RPG Forums

Go Back   RPG Forums > Role Playing Game Section > Morrow Project/ Project Phoenix Forum
Register FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-17-2014, 05:18 PM
Gamer Gamer is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
I disagree.

I am sure that the Project would purchase and use light COIN aircraft.

COIN aircraft do not operate unless your side owns air superiority. Look at A-1 Skyraiders
operating in the COIN and air support mission in Viet Nam. These were regularly in danger from Mig -17s and Mig-19s operated by the North.

The Project doesn't need a large fleet. Flights of four (2x2) operating from Prime and the largest regional bases is enough. These to cover the air over those large important assets and protect them from Soviet bombers, rogue military forces, and act in the air to ground mission on extreme cases.

Air Superiority is the key to freedom of movement on the ground.

As for fuel......... Turbines eat anything that can be sprayed as a mist ahead of the compressor. AvGas is just kerosene. Kerosene is 1880s technology and not something that is difficult to refine.

This assumes that Project F-5s need fuel....... An electric motor that turns a turbine could conceivably draw in and compress air until the air itself ignited and made thrust.
running on compressed air alone? you can't really be serious.
you might as well forget any jet you're fawning over, it isn't gong to happen.

You can disagree all you want and do it in your own game, but the fact is, MP has no need for combat jets for air superiority.
If it was afraid of aircraft THAT much why is there not any serious anti-aircraft weaponry anywhere in the books?
Something far easier to obtain, maintain, and operate than ANY jet aircraft.
Stinger systems are not a serious system, a nice tactical battlefield defense system yes.

Quote:
COIN aircraft do not operate unless your side owns air superiority.
Yes they do, and will continue to do so, COIN has changed dramatically since Vietnam as has air to air capabilities.
COIN aircraft have proven they are a bitch to detect much less hit with look down shoot down capabilities.
Helos are easy due to that lovely radar reflection from the rotors and I've been sent in on helo's minus escort into combat zones before any air superiority was achieved or desired several times in my career.
Modern coin capabilities fly way lower than any air superiority jet pilot even dreams of going (married one).

Quote:
Air Superiority is the key to freedom of movement on the ground.
The Morrow Project is NOT and NEVER has been set up you own local warlord.
The morrow porject does not field an army.
It fields small teams spread out through the united states, NOT in Iraq or afghanistan, Russia, Crimea, Germany or Poland.
WHO after WW3 and all those nukes is going to have any desire to continue the war?
EMP alone is going to make and end to long range aircraft going anywhere.
Hardened systems only protects against a few nukes going off not hundreds -to thousands -yes the us military does teach that fact-
Just HOW are the soviets getting those aircraft to the states to the degree that requires the Morrow project to demand air superiority aircraft be stored away?
You expect them to sacrifice Ilyushin tankers just to bomb a nuked US?
They will need all the aircraft for themselves after all they are surrounded by far more people against them than we are.
The collapse of governments will bring a cease to hostilities to the degree you insist is going to happen.
Nobody with such aircraft left is going to waste them on a fools errand on sending them all the way over to bomb an already nuked to collapse United States, nothing more is to be gained.
You seem to be missing the theme of the game yourself.

Avgas is not kerosene, jet A, or JP-8.
Unless you take every and all precautions on storing it (and it's still not a guarantee) you will have some interesting things to deal with in the fuel to preserve your aircraft.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-18-2014, 04:31 AM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,657
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Gamer,

While I think you are right about the canon project probably not needing anything approaching a high-powered jet, I still find ArmySgt's posts interesting and potentially useful.

I have planned games using the Phoenix Project rules (A Morrow rules clone) and in those games there is military involvement in the project. That upgrades equipment at every level.

Everyone's project is different. For example, I want ALL my project's teams to bristle with firepower (marauders will look at them like porcupines). "No way im going to touch that". This is often more for show than for combat, but it allows my regional teams enough freedom to reach their local rally points. So in my project plan, once a community support team reached the rally point more than half of the heaviest equipment would have been put in an armory, and they would move into areas, that have been swept by mars and recon teams, with a much less intimidating appearance.

The personality of my gaming group is one that very much avoids combat, but I think they want a project to be prepared for almost anything (if it had actually worked). I also want the project planners to have a desire to have a technical edge over most 5 year post threats.

It is possible some warlord has the Commemorative Air Force(formerly Confederate Air force) under his control. So to counter that I give my project 4-8 A-37s that can be fitted with AAMs. F-5s are a little heavy for my taste, but if any threat is going to have prop planes it is nice to have a jet trump card.

Maybe the surviving US Military, who I believe the project is supposed to help if they get the chance, could really use 4 jets which have been sheltered from EMP and have a full logistical chain.

Just food for thought.

Last edited by kato13; 04-18-2014 at 05:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-18-2014, 06:24 AM
stormlion1's Avatar
stormlion1 stormlion1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Vineland, NJ
Posts: 581
Default

While I don't see the Project needing Fighter Aircraft I can see them stocking one or four away for a rainy day. But without dedicated Pilots and a limited amount of Avgas and munitions. There job is to aid in rebuilding not arm the USAF or combat Russian Forces. At most they would be dedicated to aiding Mars Teams if they were in distress but that is about it. The resources would be better spent on cargo aircraft and small aircraft for survey work. The major issue is that while a Fighter plane might survive five years unattended (Will they be in sealed bunkers or in Bolt Holes with inert gas? That's a lot of inert gas.) One hundred and fifty years after the fact there going to be so much junk and any landing fields will be either broken up asphalt or grass covered fields. Just clearing a usable landing strip unless its a desert environment will be a major undertaking. So if there are any fighter planes they would be limited to desert regions because there just won't be enough usable landing strips to even use them without a huge landscaping project needing to be done.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-18-2014, 06:54 AM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,657
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
The major issue is that while a Fighter plane might survive five years unattended (Will they be in sealed bunkers or in Bolt Holes with inert gas? That's a lot of inert gas.)
A modified A-10 flew on cellulose processed into alcohol a few years ago.
This could be another Project development. If the agricultural teams do their job, there should be MUCH surpluss cellulose.

http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Ener...-Jet-Fuel.html

Quote:
Originally Posted by stormlion1 View Post
One hundred and fifty years after the fact there going to be so much junk and any landing fields will be either broken up asphalt or grass covered fields.
When I plan my project I try not to think about the 150 year mistake, unless it is lethal to the team. With teams waking up randomly a lot of equipment ends up being only borderline useful as it was expected to synergize with other teams.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-18-2014, 07:58 AM
Jeff9650 Jeff9650 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8
Default

What about the Project using the V-22 Osprey? All the teathing problems aside, I can see the Project supply bases using an Aircraft that has the lift of a heavy aircraft, and the vertical power of a helicopter.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-18-2014, 08:51 AM
nuke11 nuke11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 310
Default Idea Twist

Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13 View Post
Gamer,

It is possible some warlord has the Commemorative Air Force(formerly Confederate Air force) under his control. So to counter that I give my project 4-8 A-37s that can be fitted with AAMs. F-5s are a little heavy for my taste, but if any threat is going to have prop planes it is nice to have a jet trump card.
Actually I like the idea of the State of Texas controlling the CAF resources better, along with whatever was left of the US military air assets in Texas.

They have some interesting plans that can fly long ranges to say the KFS.

The P-47N-5RE they have is an extreme long range bomber escort (3200 km range). It is more than capable of flying to the KFS on photo recon and back, from the center of Texas to the center of Kentucky is only 1566 Km.

Interesting addition to any KFS campaign out there.

Last edited by nuke11; 04-18-2014 at 08:58 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-18-2014, 08:58 AM
nuke11 nuke11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 310
Default

I'm for the MP having air assets, but not that much of it.

Hiding stuff around the country at the smaller airfields is easy to do, currently working on an MP Airbase for release later, but there are dozens and dozens of small air fields around the country that MPI can purchase and use to store air assets.

I'm leaning myself to 1 / 2 engine prop and small helicopters . Since we have the CH-47 and C-130 from Prime Base, we have to include them as well, but in limited numbers and very limited locations.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-18-2014, 10:19 AM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuke11 View Post
I'm for the MP having air assets, but not that much of it.

Hiding stuff around the country at the smaller airfields is easy to do, currently working on an MP Airbase for release later, but there are dozens and dozens of small air fields around the country that MPI can purchase and use to store air assets.

I'm leaning myself to 1 / 2 engine prop and small helicopters . Since we have the CH-47 and C-130 from Prime Base, we have to include them as well, but in limited numbers and very limited locations.
I really think the air assets are going to operate solely out of Prime Base and Regional bases. Simply because that is where the most Morrow Project support structure.

Conceivably, Select Teams of MARS could be in Bolt Holes and equipped with Air Ambulance and Rescue versions of common helos. They would need to immediately link with their Combined Group for atleast maintenance support.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 04-18-2014, 09:13 AM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuke11 View Post
Actually I like the idea of the State of Texas controlling the CAF resources better, along with whatever was left of the US military air assets in Texas.

They have some interesting plans that can fly long ranges to say the KFS.

The P-47N-5RE they have is an extreme long range bomber escort (3200 km range). It is more than capable of flying to the KFS on photo recon and back, from the center of Texas to the center of Kentucky is only 1566 Km.

Interesting addition to any KFS campaign out there.
Read PF-06 Operation Lone Star for the state of U.S. forces in and around Ft. Hood, Texas. Incursion by Cuban/Central American Soviet allies, and the state of oil production......

Own and get a Morrow Project communications satellite too while you are at it as an added bonus!
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 04-18-2014, 09:38 AM
nuke11 nuke11 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 310
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
Read PF-06 Operation Lone Star for the state of U.S. forces in and around Ft. Hood, Texas. Incursion by Cuban/Central American Soviet allies, and the state of oil production......

Own and get a Morrow Project communications satellite too while you are at it as an added bonus!
Yes I have 6 or 7 of it.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 04-19-2014, 12:08 PM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuke11 View Post
Yes I have 6 or 7 of it.
Morrow sats? Wow......
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 04-20-2014, 01:32 PM
welsh welsh is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 49
Default

Sorry, I am with Gamer on this. Sophisticated air assets on a large scale don't make a lot of sense in the Morrow world. Even an organization of a 10,000 people are not going to be able to field the capacity necessary to maintain that level of technology. If anything, the technology that you deal with might be superior to what you got frozen with, but its 150 years old and age wears stuff down.

Look, even rubber has a limited shelf life. The Morrow plan was to revive the project shortly after a nuclear war. On something as simple as tires, that would have significant damage. Even if you could make a rubber that could remain essentially inert for a few years or lift the weight off, the weight of the vehicle will likely cause the rubber to settle. 150 years and tires are flat. Even if you could "freeze" the tires in time, gravity will cause damage.

You rely on a technologically advanced system to sustain the project, it becomes illogical. It would consume too much resources when those resources need to go elsewhere. As mentioned by Gamer above- Morrow Project is not about local warlordism but about responding to a disaster and rebuilding society. The priorities or reconstruction would out weigh war fighting. In fact, the war fighting aspects are meant to serve only to protect the rebuilding effort- which is front and center.

I am not saying I don't see the "coolness" of it, but that's always been a problem with the Morrow project and, in a way, with the trend in doomsday prep in real life- a desire to "have stuff in an apocalyptic world." If that's your thing, go for it. It is your game.

But I would caution that the more the game bends realism for "coolness" it risks blundering away from good story telling and into some pretty significant silliness. All I am saying is that you have to keep it real. What kind of aircraft?

Balloons, ok, A World War 1 tech bi-plane that flies one ethanol "moonshine" fuel, ok (that's what twilight 2000 engines ran on).

I would add that budgets matter here, especially in what goes into the bolt holes- how much does an F-5 cost? I can understand putting the fusion reactor in the F-5, but then can you keep the supply chain for an F-5 as well as other types of vehicles that are more necessary to the mission? Its interesting that the only real air asset is a 2 man scout helicopter.

The temptation to include stuff because its cool needs to be avoided. One might consider, if one were so predisposed, either older and simpler designs that are dual-use (and which might be armed). Put a mini-gun on that aging Dakota cargo plane? One would also need simply aircraft that are sustainable under conditions of high scarcity.

Think of the before and after- Before- Morrow is operating in secrecy- so a company buys advanced fighter aircraft would draw attention. Billions spent on buying advanced warfare systems- would draw attention. Attention is not a good thing. Post-war- military scarcity and the break down of civilization- national industrial capacity was destroyed, neglected, irradiated or has simply rusted away. Things we take for granted are just not there. Most of your technological capacity ranges from stone age to mid 20th century at best. Higher levels require organization of social, technical and economic power that would be hard to imagine. Remember, this is a world that has broken down.

That material scarcity is not a bad thing for story telling. It means that game directors have to keep it real.

Consider the plot possibilities- Who has those air assets. The Ballooners, a small group of dare devil pilots flying alcohol fueled airplanes across the country- a form of air pirates? What kind of network and resources do they use? Are they owned by a government or independent?

If there is high tech in the world, where did it come from? And 150 years later, that tech is likely to be nothing like we have today. If a Kentucky Free State has more advanced aircraft- where did it get that tech from? Did high technology survive in other parts of the world and are selling it American warlords, perhaps to put the Americans against each other so they can exploit or weaken the Americans for their own purposes? Who are these outsiders? Brazil, Singapore, a Japan that survived the war better than the Americans, a Mormon colony? Did all parts of the world suffer the cataclysm the same? Have some recovered faster than we have?

All I am saying is the fetish for "cool stuff" risks undermining the stories you tell, and the strength of Morrow isn't the stuff but the story.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 04-18-2014, 10:37 AM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kato13 View Post
, I still find ArmySgt's posts interesting and potentially useful.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 04-18-2014, 10:50 AM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Another thought........

How much heat does a target aircraft have to give off for a heat seeker like the Stinger or Chapparal to actually lock on?

Would KFS P-47Ds even be targetable?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 04-18-2014, 05:09 PM
kato13's Avatar
kato13 kato13 is online now
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Chicago, Il USA
Posts: 3,657
Send a message via ICQ to kato13
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
Another thought........

How much heat does a target aircraft have to give off for a heat seeker like the Stinger or Chapparal to actually lock on?

Would KFS P-47Ds even be targetable?
I would think the newer missiles which are all-aspect would have a chance. If they can target heated guard towers (ala "Cardinal and the Kremlin") and smaller helicopters I think the heat output from a P-47 would be sufficient.

Also don't newer missiles look look for both heat and an absence or UV. This keeps them from targeting the sun IIRC.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 04-19-2014, 09:48 AM
Jeff9650 Jeff9650 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ArmySGT. View Post
Another thought........

How much heat does a target aircraft have to give off for a heat seeker like the Stinger or Chapparal to actually lock on?

Would KFS P-47Ds even be targetable?
Oh heck yeah it would. Back when I was taking aviation maintenance at a 2 year college back in 1988, I talked with someone who had just left the navy and his last post was the USS Midway. Knowing that the Carrier was all Hornets, I asked about how sensitive the Sidewinders heat seeking warheads were. He told me that he was walking by a Hornet that was fitted out one day and he heard some strange noises coming from there. When he walked back, he heard the same noises again. On the third time back, he looked over and noticed the warhead seeker was following him, and with that, the vanes on the missile was adjusting themselves to target him. So if the sensor on a Sidewinder (which is a Chapparal, just renamed) can track a human, then it can track a P-47.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-19-2014, 11:44 AM
stormlion1's Avatar
stormlion1 stormlion1 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Vineland, NJ
Posts: 581
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff9650 View Post
Oh heck yeah it would. Back when I was taking aviation maintenance at a 2 year college back in 1988, I talked with someone who had just left the navy and his last post was the USS Midway. Knowing that the Carrier was all Hornets, I asked about how sensitive the Sidewinders heat seeking warheads were. He told me that he was walking by a Hornet that was fitted out one day and he heard some strange noises coming from there. When he walked back, he heard the same noises again. On the third time back, he looked over and noticed the warhead seeker was following him, and with that, the vanes on the missile was adjusting themselves to target him. So if the sensor on a Sidewinder (which is a Chapparal, just renamed) can track a human, then it can track a P-47.
Which means it was armed and sitting on a grounded planes launch rack. Which is kind of scary when you think about it.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-18-2014, 08:58 AM
ArmySGT.'s Avatar
ArmySGT. ArmySGT. is offline
Internet Intellectual
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Colorado
Posts: 2,412
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
running on compressed air alone? you can't really be serious.
you might as well forget any jet you're fawning over, it isn't gong to happen.
Quite serious. Compression makes combustion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
You can disagree all you want and do it in your own game, but the fact is, MP has no need for combat jets for air superiority.
If it was afraid of aircraft THAT much why is there not any serious anti-aircraft weaponry anywhere in the books?
Something far easier to obtain, maintain, and operate than ANY jet aircraft.
Stinger systems are not a serious system, a nice tactical battlefield defense system yes.
Chapparal (Sidewinder AA missile) starts on pages 18-19 in the 3rd edition. Found on the MARS One, Science One, and Prime Base. A large Medium category Air Defense missile system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
Yes they do, and will continue to do so, COIN has changed dramatically since Vietnam as has air to air capabilities.
COIN aircraft have proven they are a bitch to detect much less hit with look down shoot down capabilities.
Helos are easy due to that lovely radar reflection from the rotors and I've been sent in on helo's minus escort into combat zones before any air superiority was achieved or desired several times in my career.
Modern coin capabilities fly way lower than any air superiority jet pilot even dreams of going (married one).
COIN aircraft rely on Air Superiority fighters to keep the skies clear. Iraq or Afghanistan isn’t a good example as the Iraqi air force wasn’t very credible to start with and the Mujahideen didn’t have pilots. (helos, yes; fighters, no)

COIN aircraft are Air to Ground support aircraft. Calling them COIN aircraft is just obscuring they title to support the hearts and minds campaign. Much like a dropping a bomb on a bridge became “servicing a target”.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
The Morrow Project is NOT and NEVER has been set up you own local warlord.
The morrow porject does not field an army.
It fields small teams spread out through the united states, NOT in Iraq or afghanistan, Russia, Crimea, Germany or Poland.
Yet, there is the MARS One vehicle. Which has no rescue equipment other than a med unit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
WHO after WW3 and all those nukes is going to have any desire to continue the war?
Apparently both sides…….. In the “Fringeworthy: Complete” CD collection from Tri Tac Games (owned by Richard Tucholka) is some supporting material for the Morrow Project. The War begins 19 November, 1989 and lasts several months. Denver is the last place known nuked and that is for atleast the third time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
EMP alone is going to make and end to long range aircraft going anywhere.
Hardened systems only protects against a few nukes going off not hundreds -to thousands -yes the us military does teach that fact-
I am a graduate of the NBC NCO course 1999. EMP has been highly overrated.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
Just HOW are the soviets getting those aircraft to the states to the degree that requires the Morrow project to demand air superiority aircraft be stored away?
Bear bomber have exceptional range for their class, some models with ranges greater than 9,000 miles. Enough to strike targets in the upper continental US and return without refueling with an over the Pole course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
You expect them to sacrifice Ilyushin tankers just to bomb a nuked US?
Nope, the tankers will be in their race track orbits over the Soviet arctic shoreline as the NATO ones will be over the Canadian shoreline with interceptor aircraft nearby to protect them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
They will need all the aircraft for themselves after all they are surrounded by far more people against them than we are.
Possibly, depends upon the State of things. If it is 1989…….. Not so much. China is their friends, South Korea and Japan can’t do much beyond their territorial waters. Europe is going to catch some nukes, then Russian will dominate their air space and sea lanes. Europe will fall.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
The collapse of governments will bring a cease to hostilities to the degree you insist is going to happen.
Governments will but the military in each is going to carry on as long as they can. Russia has the “Dead Hand” system for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
Nobody with such aircraft left is going to waste them on a fools errand on sending them all the way over to bomb an already nuked to collapse United States, nothing more is to be gained.
Retaining the initiative, denying the enemy maneuver, and disrupting war or domestic production are typical reasons for strategic bombing missions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
You seem to be missing the theme of the game yourself.
No, I plan for what the Project was supposed to be if it had functioned properly. Then, I have fun taking away all the toys, giving the Team something that almost could be useful, or having a reasonable explanation for how the “Cavalry” is what it is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gamer View Post
Avgas is not kerosene, jet A, or JP-8.
Unless you take every and all precautions on storing it (and it's still not a guarantee) you will have some interesting things to deal with in the fuel to preserve your aircraft.
Production of aviation fuel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aviation_fuel
The production of aviation fuel falls into two categories: fuel suitable for turbine engines and fuel suitable for internal combustion engines. There are international specifications for each.
Jet fuel is used in both turboprop and jet aircraft, and must maintain a low viscosity at low temperature, meet definite limits in terms of density and calorific value, burn cleanly, and remain chemically stable when heated to high temperature.[3]

Aviation gasoline, often referred to as "avgas", is a highly refined form of gasoline for aircraft, with an emphasis on purity, anti-knock characteristics and minimization of spark plug fouling. Avgas must meet performance guidelines for both the rich mixture condition required for take-off power settings and the leaner mixtures used during cruise to reduce fuel consumption.
Avgas is sold in much lower volume than jet fuel, but to many more individual aircraft operators; whereas jet fuel is sold in high volume to large aircraft operators, such as airlines and military.[4]
Avgas (aviation gasoline) is used in spark-ignited internal-combustion engines in aircraft. Its formulation is distinct from mogas (motor gasoline) used in cars. Avgas is formulated for stability, safety, and predictable performance under a wide range of environments, and is typically used in aircraft that use reciprocating or Wankel engines.
Jet fuel is a clear to straw-colored fuel, based on either an unleaded kerosene (Jet A-1), or a naphtha-kerosene blend (Jet B). It is similar to diesel fuel, and can be used in either compression ignition engines or turbine engines.
Jet-A powers modern commercial airliners and is a mix of pure kerosene and anti-freeze and burns at temperatures at or above 49 degrees Celsius (120 degrees Fahrenheit). Kerosene-based fuel has a much higher flash point than gasoline-based fuel, meaning that it requires significantly higher temperature to ignite. It is a high-quality fuel; if it fails the purity and other quality tests for use on jet aircraft, it is sold to other ground-based users with less demanding requirements, like railroad engines.[5]

Last edited by ArmySGT.; 04-18-2014 at 09:16 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.