![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Big John wrote in message . ..
Jim 115-145 octane (purple color) used in WWII aircraft would burn you also. I've had a fuel tank, after sitting in hot sun, gush out when opened to check fuel level and I had to go in and shower and put on a new flight suit to prevent burns and blisters on my chest and arms. The 115-145 also worked in Zippo lighters. When I pre-flighted and checked tanks for water I held Zippo in stream. When just filled would flame up 3-4 inches even in strong wind. G I've also had one filled fresh, leak at altitude (no cockpit pressurization in P-51) and burn by ankle/leg. Don't think they make that stuff any more even on special order? Big John On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 20:01:32 -0400, "Morgans" jisumorgan@charterdotjunkdotnet wrote: "Dan Thomas" wrote in message om... Laquer thinner rips off grease and oil faster than anything else. And catches fire just about as fast as gasoline. And gets under your skin and causes b-b-b-brain duh-damage... Dan One time, I was visiting a small furniture factory, and the guy I went to talk to came out of the plant and into the break room. I didn't notice that he had a lacquer thinner soaked rag with him, and that he tossed it down on the picnic bench. You can see what is coming. I sat on it, unknowingly, and didn't realize it until it had soaked through a relatively large area, and had wetted my thigh down in the process. I danced around, and tried to get the jeans away from my leg, but the damage was done. I ended up having to go in the restroom and washing out the area with soap and water, and my leg also. Moral of the story: Don't get lacquer thinner on sensitive areas of your body. It really burns! :-( I once filled a motorcycle tank right up to the top, with cool gas on a hot day. When I hit the highway that cool gas expanded and came up to the top of the tank and blew back. It felt cool at first................. I now check the vent line for wasp larvae every so often. Pragmatist. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Morgans" wrote: Moral of the story: Don't get lacquer thinner on sensitive areas of your body. It really burns! :-( ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Gee.... Who would have thunk you were a 'sensitive guy', too. Barnyard BOb -- |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Richard
It's probaby all Nitro with a touch of lead to stop detonation G Maybe some of our 'oil' company types can explain how the 115-145 was made in WWII? We called it 115-145 octane not some other name. The Hurricane is gone and back to normal summer Wx here in Houston (Thunderstorms and rain showers). Big John On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 04:47:17 GMT, Richard Riley wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:42:27 -0500, Big John wrote: :Jim : :115-145 octane (purple color) used in WWII aircraft would burn you :also. I've had a fuel tank, after sitting in hot sun, gush out when ![]() :new flight suit to prevent burns and blisters on my chest and arms. : :The 115-145 also worked in Zippo lighters. When I pre-flighted and :checked tanks for water I held Zippo in stream. When just filled :would flame up 3-4 inches even in strong wind. G : :I've also had one filled fresh, leak at altitude (no cockpit ![]() : ![]() They must have it at Reno, at least. And there's a small refinery here in So Cal that sells racing fuel, I've heard of them doing up to 150 octane (I don't know how that's chemically possible, but that's what they say) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Big John" wrote in message ... Richard It's probaby all Nitro with a touch of lead to stop detonation G Maybe some of our 'oil' company types can explain how the 115-145 was made in WWII? We called it 115-145 octane not some other name. From the Wikipedia: One interesting historical issue involving octane rating took place during WWII. Germany received the vast majority of their oil from Romania, and set up huge distilling plants in Germany to produce petrol from it. In the US the oil was not "as good" and the oil industry instead had to invest heavily in various expensive boosting systems. This turned out to be a huge blessing in disguise. US industry was soon delivering fuels of ever-increasing octane ratings by adding more of the boosting agents, with cost no longer a factor during wartime. By war's end their aviation fuel was commonly 130 to 150 octane, which could easily be put to use in existing engines to deliver much more power by increasing the compression delivered by the superchargers. The Germans, relying entirely on "good" petrol, had no such industry, and instead had to rely on ever-larger engines to deliver more power. The result is that British and US engines consistently outperformed German ones during the war, playing no small part in the defeat of the Luftwaffe. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Richard Riley wrote: On Tue, 15 Jul 2003 21:42:27 -0500, Big John wrote: :Jim : :115-145 octane (purple color) used in WWII aircraft would burn you :also. I've had a fuel tank, after sitting in hot sun, gush out when ![]() :new flight suit to prevent burns and blisters on my chest and arms. : :The 115-145 also worked in Zippo lighters. When I pre-flighted and :checked tanks for water I held Zippo in stream. When just filled :would flame up 3-4 inches even in strong wind. G : :I've also had one filled fresh, leak at altitude (no cockpit ![]() : ![]() They must have it at Reno, at least. And there's a small refinery here in So Cal that sells racing fuel, I've heard of them doing up to 150 octane (I don't know how that's chemically possible, but that's what they say) An octane "rating" of over 100 simply means that it has anti-knock characteristics that are *better* than 100% octane. You graph the knock resistance vs the % octane, and 'extrapolate the curve' right of the 100% value. No big deal. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:43:11 -0600, "Bill Daniels"
wrote: In the 1950's I saw a translated German report on the chemical analysis of fuel from allied aircraft shot down over Germany. It referred to "high levels of lead contamination from poorly make pipe joints in American refineries". It appeared, at least from this report, that the Germans completely failed to understand the implications of their lab tests and the benefits of tetraethyl lead as an octane booster. Bill Daniels That just cracks me up Bill. For all their much vaunted and highly admired military technology, the Germans continually shot themselves in the foot during WWII. This is just one example. During the war, the the British took incredible pains to prevent their airborn radar technology from falling into the hands of the Germans so as to prevent them from reverse engineering the same set and turning it against them, or devising a homing device or warning device. Yet when the centimetric radar actually DID end up in German hands when an unfortunate airplane that had it went down, they completely missunderstood how it worked and dismissed it. From mid war on, German U-boats were harassed and sunk at increasingly higher numbers by aircraft and the Germans appeared clueless as to why this was happening. It is said that the Germans never made small mistakes, they only made big ones. Corky Scott |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Introduction to a newbie | Shane O | Aerobatics | 9 | December 31st 04 06:13 AM |