Notice from the FSDO

[51fixer]

Just got an email from the FAA saying that ASTM has developed a standard for 100VLL fuel.
I wonder how this will affect performance and engine operation for the older engines?

SAIB: NE-11-55
SUBJ: Grade 100VLL Aviation Gasoline Date: September 14, 2011
This is information only. Recommendations aren’t mandatory.
Introduction
This Special Airworthiness Information Bulletin (SAIB) advises aircraft operators, Fixed Base
Operators (FBOs), FAA repair stations and Flight Standards District Offices, and Foreign Civil
Aviation Authorities that grade 100VLL aviation gasoline meeting the American Society for Testing
and Materials (ASTM) fuel specification D910 is acceptable for use on aircraft and engines
certificated for operation with D910 grades 80, 91, 100, and 100LL aviation gasolines. Grade
100VLL meets all the performance requirements of grades 80, 91, 100, and 100LL and therefore
meets the approved operating limitations for aircraft and engines certificated to operate with these
other grades of aviation gasoline.
Background
The FAA relies on ASTM International to develop fuel specifications that applicants may designate
as operating limitations for their approved products. These aviation fuel operating limitations may be
listed in the product’s Type Certificate Data Sheet (TCDS), Installation Manual, service instructions,
or as limitations associated with a Supplemental Type Certificate (STC).
Grade 100VLL aviation gasoline (avgas) was developed by ASTM International to provide a lowerlead
alternative to 100LL in response to impending environmental regulations. Grade 100VLL is
identical to 100LL in all aspects, except that the maximum lead content is reduced by about 19%.
The specification criteria for lead content is expressed as only a maximum value, because avgas
producers routinely tradeoff lead content with other fuel compositional changes to meet the
specification criteria for Motor Octane Number (MON). FAA survey data has shown that the lead
content can vary by up to 39% from the maximum lead value listed in the specification while still
meeting the MON minimum requirement. Consequently, and most importantly, grade 100VLL has
the same minimum octane rating and will provide the same level of anti-knock performance as
100LL and 100 avgas grades.
The FAA collaborated with industry on the ASTM International task force that evaluated data
supporting the incorporation of grade 100VLL into specification D910. The FAA determined that
grade 100 VLL meets all of the performance requirements of grades 80, 91, 100, and 100LL and will
perform identically in existing aircraft and engines.
Recommendations
Because grade 100VLL avgas that meets ASTM specification D910 is identical to grade 100LL
avgas, the following recommendations apply:
1. Grade 100VLL avgas is acceptable for use on those aircraft and engines that are approved to
operate with grades 80, 91, 100, or 100LL avgas.
2
2. ASTM International standard D910 specifies blue coloration for both grade 100VLL avgas
and grade 100LL avgas, and, therefore, these fuels are visually indistinguishable from each
other.
3. Operating limitations in Aircraft Flight Manuals, Pilot Operating Instructions, or TCDSs that
specify grades 80, 91, 100, or 100LL avgas fuel are acceptable for use with grade 100VLL
avgas.
4. Current aircraft placards that specify grades 80, 91, 100, or 100LL avgas are acceptable for
use with grade 100VLL avgas.
5. Operating, maintenance, or other service documents, for aircraft and engines that are
approved to operate with grades 80, 91, 100, or 100LL avgas, are acceptable for use when
operating with grade 100VLL avgas.
For Further Information Contact
Mark Rumizen, Aerospace Engineer, FAA, Engine & Propeller Directorate, 12 New England
Executive Park, Burlington, MA 01803; phone: (781) 238-7113; fax: (781) 238-7199;
email: mark.rumizen@faa.gov.

[Red Tail]

Thanks for the heads up Rich.

John

[sdennison]

So, who is producing 100VVL? FBO's et al must have a source? Cheaper of now another price hike?

[51fixer]

So, who is producing 100VVL? FBO's et al must have a source? Cheaper of now another price hike?

Not being produced yet.
ASTM just released the standard.
I imagine refineries will need to figure out how to do this and then configure their operation. It sounds like we won't be able to see the difference visually. Jim and I hope to discuss this with the Roush people when we have a chance.
The FBO manager here says it might be a couple years away and doesn't have any idea how it will affect pricing, which is already high.
ASTM standard for jet fuel blends made in the McDonalds parking lot was also released today via the FSDO.

[LadyO2Pilot]

Rich,,,, please excuse my naivete in advance. What were the engines originally designed to operated with? Mine was fueled with 135 during the war (Vietnam that is) and just wondered what was used or available during WWII??????

Thanks for the giggle about McDonalds jet fuel

[N3Njeff]

Karen. Believe that 80 octane was the standard in ww2. I remember when we could still get it, our N loved it!! What sucks is we just spent a good amount of cash to have a cylinder have it's valves and guides replaced due to wear. Now they want to take away more lead? All I can see this doing is raising maintenance costs.

[Red Tail]

Rich,,,, please excuse my naivete in advance. What were the engines originally designed to operated with? Mine was fueled with 135 during the war (Vietnam that is) and just wondered what was used or available during WWII??????

Thanks for the giggle about McDonalds jet fuel

Karen,

130 octane was the norm for supercharged engines in WWII. It contained a lot of TEL to get it to that octane which contrary to popular belief was not necessarily a great thing...all health and environmental considerations removed from the conversation. Lead fouled plugs, combustion chamber, valve and piston deposits were an issue. Low lead is not a bad thing but the octane rating must be as good as its fully leaded brother to be of any value at all. Valve seat wear (Which the lead lubricates) can be a problem in some engines if they do not have hardened seats. I'm sure that will be considered when the actual 100VLL formulation is developed...then again, maybe not.

John

[Baldeagle]

If I remember right, 100LL has 2.0 ml of lead per gallon, 80 has 0.5, and mogas has 0.02, so 100VLL will still have about three times as much lead as 80 did. Can anybody confirm that these are the correct figures?



-

[ZRX61]

You can still buy 110octane leaded....



However, I was told some years ago that 100LL contains about 7x the amount of leaded used in street gas...

Only advantage I've found running the 110 stuff on the street is that the smell infuriates Prius drivers when they are behind you

[Red Tail]

If I remember right, 100LL has 2.0 ml of lead per gallon, 80 has 0.5, and mogas has 0.02, so 100VLL will still have about three times as much lead as 80 did. Can anybody confirm that these are the correct figures?
-

Current 100LL = 0.53 mL TEL/L

Proposed 100VLL = 0.43 mL TEL/L.

AvGas 100 is higher in lead content than 100LL. Below is the rationale for the change:


The National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) were updated by the EPA in 2008 to reduce allowable levels of lead by 90%. The revised standard requires measurement of lead levels in the vicinity of general aviation airports. For each location found to be in a non-attainment status with the NAAQS, the State must develop a plan approved by the EPA to reduce lead emissions to bring these areas into attainment by 2017. As a result of this regulatory action, there is an urgent emphasis on addressing measures for reducing lead emissions from general aviation aircraft. The Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA), the General Aviation Manufacturers Association (GAMA), the National Air Transportation Association (NATA), the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA), the American Petroleum Institute (API), and the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association (NPRA) comprise the AVGAS Stakeholders Group which represents the General Aviation aircraft owners, operators, and manufacturers and the oil and natural gas industry producers, refiners, and distributors of aviation grade gasoline (AVGAS). This AVGAS Stakeholder Group is actively engaged in working with the manufacturers, the FAA, and the EPA to achieve significant reductions in lead emissions for the General Aviation piston powered fleet which requires a minimum grade 100LL AVGAS. The AVGAS Stakeholder Group has identified both near term and long term strategies leading to the eventual transition to an unleaded AVGAS. The Stakeholder Group Near Term Strategy provides for a reduction of lead emissions from General Aviation aircraft based upon the criteria of 1) a drop-in reduced TEL content AVGAS as a replacement for grade 100LL, 2) no action required from manufacturers or operators, 3) no impact on engine or aircraft FAA certification, and 4) a lowering of the total lead emissions in airport areas where monitoring may determine the current NAAQS standard is not being met. The attached proposed ballot provides for a revision to ASTM D-910 Standard Specification for Aviation Gasoline to include provisions for a reduced TEL content AVGAS identified as grade 100/130VLL which is identical to Grade 100LL except for TEL content which is reduced from 0.53 mL TEL/L to 0.43 mL TEL/L. Supporting data for this revision is presented by the attached CRC Research Report No. 657 which documents the results of a survey of TEL content in FBO AVGAS as performed by the FAA Technical Center and engine test investigations into the sensitivity of engine response to TEL content. The suffix VLL is used to identify the reduced TEL content AVGAS.

[Red Tail]

You can still buy 110octane leaded....



However, I was told some years ago that 100LL contains about 7x the amount of leaded used in street gas...

Only advantage I've found running the 110 stuff on the street is that the smell infuriates Prius drivers when they are behind you

It will also kill your O2 sensors and plug your catalytic converter post haste...not recommended.

[T-28mike]

There are also no road TAXES in 100LL. The absence of this product (latin name Makeimus governmentus functionus) can lead to bad juju for the person using it, and the person selling it, if the authorities wish to prove a point. Including a very hard seat in the cell.....

[ZRX61]

It will also kill your O2 sensors and plug your catalytic converter post haste...not recommended.

It doesn't get used in anything that has any of that newfangled electrickery & funny metal stuff. The only thing between the pistons & the Prius behind me are the exhaust valves

[ZRX61]

There are also no road TAXES in 100LL. The absence of this product (latin name Makeimus governmentus functionus) can lead to bad juju for the person using it, and the person selling it, if the authorities wish to prove a point. Including a very hard seat in the cell.....

Quite so, it's been over a decade (maybe 2) since I last saw anyone filling a fuel can from an airport fuel truck. That stuff in the pic isn't 100LL tho, I think it's C12.

If you want to spend silly money you can always buy VP AirRace or VP 115/145. The really spiffy stuff used to be made by Nutec, but I haven't heard of them for years. The smell was unbelievable (in a good way).