Landships II

Rectalgia · Legend

Steam power

kieffer · Commander in Chief

Hi Steve, an interesting application of steam power!
Did they fire the engine by oil, or gas? The immunity of engine stalling: that might be a possibility, aerodynamical stalling is another thing, as every plane has a tendency to stall.
The ability to reverse: with another wing configuration that could have been a very interesting novelty..may be they missed the opportunity to invent the 'horizontal Harrier'...

Rectalgia · Legend

Hi Kieffer,

Most or all of the Besler designs used fuel oil - No. 2 fuel oil I have seen mentioned but unsure just what that is right now. I should imagine kerosene/paraffin/shale oil, 'diesel distillate' or bunkering oil would all be possible slight modifications - the latter useful for sea planes once ships started using it (there was a WW2 German sea plane using that bunker fuel in diesel engines, I think, the DO 26).

More on the Besler-powered 'plane at http://wow-really.blogspot.com/2007/01/steam-powered-aircraft-flies.html.

Ironsides · Legend

Steam powered bike 1896

CharlieC · Legend

RE: Steam power

Rectalgia · Legend

Thanks Charlie, interesting. A minor compensation for diesel engines in aeronautical application might be that they shouldn't need the gearing (down) to be quite as massive as a similarly configured gasoline/petrol/benzine engine. Anyway it was a brilliant concept for wartime sea planes to use the same fuel as boats/ships - and a less volatile alternative to "avgas" too.

Talking of the latter, petrol is a risky fuel of course, even in civilian use. I always remember C�line's account of the detonations and resulting craters left by the early automotive pioneers when they tried pressurised fuel tanks for fuel feed ("Death on the instalment plan"). I don't know if it true or not, but it certainly impressed me as an impressionable youth.

-- Edited by Rectalgia on Monday 5th of July 2010 07:37:11 PM

CharlieC · Legend

As usual the festering heap of information I call a memory produced another "interesting" piece about German diesels after I posted. The Junkers Ju 86 bomber from the 1930s was powered by diesels - it wasn't very successful because the diesels didn't like being throttled up and down and gave the plane poor acceleration. This wasn't a problem for long range patrol aircraft like the flying boats.

The Russians used a system before and during WW2 to duct exhaust gas into the fuel tanks to replace the air in the tank's headspace.

Regards,

Charlie

kieffer · Commander in Chief

Rectalgia wrote:

Talking of the latter, petrol is a risky fuel of course, even in civilian use. I always remember C�line's account of the detonations and resulting craters left by the early automotive pioneers when they tried pressurised fuel tanks for fuel feed ("Death on the instalment plan"). I don't know if it true or not, but it certainly impressed me as an impressionable youth.

-- Edited by Rectalgia on Monday 5th of July 2010 07:37:11 PM

As fuel pumps were low pressure, approx 10 -15 bar, may be Celine saw some experimenting gentlemen, like the one who tried to suck up benzine during the Suez oil crisis with a vacuum cleaner here..

�

Rectalgia · Legend

kieffer wrote:

...As fuel pumps were low pressure, approx 10 -15 bar, may be Celine saw some experimenting gentlemen, like the one who tried to suck up benzine during the Suez oil crisis with a vacuum cleaner here..
�
As I understand it, the feed system was to simply pump air into the (top of) the fuel tank to force the petrol to the engine from the bottom of the tank. As you will appreciate (partial pressures), at just 5 bar that is the chemical equivalent of pure molecular oxygen (O₂) at 1 bar. Who knows what pressures were actually tried? The "diesel principle" applied to the whole fuel tank of high-volatiles at once! But then, when pneumatic tyres were invented, they at least had the pump already designed to inflate them.

"Fuel" and excess oxygen is a similar situation to that of unfortunate submariners when there is a pressure-hull breach at depth. They don't drown, they spontaneously combust as any organic material must at maybe 6-8 bar equivalent of O₂ - 300-400 m depth - at "room temperature" (actually quite a lot higher temperature as the air is suddenly compressed).

Ah, the old vacuum cleaner and the petrol trick. Some likely lads recapitulated that amusing phenomenon recently hereabouts, in a car wash/detailing facility. Some brands of stupidity are just too good not to repeat for the benefit of new generations, just as a reminder.

-- Edited by Rectalgia on Tuesday 6th of July 2010 05:50:50 AM

kieffer · Commander in Chief

old fuel pumps in benzine engines were diaphragm pumps, they 'suck' the fuel from the tank to the motor (and were built on the block). They were low pressure as you don't need much. Unlike Diesels, were fuel is injected under high pressure directly in the engine.

regards, Kieffer

kieffer · Commander in Chief

Rectalgia wrote:

would have been the bees knees for airships with the ability to reverse ..

not exactly a reversable engine but anyhow a try: the Pterodactyl, an experimental of unknown designer, at least to me

Rectalgia · Legend

Hi Kieffer,

kieffer wrote:
old fuel pumps in benzine engines were diaphragm pumps, they 'suck' the fuel from the tank to the motor (and were built on the block). They were low pressure as you don't need much. Unlike Diesels, were fuel is injected under high pressure directly in the engine.

I know - but C�line's story (that part of it) refers to the very early days before all the problems were solved - things were experimental and not all the experimenters were competent engineers and technologists. Hence craters in the ground.

Supposing how it might happen - the most reliable fuel feed system in those days was gravity feed. I've used that myself when a fuel pump failed. So maybe it's still the most reliable system. But not elegant and not flexible with regard to the flow-rate. Want more fuel flow? (Elegance doesn't matter right now, simplicity and progress - progress above all - does matter.) Bigger hose, change the fittings to suit. No, easier, fit a valve and lets just pump some air pressure in there to force it out faster (great solution, flexible too, just carry a kid to work a hand pump on demand). Crater in the ground. I don't know if it really happened, but it could have, just like that.

Such things still can happen of course but hopefully air-pressurising petrol tanks has become uncommon. Maybe the Myth-busters should look at the matter. They love craters in the ground.

Fuel-air explosions are far more "energetic" than conventional high explosives. Fuel has to be totally vaporised for full effect but I believe I have seen figures like 200 times more energy than TNT, weight for weight. It follows you probably wouldn't get much mileage on nitroglycerine. But certainly a nice (little) crater in the ground.

Fiona Bunny · Corporal

Regarding the Pterodactyl.
The Pterodactyl MkV designed by Captain Hill for Westland.
Kieffer, your pic is the MKV, a turret fighter in the same vein as and contemporary to the Hawker Demon (1932). The Mk I was a two seat proof of concept aircraft and the MKIV a three seat cabin monoplane.

Rectalgia · Legend

Wow, thanks Fiona. I meant to look for it but you've done all the work. The "flying wing" concept just keeps coming back but that has to be one of the earlier implementations (thus for once not based on a "WW2 German Secret Weapon").

Steve

kieffer · Commander in Chief

Hi� Fiona,

thanks too for the information. The picture is from Airframes, A manual for mechanics and students, by J.Campbell Corlett A.R.Ae.S, publ. Pitman 1936. The caption only said Pterodactyl, no further names were mentioned. (where stands A.R.Ae.S for?).
I don't think it's really a canard, and I don't know if it's a pushing or pulling engine.

Kieffer

Ironsides · Legend

Westland Pterodactyl V

Rectalgia · Legend

RE: Steam power