Looking for ideas, articles, etc., with Aviation applications... specifically, in a teaching/classroom setting...
"Green" Aviation applications
- Thread starter runtherace
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil. -
Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
- Status
there is nothing green about aviation, as a 16 year aircraft mechanic I can tell you flying is energy intensive, the fuel millage is poor and the waste stream generated by it is huge. There are a few attempts being made to run jet engines on biofuels which just pumps up the already large bill when fueling an aircraft. not to mention the shortening of the engine life span which is dramatic in any honest coverage of the attempts. Biofuels gel at a much higher temp than kerosene, have very bad problems with water suspended in the fuel, and have less energy per pound (the last thing you need more of is weight). ("greenwashing")
Adding aerodynamic helpers like winglets, gap seals, and improved engine efficiency is the only reasonable way to get a good return on your investment. Check out Boeing and the new 787 construction details (popular mechanics had a good article recently) using carbon fiber, bleedless engines etc. to reduce fuel per seat mile, and increase the lifespan of the aircraft. with all the billions invested in the program they hoped to save 20% in fuel, it looks like closer to 7-10% which is a HUGE improvement for aircraft design.
The old saying is "a boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money". An airplane flys on money. An airplane trades efficiency for speed.
Adding aerodynamic helpers like winglets, gap seals, and improved engine efficiency is the only reasonable way to get a good return on your investment. Check out Boeing and the new 787 construction details (popular mechanics had a good article recently) using carbon fiber, bleedless engines etc. to reduce fuel per seat mile, and increase the lifespan of the aircraft. with all the billions invested in the program they hoped to save 20% in fuel, it looks like closer to 7-10% which is a HUGE improvement for aircraft design.
The old saying is "a boat is a hole in the water into which you pour money". An airplane flys on money. An airplane trades efficiency for speed.
Bravo, three cheers for a real life non biased real life assessment of fuels. There are so many places where all this "green" stuff ( I hate that stupid term) can be made to work but aviation is not one of them. Sure it can be made to work just like you can turn a plane on its side and hang it by the prop if you have enough power, for a while. Thats the whole problem with this green foolishness. True enough you can make it work but it will never be right let alone cost effective. Sadly this is not going to factor into the PR driven industry so this lunacy will go on. In short, stuff that juice in your furnace or Kennworth but lets keep the good stuff in the air. Still, at the end of the day we all just know it's not going to happen. I have to agree that aircraft lightening and design have led to most of the efficiency changes you see today. The thing I am waiting to see is how well those carbon fiber airframes hold up down the road. Non destructive testing and periodic checks have eliminated the guesswork with aluminum but this new composite is a whole new world. Last I heard they haven't yet figured out how to test the airframe life of carbon fiber. Something along the line of an MRI I guess. I like that term, "Greenwashing". Truer words were never spoken. Get your B-20 and if the seals start to leak on your burner it will cost you a couple hundred bucks tops. Get jelled fuel going into a turbine and I hope its a plane full of greenies not me and mine.
Diamond Aircraft has made a great attempt with their diesel engine that runs on jet fuel. Alot of homebuilts are running digital fuel injection, instead of mechanical or carbs that are on production aircraft. I'd like to see a STC for wide band oxygen sensors instead of temperature probes. Look into tuned exhausts. They make alot more power on the same fuel.
Look up the Dehavilland Q400. It's a quiet, fast, turboprop. It's a shame nobody is buying them. The general public wants to ride on a jet and jets are gas hogs.
Look up Burt Rutan's designs. The verieze, longeze, and defiant. He got something like 180 miles and hour on less than a hundred horse power. Only one company every built a larger one. The beech Starship. It wasn't a commercial sucess and the company that bought out Beech tried to buy all the aircraft back. I think it was Raytheon. The owners loved these planes and a few refused to sell them back.
There's room for major improvemnt in aircraft design. Too bad the FAA isn't very helpful about getting these things certified.
Also, watch out for these composite aircrafts. The material is great in small general aviation planes, but there has been alot of problems putting it in large planes. Even the military has had problems with them.
Look up the Dehavilland Q400. It's a quiet, fast, turboprop. It's a shame nobody is buying them. The general public wants to ride on a jet and jets are gas hogs.
Look up Burt Rutan's designs. The verieze, longeze, and defiant. He got something like 180 miles and hour on less than a hundred horse power. Only one company every built a larger one. The beech Starship. It wasn't a commercial sucess and the company that bought out Beech tried to buy all the aircraft back. I think it was Raytheon. The owners loved these planes and a few refused to sell them back.
There's room for major improvemnt in aircraft design. Too bad the FAA isn't very helpful about getting these things certified.
Also, watch out for these composite aircrafts. The material is great in small general aviation planes, but there has been alot of problems putting it in large planes. Even the military has had problems with them.
- Status
Similar threads
