slacktide
Line Up and Wait
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2008
- Messages
- 556
- Display Name
- Dan
Claimed that the chemical name of vinegar was "Acidic Acid." https://www.pilotsofamerica.com/community/threads/soda-blast-vs-other-media.112868/#post-2575506
The hierarchy of the four engineering estimates from least accurate to the most accurate is: Rectorandom, WAG, SWAG, and EWAG (EDUCATED scientific wild ass guess).In chemistry and economics it's called the SWAG method, which is a slight improvement on the WAG method.![]()
Full is good. Appearances would not seem to be a significant measure of quality to me.These tanks are completely full, the fuel I've drained looks just like 100LL should.
As always you can't answer the question so you try to pick a fight.Tom isnt really asking us our opinion. The quote below gets to the crux of the matter. Tom is itching for a battle of wits with someone. This has nothing to do with actually flying with old gas.
Full is good. Appearances would not seem to be a significant measure of quality to me.
How does it run on the ground?
I would drain at least one whole tank and put in fresh fuel and start out on that.
It gets pretty old after a while.
Would you settle for big romping, stomping, chest-beating musicians, pointing out that "zink" is a correct spelling for a 16th-century musical instrument?I was hoping that some one could tell why that is?
Big romping stomping chest beating chemists on this page, would call you out for mis-spelling (Zink), and will argue all day about refinery operations, Yet not a peep out of them when asked about 100LL.
HMMmmmm
Sorry, Tom, but you bring it on yourself with your attitude and demeanor here.
It's the typical Tom thread...except this one is in future tense.
Typically it is:
Tom: boy, I f***ed up.
Others: yeah, Tom, you f***ed up.
Tom: F*** you, I DID NOT!!!
And you're the only person here who almost always hijacks his own threads and takes it off into an excursion in the weeds. It's like if you can't get someone to argue with you with your original then you'll change it hoping to find something that some one will argue with you on.
I agree with you completely that:
I actually did the sump thing, no water found.That's one of the FEW things I remember from chemistry class: "Water is the universal solvent."
Timmy, your just a hater, and now on ignoreSorry, Tom, but you bring it on yourself with your attitude and demeanor here.
It's the typical Tom thread...except this one is in future tense.
Typically it is:
Tom: boy, I f***ed up.
Others: yeah, Tom, you f***ed up.
Tom: F*** you, I DID NOT!!!
And you're the only person here who almost always hijacks his own threads and takes it off onto an excursion into the weeds. It's like if you can't get someone to argue with you with your original premise then you'll change it hoping to find something that someone will argue with you on.
I agree with you completely that:
Have you considered the possibility that you might be overreacting?Sorry, Tom, but you bring it on yourself with your attitude and demeanor here.
It's the typical Tom thread...except this one is in future tense.
Typically it is:
Tom: boy, I f***ed up.
Others: yeah, Tom, you f***ed up.
Tom: F*** you, I DID NOT!!!
And you're the only person here who almost always hijacks his own threads and takes it off onto an excursion into the weeds. It's like if you can't get someone to argue with you with your original premise then you'll change it hoping to find something that someone will argue with you on.
I agree with you completely that:
Simply not reacting anymore. Thread is dead, useless to ask any thing here and expect an answer.Have you considered the possibility that you might be overreacting?
Especially when you’re actually expecting an argument.Simply not reacting anymore. Thread is dead, useless to ask any thing here and expect an answer.
I must be the only one who doesn’t see where Tom is creating an argument at all. He’s just asking a legit question that nobody can answer.Especially when you’re actually expecting an argument.
I still call bs on a vented tank of fuel remaining full after 10 years.
I was hoping that some one could tell why that is?
I must be the only one who doesn’t see where Tom is creating an argument at all. He’s just asking a legit question that nobody can answer.
Please look at the first reply, a link was provided with an answer.I must be the only one who doesn’t see where Tom is creating an argument at all. He’s just asking a legit question that nobody can answer.
Simply not reacting anymore. Thread is dead, useless to ask any thing here and expect an answer.
It was answered in the very first reply with a link to an article written by:I must be the only one who doesn’t see where Tom is creating an argument at all. He’s just asking a legit question that nobody can answer.
Big romping stomping chest beating chemists on this page, would call you out for mis-spelling (Zink), and will argue all day about refinery operations, Yet not a peep out of them when asked about 100LL.
Well,,,, the 182 I'm working on has sat for 10 years (maybe more) don't know when the fuel was put in.
Doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy using the old fuel.
So, I was wondering how old the fuel can be, and still be usable.
I find it highly unlikely that a vented tank of 100LL would remain full for 10 years.
Boom.....Yep, I'd say the search for an argument was the goal.

That sounds far more likely to me.I think you are onto something there; I had an airplane in my hangar which did not fly for about 10 years. I know the tanks were almost full when I parked it for the owner.
When I went to get it out of pickling, the tanks were bone dry as if someone had scrubbed them clean and blotted them dry! I know it wasn't leaking in that hangar, I was walking past it regularly. Zero blue dye stains. There is no way someone could have drained or siphoned the fuel. I filled the airplane after all that time, and it did not leak a drop.
I've done that, a long time ago. My Dad did it for years. Bare hands. Leaded mogas. Deadly stuff, that. He was almost 90 when he passed away.When we drained ours we used the old gasoline for cleaning stuff. Twenty years ago that was OK, apparently not today.
Curious ? what happened to the dye? dye doesn't evaporate it would have stayed in the tank, and when new fuel was added it would have contaminated the new fuel with double dose of dye.I think you are onto something there; I had an airplane in my hangar which did not fly for about 10 years. I know the tanks were almost full when I parked it for the owner.
When I went to get it out of pickling, the tanks were bone dry as if someone had scrubbed them clean and blotted them dry! I know it wasn't leaking in that hangar, I was walking past it regularly. Zero blue dye stains. There is no way someone could have drained or siphoned the fuel. I filled the airplane after all that time, and it did not leak a drop.
There is always the exception to the rule. The lead absorbed is still with him.I've done that, a long time ago. My Dad did it for years. Bare hands. Leaded mogas. Deadly stuff, that. He was almost 90 when he passed away.
I have no idea,,he should have found it in the tank. (just like you'd find it on the floor had the tank leaked)Gosh Tom.....we don’t know. What does happen to that dye?