A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

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.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Piloting
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Ethanol Powered Aircraft



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old August 16th 06, 02:33 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Greg Copeland[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:50:17 -0700, Bret Ludwig wrote:
the very long run, nukeplants may be built under the sea, in huge
subterranean underwater canyons with a closed power cycle, and the
wastes glassified and buried. In the shorter run...who knows?


I have a hard time imagining anything less likely. This sounds like a
"World of Tomorrow" movie clip made during the 50's. We all know how much
we love our flying cars and cities in the skies!

Greg

  #42  
Old August 16th 06, 02:38 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jay Honeck
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,573
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft

You fly a balloon -- in WINTER?

BRRRRRRR!


Well, they do carry a really big heater with 'em...


and once aloft, there is no wind.


"It's a dry cold..."
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

  #43  
Old August 16th 06, 02:57 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Greg Copeland[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft

On Tue, 15 Aug 2006 09:33:50 -0500, James Robinson wrote:

"Jay Honeck" wrote:

Aside from the obvious stupidity of using more energy to make ethanol
than it actually produces,


There is a certain amount of healthy debate on that issue.

A couple of professors from Cornell and Berkeley have been making that
argument, but the Dept. of Energy has come out with the "definitive"
analysis that concludes you get something like 25 or 30% more energy out,
when corn is used as the base. A higher level of return is projected for
other sources, like switchgrass.


I seriously question their results. Pretty much every other study shows,
with current technology, that's pretty much impossible. On top of that,
countries which are currently using agro to produce eneregy have long
since moved from crappy corn to crops that make more sense: sugar cane,
sugar beats, and hemp. Even with these crops, obtaining a return was
difficult.

Beyond that, every study I've read which indicated a return from corn were
torn to bits by other papers, rightfully so, because they ignored huge
segments of the process which chewed up energy to obtain the energy from
corn.

I have to agree, trying to obtain energy from corn is stupid when far
better crops readily exist. Trying to make it work with corn only
translates into higher prices at the end of the day.

Greg

  #44  
Old August 16th 06, 03:48 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Jose[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,632
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft

I have to agree, trying to obtain energy from corn is stupid when far
better crops readily exist. Trying to make it work with corn only
translates into higher prices at the end of the day.


.... which is probably the =real= agenda.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.
  #46  
Old August 16th 06, 06:22 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Grumman-581[_1_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 491
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:40:25 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:
Perhaps 23,437.5 square miles, or an area 153 miles on a side, is
easier to visualize. :-)


In other words, a medium sized Texas ranch...
  #47  
Old August 16th 06, 06:49 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
JJS
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 41
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft


"Bret Ludwig" wrote in message ups.com...

LNG, as used in the Beech system (Beech Aircraft really did the
pioneering work on LNG, of course it went nowhere....) was stored at
very low temperature at approximately atmospheric pressure in a dewar
type insulated tank. It's important to understand that methane-natural
gas- is an incondensible gas for all intents and purposes, like oxygen
and nitrogen but unlike propane, nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, ammonia
which can be stored at human-habitable ambient temperatures at
pressures feasible for storage tanks.

Methane and propane can be burned in an IC engine in similar fashion
once they are a gas, but at very different fuel-air mixtures. Methane
is approximately 108 octane and propane is in the 103-106 range
depending on exactly what's in it (LP motor fuel is nothing like
reagent grade and contains methane, butane, methanol, and lots of
other junk).

LNG would be practical but the cost of distribution would be high and
the fuel system is fairly complex, at least in the Beech system. CNG
has no range to speak of. LPG is very practical for all sort of ground
vehicles and has been done successfully in helicopters, but large
volume storage in fixed wing aircraft is problematic. A fixed wing
aircraft designed around a fuselage LP tank as a stressed member might
make some sense.


For those of you who have not yet decided that this guy Ludwig is a dufus and / or a troll.... natural gas is not
methane. Although methane makes up approximately 96% of the local natural gas here, there are many other
constituents. Several of the products that he says are stored at human habitable temperatures... well lets just say
that he is wrong at least on the ones that I am most familiar with. For instance, ammonia is stored at temperatures
around -28 degrees f. As a matter of fact, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and ammonia are all cryogenically stored. BTW,
we condense methane at -282 degrees f. at my work place 24 hours a day as a step in recovery hydrogen for reuse.

Joe Schneider
N8437R



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----
  #48  
Old August 16th 06, 06:59 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bret Ludwig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft


For those of you who have not yet decided that this guy Ludwig is a dufus and / or a troll.... natural gas is not
methane. Although methane makes up approximately 96% of the local natural gas here, there are many other
constituents.


96% is "most", most of the time. Where I'm from.

Several of the products that he says are stored at human habitable
temperatures... well lets just say
that he is wrong at least on the ones that I am most familiar with. For instance, ammonia is stored at temperatures
around -28 degrees f. As a matter of fact, nitrogen, carbon dioxide, and ammonia are all cryogenically stored.


Nitrogen must be cryogenic to be in liquid form. CO2 and NH3 are
stored in regular steel tanks and when both gas and liquid are in the
tank, and the tank is allowed to sit with no flow, the tank assumes
ambient temperature (or higher in the sun) and the pressure inside is a
direct function of the product's temperature. Same with Freon (most
kinds), propane, etc. Nitrogen, oxygen, hydrogen, helium, are a liquid
at earth temperatures only under freakish pressures. There is said to
be solid methane at the bottom of the ocean in certain places but what
is the absolute pressure at those depths? About ten thousand psi is the
practical limit for pressure vessels. That's why these gases are
transported cryogenically or as _gases_ in the 2-3000 psi welding type
cylinders.

  #49  
Old August 16th 06, 07:09 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bret Ludwig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft


ktbr wrote:



oh...So... since YOU don't fly any of these aircraft, the fuel they
use should banned. And you could care less whether they fly or not...
Who cares if most flight schools use airplanes that burn this fuel.
You are knee-jerkingly ignorant of the facts and that is a sad
comentary.


Even given a unlimited fuel supply they will be out of the air well
within my lifetime unless highly modified or someone starts making
R-3350 Turbocompound and RR Merlin parts again including cases, banks
and cranks. The Connies could now be converted to turboprop in the
stock nacelle and with the stock blades (the hub, or at least the pitch
mechanism, would need changing depending on whether a single or double
shaft engine were used) but a turbine Mustang just isn't a Mustang and
Allisons are in the same boat.

Running them on straight ethanol would be the easy mod.

Besides, I thought we were done "aggrandizing WWII"......((ROTFLMAO)).

  #50  
Old August 16th 06, 07:13 PM posted to rec.aviation.piloting
Bret Ludwig
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default Ethanol Powered Aircraft


Grumman-581 wrote:
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 15:40:25 GMT, Larry Dighera
wrote:
Perhaps 23,437.5 square miles, or an area 153 miles on a side, is
easier to visualize. :-)


In other words, a medium sized Texas ranch...


The point is, it's a short term fix anyway. If the oil gets so scarce
a small quantity is needed truly at any cost, then get it there. Not
now. Let oil go high enough to get alternatives capitalized, with a
price floor if necessary, lest the Saudis pull the rug out from under
the billion dollar investments needed.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
UAV's and TFR's along the Mexico boarder John Doe Piloting 145 March 31st 06 06:58 PM
I want to build the most EVIL plane EVER !!! Eliot Coweye Home Built 237 February 13th 06 04:55 AM
NTSB: USAF included? Larry Dighera Piloting 10 September 11th 05 10:33 AM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 April 5th 04 03:04 PM
Homebuilt Aircraft Frequently-Asked Questions (FAQ) Ron Wanttaja Home Built 0 July 4th 03 04:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:52 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.