Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Even when all quality issues are sorted out there can still be problems. After the various issues of high and low aromatic fuels were sorted as far as engine performance goes they then discovered that the high aromatic fuels would find a leak point the others wouldnt. Easily resolved in the factory but a pain in the ass to replace connectors on fuel systems in the field.Well, there is a big difference between OIL as it comes out of the ground (called crude oil) and OIL PRODUCTS.
Crude oil can vary considerably depending on which oil field it comes from in regards to what percentage of different products you can per ton and for certain products it can make a big difference in the products also. Like 40 octane gas to 70 octane after simple distilling.
When it comes to the products they have to meet certain standards regardless of source. Going back to aviation fuel, 87 octane product is pretty much 87 octane fuel regardless of source. It not only has to pass the octane test, it needs to have a certain heat value, it needs to evaporate at a certain temperature and specified rate. It has to have a certain vapor pressure and gum residue limit. Different countries can have slightly different limits but they have to be close or the fuel won't work properly at different temperatures or altitudes. It doesn't matter if the fuel is made from coal or crude oil, it has to work in the engines desired.
Same for lubricating oil or diesel fuel. Russian diesel isn't going to be much different than German diesel.
Ships that weren't diesel ran on bunker fuel which is pretty much crude oil with some of the good stuff taken out and with most of the lumps also taken out (joke) but bunker needs to be heated to flow even at normal temperatures.
Oil products can cover quite a range and sometimes sources just use "oil" as shorthand for oil products so it can be a bit confusing.
However, aside from needing more frequent fuel filter changes, one country's Diesels should run just fine on another country's diesel fuel.
I agree, but my point was there were all sorts of problems that people obviously never imagined could be problems. Fuel is fuel isnt it? What you talking about viscosity and permeability an all that stuff?High aromatic fuels also tended to dissolve US rubber gaskets and self sealing fuel tank liners. The first caused leaks, the second tended to plug lines and filters.
It was solved fairly soon.
I did not say that Soviet machinery needed different oil than German machinery : I said that the Red Army used different oil than the German economy .
Ever notice how our resident "historian" never quickly replies to posts?
This is called the "wikipause", which is a period of time consumed by frantic google searches using a specific combination of keywords that favor/support their position, then sifting through the results for bits and pieces that can then be used as a seemingly authorative response...
And auxiliary jets on B36s, KC97s, C23s, and P2Vs used 115/145 avgas.JP4 was a post-war blend used from the 1950's through the 1990's, so nope - wrong.
WWII German jet engines used diesel or kerosene, depending on the engine.
Most HeS engines used kerosene, most Jumo and BMW engines used diesel.
Gas turbines are not very fussy about fuel.
Ditto for Jet A sump drains and home kerosene heaters.Conversely, the same goes for Toyota Surfs and other diesel trucks! When we used to do fuel drains some of the guys used to take the used fuel home in canisters and chuck it in their cars, but it was stopped because some - there's always some, were double-dipping. There was one guy when I worked on Hueys who hadn't fuelled his truck in years because he relied on fuel drain supplies!
But when they burn 115/145 avgas it coats their hot section with a beige/tan crust of hard deposit that slowly grows till it chokes the engine.Gas turbines are not very fussy about fuel. If there is enough vapor pressure for ignition and the impurities don't mung up the hot end, hey can tolerate quite a lot. To give an idea, when I worked at Lycoming, there was a civil T-55 (LTC4) running on peat.
In newer engines, it will also clog the cooling holes in the hot end. This is bad.But when they burn 115/145 avgas it coats their hot section with a beige/tan crust of hard deposit that slowly grows till it chokes the engine.
IIRC, doesn't JP4 have a few more BTU/LB?(and why would anybody use JP-4, anyway?)
IIRC, doesn't JP4 have a few more BTU/LB?
NAS Boca Chica was required to stock JP4 ONLY, because of our high level of AF and ANG transient traffic, which meant we had to defuel and dispose of the JP5 tankered in by jets returning from deployment, then the fuel controls had to be rerigged.
USAF always seemed to prefer JP4, probably because of its slightly greater performance. They don't have to operate in confined hangar decks at high temperatures where the extra volatility of JP4 is an issue.My base, Carswell, used only JP-4 for the entire fleet, including the F-16 A/Bs the 301st gained in 1991. Hell, I didn't know there was another fuel at all until 1990 or so... doh!
And, why did the Germans use only synthetic fuel for the LW, not imported fuel, not domestic fuel ?Well, there is a big difference between OIL as it comes out of the ground (called crude oil) and OIL PRODUCTS.
Crude oil can vary considerably depending on which oil field it comes from in regards to what percentage of different products you can per ton and for certain products it can make a big difference in the products also. Like 40 octane gas to 70 octane after simple distilling.
When it comes to the products they have to meet certain standards regardless of source. Going back to aviation fuel, 87 octane product is pretty much 87 octane fuel regardless of source. It not only has to pass the octane test, it needs to have a certain heat value, it needs to evaporate at a certain temperature and specified rate. It has to have a certain vapor pressure and gum residue limit. Different countries can have slightly different limits but they have to be close or the fuel won't work properly at different temperatures or altitudes. It doesn't matter if the fuel is made from coal or crude oil, it has to work in the engines desired.
Same for lubricating oil or diesel fuel. Russian diesel isn't going to be much different than German diesel.
Ships that weren't diesel ran on bunker fuel which is pretty much crude oil with some of the good stuff taken out and with most of the lumps also taken out (joke) but bunker needs to be heated to flow even at normal temperatures.
Oil products can cover quite a range and sometimes sources just use "oil" as shorthand for oil products so it can be a bit confusing.
However, aside from needing more frequent fuel filter changes, one country's Diesels should run just fine on another country's diesel fuel.
Does it?And, why did the Germans use only synthetic fuel for the LW, not imported fuel, not domestic fuel ?
The fact that they used only synthetic fuel for the LW means that it matters if the fuel was made from coal or was crude .
And, why did the Germans use only synthetic fuel for the LW, not imported fuel, not domestic fuel ?
The fact that they used only synthetic fuel for the LW means that it matters if the fuel was made from coal or was crude .
No.IIRC, doesn't JP4 have a few more BTU/LB?
NAS Boca Chica was required to stock JP4 ONLY, because of our high level of AF and ANG transient traffic, which meant we had to defuel and dispose of the JP5 tankered in by jets returning from deployment, then the fuel controls had to be rerigged.
The Luftwaffe didn't "only use synthetic fuel".And, why did the Germans use only synthetic fuel for the LW, not imported fuel, not domestic fuel ?
The fact that they used only synthetic fuel for the LW means that it matters if the fuel was made from coal or was crude .