Menu Sign In Contact FAQ
Welcome to our forums

100UL (merged thread)

@Peter mine aren’t! 🥸

Seriously, I know what you mean, but I can tell you that there are ways to draw a valid and strong patent. I do patent prosecution in my law firm on both sides of the game.

Regarding the UL100 patents however I think you could be right. To my eyes the texts don’t even look like high-level drafted. And on top it’s a minefield, because there are zillions of applications in this field.

That may well be a reason why this develops so slowly. The big players just wait for the applications (or patents) to fall.

Last Edited by UdoR at 22 Feb 14:16

I am not a chemist but it would not surprise me if their formula is very close to something from around 1935.

Me neither but from what I’ve read elsewhere it’s about 20 or 30% Xylene and the rest is low grade gasoline. There are many web links on using Xylene as an octane booster.

In the absence of coercion, the market will be interested in GAMI’s fuel when it is within a few cents per gallon of 100LL.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 22 Feb 14:24

there are ways to draw a valid and strong patent

Of course, but the reality is that most people don’t bother – because patents are useful for

  • impressing customers
  • putting off casual rip-off artists
  • lubricating VC (vulture capital) funding or acquisition

It is many years since patent examiners were super clever so you can file a really useless patent (I did one in 1991).

It is very hard to do a strong patent in an area where

  • absolute tons of prior art exists (i.e. basically almost everything created by man since 100,000 years BC)
  • most of the prior art can’t be found with a casual search (so you never really know what will turn up in 10 years’ time, right about when you are trying to beat somebody around the head with your patent)

and most tech patents (I’ve read hundreds) that may be valid are irrelevant because you just do what you want to do in a different way. A competitor of mine once spent tens of thousands filing patents describing something really obscure and pointless.

But as you say it is possible, in the right scenario. I just don’t think this is one of those.

I would expect the major oil companies to have examined the formula (which they all have under an NDA) and decided the patent is weak. Anybody who has read this will be smelling a rat in case of any fuel patent. And as you say they may be waiting for the whole thing to fold up.

Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

AIUI there appears to be a problem between Gami and one of the alphabet associations (ATML or that.)
It seems GAMI are refusing to let this alphabet association test/examine the fuel.
It is not an FAA requirement that they do so but it is apparently the normal thing to do.
Also insurers like to see approval from this association and are not keen to insure if it is not done.
Apologies for being a bit vague but I just caught the end of a discussion and not being up on the scene I didn’t take it all in.


Wikipedia suggest 186 Million USG per year of Avgas is sold in the USA.

Let’s say it’s double that to make a worldwide usage of 372 M USG.
That’s 1.414 Billion Litres.

If they charged 5 cent per litre it should easily be passable on to the end consumer (we deal with this sort of price volatility without blinking an eye), and the would make 70 Million a year, every year, for a long time to come.

How much do they really want to make from this? Are they being super greedy?

EIWT Weston, Ireland


Shoreham EGKA, United Kingdom

It might be Peter but I couldn’t be positive as I really wasn’t taking much notice at first.


Peter wrote:

Of course, but the reality is that most people don’t bother – because patents are useful for impressing customers putting off casual rip-off artists lubricating VC (vulture capital) funding or acquisition

Again I know what you mean, and I agree there’s lots of bullshit around. But I’m educating my clients what patents are actually there for and what we need to have a good IP. Seems like you haven’t had the chance to get in touch with someone who really does serious IP by heart in your business career.


Yes, ASTM.

Other than it being a way for GAMI to make money up front, the reason for STC approval is that otherwise aviation fuel has to be ASTM approved.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 22 Feb 18:51

Which BTW means that unless there is an applicable GAMI G100UL STC for your type of plane in your country of registration, I don’t believe your plane can legally use G100UL, if it ever does become commercially available. The game with STCs is not unlike Garmin’s game in using STCs to force you to pay their dealer for installation. All this stuff is nonsense IMHO, private companies using a combination of government regulations to manipulate people into sending money to the company if they want to use their own property, whether it be gasoline or avionics. Best to stay uninvolved IMHO.

Last Edited by Silvaire at 22 Feb 19:23
Sign in to add your message

Back to Top