achimha wrote:
AVGAS contains lead and it is completely unacceptable to emit lead. We’re past that and granting GA an exception is a bold mistake. Nobody should be allowed to emit any lead at all.
Most normally aspirated GA engines can run on UL91 or 91/96UL which are both lead-free. Of 25 or so aircraft based at my home airport only 1 uses 100LL, the other use 91/96UL — that includes two Bonanzas and a Cessna 182.
Innovation and GA business were largely divorced when Experimental Amateur Built became the route for useful innovation, as it has. The whole point then became “education and recreation” with innovation as a by product. That happened about 40 years ago. The current kit plane business is a real business but most of its products were initially developed by smart people having fun.
Looking at the SMA website I realized my friend, A&P IA and numerous other things arguably works for the company in the way it’s been restructured (his money comes from other, better established products) I’ll have to ask him why he doesn’t buy an SMA for his Pitts… He’s good at quick, imaginative and very rude responses so this should be fun.
AFAIK the bog bore Contis, like my IO-550N, can only fly with AVGAS.
Silvaire wrote:
I’ll have to ask him why he doesn’t buy an SMA for his Pitts…
Oh well. Changing an engine for another is extremely costly, new engine technology is best introduced with new airframes. Diamond has shown that. And in the US of A the fuel issue does not exist so the biggest reason isn’t there in the first place. Half of the posts on this forum are how to organize a trip that there is enough AVGAS, not a topic US pilots have to discuss a lot.
Innovation in GA happens largely outside the US these days. That used to be different.
achimha wrote:
Innovation in GA happens largely outside the US these days.
When Oshkosh moves to Europe then you may be right. Right now, Pipistrel is the most interesting example of useful non-US GA innovation can think of, the innovative UL two seaters. The four seater will never get anywhere.
The most useful innovation to promote GA in Europe would have to do with AVGAS distribution.
Silvaire wrote:
The four seater will never get anywhere.
Primarily because they set on the wrong horse with the IO390. But as they are now proposing an IO540, it would be a prime candidate for the new SMA.
Silvaire wrote:
The most useful innovation to promote GA in Europe would have to do with AVGAS distribution.
You read the papers from over here? Not going to happen. Right now country after country is banning sale of fossil fuel cars (both gas and diesel) and the trend is clear. Avgas is going to be a rare comodity over here if it doesn’t get banned altogether. With the car industry switching to electric engines, I’d not be surprised if also the UL fuels will become more difficult if not less available.
However, they CAN NOT ban Jet fuel as long as there are airliners and rescue helicopters who use it in civil aviation (and countless military jets). So unless there is finally a turbine who can replace the current gasoline engines then Diesel is the only future for European aviation. Yes I know, it will take some years before gasoline cars disappear altogether, but several countries are set on this now and as they are the real powers in the EU, sooner or later it will become EU law.
In practice, there are now the Continental / Thielert engines for the segment 135 to 155 and the SMA under this development will beocme an option for that segment. Missing at the moment is a replacement for the very popular 180-220 hp segment, to replace all the O/IO/TSIO 360 to 520. That is the real challenge.
Right now country after country is banning sale of fossil fuel cars
Not quite yet… year 2040 in the UK and that is obviously a totally empty gesture which nobody will be held to, 23 years from today.
Currently of the order of 1% of cars sold are hybrid or electric so the market is miniscule and no current petrol/diesel car maker would survive on it. A lot of “I am more green than you” posturing is being done right now.
This conversation will sure be different in 23 years’ time but so will everything else and I will be 83 years old 
You are right Peter I should have written the timeframes. Last I read the first want to start in 2020 and others somewhere in between. The UK won’t be of any concern of the EU at the time, but I somehow fear that Germany might try to bully the rump EU to adopt their own agenda, which obviously is aimed at saving their auto industry in the wake of the diesel scandals.
That by the way might be a problem for the continued availability of Diesel engines in the future and therefore also for engines relying on engine blocks made from car engines.
But maybe you are right and eventually people will rise up against this and stop this madness.
Peter wrote:
Currently of the order of 1% of cars sold are hybrid or electric so the market is miniscule and no current petrol/diesel car maker would survive on it. A lot of “I am more green than you” posturing is being done right now. This conversation will sure be different in 23 years’ time but so will everything else and I will be 83 years old
Yes. The political class of Europe has an overpopulation problem much like the place itself, and I think one result is politicians and those (companies) who pander to them endlessly making ‘bold forward looking proclamations and laws’ in the hope of distinguishing themselves and gaining power. GA is so visible, if in reality inconsequential to anything except the enjoyment and utility of those doing it, that it’s a victim of this growing European mass fantasy mindset. I do think in the end the overall phenomena will collapse under its own weight and lack of rational, market driven direction but perhaps a small fraction of the technology developed will be taken up by others and used more productively in the future – as Achimha thinks. Maybe the incoming European electric phase (no pun intended) will produce more useful results than the outgoing Diesel phase.
Mooney_Driver wrote:
aimed at saving their auto industry in the wake of the diesel scandals.
The auto industry does not depend on a single type of engine. Gasoline, diesel, LNG, hydrogen, battery — those are all available and can be offered based on demand and the regulatory situation. The diesel boom in most of Europe (France is at the top there) is mostly due to tax subsidies making diesel fuel less expensive per liter (and even less expensive in energy units). The car industry doesn’t really care much which engine customers buy, the engine is not what sells a car today, design and brand play a bigger role.
The diesel engine is by far the best combustion engine there is. Its thermal efficiency is up to 45% with the most modern engines while gasoline is below 30%. The diesel cycle can also be applied to non fossil fuels, i.e. synthetic hydrocarbons which have a neutral CO2 balance. A lot of research on such fuels is happening right now and this is one very likely scenario for the future because it would be very elegant: continue to use existing engine technology, very high energy density as chemical energy, use of existing distribution mechanisms. It could be created directly near the big wind and solar farms, thereby converting the electric energy into chemical energy and making it easy to store and transport. Diesel engines and turbines burning synthetic hydrocarbons would also be a very good scenario for powered flight.
