SNIP

This is great for race cars, but horrible for airplanes where we want

the

highest energy density fuel possible (more bang per pound therefore

better

range). Kerosene is better than gasoline, diesel is better than

kerosene,

and I suppose if you could make an engine run on tar, that would be

even

better.

Monty

Excellent commentary, Monty.  My Dad is an old retired Naval Aviator
("they say they're *better* than pilots" - The Right Stuff) and the jet

Navy

actively sought denser fuels for the early jets to increase the range.

Weight

was higher but the problem was limits on fuel volume in the tanks.  They
could burn gasoline, and sometimes did, but had special high density

"kerosene-

like" dense fuel made up.  I forget the designation, perhaps JP2 or JP3.
There are probably some REAL "Nasal Radiators" out there that can
correct this if I've gotten it garbled from my Dad.

This is one of the potential advantages of an aviation diesel, too.

Bill Freeman

>From a current "Nasal Radiator", we now use kerosene based JP-8 for aircraft
in the Navy.  Admittedly I don't know all of it's properties, but it does
have a suitably high flash point for safe handling on board ships.  On the
subject of using fuel as a coolant - in the FA-18 Hornet the fuel is used to
cool the accessory drive units on each engine (generator, hyd pump, fuel
pump).  From there the fuel is circulated through the relatively small and
thin internal wing tanks to radiate the gained heat.  Unfortunately, I can't
think of a good use for this concept in our homebuilt aircraft.  :(

Mike Amos

 
The AirCraft Rotary Engine NewsLetter.              Powered by Linux.
ACRE NL web site.
http://home.earthlink.net/~rotaryeng/            http://www.linux.org