Avgas

This forum has been developed to discuss aviation related topics.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore, I WAS Birddog

User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: Avgas

Post by PilotDAR » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:01 pm

I think that .025% is 1/4 of 1%. Did I get my small numbers wrong?
---------- ADS -----------
  

RevT
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 18
Joined: Fri Jan 31, 2014 4:25 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by RevT » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:06 pm

Broken Slinky wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:09 am
PilotDAR wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:38 am
Back when I worked in the gas for airplanes business, I was told that avgas production was .025% of gasoline production
Would bet that percentage is even lower. I was told that only 1% of the aviation fuel produced in Canada is AvGas, the other 99% is Jet A. Even that number seemed high to me based on the number of jets buzzing around compared to 100LL burners. Compare that to the number of Mogas burners stuck on the 401 any given day, could easily add another 0 to that number.
You need not guess - StatsCan publishes the data.

http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?la ... +products
---------- ADS -----------
  

jschnurr
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 164
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:42 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by jschnurr » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:14 pm

PilotDAR wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:01 pm
I think that .025% is 1/4 of 1%. Did I get my small numbers wrong?
0.25% is 1/4 of 1%

0.025% is 1/40.
RevT wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:06 pm
You need not guess - StatsCan publishes the data.

http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/cansim/a26?la ... +products
Taking Nov 2017, the amount of "Aviation turbo fuel" is 462,432. The amount of "Aviation gasoline" is 8,373. "Total refined petroleum products" is 9,192,621.

100LL is about 1.77% of total aviation fuel, and only 0.091% of total refined petroleum products (about 1/1000).
---------- ADS -----------
  

photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7493
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Making aviation exhausting, everywhere

Re: Avgas

Post by photofly » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:45 pm

PilotDAR wrote:
Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:01 pm
I think that .025% is 1/4 of 1%. Did I get my small numbers wrong?
:)
---------- ADS -----------
  
Kirk: This is a dangerous mission. Likely, one of us will die. The landing party will be me, Spock, McCoy, and Ensign Ricky.
Ensign Ricky: Aw, crap.

User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3069
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: Avgas

Post by PilotDAR » Fri Feb 16, 2018 8:12 pm

Ooo, it's lucky that I fuel with direct fuel pump readings, rather than my percentage calculations!
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by 7ECA » Fri Feb 16, 2018 9:53 pm

Seems the story from Esso keeps changing. Now it's only deliveries from December 28th - and apparently the majority of these deliveries are to airports/distributors in Western Canada.

I still question how the hell it is possible that it took this long to note a quality control issue...
---------- ADS -----------
  

milotron
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Avgas

Post by milotron » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:50 pm

Have any actual performance issues or damage been noted? I have flown with this fuel several times in the last month with no issues, but I have float type level sensors.

Hopefully it is not a bunch of ethanol in the blend.

Is anyone staying grounded because of this?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Avgas

Post by Cessna 180 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:52 pm

I highly doubt there's ethanol in the blend (and it would be very easy to test). Ethanol is blended at the distribution hub, not at the refinery nor is it sent by pipeline. I'd be very surprised if it was possible for them to blend ethanol in a product that is substantially different than car gasoline (for the most part).
---------- ADS -----------
  

superbilly24
Rank 1
Rank 1
Posts: 23
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:55 am

Re: Avgas

Post by superbilly24 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:07 am

180039 CYQM MONCTON/GREATER MONCTON R.LEBLANC INTL
CYQM FUEL 100LL NOT AVBL
1802161341 TIL 1802171600

We've been grounded since Thursday in Moncton. I guess all the fuel comes from that one refinery in Alberta.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Pavese
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 217
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 10:26 am

Re: Avgas

Post by Pavese » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:16 am

180078 CYHZ DEBERT
CCQ3 FUEL 100LL NOT AVBL
1802162035 TIL APRX 1802231500
---------- ADS -----------
  

SuperchargedRS
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1485
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
Location: the stars playground

Re: Avgas

Post by SuperchargedRS » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:47 am

superbilly24 wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:07 am
180039 CYQM MONCTON/GREATER MONCTON R.LEBLANC INTL
CYQM FUEL 100LL NOT AVBL
1802161341 TIL 1802171600

We've been grounded since Thursday in Moncton. I guess all the fuel comes from that one refinery in Alberta.

You guys can't tanker in fuel from elsewhere?
---------- ADS -----------
  

milotron
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Avgas

Post by milotron » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:54 am

superbilly24 wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:07 am
180039 CYQM MONCTON/GREATER MONCTON R.LEBLANC INTL
CYQM FUEL 100LL NOT AVBL
1802161341 TIL 1802171600

We've been grounded since Thursday in Moncton. I guess all the fuel comes from that one refinery in Alberta.
Are you grounded due to lack of fuel, or to fear of damage or operational issues?
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by 7ECA » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:49 am

They're grounded, because they've likely received fuel produced at Esso's Edmonton refinery. The instruction from Esso is to immediately quarantine all suspect fuel - as use of it is prohibited due to the conductivity issues.
---------- ADS -----------
  

who me ?
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 135
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 8:42 am

Re: Avgas

Post by who me ? » Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:28 am

7ECA wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:49 am
They're grounded, because they've likely received fuel produced at Esso's Edmonton refinery. The instruction from Esso is to immediately quarantine all suspect fuel - as use of it is prohibited due to the conductivity issues.


Curious, where you found , “ as use of it is prohibited due to conductivity issues” quote?
---------- ADS -----------
  

YYC650
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 5
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 12:00 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by YYC650 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:22 pm

Is there actually any prohibition on the use of this fuel, if it is already in your aircraft? We've filled up our RV-7a at Springbank several times since December 28, and haven't observed any issues. Is there any reason why we can't fly off the fuel that is currently in the tanks?
---------- ADS -----------
  

milotron
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 52
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:53 am

Re: Avgas

Post by milotron » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:31 pm

YYC650 wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:22 pm
Is there actually any prohibition on the use of this fuel, if it is already in your aircraft? We've filled up our RV-7a at Springbank several times since December 28, and haven't observed any issues. Is there any reason why we can't fly off the fuel that is currently in the tanks?
This is my question too. I see that the fuel is not being sold, but nothing preventing anybody from actually using what they have. I also have 70 gallons in the tanks bought early January. No operational issues and the level sensors are reading in compliance with what the totalizer is saying.

I mentioned ethanol previously, but so long as there are no chemistry issues related to seals, o-rings, etc., and my floaty tank sensors read fine, I am not sure what the concern is. If I had capacitive level sensors, or there was a significant static discharge concern related to the fuel flowing through the lines, then that would be a different story.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Oldguystrtn2fly
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 9:30 am

Re: Avgas

Post by Oldguystrtn2fly » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:41 pm

Buy8ng it 8n January doesn’t mean you have the “bad”fuel. They stated deliveries starting the 28th of December. So it matters when your airdrome got there last delivery and then, if after the 28 , was it a out of spec load or not. My home aerodrome got there last fuel shipment dec 21 so we know our fuel is unaffected.
---------- ADS -----------
  

final28
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2016 8:47 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by final28 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 6:49 pm

For a certified aircraft operating with fuel that does not meet specifications may violate operating conditions. If anything, even unrelated, occurs there could be insurance issues.
For experimental category aircraft probably up to you and depending on your specific engine.
---------- ADS -----------
  

BE02 Driver
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 112
Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2018 4:43 am

Re: Avgas

Post by BE02 Driver » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:14 pm

YYC650 wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:22 pm
Is there actually any prohibition on the use of this fuel, if it is already in your aircraft? We've filled up our RV-7a at Springbank several times since December 28, and haven't observed any issues. Is there any reason why we can't fly off the fuel that is currently in the tanks?
Personally I'd ask my airport for all the fuel for my homebuilt. They can't sell it and it's going to be a pain in the a** to get rid of. Offer to take it off their hands! Free fuel!
---------- ADS -----------
  

Cessna 180
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 273
Joined: Wed Sep 23, 2015 8:28 pm
Location: YKF

Re: Avgas

Post by Cessna 180 » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:23 pm

BE02 Driver wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:14 pm
YYC650 wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 5:22 pm
Is there actually any prohibition on the use of this fuel, if it is already in your aircraft? We've filled up our RV-7a at Springbank several times since December 28, and haven't observed any issues. Is there any reason why we can't fly off the fuel that is currently in the tanks?
Personally I'd ask my airport for all the fuel for my homebuilt. They can't sell it and it's going to be a pain in the a** to get rid of. Offer to take it off their hands! Free fuel!
Probably will be taken back by the supplier. They sold them a bad product so I can't see why they wouldn't if it wasn't the product you paid for.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Schooner69A
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 529
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: The Okanagan

Re: Avgas

Post by Schooner69A » Sat Feb 17, 2018 9:55 pm

YYC650:

I've sent you a pm...

JMS
---------- ADS -----------
  

sunk
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2014 3:51 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by sunk » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:49 pm

My concern is esso going to come good for the commercial operators who lost revenue?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Victory
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 440
Joined: Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:32 am

Re: Avgas

Post by Victory » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:56 pm

Uh no that's ridiculous. They sell a product. Avgas isn't some human right or something.
---------- ADS -----------
  

7ECA
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 813
Joined: Thu Jul 03, 2014 4:33 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by 7ECA » Sun Feb 18, 2018 12:11 am

who me ? wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 11:28 am
Curious, where you found , “ as use of it is prohibited due to conductivity issues” quote?
Until Imperial’s understanding of the issue improves and the most appropriate resupply options are identified, Imperial continues to advise to not use or distribute the product.
Pardon me, I may have overstepped by saying "prohibited". Nevertheless, Imperial Oil aka Esso, is saying don't use any AvGas delivered after December 28th.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
dpm
Rank 2
Rank 2
Posts: 96
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:08 pm

Re: Avgas

Post by dpm » Sun Feb 18, 2018 6:49 am

sunk wrote:
Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:49 pm
My concern is esso going to come good for the commercial operators who lost revenue?
If they did have to make a payout of tens of millions of dollars to users for lost business, the obvious follow-up action would be to stop producing 100LL in Canada altogether. It's already a tiny-volume, marginal business that probably barely survives the chopping block at every annual budget-planning meeting.


D
---------- ADS -----------
  
@CYRO

Post Reply

Return to “General Comments”