Diesel
Vege. Prist would be used as a fuel additive in the Lear. Prist was also used in the Citation II P2-RDZ.
Prist was Ethylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether (EGMME), a carcinogenic. It now consists of diethylene glycol monomethyl ether (DEGMME). The primary purpose of this chemical is to prevent freezing of water in the fuel system of aircraft.
EGMME was the original additive used in jet fuel since the 1960’s when it was invented by the USAF and Phillips Petroleum. The military has been using the less hazardous and higher flash point DEGMME for over a decade now. In approximately 1994, the civilian ASTM specification was changed to DEGMME, as was the military specification to MIL-I-85470. Prist additive complies with the newer MIL-DTL-85470B specification. Both were and are mixed at .10 to .15% volume in Jet-A turbine fuel and aviation gasoline. DEGMME serves the exact same purpose of preventing icing of suspended water in jet fuel at altitude as did the previous EGMME product.
Prior to 1994, Prist additive specified ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (EGMME), certified as a pesticide with the EPA and Prist additive was advertised to retard growth of microbes in aviation fuels. The correct term is microbiostat, not microbiocide (-stat means it controls or retards growth, -cide means it kills microbes). With all of the new EPA requirements, it became economically prohibitive to certify the new DEGMME based additive as a pesticide. Summarizing the above, it is widely believed that DEGMME does have a retarding effect on microbial growth, however this is no longer an officially claim property for the Prist additive.
http://www.csdinc.org/prist/faq2.html#Q2
For non pressurised turbine aircraft operating at warmer ambient temps, a few liters of Avgas per week acts as a biocide and keeps the bugs at bay. At the Pratt's formula (of max 150 hours on Avgas per overhaul period) the effect on the engine would be negligable. But you didn't get that from me!!!
A trap for Cessna 208B Grand Caravan (PT6A-114A) operators: The US Flight Manual mandates the use of Prist and prohibits the use of Avgas. This Cessna 208 Caravan's Australian Flight Manual which does not require Prist and permits the use of Avgas for 150 hours in the PT6A-114 engine. Same engine - different rules.
Prist was Ethylene Glycol Monomethyl Ether (EGMME), a carcinogenic. It now consists of diethylene glycol monomethyl ether (DEGMME). The primary purpose of this chemical is to prevent freezing of water in the fuel system of aircraft.
EGMME was the original additive used in jet fuel since the 1960’s when it was invented by the USAF and Phillips Petroleum. The military has been using the less hazardous and higher flash point DEGMME for over a decade now. In approximately 1994, the civilian ASTM specification was changed to DEGMME, as was the military specification to MIL-I-85470. Prist additive complies with the newer MIL-DTL-85470B specification. Both were and are mixed at .10 to .15% volume in Jet-A turbine fuel and aviation gasoline. DEGMME serves the exact same purpose of preventing icing of suspended water in jet fuel at altitude as did the previous EGMME product.
Prior to 1994, Prist additive specified ethylene glycol monomethyl ether (EGMME), certified as a pesticide with the EPA and Prist additive was advertised to retard growth of microbes in aviation fuels. The correct term is microbiostat, not microbiocide (-stat means it controls or retards growth, -cide means it kills microbes). With all of the new EPA requirements, it became economically prohibitive to certify the new DEGMME based additive as a pesticide. Summarizing the above, it is widely believed that DEGMME does have a retarding effect on microbial growth, however this is no longer an officially claim property for the Prist additive.
http://www.csdinc.org/prist/faq2.html#Q2
For non pressurised turbine aircraft operating at warmer ambient temps, a few liters of Avgas per week acts as a biocide and keeps the bugs at bay. At the Pratt's formula (of max 150 hours on Avgas per overhaul period) the effect on the engine would be negligable. But you didn't get that from me!!!
A trap for Cessna 208B Grand Caravan (PT6A-114A) operators: The US Flight Manual mandates the use of Prist and prohibits the use of Avgas. This Cessna 208 Caravan's Australian Flight Manual which does not require Prist and permits the use of Avgas for 150 hours in the PT6A-114 engine. Same engine - different rules.
Last edited by Torres; 28th Jul 2002 at 00:42.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: My balcony.
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well thanks for jogging me memory Torres.
Was using that stuff in the 70's so musta been carcenogenic huh?
Me kids all turn out ok but , 2 hands, 2 feet, 2 heads.
I would like to know where and when this diesel plane is going to be in Auss.
Would also like a cost of one of these things not much on the web.?
Was using that stuff in the 70's so musta been carcenogenic huh?
Me kids all turn out ok but , 2 hands, 2 feet, 2 heads.
I would like to know where and when this diesel plane is going to be in Auss.
Would also like a cost of one of these things not much on the web.?
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Throttlemonkey, a 6v53 is a small V6 two stroke deisel engine produced by general Motors co and sold under the name of Detoit. it was mostly used as a small truck engine and a marine engine for use in small to medium sized work boats. they were (from memory) about 180 HP. they were a pretty inefficiant, noisy, dirty, smelly little bugga that had the nickname of birdscarers due to all the racket they produced. Highly unlikely they would be used for aviation as they weighed in at about 700kg for the basic motor without accesories and were far too unreliable and had a very low run without major repairs being required.they also produced a few veriants that were half decent engines, like the 6V71 and the 6V92. the 8V and 12V series were a much improved motor but still had the problems of fuel inefficientcy (is that a word?) and monster amounts of noise.
Reminds me of the noisy bloody 65 KVA 6 cylinder Lister generator behind the old Talair office in Goroka.
50% of the fuel burn produced the noise.
30% of the fuel burn produced smokey exhaust
20% of the fuel burn produced ergs - on a good day!
50% of the fuel burn produced the noise.
30% of the fuel burn produced smokey exhaust
20% of the fuel burn produced ergs - on a good day!
Don Quixote Impersonator
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Australia
Age: 77
Posts: 3,403
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gemmies ??
Had one of them 6V53N I think in a 34 footer, me mate and I had as lads.
Never put a spanner on it.
Converting fuel to noise, yup and virgins to whatever they become afterwards.
That garump sound followed by the clatter at idle that shattered the silence in the local mooring when firing up at first light in the morning was quite satisfying. Got every one else going too.
If that didn't get em going, the howling as we pushed out to sea for a days fishing did. "Bluddy Hoons" could be heard echoing in our wake.
Funny that's what "I" say nowadays.
Had one of them 6V53N I think in a 34 footer, me mate and I had as lads.
Never put a spanner on it.
Converting fuel to noise, yup and virgins to whatever they become afterwards.
That garump sound followed by the clatter at idle that shattered the silence in the local mooring when firing up at first light in the morning was quite satisfying. Got every one else going too.
If that didn't get em going, the howling as we pushed out to sea for a days fishing did.
"Bluddy Hoons" could be heard echoing in our wake.Funny that's what "I" say nowadays.
Diverging. The Yanmah diesel in the yacht was 8.5 horse power (I suspect more like Shetland Ponies!) and weighed 80kg. Ah, but the fuel flow! 0.85 of a litre at full throttle!
On that basis a 100 HP diesel donk for a Cessna 150 would weigh 960 KG and burn 10 litres per hour.............
On that basis a 100 HP diesel donk for a Cessna 150 would weigh 960 KG and burn 10 litres per hour.............
Diesels,hmm maybe you guys should stick to flying A little folklor for Y'all take the 6V53 in laymans terms that is a V6 with a capacity of 53 cubic inches per cylinder. Have seen upto 16v149 in diesel gen sets and haulpaks. 2 stoke technology dated back to WW2. Most truck motors were either 6 or 8V or N (Normal or staight) 53 ,71 or 92's supercharged all and some with turboes using a "T"suffix. Power varied from 180hp to 500hp although you could fit huge squirters and pull out in excess of 900hp. These two strokes were ULTRA reliable and you can get parts for em in any post office in the country along with the points for a 186holden Most applications in trucks would easily see 1000000km between rebuilds( thats about three years of solid linehaul 24 7 52 weeks a year. roughly about 15000hrs in service) Sweetest sound ever to hear a freshly rebuilt 92 purr into life. Almost as good as a Pratt powered Ag-cat taking off on a crisp winter dawn. Will be phased out due to emission laws in favour of 4stroke technology series 60's. Which is where they fit in with lycoming. Understand Detroit is supplying the ECU and unit injectors for the jet-a burner. Not sure what size engine or if they will be using 2stroke technology with a turbo and a supercharger or a more conventional 4stroke(now if I could work out how to use the jacobs brake in fine pitch on descent then that would give the latte set something to whinge about.)
As for the bugs, they actualy live in the water and feed off the fuel. What causes the problems is when the mo#@*&ls die they block the filters.(understand this is what happened to the B200 that crashed off the end of 16 at YSSY in the eighties) Another problem when using diesel is the tendancy to turn into a block of wax approaching FZL from the high parafin levels. Not good for use in the FLs
Detroit also make Allison turbines.
A little folklor for Y'all take the 6V53 in laymans terms that is a V6 with a capacity of 53 cubic inches per cylinder. Have seen upto 16v149 in diesel gen sets and haulpaks. 2 stoke technology dated back to WW2. Most truck motors were either 6 or 8V or N (Normal or staight) 53 ,71 or 92's supercharged all and some with turboes using a "T"suffix. Power varied from 180hp to 500hp although you could fit huge squirters and pull out in excess of 900hp. These two strokes were ULTRA reliable and you can get parts for em in any post office in the country along with the points for a 186holden Most applications in trucks would easily see 1000000km between rebuilds( thats about three years of solid linehaul 24 7 52 weeks a year. roughly about 15000hrs in service) Sweetest sound ever to hear a freshly rebuilt 92 purr into life. Almost as good as a Pratt powered Ag-cat taking off on a crisp winter dawn. Will be phased out due to emission laws in favour of 4stroke technology series 60's. Which is where they fit in with lycoming. Understand Detroit is supplying the ECU and unit injectors for the jet-a burner. Not sure what size engine or if they will be using 2stroke technology with a turbo and a supercharger or a more conventional 4stroke(now if I could work out how to use the jacobs brake in fine pitch on descent then that would give the latte set something to whinge about.)As for the bugs, they actualy live in the water and feed off the fuel. What causes the problems is when the mo#@*&ls die they block the filters.(understand this is what happened to the B200 that crashed off the end of 16 at YSSY in the eighties) Another problem when using diesel is the tendancy to turn into a block of wax approaching FZL from the high parafin levels. Not good for use in the FLs
Detroit also make Allison turbines.
Last edited by OZBUSDRIVER; 31st Jul 2002 at 11:51.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I never had a real good run out of em and we operated two 71s and four 92 silvers......and all through my time as a fitter I repaired em on boats, gen sets, trucks, pumps and compresors.
they all had a quirk or two but mainly suffered from people not operating them the way they enjoy being operated...flat out.
they also had this nasty habit of wearing the liner mounting points to an out of limit condition and then needed boring and line boring to make the blocks reusable.
you can run the big squirts in em no doubt at all, but this tended to make em blow heaps of black smoke and wash the bores, then needing a ring set pretty damn promptly.
we had a 16v92 in a W series kenny for a while and it would pull the titanic up, but you had to pay for it later down the line.
Now the series sixtys were a whole differant story.....what a magnificent engine.......never put a spanner on the four we ran and regularly had 1million Ks out of them.
OOOOOOOH boy, Im glad I dont do that stuff no more. (well no where as much any way)
they all had a quirk or two but mainly suffered from people not operating them the way they enjoy being operated...flat out.
they also had this nasty habit of wearing the liner mounting points to an out of limit condition and then needed boring and line boring to make the blocks reusable.
you can run the big squirts in em no doubt at all, but this tended to make em blow heaps of black smoke and wash the bores, then needing a ring set pretty damn promptly.
we had a 16v92 in a W series kenny for a while and it would pull the titanic up, but you had to pay for it later down the line.
Now the series sixtys were a whole differant story.....what a magnificent engine.......never put a spanner on the four we ran and regularly had 1million Ks out of them.
OOOOOOOH boy, Im glad I dont do that stuff no more. (well no where as much any way)
Wiz, I know what you mean. Those squirters were only for racing applications and marinized applications. "Drive 'em like you hate 'em"
By the way you did mean a 6V didn't you, otherwise you would have bonnnet something like an autocar
By the way you did mean a 6V didn't you, otherwise you would have bonnnet something like an autocar
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wilsch Airmotive are taking orders for their 160hp four cylinder
diesel engine but you won't get delivery until late 2003.
It's a blown and turbocharged two-stroke running on jet A1.Price around Au$43000
More details WWW.Wilksch.com
diesel engine but you won't get delivery until late 2003.
It's a blown and turbocharged two-stroke running on jet A1.Price around Au$43000
More details WWW.Wilksch.com
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wilsch Airmotive are taking orders for their 160hp four cylinder
diesel engine but you won't get delivery until late 2003.
It's a blown and turbocharged two-stroke running on jet A1.Price around Au$43000
More details WWW.Wilksch.com
diesel engine but you won't get delivery until late 2003.
It's a blown and turbocharged two-stroke running on jet A1.Price around Au$43000
More details WWW.Wilksch.com
Chlamydia Resinae is one of the little bugs that like to live in hyrdocarbon fuels, I have occasionally heaved a plug of it outta the fuel-filter on my Diesel Toyota Troopy.
How about using centrifugal oil-purifiers like they use on ships to remove crud, Chlamydia, water etc from fuel? As for the problem with freezing levels, why not either heat the tanks or use a lower-temp blend (e.g. Alpine-blend) which I understand is regularly used in the Snowy in winter.
Would love a little diesel for the microlight but the power-weight ratio of the Rotax 582 is very hard to argue with.
How about using centrifugal oil-purifiers like they use on ships to remove crud, Chlamydia, water etc from fuel? As for the problem with freezing levels, why not either heat the tanks or use a lower-temp blend (e.g. Alpine-blend) which I understand is regularly used in the Snowy in winter.
Would love a little diesel for the microlight but the power-weight ratio of the Rotax 582 is very hard to argue with.