| Author |
Message |
niles steckbauer (Niles500)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 1:49 pm: | |
I was having a discussion with a mechanic the other day that ended up talking buses then diesels - then he told me something I never would have believed - he said thay now have 'Diesel Airplane Engines' - an low and behold look at this - he told me they cost from 75 to 90k -
http://www.smaengines.com/enginesr.htm#technical
Comments from th pilots out there?????????? |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 2:50 pm: | |
say ZEPPLIN |
Brian (Bigbusguy)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 3:39 pm: | |
Zepplin is not a air plane is a balloon.
I wonder if it would also run good on #1 or #2 pump diesel?
Brian 4905 Klamath Falls Oregon |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 4:49 pm: | |
zepplin was diesel....
also...go to the "E" place & type in diesel engine....every other diesel engine is a model airplane engine
zepplin had HUGE diesel airplane engines |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 5:21 pm: | |
kinda still 'off topic',but...anybody want to bet a jet engine won't run on diesel....diesel is one of the neatest things in the world,it's medicine,bus fuel,heat...just remember...next Sunday..."I LOVE THE SMELL OF DIESEL IN THE MORNING" |
Brian Brown (Fishbowlbrian)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 5:25 pm: | |
Runs on Jet fuel, eh? Wild. I learn something new every day here.
Hmm... I wonder if a DD 2-stroke would run better, worse, or simply not at all on Jet A fuel?
-BB |
Stan
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 5:27 pm: | |
A local crop duster has one plane with a diesel engine. |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 5:29 pm: | |
bus will run on jet fuel |
Vin (Billybonz)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 5:46 pm: | |
Who knows what JP-8 and JP8+100 are. I know they are military fuels. Are they similar to diesel?
Bones |
Don/TX
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, March 16, 2005 - 9:20 pm: | |
We used to run all the diesel trucks and bobcats on Jet A. You could not tell the difference. |
Johnny
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 12:20 am: | |
JP-8/Jet A is highly refined kerosene. Not great for the injector pump, but a diesel will burn it.
Junkers had a diesel airplane in WW2. |
FAST FRED
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 5:44 am: | |
The Germans had Diesel aircraft BEFORE WW2 , quite sucessfull , the engine weighed more than gas engines , but the fuel was cheaper & lasted longer.
FAST FRED |
Jim Bob
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 8:18 am: | |
Jet fuel has virtually no lubricity & causes accelerated wear in fuel injection equipment. But it's very clean compared to diesel fuel.
Jim-Bob |
Tim Brandt (Timb)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 9:58 am: | |
Two dogs,
These guys burn deisel in their jet
http://www.shockwavejets.com/shockwave.cfm |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 10:03 am: | |
I know....was saying it DOES run on diesel |
Doug Dickinson (Dougd470)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 11:35 am: | |
The Zepplin was more than a balloon - it was a true airship. It has a frame and used gas cells for lift. Quite different from a construction standpoint than a "blimp". A "blimp" is a gas bag and much more like a balloon than an airship.
Zepplins were sometimes gas and sometimes diesel. The later ones for long distance travel were diesel because of fuel consumption and other factors.Read books by Douglas Robinson - he was my father-in-law and an authority on Zepplins. Published several books on the topic. His daughter (my wife) explained that - more than I care to know about.
The US military is headed for (and almost there) with a single fuel concept. In Iraq, they burn the same fuel in turbine choppers as they burn in trucks and Hummers. One tanker will fuel everything.
A bus will "run" on jet fuel - it is similar to #1 kerosine in combustion but more like water from a lubrication standpoint. I don't think I want to use it!
Doug
St Louis MC9 |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, March 17, 2005 - 12:27 pm: | |
I would be willing to accept 140 gallons of jp-4...course ...I'd add a couple gallons of oil to it... |
Johnny
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 10:06 am: | |
There's a guy on TDS who has run a 96 F-250 diesel on kerosene for over 150,000 miles (he gets it cheap). He does add Power Service to every tank, & has had no problems.
I have to say, at $2.28gallon, the 500 gallon heating oil tank ($1.95/gallon) in the basement is looking pretty good right now... |
TWODOGS (Twodogs)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, March 18, 2005 - 10:20 am: | |
so is used oil from those quick change places |
CoryDaneRTS
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 3:57 pm: | |
(" Zepplins were sometimes gas and sometimes diesel. The later ones for long distance travel were diesel because of fuel consumption and other factors ")
From what I understand, All but the Graff Zepplin II ran on a diesel mix, not true diesel. I think the Graff Zep II ran on straight Diesel.
I imagine the mix was either from habit or something in particular that the engines needed. One of my books talks about it, have to go look it up I guess.
I have come to beleive that it does not matter what the cost is anymore. If Gas is cheap, the big 4 will build to suck it all up and increase the price. It eventually will go around as the prices fluctuate over time.
I noticed that the CHRYSLER TURBINE would run on ALCOHOL, like the original cars did. Now why id the government kill that breakthrough?
cd |
Johnny
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, March 19, 2005 - 9:57 pm: | |
They didn't--the car would have cost roughly twice as much as a full-tilt Imperial, since the turbine required so much precision assembly.
Also, it was thirsty, slow, and poured out enough heat to scorch pedestrians.
Any gasoline engine will run on alky with a few tweaks. |
Brian (Bigbusguy)
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 12:13 pm: | |
What I want to know is what can I buy that my old 8v71 will run on that is cheeper then the $2.20 to $2.70 a gal diesel?? And not old french fry goo. A lot of cooking oils will flow when cold when new if one could buy it cheper then the diesel will it work??
Brian 4905 Klamath Falls Oregon |
CoryDaneRTS
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, March 20, 2005 - 10:20 pm: | |
(" Also, it was thirsty, slow, and poured out enough heat to scorch pedestrians.
Any gasoline engine will run on alky with a few tweaks ")
I just read several articals about the Chrysler Turbine and all of your above comments were delt with.
The engineers repeatedly stated that the turbine was running with the economy of the current day piston engines. Stop and go traffic, as with the piston engine, showed higher results.
The turbine recovered over 93% of the heat exhausted and reused for the intake. This heat recovery meant less fuel needed to make heat which drove the turbine.
Having extracted the heat from the exhaust, the temp would be at safe levels.
It is documented that the government stopped the turbine production. It was within days of setting up to become the Chrysler Turbine car. The last engine up-grade was #4, was in a test car, a remodeled Cordoba, but would never make production.
It is also documented that the turbine needed no adjustments (tweeking) to burn alcohol(or any other fuel) as todays piston engines would. The Chrysler engineers were quite proud of that fact.
There are some great articals out there about this topic and makes for interesting reading.
Some of the cars exist today, a couple have been restored to running condition and make certain car shows. There are also some engines that were supposed to have been crippled and given to museums but when they inspected them, they were never crippled. These are also on display at several museums.
Of the cars that exist, mileage varies from 50k miles up to around 80k. The only comments I have found on problems concerns not the turbine at all but a control or instrument for the turbine.
50 of the cars were on the street for testing with everyday car owners. They kept the car for about 3 months. If there were hot exhaust temp concerns, this would never have been possible.
The cars went through 5 cycles of owners/testers before recalled by Chrysler for eventual production set up a few years later.
There is a very short vid of the test cars being prepared for crushing. It is a shame to waste technology, but then a busnut is waste not/want not.
cd |