Reducing the air show carbon footprint

Hey, you guys have FEMA 😉

Yeah, that organizations spending is a real license to steal. :diablo:

…even if you could use every drop in the tank (which you can’t). 🙂

Sure you can, just ignore the fuel warning light. I filled up my 40 litre tank with 43 litres of petrol two or three weeks ago…

Hey, you guys have FEMA 😉

The big scam: The carbon footprint/credit scheme.

Edit… I forgot: with no disrespect to my buddies Frank and Arthur above. 😉 . BTW that is a pretty good water management thing you’all have got going. Probably could save us another Katrina instead of always going with the lowest bidder.

It tells you the truth based on 10 second snapshots.
But it is best to use the MoT qualified/certified milometer.

My trip computer has two settings for fuel consumption, instantaneous or average, plus two other settings, global and trip.

If I use the global average setting apparently my car does 49.50 mpg but I know it actually only does 42.25 mpg based on the mileage and how much diesel I put in.

Now I know my average is based on the accuracy of the milometer and the actual quantity of diesel I put in but these cannot account for a 17% discrepancy between the mpg figures…..so the car lies! 😀

Lets be honest here, what use is an average mpg figure anyway? The trip computer tells me the distance I can go based on my remaining fuel.

Could it be that the car manufacturer wants to give us a false impression of how economical our car is? :diablo:

In a previous job, I had a 60 minute jouney to work, 95% of that journey was on the M/way. So, with that sort of boredom daily, I experimented. At 56ish mph the journey took 75 mins, but my mpg was in the low 50’s per gal. (It was a Mark 3 Golf Ryder 1600).
At 70 it took the hour, and MPG was 42.
At 80/90 (It was before cameras on the M62/M57) it took 52 mins but the MPG was down at 20 something. Pathetic, just proves that to save 8 minutes (Big deal!!!!) I used twice the fuel

That is an interesting real-life experiment and the results don’t really surprise me. Speed has a great influence on fuel consumption because the power required to move a car through the air is in proportion to the square of its speed…..twice as fast…four times the power!

As for the MPG decreasing because the tank is full, this must be true, cannot dispute science.

Yes, a lighter car will use less fuel but the weight difference of a full tank (a 14 gallon tank-full weighs 54kg) makes an almost negligible difference to fuel consumption, and of course it is not possible to keep it full, on average it is only ever half full, even if you could use every drop in the tank (which you can’t). 🙂

Theoretically, yes…..but in practice a negligible improvement.

My point was, don’t take for granted what the trip-computer in your car tells you…..mine just lies!

It tells you the truth based on 10 second snapshots.
One hit of the gas to get round an annoying truck or Volvo and you can undo miles of 50mph conservation. But it is best to use the MoT qualified/certified milometer.
In a previous job, I had a 60 minute jouney to work, 95% of that journey was on the M/way. So, with that sort of boredom daily, I experimented. At 56ish mph the journey took 75 mins, but my mpg was in the low 50’s per gal. (It was a Mark 3 Golf Ryder 1600).
At 70 it took the hour, and MPG was 42.
At 80/90 (It was before cameras on the M62/M57) it took 52 mins but the MPG was down at 20 something. Pathetic, just proves that to save 8 minutes (Big deal!!!!) I used twice the fuel, drove in twice the danger and was on the look-out for Police instead of looking out for problems.
Luckily now, I walk to work, 500 yards.
As for the MPG decreasing because the tank is full, this must be true, cannot dispute science.
Personally, I fill up, run to the red light (40 miles from empty) and fill again. But a tankful now lasts me 2 months, and my MPG is pathetic because it’s all on short runs.

Try not filling the tank to the top and note the mpg. As the car will be running lighter the fuel economy will improve as the engine is not having to lug so much weight about.

Theoretically, yes…..but in practice a negligible improvement.

My point was, don’t take for granted what the trip-computer in your car tells you…..mine just lies!

By the time the water starts rising seriously, I predict my part of the Netherlands will re-unite with Belgium just like we were between 1830 and 1839… if it weren’t for those damn traitors in Maastricht, the two of us would have been fellow countrymen 😎

Not that the water will seriously rise, of course. Our Crown Prince has been given the wonderful task of Water Management. He’ll draw a line in the sand for sure, a line the Sea Dare Not Cross!

Don’t dig too much, you’re pretty near sea level already.. If that water rise happens … 😉

That’s true. You know you can’t blame us for wanting to leave our country. Besides, with Austria recently taking over the Creepy Cellar Trophy, Wallonia is considered safe again…

…yeah, I’ll get my coat. And umbrella, helmet, safety vest, and entrenching tool. 😉

Hey, the dutch come here no matter what 😉

And if it was to increase the temperatures a little, so what – we might get a decent summer in Europe, for a change. Bring on the palmtrees ! :diablo:

But Frank, you know the last Walloon with a job tries to run a skipiste somewhere in the Ardennes. You want him to end up unemployed as well?
:dev2:

What about forgetting about the new “ecologic” cult? Carbon footprint here, emissions there. All good excuses to culpabilise people and impose more taxes on them.

And if it was to increase the temperatures a little, so what – we might get a decent summer in Europe, for a change. Bring on the palmtrees ! :diablo:

These figures come from the trip-computer on your car?

Have you tried filling your car (absolutely full to the top of the filler neck) and checking your actual fuel consumption against what your trip-computer tells you?

You may be unpleasantly surprised! 😉

Try not filling the tank to the top and note the mpg. As the car will be running lighter the fuel economy will improve as the engine is not having to lug so much weight about.

If anyone complains about airshow pollution ask them to think about the thousands of vehicles converging on football grounds on a weekly basis. A quick calculation should show that aviation is far less polluting than football.

Imagine my suprise to see that my average fuel consumption went to 60 miles per gallon from my petrol engine. ( Average motoring produces something closer to 40 mpg ).

These figures come from the trip-computer on your car?

Have you tried filling your car (absolutely full to the top of the filler neck) and checking your actual fuel consumption against what your trip-computer tells you?

You may be unpleasantly surprised! 😉

How often do you manage to get UP to 50 mph on the M11?

It always seems to be jammed when I’m on it!

Maybe Im missing something here but I find it kind of ironic that your suggesting we reduce the carbon footprint we leave when we travel to airshows to watch gas guzzling, emission ejecting aircraft.

Maybe you should save the petrol and reduce your footprint by staying at home and purchasing a DVD? :p

On a serious note I would put the idea forward that more people car share on the way to airshow’s than they do on the journey to and from work……… so in effect we may be a cleaner bunch than you give credit for. 😀 ( please note the environmentally friendly green smiley)

You have short memories, the 50mph speed limit was introduced for a period in the 70’s during the time of the Yom Kippur War I recall.
I remember travelling down to Braintree from Notty in my brothers car and it was a wierd experience travelling down the A1. While keen to enforce the rule, the police tended to be fairly lenient with offenders, ie, a quick flash of the lights and 5 fingers held up, they must have had a hard time of it.
Can anyone remember how long that went on for, and is it still the rule in the States.
Quite frankly, driving from Stansted to DX up the M11 at the best of times doesn’t allow you to go much faster, the lorries tend to struggle up some of those hills, which is the point at which the heavily loaded one’s try to overtake everything and can’t.
In theory, Braintree to DX takes about 25-30 mins, duel carriageway/motorway and pushing it a bit, the AA Routefinder says 51 mins, must be in old Fred Dibnahs ‘Betsy’ I reckon.
When I go to Legends, it will be by the back roads, it’s more pleasant, free of traffic, and really gets you in the mood instead of suffering the unknown quantity of the A120/M11, and I can assure you it doesn’t take 51mins, who works these figures out for the AA.
I’m sure the carbon footprint is horrendous though, but I’ve only got a little Puegot 206 which will go on for ever with a tenners worth of petrol.

What do you propose to do with the angry , frustrated truckers stuck behind?

S0d ’em! 😡

It’s about time truckers got some of their own medicine… Go for it!:D:D:D