Got AvGas?

[raketenjagdpanzer]

In the warzones, avgas stocks on both sides are going to get a good pasting.

In the CONUS, I think there's going to be a good amount left. Relatively speaking there are fewer pilots than drivers, and fewer still who'd fly by eyeball once fancy navigation systems crapped out due to EMP. The military would seize as much as they could, but there are places where it'd cost more in fuel to get it out than you'd get, so generally it would sit there.

The JMC stuff I've been tinkering with has most of the AvGas in the metro Orlando, FL and surrounding areas at the disposal of the JMC. They currently have only a couple of flyable helos (but are looking to get more and/or possibly an airplane or two operating), so the massive volume at McCoy/Orlando Int'l, Sanford Int'l, and Orlando Executive will keep them flying well into the mid 2000s if not beyond. Sure there will be some spoilage, and some will be appropriated for other things (possibly - I'm not sure what else AvGas is good for except aircraft engines, although I could have something about it also being used as a backup fuel for hospital generators) but couple small airfields in (and there are a great many here as well as all across the country) and you see AvGas isn't a huge issue, just so long as you're not trying to keep thousands of fighters and hundreds of bombers aloft.

[rcaf_777]

AVGAS is avaible in the Middle East right? so I am sure that certian ammounts would start to be in states once trade resumes, which is not the reason why the US and other nations say in the middle east?

I have another question with huge ammounts of commerial pliots and small airfeilds in North American would, there not be a good ammount of AVGAS in the states for MILGOV or CIVGOV to use, or better yet could you covert it to run a Tank or AFV?

[Legbreaker]

I really don't see ANY significant reserves of ANY fuel type remaining by 2000.
Chances are if the military didn't requisition it, then civilians would have.

And as for sending fuel back to the US from the middle east, I can't see that happening either, not with supplies as short as they are for CENTCOM. Where's the logic in it? What would Milgov send back given that the forces there are in an unholy alliance with Civgov and just about everyone else? How would they get anything there, let alone scrounge it up in the US to begin with.

And don't think it's going to be a one way trade either. The owners of the oil aren't going to just let the US steal it, they'll want to get paid and paid WELL.

[raketenjagdpanzer]

CENTCOM is in a bad tautology. They protect the remaining POL so they can have enough fuel and lubricant reserves to keep tanks and aircraft operational...so they can protect the remaining POL infrastructure...GOTO 10.

They won't be shipping any more gas stateside for quite a long time.

[Targan]

Originally Posted by Legbreaker

I really don't see ANY significant reserves of ANY fuel type remaining by 2000.
Chances are if the military didn't requisition it, then civilians would have.

And as for sending fuel back to the US from the middle east, I can't see that happening either, not with supplies as short as they are for CENTCOM. Where's the logic in it? What would Milgov send back given that the forces there are in an unholy alliance with Civgov and just about everyone else? How would they get anything there, let alone scrounge it up in the US to begin with.

And don't think it's going to be a one way trade either. The owners of the oil aren't going to just let the US steal it, they'll want to get paid and paid WELL.

+1 all of this.

Getting a distinct feeling of deja vu from this discussion.

[HorseSoldier]

I could honestly see a trickle getting out and headed back to Europe and North America -- the situation is bad enough that if the House of Saud balks at being shaken down for oil, for instance, CENTCOM is likely to just find another prince willing to play ball and arrange regime change. Same/same for where the French are parked, whatever voting rights MEFF earns at the table, etc. The region circa 2000 is back to colonialism red in tooth and nail, not pre-TDM diplomacy.

(And by trickle I'm thinking more drums of oil or refine fuel loaded onto surviving generalist shipping. Tankers are probably entirely extinct, or so rare as to hardly matter.)

That said, the trickle I'm talking about would be wholly inadequate even for strictly rationed military use. Even before looking at the issue of distribution issue in the US. "Trickle" might just amount to meaning, for instance, the MilGov cantonment receiving the Op Omega personnel has access to tightly rationed gasoline and diesel for some recovery/security operations, but not even enough sustain a major offensive action against anyone, and none of that rolls any further west than the Virginia tidewater. It might be a little better for, say, the UK, is only because they distances are smaller and the government controlled zone is more contiguous, but still not enough.

[Fusilier]

Just for my own interest, what is the normal "shelf life" of aviation fuel?

[Legbreaker]

It appears not long.

According to one source, a long storage period is anything between 4 and 24 weeks. http://books.google.com.au/books?id=...sition&f=false
Another source http://www.chevronglobalaviation.com...ech_review.pdf has this:

Storage Stability Instability of jet fuel during storage is generally not a problem because most fuel is used within weeks or months of its manufacture. Storage stability is an issue for the military, which often stores fuel for emergency use. And it can be an issue at small airports that don’t use a lot of fuel. Jet fuel that has been properly manufactured, stored, and handled should remain stable for at least one year. Jet fuel subjected to longer storage or to improper storage or handling should be tested to be sure it meets all applicable specification requirements before use. Because it is the more reactive fuel components that cause instability, storage stability is influenced by fuel composition. It is also influenced by storage conditions; instability reactions occur faster and to a greater extent at higher ambient temperatures. Antioxidants may be added to fuel to improve its storage stability.

So my guess is with fuel refining effectively stopping dead in November 1997, there's going to be next to no useable pre-war fuel by 2000/2001.

Note that additives are included in modern fuels to increase stability (reflected in the above periods) and are unlikely to be available post nuke.