4 ms·

This is an excellent point. The helicopter exhaust is probably deposited in its entirety on the cherry trees and in the field. I guess the Jetranger dried field

by zzless 7y ago

This is an excellent point. The helicopter exhaust is probably deposited in its entirety on the cherry trees and in the field. I guess the Jetranger dried fields look almost 'organic' in comparison:) Hopefully, the FAA and the oil companies will eventually come up with a less toxic alternative to the 100LL (although they have been promising it for years now).

AWildC182 7y ago
The R44 should be able to run 93E10 without too much modification or 93E0 with no modification but nobody wants a multi fuel solution so here we are :/
mveety 7y ago
I know it a pipe dream, but I’ve been hoping we’ll all switch to diesels. JetA is so much cheaper. That being said I think probably ethanol will replace 100LL. It’s got a sufficient octane rating and the modifications needed to the engine and aircraft are pretty minor.
- Yetanfou 7y ago
  Ethanol is less energy-dense than 100LL, let alone JetA. This means you need to carry more of it as specific fuel consumption will go up by ~20% - 25% (estimate from the increased fuel consumption of multi-fuel car engines running on E85 (a mixture of ~85% ethanol with ~15% petrol). Given the limited load capacity of aircraft I'd expect JetA to be the preferred route as that is actually more energy-dense than 100LL. Both ethanol as well as (something resembling) JetA can be made from renewable sources so there is no advantage either way in that respect. That said it is not feasible to run an engine made for 100LL on JetA while conversion to ethanol in theory can be achieved without too much effort - bigger jets on a carburettor, adjusted injection mappings for fuel injection, all seals and gaskets need to be compatible with ethanol which tends to cause swelling and eventual failure in many types of synthetics. I've converted a few motorcycle engines to run on E85 as that is a more economical fuel here in Sweden. I did the same for some smaller engines and am trying to get a chain saw to run reliably on this fuel. The big advantage here is that the exhaust fumes from E85 are far less noxious than those from petrol or syngas. The problem is that these are 2-stroke engines which depend on a fuel-oil mixture for crankcase lubrication. There are not that many suitable lubricants which mix well with E85.

by zzless 7y ago

AWildC182 7y ago

The R44 should be able to run 93E10 without too much modification or 93E0 with no modification but nobody wants a multi fuel solution so here we are :/

mveety 7y ago

I know it a pipe dream, but I’ve been hoping we’ll all switch to diesels. JetA is so much cheaper. That being said I think probably ethanol will replace 100LL. It’s got a sufficient octane rating and the modifications needed to the engine and aircraft are pretty minor.

Yetanfou 7y ago
Ethanol is less energy-dense than 100LL, let alone JetA. This means you need to carry more of it as specific fuel consumption will go up by ~20% - 25% (estimate from the increased fuel consumption of multi-fuel car engines running on E85 (a mixture of ~85% ethanol with ~15% petrol). Given the limited load capacity of aircraft I'd expect JetA to be the preferred route as that is actually more energy-dense than 100LL. Both ethanol as well as (something resembling) JetA can be made from renewable sources so there is no advantage either way in that respect. That said it is not feasible to run an engine made for 100LL on JetA while conversion to ethanol in theory can be achieved without too much effort - bigger jets on a carburettor, adjusted injection mappings for fuel injection, all seals and gaskets need to be compatible with ethanol which tends to cause swelling and eventual failure in many types of synthetics. I've converted a few motorcycle engines to run on E85 as that is a more economical fuel here in Sweden. I did the same for some smaller engines and am trying to get a chain saw to run reliably on this fuel. The big advantage here is that the exhaust fumes from E85 are far less noxious than those from petrol or syngas. The problem is that these are 2-stroke engines which depend on a fuel-oil mixture for crankcase lubrication. There are not that many suitable lubricants which mix well with E85.