contract said 3 so I asked if they could run it another hour since it was still on the stand. They said sure… for $500/hour. Nice… As an FYI when initially talking to the major builders Aerosport offered at my request to run the engine for up to 10 hours in house. Their cost… Fuel & Oil only.  

I wanted the builder to run the engine a bit extra to give the people that know the most about this beast the opportunity to properly operate the engine in a controlled environment. I have never thought it was a good idea to take an airframe that has barely left the hangar let alone left the ground to the end of the runway and fly it full throttle the very first time. Think of how many things could go wrong even in an expertly built aircraft.   

I hope with the added bench time the most critical phase of the break in will be professionally handled allowing us to perform normal taxi, high speed taxi and other ground testing without fear of damaging this engine.  

   

Robin  

Technically 3 hours to date.  

   

Do Not Archive  

   

      [quote][b]

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:33 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

That is definitely one of the solutions I had in mind. I'd think 3 hours

would be the bare minimum to get the rings somewhat seated. I suppose doing

high speed taxi tests where the engine got a few bursts of power, then was

shut down immediately might be OK, as an alternative, with full cowling in

place. Deems, I know you would not get adequate cooling without the cooling

and some forward motion.



On Nov 30, 2007 12:13 AM, Robin Marks <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com> wrote:



[quote]  Kelly, Deem,



 You can categorize this under too little too late but I negotiated with my

 engine builder to run my engine a total of 3 hours on the dyno instead of

 their standard 1.5 hours. I did this BEFORE I sent in my deposit for the

 engine. I originally thought we agreed on 4 hours but my contract said 3 so

 I asked if they could run it another hour since it was still on the stand

Deems Davis

Joined: 09 Jan 2006
Posts: 925

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:20 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

So how do the engine builders cool the engines when they run them on 

their test stands for prolonged periods? The  BPE dyno is inside IIRC, 

and I recall numerous pictures of engine 'test cells' where the engine 

is mounted on a trailer or the back of a truck. I'm not trying to be 

argumentative, just trying to learn and understand. I think I'll give 

Rhonda/Allen a shout and see if they've got any suggestions. Anybody 

know how Aerosport does their test runs?



Deems



Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   That is definitely one of the solutions I had in mind. I'd think 3 

 hours would be the bare minimum to get the rings somewhat seated. I 

 suppose doing high speed taxi tests where the engine got a few bursts 

 of power, then was shut down immediately might be OK, as an 

 alternative, with full cowling in place. Deems, I know you would not 

 get adequate cooling without the cooling and some forward motion.



 On Nov 30, 2007 12:13 AM, Robin Marks <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com 

 <mailto:robin1(at)mrmoisture.com>> wrote:



     Kelly, Deem,



     You can categorize this under too little too late but I negotiated

     with my engine builder to run my engine a total of 3 hours on the

     dyno instead of their standard 1.5 hours. I did this BEFORE I sent

     in my deposit for the engine. I originally thought we agreed on 4

     hours but my contract said 3 so I asked if they could run it

     another hour since it was still on the stand. They said sure… for

     $500/hour.

 *

 *

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:44 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Test stands or dynos they use a "club" prop to move air, and a big pressure plenum over the engine, and possibly some additional big fans to keep cyl temps where they belong.



On Nov 30, 2007 6:19 AM, Deems Davis < deemsdavis(at)cox.net (deemsdavis(at)cox.net)> wrote:

[quote]--> RV10-List message posted by: Deems Davis < deemsdavis(at)cox.net (deemsdavis(at)cox.net)>



So how do the engine builders cool the engines when they run them on

their test stands for prolonged periods? The  BPE dyno is inside IIRC,

and I recall numerous pictures of engine 'test cells' where the engine 

is mounted on a trailer or the back of a truck. I'm not trying to be

argumentative, just trying to learn and understand. I think I'll give

Rhonda/Allen a shout and see if they've got any suggestions. Anybody 

know how Aerosport does their test runs?



Deems



Kelly McMullen wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   That is definitely one of the solutions I had in mind. I'd think 3

 hours would be the bare minimum to get the rings somewhat seated. I 

 suppose doing high speed taxi tests where the engine got a few bursts

 of power, then was shut down immediately might be OK, as an

 alternative, with full cowling in place. Deems, I know you would not 

 get adequate cooling without the cooling and some forward motion.



 On Nov 30, 2007 12:13 AM, Robin Marks <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com (robin1(at)mrmoisture.com)


	


 > <mailto:robin1(at)mrmoisture.com (robin1(at)mrmoisture.com)>> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

     Kelly, Deem,



     You can categorize this under too little too late but I negotiated

     with my engine builder to run my engine a total of 3 hours on the 

     dyno instead of their standard 1.5 hours. I did this BEFORE I sent

     in my deposit for the engine. I originally thought we agreed on 4

     hours but my contract said 3 so I asked if they could run it 

     another hour since it was still on the stand. They said sure… for

     $500/hour.


	


 	  Quote: 	
		   *


	


 	  Quote: 	
		  



 *

http://www.matronics.com/contribution nbsp;- The RV10-List Email Forum - more: List" target="_blank">http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?RV10-Listhttp:===================== 
	




[b]

BPA(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:07 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Guys,



You need to keep your taxi tests (and all ground runs) as short as

possible. On the ground there is NOT enough cooling air to keep the

CHT's in check. Several 5-10 minute tests are much better than a couple

of lengthy runs around the airport. Need to keep CHT's in the 300-330

range while testing. Many a new/overhauled engine have had the jugs

removed to 'deglaze' the barrels because of extensive ground running.



We test new engines for 1 1/2 hours on our dynamometer. Additional time

is required whether it be on the dyno or in the airplane. Keep in mind

however that extensive ground running at any time can lead to what we

call coked cylinders.



When a cylinder gets hot, the oil 'cooks' and adheres itself to the

barrel. When this happens, instead of the rings scraping the oil off the

barrel (to dissipate the generated heat and to lubricate), the rings

hydroplane over the barrel. This leads to blo-by, dirty oil, and a lot

of wiping the belly down on your bird.



Allen

--

coop85(at)cableone.net
Guest

Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 6:47 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

I did the same thing with my engine from Aerosport. It showed up with 3 hours on it.  However, I did very little taxi testing on it since the airplane was so easy to handle.  It will fly without much effort and accelerates rapidly so be cautious with any intent to do high speed taxi testing unless you are ready to take it airborne.  

   

Marcus  

40286  

   

         

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen

 Sent: Friday, November 30, 2007 6:29 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)  

  

   

That is definitely one of the solutions I had in mind. I'd think 3 hours would be the bare minimum to get the rings somewhat seated. I suppose doing high speed taxi tests where the engine got a few bursts of power, then was shut down immediately might be OK, as an alternative, with full cowling in place. Deems, I know you would not get adequate cooling without the cooling and some forward motion.     

On Nov 30, 2007 12:13 AM, Robin Marks <robin1(at)mrmoisture.com (robin1(at)mrmoisture.com)> wrote:      

Kelly, Deem,  

You can categorize this under too little too late but I negotiated with my engine builder to run my engine a total of 3 hours on the dyno instead of their standard 1.5 hours. I did this BEFORE I sent in my deposit for the engine. I originally thought we agreed on 4 hours but my contract said 3 so I asked if they could run it another hour since it was still on the stand. They said sure… for $500/hour.   

  

  

  

    	  Quote: 	
		    http://www.matronics.com/contribution 	
0 	  Quote: 	
		   	
1 	  Quote: 	
		   	
2 	  Quote: 	
		   	
3 	  Quote: 	
		   	
4 	  Quote: 	
		   	
5 	  Quote: 	
		   	
6 	  Quote: 	
		   	
7 	  Quote: 	
		   	
8 	  Quote: 	
		   	
9 	  Quote: 	
		  	
0 	  Quote: 	
		  	
1 	  Quote: 	
		  	
2 	  Quote: 	
		  	
3 	  Quote: 	
		  	
4

        [quote][b]

wayne.e(at)grandecom.net
Guest

Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:02 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Hi Deems,

  

 Attached are pictures of my engine on Aerosport's  engine test stand, which is on the back of a truck so they can run it  outside.

  

 Boy I can't remember exactly, and my records are at  the hangar, but I think they ran it for nearly 4 hours on the test stand. I seem  to remember they had an entry where they ran it somewhere around 45 minutes at  2750rpm on one run.

  

 Wayne Edgerton N602WT

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

  

             Time:      05:20:35 AM PST  US            From:      Deems Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net (deemsdavis(at)cox.net)>            Subject:      Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New        Engine)       

      

      So how do  the engine builders cool the engines when they run them on  

      their test stands for prolonged periods?  The  BPE dyno is inside IIRC, 

      and I  recall numerous pictures of engine 'test cells' where the engine  

      is mounted on a trailer or the back of a  truck. I'm not trying to be 

      argumentative,  just trying to learn and understand. I think I'll give  

      Rhonda/Allen a shout and see if they've got  any suggestions. Anybody 

      know how Aerosport  does their test runs?

       

      Deems

RV-engine-14.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

63.82 KB

Viewed:

296 Time(s)

RV-engine-12.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

41.12 KB

Viewed:

269 Time(s)

RV-engine-13.jpg

Description:

Filesize:

70.02 KB

Viewed:

289 Time(s)

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Sat Dec 01, 2007 5:45 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

A wonderful view on the perspective.  Thanks   Wayne  

   

John Cox  

         

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Wayne Edgerton

 Sent: Saturday, December 01, 2007 5:02 AM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)  

  

     

Hi Deems,  

    

   

    

Attached are pictures of my engine on Aerosport's engine test stand, which is on the back of a truck so they can run it outside.  

    

   

    

Boy I can't remember exactly, and my records are at the hangar, but I think they ran it for nearly 4 hours on the test stand. I seem to remember they had an entry where they ran it somewhere around 45 minutes at 2750rpm on one run.  

    

   

    

Wayne Edgerton N602WT  

    

   

    

   

    

   

    

   

    

   

    

   

    

   

    

   

            

Time:          

05:20:35   AM PST US        

           

From:          

Deems   Davis <deemsdavis(at)cox.net (deemsdavis(at)cox.net)>        

           

Subject:          

Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New   Engine)        

      

       

       So how do the engine builders cool the engines when they run them on 

       their test stands for prolonged periods? The  BPE dyno is inside IIRC, 

       and I recall numerous pictures of engine 'test cells' where the engine 

       is mounted on a trailer or the back of a truck. I'm not trying to be 

       argumentative, just trying to learn and understand. I think I'll give 

       Rhonda/Allen a shout and see if they've got any suggestions. Anybody 

       know how Aerosport does their test runs?

       

       Deems  

  

      [quote][b]

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 11:24 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Allen, my tail is on fire here in Oregon for not having 20/20 Hindsight

vision on the poor job our state legislature just did for banning all

gasoline sales (both MOGAS and AVGAS) which does not contain at least

10% ethanol.  They (the Greenies)want even more.



Can you come up with a price to Dyno an IO and O-540D4A5 run on 10%

adulterated Oregon fuel and maybe E85 so everyone can chose their engine

wisely.  This is not about availability, this is about Greenies saying

AVGAS must help clean the environment and save Global Warming.  Jerry

Cochran in his Subie began the call that the "Sky is Falling to the

EAA".  The Tsunami hits next month.



Dave Martin, past President of OPA and past Editor of Kitplanes added

the impact ramification to LSA, STCed aircraft and other Rotax

propulsion systems.  This issue will clearly affect all kit builders,

not just us RV-10 bangers.  Hard data is always best and maybe you will

direct me to contract with George Braly.  "Carbon credits" like Albert

Gore uses might have made more sense to the public.



John Cox

VP for Legislative Affairs - Oregon Pilots Association



--

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.co
Guest

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 1:20 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

A couple of questions:

What studies did they do to show there are no issues with all the current aircraft?  

What effect do you all see with this if we want to fly our IO-540's out there?  



It really is too bad the special interest groups have so much power.  I don't know how they do it.  

If they only knew the effect of 100LL vs.  what other countries allow.  Pollution is a global problem and I can promise that 100LL is not the issue.  I've traveled the world in my oil and gas career and they need to go visit a few third world countries. We are the leaders in burning energy cleanly.  I want clean air too but lets be smart about it.  

Just wait til China starts driving cars, I can promise they won't have the restrictions we  have, and oil will blow through $100/bbl with ease.  

I love the ads on TV that GM has: "I want to drive an electric car!"  And where are you going to get the electricity? 



Sorry, stupidity bothers me.  Just concerned about flying to OR now.  I do think this ethanol fad will be gone in 24 months when they find out how much energy it takes to produce it and that we can't continue to increase the production of it. 



Go get em John!!! Talk some sense into them. 

Scott Schmidt

scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com



---

Rhonda(at)bpaengines.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 2:19 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

To the List:



This is a response from Monty regarding testing of Ethanol in engines

for aviation.  He asked me to post it directly to the list.



Thanks!

Rhonda



"John:



A few years ago we did some ethanol tests including E-85, straight

ethanol, oxygenated fuel with ETBE, and some other tests.  As far as

ethanol is concerned with the performance of the engine there was a

significant power  loss when burning the same amount of ethanol in terms

of weight compared to av-gas.



Some facts: (not all)



Straight ethanol will not vaporize below 50 F. and an engine to be

operated on straight ethanol MUST be started with a more volatile fuel.

There are some vapor pressure issues with diluted av-gas, of which I

have forgotten the details.  Ethanol-gas mixes MAY be harmful to fuel

hoses.  This is a test which needs to be done.  I am not sure what the

results would be.



Contrary to popular belief, ethanol fuels can be made to detonate.



Adding ethanol to av-gas (or mogas either) requires some strict quality

control on the ethanol product.  I don't believe those controls are in

place.  Av-gas is strictly controlled at the refinery level and I

seriously doubt that the refiners are going to add ethanol to av-gas

because of the potential of litigation in the event of a fuel related

accident.  In the case of mogas there is not much to fear from the

attorneys because the failed vehicle just pulls to the side of the road.

A little bit different in an airplane.



The "greenies" have petitioned the EPA to do a study on the effects of

lead in av-gas with regard to the atmosphere.  I guess your legislators

could not wait for the results of that study and "jumped the gun" trying

to force the issue?  The legislatures in question have created a very

unsafe, if not illegal statute.  Av-gas specifications are mandated by

the engine manufacturers and the whole set of certification regulations

is based on the fuel to be used.  This includes the engine, its pumps,

airframe hoses, weight and balance issues (assuming ethanol is of a

different weight than av-gas), performance criteria, operational

ceilings, turbocharger materials, etc.  In 10 words or less, the FAA

controls what fuels are suitable.



The costs to test for all the aspects of ethanol reduced fuels are

likely to be enormous.  It may be a smart move by the aviation community

as a whole, to seek an injunction against this legislation until such

times as the testing required can be completed.  This may take several

years.



I'll stay in touch and you do the same with me, please.



Monty Barrett

Barrett Precision Engines, Inc."

--

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Might I point out that your Oregon legislature has no jurisdiction over aviation fuel. Zero. None, etc. Federal preemption over aviation is still the law of the 50 states.

If 10% ethanol is added to current 100LL, it won't meet the specs for the fuel, especially for vapor pressure, as that addition raises the vapor pressure a fuel inch..so your  7.0 Avgas will be 8.0 give or take a tenth. Second, the FAA has prohibited ethanol in fuel for all aircraft that don't hold an STC to use it.

As Rhonda mentioned, ethanol is detrimental to our fuel systems, as the gaskets in your carburetor/fuel injection, the O-rings in your valves, and any rubber hoses in your system are all subject to attack by the ethanol. Then any bare aluminum in your fuel tanks is subject to corrosion by the ethanol.  

In other words, your politicians stepped in a big pile of doo-doo and unless they want the FAA on one side and Arthur Alan Wolk on the other side handing them their head for lunch, they best undo it. Maybe the EAA should be involved as well. 



On 12/3/07, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)> wrote:[quote] --> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)>



Allen, my tail is on fire here in Oregon for not having 20/20 Hindsight

vision on the poor job our state legislature just did for banning all 

gasoline sales (both MOGAS and AVGAS) which does not contain at least

10% ethanol.  They (the Greenies)want even more.



Can you come up with a price to Dyno an IO and O-540D4A5 run on 10%

adulterated Oregon fuel and maybe E85 so everyone can chose their engine 

wisely.  This is not about availability, this is about Greenies saying

AVGAS must help clean the environment and save Global Warming.  Jerry

Cochran in his Subie began the call that the "Sky is Falling to the 

EAA".  The Tsunami hits next month.



Dave Martin, past President of OPA and past Editor of Kitplanes added

the impact ramification to LSA, STCed aircraft and other Rotax

propulsion systems.  This issue will clearly affect all kit builders, 

not just us RV-10 bangers.  Hard data is always best and maybe you will

direct me to contract with George Braly.  "Carbon credits" like Albert

Gore uses might have made more sense to the public.



 John Cox

VP for Legislative Affairs - Oregon Pilots Association



-[b]

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:27 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Let’s take it the next step Kelly to mandate MOGAS has 10% + Ethanol in all 50 states.  Now all of those Peterson and EAA STCed aircraft refueling in Orygun will pass Ethanol through the lines, seals and over the gaskets.  Rotax requires not more than 50% Avgas to be added to Mogas or extensive additional repair work is required.  

   

Dave Martin (EAA 78011) representing the EAA will make the plea tomorrow before this panel of idiots.  These are politicians I have not voted for, do not endorse and know little of the consequence of their action to revenue collection reductions, negative mpact to tourism and economic develop and aviation safety.  We will soon be the Western Appalachia of the US of A.  There is a distinct possibility that one of the politicians is the son of the acting Director of Aviation.  

   

The Greenies are everywhere.  Be vigilant out there.  It is soon to be an election year.  

   

John (EAA 565497)  

         

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Kelly McMullen

 Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 4:46 PM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)  

  

   

Might I point out that your Oregon legislature has no jurisdiction over aviation fuel. Zero. None, etc. Federal preemption over aviation is still the law of the 50 states.

 If 10% ethanol is added to current 100LL, it won't meet the specs for the fuel, especially for vapor pressure, as that addition raises the vapor pressure a fuel inch..so your 7.0 Avgas will be 8.0 give or take a tenth. Second, the FAA has prohibited ethanol in fuel for all aircraft that don't hold an STC to use it.

 As Rhonda mentioned, ethanol is detrimental to our fuel systems, as the gaskets in your carburetor/fuel injection, the O-rings in your valves, and any rubber hoses in your system are all subject to attack by the ethanol. Then any bare aluminum in your fuel tanks is subject to corrosion by the ethanol. 

 In other words, your politicians stepped in a big pile of doo-doo and unless they want the FAA on one side and Arthur Alan Wolk on the other side handing them their head for lunch, they best undo it. Maybe the EAA should be involved as well.     

On 12/3/07, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)> wrote:  

--> RV10-List message posted by: "John W. Cox" <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)>

 

 Allen, my tail is on fire here in Oregon for not having 20/20 Hindsight

 vision on the poor job our state legislature just did for banning all 

 gasoline sales (both MOGAS and AVGAS) which does not contain at least

 10% ethanol.  They (the Greenies)want even more.

 

 Can you come up with a price to Dyno an IO and O-540D4A5 run on 10%

 adulterated Oregon fuel and maybe E85 so everyone can chose their engine 

 wisely.  This is not about availability, this is about Greenies saying

 AVGAS must help clean the environment and save Global Warming.  Jerry

 Cochran in his Subie began the call that the "Sky is Falling to the 

 EAA".  The Tsunami hits next month.

 

 Dave Martin, past President of OPA and past Editor of Kitplanes added

 the impact ramification to LSA, STCed aircraft and other Rotax

 propulsion systems.  This issue will clearly affect all kit builders, 

 not just us RV-10 bangers.  Hard data is always best and maybe you will

 direct me to contract with George Braly.  "Carbon credits" like Albert

 Gore uses might have made more sense to the public.

 

 John Cox

 VP for Legislative Affairs - Oregon Pilots Association

 

 -  

  

   [quote]   [b]

AV8ORJWC

Joined: 13 Jul 2006
Posts: 1149
Location: Aurora, Oregon "Home of VANS"

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 6:43 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

The phrases were snuck in at the last minute after being passed by the House (March 1st), forwarded to the Senate (June 21st) and signed by the Governor (July 3rd). The bill was introduced by the Director of the Oregon State, Department of Energy (January 8th) to promote ethanol production from Oregon grain products.  These types of administrative not legislative introductions score extremely high with a Passage Rate.  Bill introduced by duly elected legislator have an extremely low Passage Rate.  

   

No one said a word until a vigilant EAA member in an adjacent state, flying an alternate powered RV whispered the “King is wearing no clothes”.  Effective Date September 27. Promulgated into Public policy next month.  Even national EAA heard whisper after it was too late.  

   

John C.  

         

  

From: owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-rv10-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Scott Schmidt

 Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:20 PM

 To: rv10-list(at)matronics.com

 Subject: Re: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)  

  

     

A couple of questions:

 What studies did they do to show there are no issues with all the current aircraft?      

What effect do you all see with this if we want to fly our IO-540's out there?  

 

 It really is too bad the special interest groups have so much power.  I don't know how they do it.  

 If they only knew the effect of 100LL vs.  what other countries allow.  Pollution is a global problem and I can promise that 100LL is not the issue.  I've traveled the world in my oil and gas career and they need to go visit a few third world countries. We are the leaders in burning energy cleanly.  I want clean air too but lets be smart about it.  

 Just wait til China starts driving cars, I can promise they won't have the restrictions we have, and oil will blow through $100/bbl with ease.  

 I love the ads on TV that GM has: "I want to drive an electric car!"  And where are you going to get the electricity? 

 

 Sorry, stupidity bothers me.  Just concerned about flying to OR now.  I do think this ethanol fad will be gone in 24 months when they find out how much energy it takes to produce it and that we can't continue to increase the production of it. 

 

 Go get em John!!! Talk some sense into them.   

  

Scott Schmidt

 scottmschmidt(at)yahoo.com    

     

---

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 7:20 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

Well, I doubt that ethanol will be mandated nationwide, simply because there isn't a viable production capacity at least until they solve cellulosic ethanol, as there isn't enough corn and much of the environmental community recognizes that corn derived ethanol at any higher than production levels is an environmental disaster. Not to mention that it does very little to increase overall fuel supplies. 

Hmm, can we spell serious problems for LSA if Rotax really has a problem with Avgas?

Where is the boating community on this? Can't imagine it causing anything but trouble for fuel tanks and engines next to water. 



On 12/3/07, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)> wrote:[quote]               

Let's take it the next step Kelly to mandate MOGAS has 10% + Ethanol in all 50 states.  Now all of those Peterson and EAA STCed aircraft refueling in Orygun will pass Ethanol through the lines, seals and over the gaskets.  Rotax requires not more than 50% Avgas to be added to Mogas or extensive additional repair work is required.  

   

Dave Martin (EAA 78011) representing the EAA will make the plea tomorrow before this panel of idiots.  These are politicians I have not voted for, do not endorse and know little of the consequence of their action to revenue collection reductions, negative mpact to tourism and economic develop and aviation safety.  We will soon be the Western Appalachia of the US of A.  There is a distinct possibility that one of the politicians is the son of the acting Director of Aviation.  

   

The Greenies are everywhere.  Be vigilant out there.  It is soon to be an election year.  

   

John (EAA 565497)  

 



[b]

apilot2(at)gmail.com
Guest

Posted: Mon Dec 03, 2007 8:34 pm Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

John, I saw on another list that the OR ethanol mandate was ONLY for Mogas, not Avgas. Of course that still leaves all the STC'd folks and LSA folks in trouble, as well as the marine folks. I'll have to ask what folks around my home drome do, since we have 10% for all the winter months, mandatory, but optional in the summer. 



On 12/3/07, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com (apilot2(at)gmail.com)> wrote:[quote] Well, I doubt that ethanol will be mandated nationwide, simply because there isn't a viable production capacity at least until they solve cellulosic ethanol, as there isn't enough corn and much of the environmental community recognizes that corn derived ethanol at any higher than production levels is an environmental disaster. Not to mention that it does very little to increase overall fuel supplies. 

Hmm, can we spell serious problems for LSA if Rotax really has a problem with Avgas?

Where is the boating community on this? Can't imagine it causing anything but trouble for fuel tanks and engines next to water. 



On 12/3/07, John W. Cox < johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com (johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com)> wrote: 	  Quote: 	
		                 

Let's take it the next step Kelly to mandate MOGAS has 10% + Ethanol in all 50 states.  Now all of those Peterson and EAA STCed aircraft refueling in Orygun will pass Ethanol through the lines, seals and over the gaskets.  Rotax requires not more than 50% Avgas to be added to Mogas or extensive additional repair work is required.  

   

Dave Martin (EAA 78011) representing the EAA will make the plea tomorrow before this panel of idiots.  These are politicians I have not voted for, do not endorse and know little of the consequence of their action to revenue collection reductions, negative mpact to tourism and economic develop and aviation safety.  We will soon be the Western Appalachia of the US of A.  There is a distinct possibility that one of the politicians is the son of the acting Director of Aviation.  

   

The Greenies are everywhere.  Be vigilant out there.  It is soon to be an election year.  

   

John (EAA 565497)  

 



	




 [b]

james.k.hovis(at)gmail.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

In Missouri, we have a mandate that ALL gasoline sold must contain at

least 10% ethanol beginning Jan. 1, 2009. However, at least it looks

like someone had good sense to exempt aircraft from the bill, see:



http://www.house.mo.gov/bills061/bilsum/commit/sHB1270C.htm



Then again, if the fuel trucks are carrying blended fuel, won't that

contaminate straight MOGAS destined for the local airports? Or are the

fuel vendors going to have to use separate trucks to deliver MOGAS to

airports same as they do now for Avgas? I don't think so. The supply

of "clean" MOGAS at Missouri airports will dry up. My local airport

has a pump and tank for 87 MOGAS.



Kevin Hovis.



On 12/3/07, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		   John, I saw on another list that the OR ethanol mandate was ONLY for Mogas,

 not Avgas. Of course that still leaves all the STC'd folks and LSA folks in

 trouble, as well as the marine folks. I'll have to ask what folks around my

 home drome do, since we have 10% for all the winter months, mandatory, but

 optional in the summer.



 On 12/3/07, Kelly McMullen <apilot2(at)gmail.com> wrote:

 >

 > Well, I doubt that ethanol will be mandated nationwide, simply because

 > there isn't a viable production capacity at least until they solve

 > cellulosic ethanol, as there isn't enough corn and much of the

 environmental

 > community recognizes that corn derived ethanol at any higher than

 production

 > levels is an environmental disaster. Not to mention that it does very

 little

 > to increase overall fuel supplies.

 > Hmm, can we spell serious problems for LSA if Rotax really has a problem

 > with Avgas?

 > Where is the boating community on this? Can't imagine it causing anything

 > but trouble for fuel tanks and engines next to water.

 >

 > On 12/3/07, John W. Cox <johnwcox(at)pacificnw.com> wrote:

 > >

 > >  Let's take it the next step Kelly to mandate MOGAS has 10% + Ethanol in

 > > all 50 states.  Now all of those Peterson and EAA STCed aircraft

 refueling

 > > in Orygun will pass Ethanol through the lines, seals and over the

 gaskets.

 > >  Rotax requires not more than 50% Avgas to be added to Mogas or

 extensive

 > > additional repair work is required.

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > Dave Martin (EAA 78011) representing the EAA will make the plea tomorrow

 > > before this panel of idiots.  These are politicians I have not voted

 for, do

 > > not endorse and know little of the consequence of their action to

 revenue

 > > collection reductions, negative mpact to tourism and economic develop

 and

 > > aviation safety.  We will soon be the Western Appalachia of the US of A.

 > > There is a distinct possibility that one of the politicians is the son

 of

 > > the acting Director of Aviation.

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > The Greenies are everywhere.  Be vigilant out there.  It is soon to be

 > > an election year.

 > >

 > >

 > >

 > > John (EAA 565497)

 > >

 > >

 > >

 >

 >

GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 8:34 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

In a message dated 12/4/2007 9:30:02 AM Central Standard Time,  james.k.hovis(at)gmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Then    again, if the fuel trucks are carrying blended fuel, won't that

contaminate    straight MOGAS destined for the local airports? Or are the

fuel vendors    going to have to use separate trucks to deliver MOGAS to

airports same as    they do now for Avgas? I don't think so. The supply

of "clean" MOGAS at    Missouri airports will dry up. My local airport

has a pump and tank for 87    MOGAS.

	


 

 Kevin don't know how your gas is delivered but generally because the  tankers are carrying leaded gas for 100LL they cannot use those tanks for any  other product, thus it's my understanding that these tank wagons are dedicated  tanks...that's another reason we pay extra for aviation fuel.  

  

 P





  [quote][b]

james.k.hovis(at)gmail.co
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:04 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

You're right. I'm afraid delivering straight MOGAS (no ethanol) will

end up in the same boat, only a few suppliers willing to dedicate a

truck or two to deliver to the few airports who sell MOGAS (as

compared to the ethanol-gas delivered to the thousands of filling

stations). The price could end up the same as Avgas. But at least

premium gasoline in Missouri won't be required to have ethanol. You'll

probably have to ask to see if the premium in the tanks at the filling

station does or doesn't have ethanol. Think the $5 an hour clerk will

know???



Kevin H.



On 12/4/07, GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com <GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com> wrote:

 	  Quote: 	
		  

 In a message dated 12/4/2007 9:30:02 AM Central Standard Time,

 james.k.hovis(at)gmail.com writes:



 Then  again, if the fuel trucks are carrying blended fuel, won't that

 contaminate  straight MOGAS destined for the local airports? Or are the

 fuel vendors  going to have to use separate trucks to deliver MOGAS to

 airports same as  they do now for Avgas? I don't think so. The supply

 of "clean" MOGAS at  Missouri airports will dry up. My local airport

 has a pump and tank for 87  MOGAS.



 Kevin don't know how your gas is delivered but generally because the

 tankers

 are carrying leaded gas for 100LL they cannot use those tanks for any  other

 product, thus it's my understanding that these tank wagons are dedicated

 tanks...that's another reason we pay extra for aviation fuel.



 P



 **************************************Check out AOL's list of 2007's hottest

 products.

 (http://money.aol.com/special/hot-products-2007?NCID=aoltop00030000000001)

GRANSCOTT(at)aol.com
Guest

Posted: Tue Dec 04, 2007 10:21 am Post subject: Engine Choices (Taxi Testing New Engine)

In a message dated 12/4/2007 12:08:29 PM Central Standard Time,  james.k.hovis(at)gmail.com writes:

  	  Quote: 	
		  Think    the $5 an hour clerk will

know???

	


 

 That's why you should test it yourself if you're using staight MoGas sans  alcohol...

  

 P





  [quote][b]

Display posts from previous:

	Matronics Email Lists Forum Index -> RV10-List	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum