Timeline for Are turboprops more efficient than piston engines (thrust per fuel consumption)?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 20, 2020 at 12:37 | comment | added | Peter Kämpf | @BrianDrummond Because it weighs 2600 tons. For a more elaborate reasoning see this answer. | |
| Mar 20, 2020 at 11:58 | comment | added | user_1818839 | Diesel engines can burn as little as 160g/kWh, like the Wärtsilä-Sulzer_RTA96-C. I've never seen one of those flying, though. | |
| Jan 27, 2019 at 12:21 | comment | added | Mikko Rantalainen | @Harper: also notice that the answer is specifically about g/kWh instead of liters/kWh. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 16:58 | comment | added | Peter Kämpf | @Harper: Yes, Diesel fuel has a higher specific mass, but you forget the higher compression ratio of Diesels which makes them inherently more efficient. Poor individual designs are no excuse. | |
| May 13, 2018 at 16:30 | comment | added | Harper - Reinstate Monica | The higher efficiency of diesel engines is illusory, and is an artifact of measuring fuel by volume instead of mass. Diesel fuel has a higher energy volume (joules/litre) than gas, by about the proportion you quote. This also shows up "at the pump" with diesel priced about the same proportion above gas. See also the way copper wire has half, or double, the conductivity of aluminum wire, depending on whether you compare by mass or volume. | |
| Jul 1, 2016 at 7:16 | vote | accept | DrZ214 | ||
| Jun 27, 2016 at 5:22 | comment | added | DrZ214 | Okay, well assuming the engines actually use that consumption during cruise, this answers the question. Meanwhile I have to ask the related question: aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/29611/… | |
| Jun 26, 2016 at 15:03 | history | edited | user14897 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
fixed url
|
| Jun 26, 2016 at 14:44 | history | answered | Peter Kämpf | CC BY-SA 3.0 |