X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 21:38:27 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.32] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.2.12) with ESMTP id 3529552 for lml@lancaironline.net; Thu, 05 Mar 2009 20:30:29 -0500 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=76.96.30.32; envelope-from=j.hafen@comcast.net Received: from OMTA09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net ([76.96.30.20]) by QMTA03.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id PQqv1b0020S2fkCA3dVuP5; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 01:29:54 +0000 Received: from [10.128.90.198] ([75.151.125.133]) by OMTA09.emeryville.ca.mail.comcast.net with comcast id PdVr1b00G2soXEK8VdVtl3; Fri, 06 Mar 2009 01:29:54 +0000 User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.15.0.081119 X-Original-Date: Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:29:50 -0800 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance From: John Hafen X-Original-To: Lancair Mailing List X-Original-Message-ID: Thread-Topic: [LML] Re: Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance Thread-Index: Acmd+wrHbdX1Raqg20G/bmzfqgB3mQ== In-Reply-To: Mime-version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="B_3319118993_1448975" > This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --B_3319118993_1448975 Content-type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Do you remember the claims about ethanol? When Swift demonstrates the claimed, and prices as promised, I=B9ll buy. John Hafen On 3/5/09 3:54 PM, "Kevin Stallard" wrote: > Actually, if you do the math, they claim 15% increase in range/power. Me= ans > less fuel per mile. > =20 > 15% of 6.02 lbs is around .9lbs (almost the one 1 pound difference). > =20 > Seems you can pack more energy into your wings with the same volume, with= the > penalty being weight instead of quantity. > =20 > Seems close to a wash to me. If you don=B9t need to go as far, you certain= ly > don=B9t have to fill it up to the top=8A. > =20 > Kevin > =20 >=20 >=20 > From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Jo= hn > Hafen > Sent: 2009-03-05 12:12 > To: lml@lancaironline.net > Subject: [LML] Re: Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance > =20 > If the Swift Fuel is, as they say: >=20 > =B3about a pound heavier per gallon,=B2 >=20 > that makes it pretty much a non-starter in my IVP. =B3Sorry Honey, you hav= e to > stay home on this trip. I just loaded up on =B3Swift Fuel.=B2 >=20 > If a guy leaves his wife home, because he=B9s now a hundred pounds heavier,= and > he had to choose between taking his wife along or his golf clubs, then th= e > resulting scenario hurls a javelin through the heart of the primary core = of > aerodynamics of flight =8B you know =8B what makes an airplane fly, which is > =B3kitchen clearance.=B2 (we all know it has nothing to do with lift and dra= g and > all that stuff) >=20 >=20 > On 3/4/09 10:34 AM, "Kevin Stallard" wrote: > Looks like the FAA testing labs are coming out with some positive feedbac= k on > Swift Fuel (100LL replacement). Looking good! > =20 > http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/bizav/1325-full.html#199892 > =20 > =20 >=20 >=20 --B_3319118993_1448975 Content-type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Re: [LML] Re: Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance Do you remember the claims about ethanol?

When Swift demonstrates the claimed, and prices as promised, I’ll buy= .

John Hafen


On 3/5/09 3:54 PM, "Kevin Stallard" <Kevin@arilabs.net> wrote:

Actually, if you do the math, they claim= 15% increase in range/power.  Means less fuel per mile.  
 
15% of 6.02 lbs is around .9lbs (almost the one 1 pound difference).  =
 
Seems you can pack more energy into your wings with the same volume, with t= he penalty being weight instead of quantity.
 
Seems close to a wash to me.  If you don’t need to go as far, yo= u certainly don’t have to fill it up to the top….
 
Kevin
 

From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of John Haf= en
Sent: 2009-03-05 12:12
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Swift Fuel reeks havoc on kitchen clearance
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 heav= ier, and he had to choose between taking his wife along or his golf clubs, t= hen 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 i= t 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
 
 


--B_3319118993_1448975--