Jim Dunmyer said the following to Mike Ross on the subject of
RE: ENGINE DESIGN (22 Oct 97  07:45:12)
 JD> The airplane conversions are done for low maintenance, I'll grant you
 JD> that. They have extremely high reliability and long TBOs compared to
 JD> the engines they replace. They're also much higher horsepower, giving
 JD> the airplane better takeoff performance. Those factors offset the
 JD> higher cost, and don't really apply in automotive applications of
 JD> turbines.
As for those factors not appling to the automotive applications, I agree
with you. They don't apply because the requirements are very different.
I hope I'm not alone in seeing the irony in objecting to the merits of
the automotive app in the same breath as mentioning takeoff performance.
The comparison is mismatched and unequal by any analysis.
 JD> Think about this: Nearly all large ships are powered by either steam
 JD> turbines or huge Diesel engines. Does that make either suitable for
 JD> automotive use? (Especially compared to present-day gasoline engines)
Yes, I agree and most use electric drive to transfer power to the prop.
That in effect makes it a hybrid technology and it exists since almost
the start of this century. The automotive app was simply overdue.
 JD> If you believe that the present-day piston engine should be replaced,
 JD> you should be interested in the announcements in the past couple of
 JD> days of some new fuel cell technology that's being developed. The
 JD> thing runs on gasoline, extracting the needed hydrogen from that fuel.
 JD> I'd almost bet on it making it to market quicker than a turbine in
 JD> automotive applications.
I heard a quick news blurb in passing but it seems quite a trick indeed!
Do you have any details of the operating principles? Catalyzers?
 Mike
--- Blue Wave/DOS v2.30
---------------