Navy Buys $26/Gallon "Green" Fuel

[X Ring]

Good God!  They normally pay $3.50-3.60/gal for JP-8.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/48047296/ns/us_news-environment/#.T_JfaPVdl5d

Marty

[Jess Tolbirt]

times have changed, when i was in the best was JP-4

[G-Man]

$300 for a hammer, $400 for a toilet seat.............

Yup, let's raise taxes because the gov't does such a wonderful job in conserving and spending my money on only really important things.   

[Jess Tolbirt]

i remember the 300 dollar hammer and the 400 dollar toilet seat from back in the 70's i think,, wonder what they cost now with inflation?

[X Ring]

This is different though.  This is the Obama administration using the military to further its failed green energy agenda, no matter the cost.

Marty

[hubcapsc]

i remember the 300 dollar hammer and the 400 dollar toilet seat from back in the 70's i think,, wonder what they cost now with inflation?

A $300 hammer probably won't help you win the war.

But knowing how to, and having the infrastructure ready, to project a fleet of
warships out upon the world with fake gas might have value.

-Mike

[bigguy]

Also, the $300 hammer and the $600 toilet seat issues were completely bogus. I remember seeing some A-hole senator holding up a $10 horse shoe seat from a local hardware store, trying to make a point. What the clueless dip either didn't understand, or simply lied about to make his point, was that the $600 dollar unit was for the entire pressurized, aircraft grade unit. Boeing paid about $1,200 for the same unit at the time.
I don't know about the $300 hammer, I do remember a $400 wrench. It looked like a regular wrench, but was actually made of a special alloy because the alloy used in the standard hardware store version wrenches caused damage to turbine blades. Save a couple of hundred dollars, lose a $15 million dollar jet. The Air force had to pay a factory to shut down for a two week retool, then go into a limited production run of a few thousand units, then spend a couple of weeks tooling back. The cost per unit under these circumstances was about $400 per unit if I remember correctly.
Of course we could a just kept buying the cheap crap at the local ACE, but then we'd be risking a $15 million dollar air craft and an airman's life on every flight. I guess the a-hole with the $10 toilet seat considered that "fiscally responsible."
I don't remember the "hammer" flap, but would figure it a pretty safe bet there was similar back story.

[PAVALKER]

Mixed emotions on this one....  while I initially might think it a waste of money, it does have it's merits for testing and evaluation.  However, I would think this could and should have been tested on a smaller, less expensive scale.  And...what if this Green Fuel causes significant damage to all the ships being tested, then how much money has been spent?

[X Ring]

Mixed emotions on this one....  while I initially might think it a waste of money, it does have it's merits for testing and evaluation.  However, I would think this could and should have been tested on a smaller, less expensive scale.  And...what if this Green Fuel causes significant damage to all the ships being tested, then how much money has been spent?

What about the aircraft?  If a ship's gas turbine engine quits, it can be towed into port.  If an aircraft's quit during a flight it falls out of the sky.

Marty

[Jess Tolbirt]

Also, the $300 hammer and the $600 toilet seat issues were completely bogus. I remember seeing some A-hole senator holding up a $10 horse shoe seat from a local hardware store, trying to make a point. What the clueless dip either didn't understand, or simply lied about to make his point, was that the $600 dollar unit was for the entire pressurized, aircraft grade unit. Boeing paid about $1,200 for the same unit at the time.
I don't know about the $300 hammer, I do remember a $400 wrench. It looked like a regular wrench, but was actually made of a special alloy because the alloy used in the standard hardware store version wrenches caused damage to turbine blades. Save a couple of hundred dollars, lose a $15 million dollar jet. The Air force had to pay a factory to shut down for a two week retool, then go into a limited production run of a few thousand units, then spend a couple of weeks tooling back. The cost per unit under these circumstances was about $400 per unit if I remember correctly.
Of course we could a just kept buying the cheap crap at the local ACE, but then we'd be risking a $15 million dollar air craft and an airman's life on every flight. I guess the a-hole with the $10 toilet seat considered that "fiscally responsible."
I don't remember the "hammer" flap, but would figure it a pretty safe bet there was similar back story.

i think you are on the wrong side of state road..

[RP#62]

times have changed, when i was in the best was JP-4

Me too.  From Wiki:

It was specified in 1990 by the U.S. government as a replacement for government diesel fueled vehicles.

The U.S. Air Force replaced JP-4 with JP-8 completely by the fall of 1996, to use a less flammable, less hazardous fuel for better safety and combat survivability.

The U.S. Navy uses a similar formula, JP-5. JP-5 has an even higher flash point of > 60 °C (140 °F), but also a higher cost, limiting its use to aircraft carriers and other situations where the danger of fire is greatest.

Outside of powering aircraft, JP-8 is used as a fuel for heaters, stoves,[1] tanks,[2] by the U.S. military as a replacement for diesel fuel in the engines of nearly all tactical ground vehicles and electrical generators, and as a coolant in engines and some other aircraft components. The use of a single fuel greatly simplifies logistics.

JP-8 is formulated with icing inhibitor, corrosion inhibitors, lubricants, and antistatic agents, and less benzene (a carcinogen) and less n-hexane (a neurotoxin) than JP-4. However, it also smells stronger than JP-4. JP-8 has an oily feel to the touch, while JP-4 feels more like a solvent.

[PAVALKER]

I wonder how often the pilots practice their "gliding" skills..... might be difficult to land gliding.  Let's hope they don't  fuel up all aircraft with that.  

Hmmm...food for thought,  what if their intent is to damage or destroy all the ships/aircraft in that test battle group with the  green fuel.  The beginning of Obama's disarmament of America....              

[X Ring]

I wonder how often the pilots practice their "gliding" skills..... might be difficult to land gliding.  Let's hope they don't  fuel up all aircraft with that.  

Hmmm...food for thought,  what if their intent is to damage or destroy all the ships/aircraft in that test battle group with the  green fuel.  The beginning of Obama's disarmament of America....              

The report I posted said the ships and the aircraft.  I can't comment about the gliding characteristics of F-14s, FA-18s and other Naval aircraft but I remember hearing when I was in the Air Force that F-4s proved that anything could fly if you put enough engine behind it cause they had the aerodynamics of a brick.

Marty

[fiddle mike]

Follow the money, I say!

[Reb]

As a former Navy fuels specialists (05-09) I have a little insight on the matter. A Nimitz class aircraft carrier can hold up to 3.1 million gallons of JP-5. There are over 300 storage tanks ranging from 1000gal - 30000gal. All carriers have 2 pump-rooms, one forward and one aft. Both pump-rooms contain two purifiers, 3 transfer pumps, 3 stripping pumps, and 4 service pumps. The service pumps are what send fuel from service tanks to the flight beck, They are rated at 1100gallons/min at 150-180 psi. During COMP2EX. Which is a 2-3 month training deployment every carrier does during conflict time (basically its like being at war at sea). I've witnessed a 15,000 gallon fuel tank be sucked dry in 10 minutes. I believe in those 70 days at sea we went through around 6.7 million gallons of fuel. This was during the Bush era so things have changed some since Obama became commander and chief. Anyway, point is JP-5 is a cheaper fuel. But certain equipment on board all carriers will have to be changed and adapted for new fuel. Not sure what is the cheaper alternative, that's for you to decide.  

[X Ring]

So what your saying is $26/gal alternative fuel is cheaper than $3.50/gal regular fuel?  Plus they have to change equipment to use it?  Wth have they been teaching you at SIU?  That makes no sense whatsoever!

Marty

[Reb]

So what your saying is $26/gal alternative fuel is cheaper than $3.50/gal regular fuel?  Plus they have to change equipment to use it?  Wth have they been teaching you at SIU?  That makes no sense whatsoever!

Marty

sorry I ment to put one of these _____> after, It's intended to be Sarcasm!!! man sarcasm!!!  

I left in 09 shortly after Obama was elected, I know certain sea trials and training schedules were all changed due to budget cuts to the military. Soo I'm not sure how it balances out with higher cost fuel and less flying with cheaper fuel and more flying. It's however one wished to depict it    . Not wanting to get political if you catch my drift 

[X Ring]

You forget to put those in and people think your serious.  I almost jumped on the Interstate to come up there and give you wall to wall counseling.  

Marty

[Reb]

You forget to put those in and people think your serious.  I almost jumped on the Interstate to come up there and give you wall to wall counseling.  

Marty

BAHAHA Guess I should proof read my posts better 

[Jeff K]

But now left can scream even louder about the money wasted on defense.

This is even better.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/business/energy-environment/companies-face-fines-for-not-using-unavailable-biofuel.html