Why Are Gasoline-Like Fuels Favored For Aircraft?

Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft. Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need extra
weight.

This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?

Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure, become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground, primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.

--
Will

NOTE: To reply, CHANGE the username to westes AT earthbroadcast.com

"CHANGE username to westes" wrote in
message ...
Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft.
Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as
expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need
extra
weight.

This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?

Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure,
become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high
pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to
support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground,
primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read
about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.

Your mistake is to assume that gases are always lighter than liquid fuels.
Obviously they are under normal pressure but to be any use as fuels for a
vehicle they have to be compressed and/or liquified. This negates any
apparent weight gains. You also need to factor in the weight of insulation
and/or pressure vessels.

Weight for weight petrol and kerosine are very energetic indeed.

One of the greatest challenges facing us will be how to make hydrogen into a
usable form for cars and aircraft as the oil reserves we currently use begin
to run out over the next fifty years or so.

John

"CHANGE username to westes" wrote in
message ...
Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft.
Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as
expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need
extra
weight.

This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?

First thing to get clear

Gasoline is NOT repeat NOT favored for military aircraft

Now to address gas based fuels

Gas is by its nature volatile and a severe fire hazard, not just
for the aircraft but for the ground base/carrier. With a liquid fuel
you first have to gasify it to make it burn, thats what the wick is
for on an oil lamp or the carburettor on a car engine, with gas based fuels
you are already there

There are other problems though.

1) Gas , even when liquified, takes up more volume for the same
calorific value

2) The heavy containers needed for compressed or liquified gas
are a severe weight penalty


Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure,
become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high
pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.


There's none that I know of and if there were you just introduced
another level of complexity and extra weight

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to
support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground,
primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read
about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.


Modern aircraft dont use gasoline as fuel, they use relatively
inert grades of Kerosene stable enough that its hard to
light with a match unless you provide a wick or vaporise
the stuff.. Somehow I doubt any flammable gas would be safer.

I KNOW both LPG nor Hydrogen are more dangerous.

Keith

From: "Keith Willshaw"

snip

Modern aircraft dont use gasoline as fuel, they use relatively
inert grades of Kerosene

snip

Keith

They don't? Recips tend to use gasoline. There are plenty of modern aircraft
that use recips.

Turbines use kerosene equivelents.

Dan, U. S. Air Force

"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "Keith Willshaw"

snip

Modern aircraft dont use gasoline as fuel, they use relatively
inert grades of Kerosene

snip

Keith

They don't? Recips tend to use gasoline. There are plenty of modern
aircraft
that use recips.


Mostly light GA types and damn few military ones .

Turbines use kerosene equivelents.


Which needless to say isnt gasoline-like.

Keith

In article , "CHANGE username to
westes" wrote:

Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft. Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need extra
weight.

This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?

Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure, become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground, primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.

Energy density. Look up the BTU/lb of different fuels, Gasoline and
Kerosine are
among the highest.

Light fuel tanks and high density fuel or
very heavy fuel tanks and low density fuel.

A college course on combustion theory will cover all this.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur

"...Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure, become
explosive?..."

Yes there is! Such fuels are termed hypergolic. One such combination was
used in the Walter RII-211 rocket motor of the World War II German Me 263
interceptor.

WDA
Former Fury Flyer!

end


"CHANGE username to westes" wrote in
message ...
Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft.
Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as
expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need
extra
weight.

This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?

Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure,
become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high
pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to
support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground,
primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read
about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.

--
Will

NOTE: To reply, CHANGE the username to westes AT earthbroadcast.com

From: "WDA"
Date: 10/7/2003 4:04 PM Central Daylight Time
Message-id:

"...Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure, become
explosive?..."

Yes there is! Such fuels are termed hypergolic. One such combination was
used in the Walter RII-211 rocket motor of the World War II German Me 263
interceptor.

WDA
Former Fury Flyer!


And used with varying degrees of success in the Me163 Komet.

Dan, U. S. Air Force, retired

"WDA" wrote in message
t...
"...Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure,
become
explosive?..."

Yes there is! Such fuels are termed hypergolic. One such combination was
used in the Walter RII-211 rocket motor of the World War II German Me 263
interceptor.

WDA
Former Fury Flyer!

end


I'd hardly call either C-stoff ( hydrogen peroxide) or T-stoff
(hydrazine hydrate, methyl alcohol and water) inert gases.

Keith

In article ,
says...
Since taking up aviation as a hobby, I have wondered why gasoline, and
similar oil-derived liquid fuels, have become the defacto standard for all
forms of general aviation and commercial and military aircraft. Comparing
Jet fuel to something like natural gas, Jet fuel is four times as expensive.
Liquid fuels are extremely heavy, and certainly airplanes do not need extra
weight.


Perhaps because in the early development of aircraft it was found to be a
sutible fuel ?




This leads me to wonder why haven't engines been commercialized that can
burn gas-based fuels? Is the only reason safety, because of the
explosive nature of gas fuels like natural gas or hydrogen?


You will find any number fo ground vehicles that use LPG for fuel.


Isn't there some way you could use two separate gases, which in their
separate state are inert, but combined together under high pressure, become
explosive? Such a combination would not ignite if the airplane crashed
(you could separate the gases into separate containers on each side of the
airplane, at the wingtips), but in controlled injection into a high pressure
compartment could be made explosive in a controlled way, in a very limited
space.

Think how much fuel is being wasted each day on airplanes, simply to support
the extra weight required to carry the fuel itself. Think how dangerous
airplanes are during relatively survivable impacts to the ground, primarily
because they are gasoline bombs. I would be very interested to read about
efforts to develop gas based engines for general aviation or commercial
aircraft. I would appreciate any pointers to web sites or books.


Think how safe airplanes would be if they were powered by coal fired steam
engines....

No wait, that won't work either.. coal dust = explosions..




--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.