|
-POSTING RULES
-Advertise in here!
-
Today's Posts
|
Insert Pics
Keep VAF
Going
w/a Donation
VAF on Twitter:
@VansAirForceNet
|
02-07-2023, 06:11 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central Minnesota
Posts: 1,609
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
Why are all you people insistent on adding non-required information on your filler cap placards? The regulations call for "Minimum Octane and Capacity"; Nothing more.
Regulations do NOT call for "lead content" or anything else.
|
I think you’re misreading those posts, Mel.
__________________
RV-9A, 2011, bought flying
IO-320D1A (factory new), C/S
Dual Pmags
IFR equipped
AFS 5400/3500, G5, IFD440 navigator,
bunch of other stuff
|
02-07-2023, 06:20 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 11,693
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCool
I think you’re misreading those posts, Mel.
|
No, I'm not misreading posts. I know that this thread is about STC requirements.
I'm simply stating that if you label your filler caps "G100UL", for example, you are limiting yourself to that particular fuel brand. Now if "Swift Fuel" calls their's something else, you can't use it. Just like currently most people have labeled "100LL". They won't be able to use 100UL. If they had simply used "100", they can use any fuel with 100 octane, with or without lead.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century. Over 1,000 certifications accomplished. Discount for Veterans, Law Enforcement, Fire Fighters.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1, Lifetime EAA.
Recipient of EAA Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|
02-07-2023, 06:30 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central Minnesota
Posts: 1,609
|
|
Experimental airplanes aren’t beholden to the STC or GAMI’s “suggested” placard, as was clearly stated and nobody is suggesting that. Some of us, however, do need to re-engrave/re-placard because our current caps/placards say “100LL”. Personally, I plan to get new caps that say “AVGAS 91 OCTANE MIN” ( see post #8).
__________________
RV-9A, 2011, bought flying
IO-320D1A (factory new), C/S
Dual Pmags
IFR equipped
AFS 5400/3500, G5, IFD440 navigator,
bunch of other stuff
Last edited by MacCool : 02-07-2023 at 06:33 AM.
|
02-07-2023, 06:33 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dallas area
Posts: 11,693
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCool
Experimental airplanes aren’t beholden to the STC or GAMI’s “suggested” placard, as was clearly stated and nobody is suggesting that. Some of us, however, do need to re-engrave/re-placard because our current caps/placards say “100LL”. Personally, I plan to get new caps that say “AVGAS 91 OCTANE MIN”.
|
And that's fine. However by adding the word "AVGAS", you are still restricting yourself from using "MOGAS". If you use "91 OCTANE MIN", you will have more options.
__________________
Mel Asberry, DAR since the last century. Over 1,000 certifications accomplished. Discount for Veterans, Law Enforcement, Fire Fighters.
EAA Flight Advisor/Tech Counselor, Friend of the RV-1, Lifetime EAA.
Recipient of EAA Tony Bingelis Award and Wright Brothers Master Pilot Award
USAF Vet, High School E-LSA Project Mentor.
RV-6 Flying since 1993 (sold)
<rvmel(at)icloud.com>
|
02-07-2023, 06:34 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central Minnesota
Posts: 1,609
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
And that's fine. However by adding the word "AVGAS", you are still restricting yourself from using "MOGAS". If you use "91 OCTANE MIN", you have more options.
|
I have no intention ever of using MOGAS, so not a problem for me, but your point is well-taken.
__________________
RV-9A, 2011, bought flying
IO-320D1A (factory new), C/S
Dual Pmags
IFR equipped
AFS 5400/3500, G5, IFD440 navigator,
bunch of other stuff
|
02-07-2023, 06:45 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Defiance, MO
Posts: 2,098
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mel
No, I'm not misreading posts. I know that this thread is about STC requirements.
I'm simply stating that if you label your filler caps "G100UL", for example, you are limiting yourself to that particular fuel brand. Now if "Swift Fuel" calls their's something else, you can't use it. Just like currently most people have labeled "100LL". They won't be able to use 100UL. If they had simply used "100", they can use any fuel with 100 octane, with or without lead.
|
Completely agree. I especially do not like having a placard that has a particular brands patent number on it like it appears GAMI is selling. Very restrictive to me and pretty selfish by GAMI. I sure will not have a separate placard for ever new fuel that comes to market.
__________________
Philip
RV-6A - flying 1000+ hours
Donated to VAF yearly since 2007. Why? Because it is worth every penny and more.
There is something fascinating about science. One gets such wholesale returns of conjecture out of such a trifling investment of fact. —MARK TWAIN
|
02-07-2023, 06:58 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central Minnesota
Posts: 1,609
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by plehrke
Completely agree. I especially do not like having a placard that has a particular brands patent number on it like it appears GAMI is selling. Very restrictive to me and pretty selfish by GAMI. I sure will not have a separate placard for ever new fuel that comes to market.
|
I didn’t get that they are recommending their placard for Experimental airplanes and certainly not requiring it….just making it available in case E-ABs wanted to give them some money and I assumed that was tongue-in-cheek. They acknowledged that Experimental airplane could do whatever they want as the STC had nothing to do with that aircraft category’.
__________________
RV-9A, 2011, bought flying
IO-320D1A (factory new), C/S
Dual Pmags
IFR equipped
AFS 5400/3500, G5, IFD440 navigator,
bunch of other stuff
|
02-16-2023, 07:09 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Granada Hills
Posts: 1,305
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCool
I have no intention ever of using MOGAS, so not a problem for me, but your point is well-taken.
|
IMHO, that's a little myopic. Someday you might sell that RV-12 and the new owner will be clueless as to the truth of the fuel requirements only being 91 octane, and unleaded is acceptable.
__________________
VAF dues paid 2022
RV-12, KWHP based
"Time to Spare, go by Air."
|
02-16-2023, 08:37 PM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: central Minnesota
Posts: 1,609
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by NinerBikes
IMHO, that's a little myopic. Someday you might sell that RV-12 and the new owner will be clueless as to the truth of the fuel requirements only being 91 octane, and unleaded is acceptable.
|
It's an RV-9A with IO-320. If the subsequent owner wants to use a non-Lycoming-approved fuel, he can engrave his gas caps and change the POH to his heart's content but Lycoming doesn't approve any 91 octane D4814 fuels nor any pump gas for that engine.
__________________
RV-9A, 2011, bought flying
IO-320D1A (factory new), C/S
Dual Pmags
IFR equipped
AFS 5400/3500, G5, IFD440 navigator,
bunch of other stuff
Last edited by MacCool : 02-17-2023 at 05:22 AM.
|
02-17-2023, 11:13 AM
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Southwest Florida
Posts: 223
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacCool
It's an RV-9A with IO-320. If the subsequent owner wants to use a non-Lycoming-approved fuel, he can engrave his gas caps and change the POH to his heart's content but Lycoming doesn't approve any 91 octane D4814 fuels nor any pump gas for that engine.
|
You do realize this discussion is in the RV-12 forum and is specific to that plane?
__________________
Joe
2023 Donation Paid
RV-12iS In Progress
Empennage and Wings (except nav lights) done
Working on Fuselage
Finish kit waiting (minus BO items)
Avionics kit at Stein's
Engine on order...
|
| Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:40 PM.
|
