newt
Well Known Member
There is a possible wrinkle here - the STC may not simply be a paperwork fee. I know that the SWIFT 100UL has a higher density than 100LL. (about 4%)
Swift didn't meet ASTM D910.
Purportedly, G100UL does.
As I recall, ASTM D910 includes a density specification; which implies that G100UL can't stray measurably from the "normal" 100LL density we all know and love.
I thought the entire point of the fleet-wide approval was that you'd be able to pump it into your tanks without caring about details like W&B, achievable horsepower, CHT/EGT changes, decomposition and erosion of components, etc because it met the same specification of that which it replaces.
There seems to be a lot of head-scratching around various forums in the last 12 hours based on the assumption that none of that happened -- that it was approved for fleet-wide application by the FAA even though it behaves differently.
That doesn't seem credible to me. I'm going to assume that it's a drop-in replacement for 100LL, just like it says on the tin, unless and until there's more detail that says otherwise.
(notwithstanding that nobody needs to care about what I assume, given that none of us can buy it yet anyway )
- mark