4 ms·
The whole point of this decades-long unleaded AVGAS saga is to develop a fuel that is a drop-in replacement for the current leaded AVGAS. A fuel that needs to b
by jabl 4y ago
The whole point of this decades-long unleaded AVGAS saga is to develop a fuel that is a drop-in replacement for the current leaded AVGAS. A fuel that needs to be stored either in a pressure tank or chilled does not fulfill that requirement.
Now, if you're developing a new plane from scratch, I guess propane in theory could be an option. But why? For aircraft, energy density of the fuel is important, and propane does pretty well here, slightly better in fact than gasoline or kerosene (jet fuel). But in practice more than offset by the requirement to store the fuel pressurized. And then you have the whole fuel infrastructure issue, how are you gonna convince airports to stock propane considering they're already struggling to find an economic case for AVGAS due to the long-term decline of general aviation.
I think if you're going to develop a new plane, it would make sense to make it use the fuel that's available, namely Jet A1 (well, maybe electric for some usecases). Sure, it's not usable in an Otto engine, but since you're developing a new plane anyway, power it by a diesel engine or turbine.
- Gordonjcp 4y agoYes, and indeed in the mid-to-late 90s a lot of manufacturers experimented with Peugeot XUD engines in aircraft - various Merc ones too, but they were a bit too "high precision" for aircraft use and rattly old Citroën BX diesels were about perfect :-)
- jabl 4y agoCurrently some of the most widely used diesel aviation engines, the Thielert/Technify/Continental 1.7/2.0 liter one, as well as the Austro E4, are both based on a Mercedes car engine.