Saturday, June 9, 2012

AVGAS.


This is coolbert:

From that prior blog entry:

"An American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, for instance, expends on just one six month deployment about 1 million gallons of aviation gasoline [AVGAS], A PORTION [what percentage that is I am not sure] OF WHICH IS MERELY DUMPED OVERBOARD IN THE OCEAN!!"

A portion of that 1 million gallons of AVGAS merely dumped at sea! This needs to be clarified.

Aircraft fully fueled prior to launch not able to complete a mission as designated, for whatever reason returning to base [the flight deck of the aircraft carrier] dumping or jettisoning excess fuel for safety considerations. Dumped directly into the ocean without regard whatsoever to environmental concerns. Most of that AVGAS quickly it should be noted evaporating and dispersed by the ocean.

A fully fueled aircraft landing posing a serious risk and danger to the entire vessel.

"Fuel dumping (or a fuel jettison) is a procedure used by aircraft in certain emergency situations before a return to the airport [flight deck] shortly after takeoff, or before landing short of its intended destination (emergency landing) to either lighten the aircraft's weight or to reduce risk of fire."

Warplanes fully loaded and fueled landing in such a manner without expending a full tank of AVGAS in danger of suffering structural damage. Beyond that, a catastrophic crash on landing if occurring with explosion, imperiling that entire ship, fire spreading beyond control.

"Aircraft have two major types of weight limits: the maximum takeoff weight and the maximum structural landing weight . . . If a flight takes off at the maximum structural takeoff weight and then faces a situation where it must return to the departure airport [flight deck]. . . there will not be time to consume the fuel meant for getting to the original destination, and the aircraft may be over the maximum structural landing weight to land back at the departure point."

NOT that dumping and jettisoning callous disregard for mother nature but legitimate safety concerns without question!

coolbert.


No comments: