Rotax engine questions

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[Merlinspop]

From a paper put out by BP a couple years ago:
Petrol will last in sealed containers for more than 6 months, while some breathing will take place this is not enough to significantly affect product quality.
Read the whole thing here:
http://www.bp.com/retail/liveassets/bp_ ... anksv4.pdf

Another good article, mostly about 100LL, but he does note that mogas might only lose a point or two over a lot longer than a couple weeks.
http://www.generalaviationnews.com/2011 ... -stored-2/

[Jack Tyler]

Probably like many airports these days, I see a lot of creativity in how to fuel a/c at our rural airport - all of it driven by the cost of fuel there. Some will fuel on their way back to the airport, as most other airports in our area charge less. But of course you have to look at the add'l fuel burn and the cumulative cost of flight time,. and you have to consider whether departing on the next flight sans full fuel might be a disadvantage. Our airport authority prohibits fuel storage in hangars except for 5 gal jugs...so of course some hangars have jug farms. However, the jug farms universally lack a berm so a cracked jug would inevitably send the fuel into an adjacent hangar or two, something the witless jug owner doesn't think or care about. Others ignore the prohibition and ferry gas to the airport in 50 gal barrels (available on the cheap on Craig's List), then fuel the plane with a hand-operated rotary pump (Harbor Freight). This inevitably mandates the purchase of an appliance hand truck (also Harbor Freight) to get the barrel off the truck's bed and onto the hangar floor, either before or after the otherwise inevitable back injury. Only occasionally, an a/c owner will have a standard fuel tank set-up in the back of their truck, allowing them to tank up, then dispense the fuel as the a/c needs it at the hangar, and meanwhile drive around with a lot of fuel sloshing about unless they decant into barrels at the hangar. And so...while all the jug/barrel/pump/etc. purchases are occurring and all these individual fueling methods are being used, the safe, environmentally sound and 24/7 convenient self-service fuel farm adjacent to the FBO gets less use than it could, which reduces the fuel sales revenue and forces an increase in the fuel price & also the FBO's leasing fees. We've created a universally dysfunctional system, a Tragedy of the Commons case study.

High-wing a/c owners have a few fueling logistics issues to face that low wing owners do not so be sure to take those into account. RV-12 owners are probably as careful when fueling as you'll find, since they must pour fuel *inside* their fuselage. And if I were using E10 mogas, the *only* methods I would consider using would involve buying the mogas within a few days of using it.

[Nomore767]

Jack,

Very well articulated. Seems quite a hassle, especially when considering this is about fueling an airplane with auto-gas to save 'cost' and for 'convenience', not to mention the environment.
When you read aircraft reviews they mention 'sipping much cheaper auto-gas', and avoid discussing the logistical juggling required to do that! A pilot buys a $160k LSA and then is running around trying to fuel from plastic jugs, from gas stations either selling ethanol laced autogas or trying to find one that sells the rare 93 octane ethanol-free , and then takes the risk of fueling from static producing plastic containers, made more difficult if it's a high wing model. It's a lot like the Emperor's New Clothes.

Mixing with 100LL for longer trips would seem to reduce the cost advantage of auto-gas,although using 10%Ethanol apparently brings issues of it's own on engine components. Then again, using all 100LL on a Rotax brings new issues of lead fouling and other damage not to mention more numerous, and expensive inspections.

Or we could just fly airplanes that are more tolerant of 100LL and wait for an alternative fuel to be marketed. In Europe they already have an unleaded replacement for 100LL, I think it's called 91UL. This means it'll probably take a few years for it to arrive in the USA.

Howard

[CTLSi]

......

[CharlieTango]

Its hard to see how they are extra features, they are there to support the additional needs of the fuel injected engine. And a ton? really a ton?

[MrMorden]

Its hard to see how they are extra features, they are there to support the additional needs of the fuel injected engine. And a ton? really a ton?

Well, maybe not a ton, but at least 20-25lb worth...

[drseti]

OK, so it's more like 10 milliTons.

[Jim Stewart]

If given the choice between a 912ULS and a 912i the 912i is winner hands down. The new fuel-injected wonder also comes with a ton of extra features beyond the fuel injection including redundant alternators, new LiFeIon batteries and the obvious advantage regarding carb synching and carb ice.

OTOH, my 742 lb. CTSW can carry me, my wife, a full load of fuel and 50 lbs of baggage without breaking any rules.

[CharlieTango]

My 719lb CTSW can carry me, fuel, girlfriend (120 lbs) and 100lbs of luggage without breaking any rules.

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[MrMorden]

My 719lb CTSW can carry me, fuel, girlfriend (120 lbs) and 100lbs of luggage without breaking any rules.

I'm right between you two. 734.4 empty/585lb useful, good for me & wife, 26 gallons and 60lbs of bags.

[CTLSi]

......

[FlyingForFun]

Delete

[Nomore767]

CTLSi says:-

"The future of GA is not in a metal, riveted, steam guaged 100LL burning Cessna. Its in the carbon fiber, alternative fuel, all glass panel wonders coming from Europe and being made at Cirrus."

Sez you!

The all Flight Design CTLS school than I flew with a few times recently went out of business. Good job I didn't give them the $2500 deposit for a block of flying huh? They had the CTLS and at one time one of two Flight Design MC aircraft. The MC was Flight Design's version of the metal trainer, to compete with C150s and C162s. It's popular in Europe, but not in the USA.

Just spent time with a local maintenance shop which had 3 guys with over 100 years of experience. they've seen it all, and they're current in Rotax courses and training. They work on a local school's Remos GX planes. They like them as such but say they're a pain to work on...waiting for parts, expensive, hard to fix composite, and figure overall they're 50% more expensive in maintenance costs than 'conventional' direct drive metal aircraft.

Just saying, they don't have a dog in the race, they work 8-6pm.

You could argue the future is in kit-built aircraft, like the several being made in the USA. Cessna has produced a metal glass cockpit 'wonder' with a conventional engine (LSA version) and not a single round gauge. Yes, we could ask what is happening with Cessna, as we could with Remos.
Alternative fuel is more popular in Europe...mainly because regularl auto gas is about $9 per gallon. the demand for efficiency is greater than in the USA. In Europe they're already putting 93 non-ethaonol premium at airports. Here, you can spend $165k on a CTLS and still have to stop at the gas station on the way with plastic gas cans (non-ethanol if you can find it) to fuel it. Or you'll have to make do with 100LL and hope the Rotax doesn't get clogged up and damaged. Either way, you're maintenance costs went up over the old style airplanes.

You can argue all day long that you're right and everyone else is therefore wrong. Now what?