Jim Dunmyer said the following to Mike Ross on the subject of
RE: ENGINE DESIGN (19 Oct 97  08:55:54)
 JD> My stock ol' VW Jetta will do nearly 600 miles 'per tankful'. That is
 JD> a meaningless measure if I ever heard one; I'll bet that there's a
 JD> number of semi-tractors with huge fuel tanks that can go '1000 miles
 JD> per tankful'.
Please, don't ask me to take your explanation seriously. It's neither
here nor there. You simply missed the point that's all.
 JD> You're probably too young to remember the fuel crunches of the '70's
 JD> and early '80's,
Sorry, you could have spared a lecture, I graduated in the mid 60's.
 JD> My comment about low fuel economy (as compared to piston engines)
 JD> comes from observations about turbine engines. I've never seen one yet
 JD> that claims to do better than a recip. Your much-vaunted turbine
 JD> conversions of a particular airplane is a good example. Check the
 JD> details
Okay, I will contact the Pratt & Whitney rep. They're in my area.
 JD> Cost of the conversion to the
 JD> 'much simpler, only 1 moving part' turbine vs. simply replacing the
 JD> old recip engine with a new/rebuilt one isn't usually the reason,
 JD> either.
From what you write here, I'm still not clear on why you do or don't
believe the conversion is advantageous. If not for low maintenance and
fuel economy then why are all those dummies converting to turboprop?
 Mike
--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
---------------