|
Re: [LML] Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance
John,
Not to
worry....tell the wife she's welcome to come along. While the SF is about
a pound heavier per gallon, it also has 13% more stored heat energy, so you
don't need to carry as much fuel to go the same distance. Funny how that
works; heavier fuels hold more BTUs....must just be a
coincidence.
Chuck Jensen
If the
Swift Fuel is, as they say:
“about a
pound heavier per gallon,”
that makes it pretty much a non-starter in my IVP.
“Sorry Honey, you have to stay home on this trip. I just loaded up
on “Swift Fuel.”
If a guy leaves his wife home, because he’s now a
hundred pounds heavier, and he had to choose between taking his wife along or
his golf clubs, then the resulting scenario hurls a javelin through the heart
of the primary core of aerodynamics of flight — you know — what makes an
airplane fly, which is “kitchen clearance.” (we all know it has nothing
to do with lift and drag and all that stuff)
On 3/4/09 10:34 AM,
"Kevin Stallard" <Kevin@arilabs.net>
wrote:
Looks like the FAA testing labs are coming out with
some positive feedback on Swift Fuel (100LL replacement). Looking
good!
http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/bizav/1325-full.html#199892
|