Swift Fuel is moving forward

For you Fuel Geeks out there that understand Motor Octane and such, I found two links that may be of interest to you. One is the Swift Fuel Oshkosh 09 presentation that gives a status report and details about the fuel. The other is the FAA Final report on Detonation testing of Swift fuel in a Lycoming TIO-540-J2BD. I'm surprised at how far along the program is.

Oshkosh 09 Presentation:
http://www.swiftenterprises.com/Documents/Oshkosh%202009.pdf

FAA Final Report on Detonation:
http://www.swiftenterprises.com/Docu...702%20Fuel.pdf

For those of you who have never heard of Swift Fuel, it's a possible biofuel replacement for 100LL that contains no lead or alcohol.

They originally promised it could be made available for $2/gallon, at the pump. Even if they miss their mark by 100% they'd be onto something, if they can get to market.

Looks like a very promising motion lotion to me.

I'm looking forward to this and hope they can move it into a production level environment. My fear is that, even though developed for aircraft, the production emphasis may migrate to autos (either by economic force or government mandate) and leave GA without a source or at a much higher price point.

Originally Posted by bmcj

I'm looking forward to this and hope they can move it into a production level environment. My fear is that, even though developed for aircraft, the production emphasis may migrate to autos (either by economic force or government mandate) and leave GA without a source or at a much higher price point.

I agree.
Having said that, wouldn't it be much wiser to focus on the use of automotive fuels (gasoline and diesel) in aviation?

Originally Posted by autoreply

Wouldn't it be much wiser to focus on the use of automotive fuels?

Yes, and that is the very reason I fear that GA might be the stepchild left out in the cold.

Originally Posted by bmcj

Yes, and that is the very reason I fear that GA might be the stepchild left out in the cold.

Unless GA does the sensible thing for once in its history and adapts to use auto fuel.

Sure, that leaves lots of older airplanes on the ground since they can't run mogas. But you know? Those planes are going to be left on the ground anyway when 100LL disappears and SwiftFuel follows the money and diverts most (if not all) of their production to a mogas alternative.

GA can hold out for 'special treatment' (and pay for it at the pump) until we're blue in the face, but eventually it's not going to be worth it for the refiners to cater to us, at any price. We can adapt or we hope the 'good old days' will last forever and end up sitting on the ground for good, IMHO.

Originally Posted by Topaz

Unless GA does the sensible thing for once in its history and adapts to use auto fuel.

Sure, that leaves lots of older airplanes on the ground since they can't run mogas. But you know? Those planes are going to be left on the ground anyway when 100LL disappears and SwiftFuel follows the money and diverts most (if not all) of their production to a mogas alternative.

GA can hold out for 'special treatment' (and pay for it at the pump) until we're blue in the face, but eventually it's not going to be worth it for the refiners to cater to us, at any price. We can adapt or we hope the 'good old days' will last forever and end up sitting on the ground for good, IMHO.

I couldn't agree more.

We have the Rotax and Thielert engines. From a technical point of view, they're excellent engines. I don't see any reason why we can't adapt a watercooled inline 6 or a V6/V8 with a gearbox for the bigger engines. Car engines are way more efficient, reliable, environment friendly and light compared to those lyncosauri and conti's that were designed before my father was born.
Especially diesels are very interesting because kerosine will be there the next 30 years and all of them are turbocharged, giving them a much higher power to weight ratio.

The only thing that keeps us back is the lack of a company, willing to invest a couple of dozen million euro's/dollars into certifying one. Why would they if there's no serious competition (Thielert is recently fried out)?

We will most likely face the disappearance (more than 90% reduction) of GA/small business aviation, only homebuilts (US only) and small jets will survive, also because the ever increasing restrictions and regulations that are put on us. But that's of course only my opinion...

Originally Posted by Topaz

Unless GA does the sensible thing for once in its history and adapts to use auto fuel.

I would love to be on par with autos for usable fuel, but the fact is that many of the older engines out there call for a different formulation than autos to run at OPTIMAL levels. When you are in an aircraft, particularly at a short field, at high density altitude, or navigating in the mountains, optimal performance becomes very important.

My concern isn't so much that the new fuel will be used for autos, but that it will be formulated for autos at the exclusion of certified aircraft engines.

Add to that the difficulty in obtaining autogas STC's for many certified aircraft, not to mention what it does for manufacturer waranties, along with insurance rates and availability, and you can see my concern.

Bruce

Those planes are going to be left on the ground anyway when 100LL disappears and SwiftFuel follows the money and diverts most (if not all) of their production to a mogas alternative.

In my mind I would think the money is in Aviation Fuel. Pilots are accustomed to paying much more for Av fuel than they would be willing to pay to put gas in their car. If they can produce the stuff cheap enough to compete with oil derived auto gas, they can have a much higher profit margin in Aviation by simply charging what Pilots are willing to pay for Avgas. From reading their literature, even the amount of biomass needed to supply Aviation requires a very large amount of farmland. We'll see I guess.

Hush up Jake! They've already dangled the $2 per gallon carrot in front of us and I plan to hold them to it!

Originally Posted by Jman

In my mind I would think the money is in Aviation Fuel. ...they can have a much higher profit margin in Aviation by simply charging what Pilots are willing to pay...

But the volumes in the automotive world are orders of magnitude higher than the aviation market, so the actual profit is far higher in the automotive market.

-Dana

Welcome to the Federal Bureau for Reducing Bureaucracy!

Yep, volume is the ultimate problem. We just don't burn enough of the stuff to make refining it and transporting it worth a really decent profit margin. Frankly, I think we're one major fuel-related lawsuit away from losing 100LL as a result. If one good attorney can convince a jury that the crash was even remotely related to the fuel or fuel system and that the grieving widow deserves $50 million for the loss of her spouse and kids, it'll wipe out the profits of 100LL for several years for whichever company takes the hit. Then the 'Shareholder Value' mentality takes over and the legal departments in every fuel company out there will be clamoring to shut down the AvGas line to 'reduce our exposure to lawsuits.'

I get the argument that airplanes burn avgas for a reason, and I think that argument is valid as far as it goes. But then we get back to the fundamental problem that oil companies aren't in the business to make sure we get maximum performance out of our airplanes. They couldn't care less. They're in business to sell a product and turn a profit. When that profit gets small enough to no longer justify the business case, avgas goes away, whether we 'need' it or not.

We can either start building/using/selling engines that get ADEQUATE performance from auto fuels, or sit on the ground dumbstruck when the oil companies pull the rug out from under us.

Why don't companies already start doing this, when auto engine technology is so obviously superior to what's hiding in our cowlings now? No money in it. How do you get millions of dollars or euros to build the next great airplane motor when sales of that motor won't total a fraction of that investment? Nobody's going to throw their money away 'for the good of light aviation'. Ain't gonna happen. Modern (currently in production) auto motors are so well optimized to their task that it's not really practical to convert them to aircraft use, for all the reasons we've discussed over and over. It'll have to be a clean-sheet design, or nearly so. And again, where's the money in that?

I don't know what the solution is. Short-term, SwiftFuel or some kind of mogas additive system may carry us forward. Long-term, we need engines that can burn whatever the mogas du jour might be. Including e-whatever gasohol. How that takes place given the financial realities is beyond me. But I do know the clock is ticking, and we have to do SOMETHING. If we sit on our hands with 'business as usual', there's going to be a cold, cold day in the future for light aviation, IMHO.

Bottom line is we are going to have to burn mo-gas eventually. I flew skydivers in C-182's and they flew just fine even in the Arizona heat and density altitudes of 6000' at 2025 msl. The O-470 does great on mo-gas. They went to TBO.

But the volumes in the automotive world are orders of magnitude higher than the aviation market, so the actual profit is far higher in the automotive market.

I had that in mind to. However, since swift fuel is derived from crops, and farmland is a finite resource, the name of the game would be profit per acre.

Of course, there is a reason I'm in the Army and not a banker.....