Of course I prefer fusion ;)
maybe 20-30 years into the future we will get to see it
----- Original Message -----
From: foxiekins
To: SkunkworksAMA_at_yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2002 6:38 PM
Subject: [SkunkworksAMA] Re: New file uploaded to SkunkworksAMA
--- In SkunkworksAMA_at_y..., "~Corwyn" <Corwyn_Talia_at_m...> wrote:
> A TURBINE that gets milage like that off of PROPANE?! And it can
> do so at 150 MPH?!
>
I'd be a lot more surprised if it could do it at 50 MPH... Fuel
Efficiency goes up as the Carbon-to-Hydrogen ratio goes down...
Methane and Ethane are much more efficient than Propane, for example,
it's just that at some point you run into storage problems, so
Propane is a compromise in that regard... Jet Fighters burn
*kerosine*, you see... Highly refined kerosine, but kerosine
nonetheless... Much higher ratio of Carbon...
>
> If the girls can build an engine like that and make it fit a semi-
> standard motorcycle frame, then I can't understand why the little
> engineering masters aren't making a mint off of the superior brain
> power they posses. Because I for one KNOW the navy would pay out
> the rear for something like that.
>
Aren't you overlooking the obvious...? They probably got the engine
by finding some nerdy guy who was developing it, and screwing his
brains out in exchange for a prototype...
>
> Of course, they'd be hunted down by the auto-manufacturers and oil
> barons of the world and either bribed hugely to keep it quiet or
> have a price on their heads.
>
Not really... Propane is already more efficient than Gasoline...
It's just that Gasoline is easier to store, and so much easier to
buy...
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Received on Wed May 15 2002 - 09:41:17 CDT