On Wed, 18 Aug 2004 08:54:01 +0300 (EEST), Janne Blomqvist
wrote:

Robert M. Gary wrote:
http://www.age85.org/ProjectDescription.htm
They're testing it on a 201 right now.

Looking at the "project milestones" part of that webpage:

Project Milestones

* July, 1996 - Project Begins
* August, 1996 - Acquire Cessna 180
* January, 1997 - Team w/ TX Skyways
* June, 1997 - Install Ethanol Engine

"I believe" this not only has o-rings and seals replaced to tolerate
the alcohol (probably viton), but *probably* has lower compression.


* December, 1997 - Begin 500 Hour Fight Test
* November, 1998 - Finish 500 Hour Flight Test
* December, 1998 - Engine Teardown
* April, 1999 - FAA STC's Obtained
* July, 1999 - Project Expansion
* September, 1999 - Mooney 201 Acquired
* December, 1999 - Grumman Ag Cat Acquired


...it seems like they dropped off the face of the earth about 4 years
ago. The website itself has a 2003 copyright, but that of course
doesn't take much effort to update once in a while.

Well I'm not from the US, but it seems to me that you have quite the
farm lobby over there. I wouldn't be surprised if this is (or was,
depending on if the project actually is still alive) yet another
attempt by the farmers to peddle their wares with the help of
government subsidies.

Having been on both sides of the fence, farm subsidies are one of
those "damned if you do and dammed if you don't" sort of things.

Unlike many industries where if the individual can't make a positive
return they go out of business, in farming it affects everyone long
term. Crop prices have not changed a great deal, with some
exceptions, over many years while the end products have.

More and more farming is moving from the small (relatively speaking)
family farms to the large corporate farms.

Long term the subsidies help to reduce the end product price to the
consumer. OTOH had we never had any to begin with, we *might* be
better off and then again we might not.

I can't see why ethanol would be a particularly good fuel for planes;
it's hydrophilic (as opposed to gasoline or most petroleum products

Which to me is a good thing up to a point. IE, if you get a bit of
rain in the mix it might reduce the power slightly, but at least it
wouldn't cause a failure. OTOH you could get a lot in and never know
it, which would not be considered a good thing.

which are hydrophobic), it eats rubber and has a low energy
content. Certainly not a straight replacement for avgas.

I don't think it'd have the octane to directly replace 100 LL either
and it'd have a great time with the bladder tanks in the Deb.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com