Ja no worries…. a case of mis-information perhaps…. of who ever wrote it didnt know what they were talking about.
JP-4, AVTUR, Diesel and even Kerosene are almost the same stuff.
All turbine engine and jet engined aircraft have an alternative fuel list in their operating manual. They can in an emergency use alternative fuels for a short period of time. The Su-25Frogfoot is one aircraft which was advertised to run on diesel should it need it.
100LL AVGAS (100 being the octane rating…. LL stands for Low Lead) doesnt not contain enough lead for the high compression of the old radials… AVGAS is the only fuel left being made with a real lead content. AVGAS has a very high flash point and evapourates very quickly. It is a more refined form of everyday automotive petrol.
A few years ago it was announced that AVGAS was going to disappear because of emissions laws etc… (2011 was the date i can recall)…. but dont quote me on this….
Hence all piston engine aircraft will simply cease to fly.
You may say… why not use “Preimium” fuel as used in cars ??…. For one thing certification of a “new fuel” on old piston engines (of which there are 1000s of different models) will literally cost billions and the stuff we use in our cars actually cause more harm to engines then good.
Piston engine manufacturers are now in a race to build and certifiy diesel engines (including bio-diesel) to fit to at least some aircraft. I know Brazil has flown the first bio-diesel piston engine, the french had built one and also the USA had built a few.
The poor old Caribou is very long in the tooth and very labour intensive to maintain it flying. We all know in reality that nothing will be able to replace it.
About 16yrs ago , if not more, a company in the USA replaced the Pratt and Whitney radials in the Caribou with PT-6 turbo-props. The engine nacells looks a bit funny, but it improved the old duck immensly and the conversion was offered to Australia. It had made a short list back in those days, but was rejected in favour of “new” aircraft… (Which sadly we are still waiting on)…
Ironically…. we now own “new” 30year old SeaSprite helicopters…. have bought 2nd hand warships…. and 2nd hand main battle tanks from the USA :confused:
The C-27 would be the best replacement…mainly because of the common engines and cockpit displays…
The dash-8 doesnt have a rear ramp …. nor is it available as a combi (Freighter/ passenger version). Though it really is a great aircraft dont get me wrong.
The MRH-90 decision was interesting to say the least. (Interesting as having a “mixed” fleet is good and bad at the same time).But it certainly was in no way intended to “replace” the Blackhawk. The powers that be wanted a helicopter which could seat more troops then the Blackhawk and with greater range. The Blackhawk was still a contender for the contest but was needed in greater numbers.
Perhaps when the time comes to replace the whole fleet more MRH-90s will be used.
The “chook” numbers really needs to be increased… and the current fleet modernised or replaced. The lifting power from its cargo hook is a great assest indeed. Unless of course its replaced with a helicopter with the same sling capacity. (I dunno how much a MRH-90 can lift off hand).
The C17 order of 4 really should be 5 or 6 (as one will always be in for maintainence somewhere), but it is a step in the right direction.
The C130J may not be all its cracked up to be….. Having heard a story that because of the increase in aircraft length… that floor loading is very critical in order to avoid the floor from cracking etc….. the heaviest load needs to over the undercarriage…. but this in turn means the aircraft c of g is to the rear… not really ideal. I will have to try and find out more about this if it is true or not.
Sign In
