New fuel for GA?

Robert M. Gary wrote:
I've heard of this fuel. I believe its called Ferry Dust.

That.s spelled "Fairy Dust"!

Ang.

d$g$s-one-thee-zer0-zer0 wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Do you have a link to this article ?
It's on www.avweb.com.
And there's also this:
http://www.swiftenterprises.com/Swif...0benefits.html
Make of it what you will.

Swift gives no hint whatsoever as to the consitutents of his fuel. Many
hydrocarbons*, really most hydrocarbon liquids, will burn and can
provide an eplosive mixture with air. It's just a matter of using the
"Edison" method of locating a good replacement for 100 octane no-lead.
This fellow has apparently foung a cost-effective substitute, and he's
keeping the mixture identity under his hat.

*Ages ago (maybe not so long ago), benzine was a useful constutent for
auto fuel. In Europe, for some years, auto fuel was called "Benzin". So
Mr. Swift has found another cost-effective (at today's prices)
substirute for AvGas.

We wonder what the stuff is made of...


Angelo Campanellsa

terry wrote:
for those interested , here is a link to the Swift patent. It sounds
pretty complicated with 5 different components. One of the components
used to lower the vapour pressure is ethyl acetate, a solvent used in
nail polish , varnish etc.
This fuel is going to have quite an interesting odour. The
percentage of the various components can apparently be varied to
adjust octane rating for both aviation and auto use.

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...2&DISPLAY=DESC

For you cehm wonks, here's the nugget:

"... the present inventors provide a renewable fuel comprised of:
(a) one or more low carbon esters derivable from ethanol;
(b) one or more pentosan derivable furans;
(c) one or more aromatic hydrocarbons derived from acetone or propyne;
(d) one or more C4-C io straight chain alkanes derivable from
polysaccharides; and
(e) one or more bio-oils derived from plant germ."

Soup for the needy AvPlane, I say.

Ang.

Angelo Campanella wrote in
:

terry wrote:
for those interested , here is a link to the Swift patent. It
sounds pretty complicated with 5 different components. One of the
components used to lower the vapour pressure is ethyl acetate, a
solvent used in nail polish , varnish etc.
This fuel is going to have quite an interesting odour. The
percentage of the various components can apparently be varied to
adjust octane rating for both aviation and auto use.

http://www.wipo.int/pctdb/en/wo.jsp?...A=WO2008013922
&DI
SPLAY=DESC

For you cehm wonks, here's the nugget:

"... the present inventors provide a renewable fuel comprised of:
(a) one or more low carbon esters derivable from ethanol;
(b) one or more pentosan derivable furans;
(c) one or more aromatic hydrocarbons derived from acetone or propyne;
(d) one or more C4-C io straight chain alkanes derivable from
polysaccharides; and
(e) one or more bio-oils derived from plant germ."

Soup for the needy AvPlane, I say.

Ang.



Tell me this, what do you make of his claim that you can pour this stuff
straight into an airplane set up for Avgas? No timing or mixture
changes, no hardware changes?


Bertie

In article Bertie the Bunyip writes:

Tell me this, what do you make of his claim that you can pour this stuff
straight into an airplane set up for Avgas? No timing or mixture
changes, no hardware changes?

If it really is a substitute for 100LL, then that would be exactly
what one would do.

A pretty big 'if', though. If he can really make the stuff, why is
he talking instead of mixing? If you can put avgas out at 1/2 the price
as he seemed to be claiming, he could get a lot of attention with a
pump pumping for $2.499 / gallon.

Of course, if he makes the stuff without lead, then I don't see why
it wouldn't work in most cars as well. At $2.499 / gallon, he could
sell all he could make.

*IF* he can do it.

Alan

(Alan) wrote in
:

In article Bertie the
Bunyip writes:

Tell me this, what do you make of his claim that you can pour this
stuff straight into an airplane set up for Avgas? No timing or mixture
changes, no hardware changes?

If it really is a substitute for 100LL, then that would be exactly
what one would do.

A pretty big 'if', though. If he can really make the stuff, why is
he talking instead of mixing? If you can put avgas out at 1/2 the
price as he seemed to be claiming, he could get a lot of attention
with a pump pumping for $2.499 / gallon.

Of course, if he makes the stuff without lead, then I don't see why
it wouldn't work in most cars as well. At $2.499 / gallon, he could
sell all he could make.

*IF* he can do it.

Alan


Exactly. Even if were the same price and did what he claims ( greater
range for volume) he could still outsell Avgas.

Bertie

Exactly. Even if were the same price and did what he claims ( greater
range for volume) he could still outsell Avgas.

Bertie

But, who's going to be the first to put it in their own plane?
And how long do you think it would take the FAA to approve it?
Lou

Lou wrote in news:5f087b9e-df00-47a0-8139-
:



Exactly. Even if were the same price and did what he claims ( greater
range for volume) he could still outsell Avgas.

Bertie

But, who's going to be the first to put it in their own plane?
And how long do you think it would take the FAA to approve it?

I'd have put it in my old Luscombe. That thing would have run on carrot
juice. The LeBLond even more so (min oct 58) The injected O-320, not so
much.... There's not even an auto gas STC available for it.



Bertie

In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



Tell me this, what do you make of his claim that you can pour this stuff
straight into an airplane set up for Avgas? No timing or mixture
changes, no hardware changes?

Timing? probably, if the octane rating is there.

Mixture? You would probably have to adjust mixture accordingly. The
different fuel density would probably require adjustments to float
levels.

Other hardware changes?

I would have to see the materials compatibility tests before I started
using it. It has been known since the 1950s that the synthetic rubber
used in hoses, etc. can tolerate either petroleum-based or
parrafin-based fuels.

The problems arise when switching (either way) between the two, since
each type fuel has its own effect on the polymers.

--
Remove _'s from email address to talk to me.

Orval Fairbairn wrote in
news
In article ,
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:



Tell me this, what do you make of his claim that you can pour this
stuff straight into an airplane set up for Avgas? No timing or
mixture changes, no hardware changes?

Timing? probably, if the octane rating is there.

Mixture? You would probably have to adjust mixture accordingly. The
different fuel density would probably require adjustments to float
levels.

Other hardware changes?

I would have to see the materials compatibility tests before I started
using it. It has been known since the 1950s that the synthetic rubber
used in hoses, etc. can tolerate either petroleum-based or
parrafin-based fuels.

The problems arise when switching (either way) between the two, since
each type fuel has its own effect on the polymers.

Well, my luscombe had virtually nothing in the fuel system vunerable to
anything this side of Skydrol, but only because I installed a metal
float and an automotive fuel line. The float seat is metal of course and
there's nothing else in the system that anythign can melt. My KCAB is
anouther thing altogether. The LeBlond I'm going to have to check, but I
think it has a standard MS carb form the thirties anyway, so it should
be fine.


Bertie