Scott wrote:
> If the fuel weighs a pound more per gallon than 100LL and we can > only carry half as much......just think of all the landings one will get. > A lot of folks need takeoff and landing practice. That can't be all bad. Why would we only be able to carry half as much? If my plane is weight limited, then it's true I'd only be able to carry 20.5 gallons of Swiftfuel. But, if the 13% greater energy content does translate into energy at the prop then I'd get about as many flight miles with Swiftfuel as avgas. If my flight is not weight limited and I could carry the full 24 gallons then I'd be able to fly about 13% farther on the useable fuel load with Swiftfuel, it seems to me. Ed _____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Scott Morgan Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2009 1:30 PM To: ercoupe tech Subject: [ercoupe-tech] Swiftfuel I get Aviation eBrief from AOPA, and in that email it said the FAA had completed tests on the fuel.....I guess it did not say they had approved it, only that they had tested it. If the fuel weighs a pound more per gallon than 100LL and we can only carry half as much......just think of all the landings one will get. A lot of folks need takeoff and landing practice. That can't be all bad. Scott
