The White House’s 2025 budget proposal would boost the current tax of 22 cents per gallon to $1.06 by 2030. It’s estimated it would raise $1.1 billion over the five years. The proposal also includes a major funding increase for the FAA, including money to hire 2,000 air traffic controllers.

• READ MORE: FAA Releases Final Rule on Aircraft Fuel Efficiency for Emissions

The fuel tax hike is being championed as a fairness issue by the administration. The background documents say business aircraft account for 7 percent of FAA airspace workload but the current tax only covers 1 percent of the revenue into the federal trust fund for aviation and airports. Airline passengers pay a flat $4.50 on each flight and 7.5 percent excise tax on the fare to pay for the other 99 percent.

The backgrounder on the State of the Union address said the administration wanted to make private jet operators “pay their fair share.” In the speech itself Biden send he wanted “end tax breaks for big pharma, big oil, private jets, massive executive pay.” 

Aviation groups responded quickly to the SOTU address and were ready with comments on the budget proposal. NBAA President Ed Bolen reiterated his stance that private aviation is an important business tool and that most of those flying on the jets are mid-level managers doing company business and not their ultra-rich employers. “The Biden administration’s sweeping plan would hurt business aviation and the jobs and communities that depend on it, and make it harder for U.S. companies to compete in a global economy,” Bolen said.

The National Air Transportation Association hit all of NBAA’s points and also alleged that much of the revenue raised by the aviation fund is diverted to a similar fund for highway projects. “We are concerned that the Biden Administration is failing to account for the billions of business aviation tax dollars that are diverted from the Airport and Airways Trust Fund (AATF) into the Highway Trust Fund (HTF),” said NATA President Curt Castagna. “Such diversion weakens the National Airspace System and could place the safety of the industry at risk.”

Editor’s Note: This article first appeared on AVweb.

The post Biden Administration Proposes Fivefold Jet Fuel Tax Hike for Bizjets appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The DA42-VI signifies a commitment to eco-friendly aviation training, burning up to 50 percent less jet-A than traditional avgas counterparts. Its introduction aligns with Lufthansa Aviation Training’s dedication to resource efficiency, modernity, and safety in pilot education.

• READ MORE: Diamond DA42 Twin Makes First SAF Flight

Raymund Obst, head of pilot school European Flight Academy, emphasized the role of these new aircraft in shaping future pilots.

“We are preparing future pilots for their cockpit careers in a resource-efficient, state-of-the-art, and safe manner,” Obst said.

Jane Wang, sales director at Diamond Aircraft Austria, highlighted the global popularity of the DA42-VI among leading flight schools, emphasizing its economic advantages and exceptional low-noise performance. The three DA42-VI trainers will be stationed in Grenchen, Switzerland.

Equipped with advanced features such as efficient jet fuel Austro engines, Garmin G1000 NXi, and optional electrically driven air conditioning, the DA42-VI represents a versatile choice for multiengine training. Its all-composite design reflects Diamond Aircraft’s commitment to providing modern and technologically advanced solutions for flight training.

The post Lufthansa Commits to Eco-Friendly Training with Diamond DA42 Twins appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

The company said its clean-sheet DHK180 engine, which received its type certification last year, offers ease of operation, reliability, fuel efficiency, less maintenance, and better performance at altitude compared with traditional piston engines. The DHK engines are now moving toward production, with the first installation planned for an RV-14 owned by aircraft builder Craig Saxton. The aircraft is expected to begin flying with the new engine in late spring.

• READ MORE: DeltaHawk Gains Type Certification on Jet-Fueled Piston Powerplant

“Van’s aircraft are incredibly popular thanks to their high performance with exceptional efficiency, combined with a very high level of safety and ease of operation,” said Jon Heup, president of DeltaHawk Engines. “Those same attributes accurately describe our DeltaHawk engine family, making this a great match.”

Builder Saxton said the DeltaHawk engine is well-suited to the specific RV he’s putting together.

“I approached DeltaHawk because their new engine platform offers superior performance, while being significantly more efficient to operate and maintain. I believe it is a very capable alternative to other engine offerings,” Saxton said. 

• READ MORE: DeltaHawk High on Testing of Hydrogen Engine

Synergy Air, a leading builder assistance company, is working with Saxton on the installation. Vans’s Aircraft is providing technical assistance for the project.

“We’re pleased to be part of this revolutionary project,” said Vaden Francisco, owner of Synergy Air. “We’ve helped build over 200 Van’s RV aircraft to date, and this may be the most exciting one yet.”

DeltaHawk is also developing similar firewall-forward installation packages for Bearhawk Aircraft’s Bearhawk 4-Place. In addition to increased performance over conventional piston engines, the DHK engines have the advantage of burning jet fuel and avoiding the environmental impacts of 100LL, which is not as widely available around the world.

The post DeltaHawk Is Developing a Package for Installing Its DHK Engines in Van’s RV-14s appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

DeltaHawk Engines Inc.’s new DHK180 piston engine, which was FAA certified in May, is heading toward production, the company announced last week at EAA AirVenture.

The engine, which was in development for 15 years, is a clean-sheet design and has the option to operate on jet fuel, which is more readily available than 100LL in many parts of the world.

“We are contacted often by pilots all over the world in locations where 100LL avgas is unavailable or very expensive,” said Mark Goldberg, president of Bearhawk Aircraft. “For these builders, the DeltaHawk represents a great option. In addition, many builders in the U.S. want alternative engine choices. The economical and Jet A burning DeltaHawk will be attractive.” 

Bearhawk Aircraft are available in two-, four- and six-seat configurations. The airframe was designed to be a backcountry aircraft. Bearhawk designs can be plans built, and there are also quick-build options.

• READ MORE: DeltaHawk DHK180 Engine Heads To Production

“Bearhawk designs are extraordinary aircraft in terms of payload and STOL capability, combined with fast cruise speeds,” said Dennis Webb, an aircraft engine designated engineering representative at DeltaHawk who directed the certification effort. “The DeltaHawk DHK180 in a Bearhawk will significantly expand its capabilities, especially with regard to altitude performance, range, and lower cost of operation.”

DeltaHawk company officials said the engine installation package for the Bearhawk four-seat design is currently under development. 

The DeltaHawk DHK180 is the first small engine certified by the FAA since the 1960s. The company is currently ramping up the engine production process, anticipating deliveries to begin in the first half of 2024.

The post New DeltaHawk DHK180 Called ‘Great Option’ for Bearhawk Aircraft appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

With a growing number of light aircraft taking on jet-A instead of avgas—from a diesel-powered Cessna 172 to the single-engine Cirrus VisionJet—a prudent pilot stays on guard to supervise fueling if at all possible. But anecdotally speaking, many of us have operated under the impression that misfuelling a piston airplane burning 100LL with jet fuel is tough to do, given the difference in filler-neck sizes and pump-nozzle diameters.

However, just a little more than five years ago, a Cessna 421C on a Part 135 medevac flight operating out of Las Cruces, New Mexico, suffered the result of such a mix-up—and all four on board perished while the pilot attempted to return to the airport, as smoke and flames trailed from the airplane, according to witnesses on the scene.

The pilot looked like he had done all of the right things: Following his request to the line technician at the FBO for 40 gallons of fuel—20 gallons per side—he stayed there to observe the fueling, even assisting with the replacement of both fuel caps, according to the NTSB report.

Placards to announce the requirement for avgas were in place near the 421’s fuel filler ports—yet the FBO records, an interview with the technician, and the smell of kerosene around the accident site demonstrated the truth of what happened.

One critical link in the safety net failed: “In accordance with voluntary industry standards, the FBO’s jet fuel truck should have been equipped with an oversized fuel nozzle; instead, it was equipped with a smaller diameter nozzle, which allowed the nozzle to be inserted into the smaller fuel filler ports on airplanes that used aviation gasoline. The FBO’s use of a small nozzle allowed it to be inserted in the accident airplane’s filler port and for jet fuel to be inadvertently added to the airplane.”

Though it’s easy to Monday-morning quarterback the people involved in the fateful accident, it’s also easy in hindsight to understand how mistakes can lead to misfuelling, with just a moment’s inattention, or improper assumptions. One issue remains: jet-A and 100LL mix very well, creating a nearly homogenous sample in a fuel tester that may be difficult to judge. Unless the mixture is very strongly in favor of jet-A, the whiff of kerosene may be hidden by the overwhelming vapors of the more volatile avgas. Jet-A may indeed lighten the mixture’s color, but only to a pale blue—not nearly enough to register for many pilots.

Fortunately, we have a couple of ways to identify if there is jet-A present in a fuel sample (assuming you’re looking for 100% avgas). Both rely upon that volatility of avgas, and the residue that jet-A leaves behind. First, a thimble-sized drop of the mixture on paper (such as a Post-It note) can show how quickly the avgas evaporates, and leaves a stain behind if there is jet-A present in the sample. This must be observed within a few minutes of the test—after about 30 minutes the paper becomes difficult to “read.” Second, if you use a GATS fuel straining jar, with a clean mesh screen at the top, and strain the sample back out, the avgas should evaporate quickly. Any liquid that remains after a few minutes means the sample is suspect—or you need to clean your jar!

Our thanks to Jim Logajan from the Cardinal Flyers Online type group for the analysis of the various ways that pilots can test fuel.

The post Accident Analysis Compels Pilots to Check Fuel appeared first on FLYING Magazine.

A series of recent events involving the mixing of an incorrect additive into jet fuel dispensed at a Florida airport has triggered safety warnings to both turbine operators and fuel handlers.

Diesel exhaust fluid (DEF) is a colorless fluid derived from urea and is injected into the exhaust on diesel-burning vehicles, but is not approved for use in aircraft because of its propensity to form crystals that can clog filters and other components within aircraft fuel systems. It can be mistaken for a common icing inhibitor that is also added to Jet-A, hence the caution advised.

Two incidences of DEF contamination took place in November 2017, in Omaha, Nebraska, and in August 2018, in Opa Locka, Florida. The most recent contamination event occurred on May 9 at the Punta Gorda, Florida, airport, when DEF was mistakenly added to fuel in a fuel truck. Two Citation 550s operated by charter company Air Trek were serviced with the contaminated fuel. One, enroute from Naples to Niagara Falls, New York, suffered an engine flameout, followed by a second engine failure, and diverted successfully to Savannah, Georgia. The second, enroute to Chicago, had a single engine failure, and landed safely in Louisville, Kentucky.

The dramatic events highlight the seriousness of the issue. AOPA’s Air Safety Institute has issued a bulletin to accompany the FAA’s Safety Alert For Operators 18015 advising fuelers to put procedures into place to mitigate the likelihood of introducing DEF into aircraft fuel. Because the presence of DEF in fuel is impossible to detect during a preflight inspection, the situation must be addressed prior to fueling.

The post Warning Issued on Contaminated Jet Fuel appeared first on FLYING Magazine.