In article k.net,
"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

R. David Steele wrote:
On 14 Apr 2004 22:44:09 -0700, (KDR)
wrote:

If necessary, is it possible to use F-76 as aviation fuel? I've read
somewhere that the RN's Invincible class carrier can trade off her
endurance for embarked air group's endurance by using ship fuel tanks
as 'swing tanks'. Can anyone confirm this one way or the other?

Thanks in advance

Do a little research.

I suggest the same for you, especialy before you dismiss a reasonable
question from a regualr, and usually well-informed, poster.

1) Ship power plants are not "jet engines" -- they are marine gas turbines.
Sometimes these are derived from aircraft jet engines, but they are not the
same. Terminology matters.

2) Marine gas turbines can burn fuels, like F76 diesel, that are not
considered suitable for aircraft engines. They can also burn jet fuel, but
the reverse is not true. A jet aircraft probably cannot burn F76, at least
not for very long. So I'd agree with several earlier posts that this
"swing" tankage would be jet fuel diverted to ship propulsion if need be,
rather than F76 diverted to aircraft use.

Looking at the specs, and the tutorial, it appears that F76 and JP-5 are
essentially the same except for the anti-icing additives in JP-5.

Both can be used in marine turbines and marine diesels.
F76 is cheaper.
JP-5 burns cleaner.

You could probably use F76 in a helo that is not going to high altitude
(in a pinch, probably not specifically approved).

JP-5 and JP-8 also have anti-static additives that are not needed
aboard ship for marine use.

--
Harry Andreas
Engineering raconteur