Nice..
Thanks to the financial savings achieved through the purchase of this fuel, UL AERO SUPER + can encourage customers wishing to invest in fleet renewal to opt for aircraft equipped with ROTAX engines that consume less fuel and therefore emit less CO2, as well as being quieter.
Not sure what they mean. Savings vs what? Same price as SP98 but less consumption? That can only be a very marginal saving. Quieter? That must be a joke, but if it’s true I’m in trouble. Making my little 912 quieter will mean people will think I’m flying a glider and that’s prohibited here.
The fuel sold now at LFPN and LFPL is a true aviation mogas, ethanol-free like the one from Warter.
Just more expensive but paid by credit card.
Total say in the article they want to sell it @ 20 airfields across France by the end of 2024.
By the way, the (arrogant) guy from Warter at the Aero exhibition said to me that the TOTAL “aviation mogas) actually IS Warter’s AKI93 fuel
What a weird name choice though for a fuel aimed at the European market… AKI is “anti-knock index” which is used nowhere except in the US….
boscomantico wrote:
What a weird name choice though
At least it takes less time pronouncing, and makes a bit more sense than “UL AERO SUPER +” 
As my Rotax will run fine just fine on 10% ethanol fuel I would just run it on that.
In fact, technically speaking, that AKI93 is not a UL-only, or a Rotax-only fuel.
I asked that arrogant Warter guy why their sales material spoke if it as a ultralight fuel. He said, „well, we don‘t want to make competition to our own other products“, pointing at the UL91 banner.
Anyway, the fuel market is really becoming very intransparent here in Europe. There was another company (with a huge booth) called Puma (from Estonia). They call their equivalent fuel UL94…
The variety is becoming stupid now.
But an advantage of aviation fuels in the UL world is that hopefully they will be cheaper than 100LL and will be available on more airfields.
Carting your fuel bags down the road to the nearest fuel station and then trying to get the fuel in the plane is a bit of a drag.
For the Super Guépard the club has built a stand and made a siphon to transfer the fuel from 20litre Jerry Cans but whilst the siphon would be easily carried in the back of the UL that’s not so for the stand.🤔
boscomantico wrote:
He said, „well, we don‘t want to make competition to our own other products“, pointing at the UL91 banner.
Yes. This new fuel will surely put an end to UL91, in the extent UL91 really was a thing at all practically speaking. In a few years, it will be AKI93 (or some rebranded version) and 100LL that will be left. But it depends on the pricing. 100LL prices for something that is essentially only ethanol free mogas 98, will not work.
I’m a little confused by the flight manual for the DA20. It says that « mogas » 98 can be used (down to 95 I believe), but says nothing about ethanol contents. I’m still reluctant to use station gasoline (I think the last SP98 ethanol-free stations in France have vanished a few years ago). From what I understand it should be better for the engine than 100LL, but I’m still somewhat concerned about the manual not mentioning ethanol.
As you know, the Rotax engine allows 95-98 mogas with up to 10% ethanol. I suppose that is the maximum ethanol content in France.
As to the rest of the airframe components, surely Diamond would have issued an instruction to not use such a fuel if they see a problem with that and I don’t think they have.
