View Single Post
  #16  
Old 08-09-2016, 06:06 PM
swaghauler swaghauler is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: PA
Posts: 1,481
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aspqrz View Post
The other thing no-one mentions is that there are a LOT of civilian aircraft out there. One heck of a lot. And not all are sited at airports or airfields that will be hit by nukes.

Why is this an issue?

Well, while civilian aircraft generally aren't designed to carry weapons, that doesn't mean that they cannot do so.

Consider the Biafran Airforce ... flying Mfi-9Bs/Bölkow Bo 208 (light aircraft) which mounted six 68mm rockets under each wing.

Then there are ex-military trainers ... Biafra also flew a number of T-6 Texans forex.

Not all of these sorts of aircraft require avgas, some, at least, can run on normal petrol.

And then there are all those C-47s still out there ... 'Puff the Magic Dragon' AC-47s anyone?

High performance jets or ground attack aircraft? No. Strategic Bombers? No. Helicopters (as fuel hogs)? No.

But combat airpower? Too useful to not have.

(Not huge numbers ... probably AF Squadrons would have as many of these converted aircraft as the Army units still had tanks ... i.e. maybe a single handful or less, rarely a double handful.)

It's one thing about TW:2000 that simply made no sense to me. Even just using them for recon would be a huge advantage ...

YMMV,

Phil
I believe that any aircraft that uses JP8 would still be able to fly with existing fuel. Hercules aircraft flying out of "bush bases" in Africa would often bring in large "filters" (on trailers) to "strain" African jet fuel in order to take out the impurities that would sometimes occur in that fuel. I was told that this was "just a precaution" because the "Herky-Bird" was pretty "tolerant" of poor quality fuel (one of the reasons EVERYONE uses them). Such a filter system would allow Kerosene (with some "additives" such machines mix into the fuel) to be used as a potential substitute. This option would allow "transport" aircraft to fly but would NOT be a good idea for combat jets. Combat jets perform "High-G" maneuvers that could cause impurities in such fuel to "clog" fuel pumps and "stall" the jet in the middle of a maneuver. Transport aircraft don't have such issues.

The question then becomes, "how much of your precious Biodiesel Production are you willing to sacrifice to get an aircraft up and running?" A single C130 can use more fuel than an entire COMPANY of 5-Tons. Thus, Mission Demands versus Available Fuel Supply would determine whether you would fly or drive (or sail).
Reply With Quote