War
- Thread starter captainmorgan
- Start date
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
I think Kirby was playing fast and loose, jet fuel might be the preferred fuel, but other grades should be able to be used for logistical purposes, they should be able to burn regular diesel. Even the B52 bomber could use various grades of fuel and gas turbines engines can generally run on a wider variety of fuels than ICE. I haven't looked into it, but it makes sense to do this and there is historical precident in the battle of France during WW2 when the French tanks needed a special grade of fuel and the German ones did not. I think Kirby wanted to accentuate the difficulties and while the army does use the preferred fuel, it can use others.
The real reasons are probably logistical, maintenance and equipment security. Leopards can do the job, provided there are enough of them along with Russian lend lease. There are also a lot of other tank killing vehicles Uncle Sam is giving, anything with a TOW missile on top.
It can use other fuels, but maintenance probably goes up when they do.
What kind of fuel does M1 Abrams use?
The most recent M1 model holds 490 gallons (1,850 L), allowing the tank to go about 265 miles (426 km) without refueling. The turbine engine works with a range of fuels, including ordinary gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel.
How M1 Tanks Work - Science | HowStuffWorks
Last edited:
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
Abrams can run on diesel or aviation fuel....
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/0902dp-m1-abrams-tank/
however...it doesn't run the same on either one...it's a turbine designed to run on av fuel, which has different lubricity and viscosity, and other factors as well, than straight diesel. it requires redundant parts on the engine, and no matter what it is running on, it eats enormous amounts of it.
if you feed it gas, you have to switch to a whole separate ignition and filtration system, which is built in...redundancy built on top of complexity...
https://www.aeroclass.org/jet-fuel-vs-diesel-fuel/
so yeah, it is a multi fuel capable engine, but you get the best performance out of av fuel, and the least wear and tear on the engine.
and again, no matter what fuel you're using, you better have a BUTTLOAD of it.
"Fuel Consumption A tank will need approximately 300 gallons every eight hours; this will vary depending on mission, terrain, and weather. A single tank takes 10 minutes to refuel. Refueling and rearming of a tank platoon--four tanks--is approximately 30 minutes under ideal conditions.
0.6 miles per gallon.
60 gallons per hour when traveling cross-country
30+ gallons per hour while operating at a tactical ideal
10 gallons basic idle
A mine plow will increase the fuel consummation rate of a tank by 25 percent."
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m1-specs.htm
https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/0902dp-m1-abrams-tank/
however...it doesn't run the same on either one...it's a turbine designed to run on av fuel, which has different lubricity and viscosity, and other factors as well, than straight diesel. it requires redundant parts on the engine, and no matter what it is running on, it eats enormous amounts of it.
if you feed it gas, you have to switch to a whole separate ignition and filtration system, which is built in...redundancy built on top of complexity...
https://www.aeroclass.org/jet-fuel-vs-diesel-fuel/
so yeah, it is a multi fuel capable engine, but you get the best performance out of av fuel, and the least wear and tear on the engine.
and again, no matter what fuel you're using, you better have a BUTTLOAD of it.
"Fuel Consumption A tank will need approximately 300 gallons every eight hours; this will vary depending on mission, terrain, and weather. A single tank takes 10 minutes to refuel. Refueling and rearming of a tank platoon--four tanks--is approximately 30 minutes under ideal conditions.
0.6 miles per gallon.
60 gallons per hour when traveling cross-country
30+ gallons per hour while operating at a tactical ideal
10 gallons basic idle
A mine plow will increase the fuel consummation rate of a tank by 25 percent."
https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/ground/m1-specs.htm
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
lol no.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
injinji
Well-Known Member
the hill.More Americans believe US provides too much support to Ukraine
A growing portion of Americans think that the U.S. is giving too much support to Ukraine, as the Biden administration and other western allies have taken steps in recent weeks to escalate their backing of the country in its war against Russia.
About a quarter of Americans, 26 percent, think the U.S. support of Ukraine is too strong, according to a new Pew Research Center poll. It is a percentage of people that has steadily grown since the Russian invasion of Ukraine last year and has jumped six percent since September.
The U.S. has sent billions of dollars to Ukraine to support its military in the war against Russia. In a $1.7 trillion spending package passed by Congress late last year, lawmakers included around $45 billion in funding for Ukraine and NATO allies.
But the spending levels have come under attack by some Republican lawmakers, who argue the country is opening its pockets at unsustainable levels for Ukraine. Soon-to-be Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) said in October that House Republicans would not provide a “blank-check” for support of Ukraine if his party took control of the House — which it did. Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) said on Twitter that President Biden needed to understand the U.S. wasn’t an ATM.
And as some prominent Republicans have started to sour on the support levels, the poll of 5,152 people, with a margin of error of 1.7 percent, found that Republican voters are following along. A total of 40 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think the U.S. is providing too much support, according to the poll. That is up from 32 percent in September and from nine percent directly after the invasion.
While Republican attitudes have dimmed on Ukrainian support, they have also come to view the Russian war as less of a major threat to the U.S. Just 29 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents think the war is a major threat.
In March 2022, Republicans were more likely to see the invasion as a direct threat to the U.S., but now Democrats are more likely to hold that opinion, with 43 percent holding that belief.
More Americans believe US provides too much support to Ukraine
A growing portion of Americans think that the U.S. is giving too much support to Ukraine, as the Biden administration and other western allies have taken steps in recent weeks to escalate their bac…thehill.com
injinji
Well-Known Member
What is the long term effect of using diesel in the gas turbines? How long could they be expected to run, and how much of a drop in performance?
Grandpapy
Well-Known Member
Similar to Cedar vs Pine in a wood stove. Educated guess.
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
not a bad comparison. That's the kind of thing I was thinking too.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
they both sound like a flue fire waiting to happen
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
Report: US to supply Ukraine with longer-range GLSDB missiles;
There was disappointment when the last US aid package for Ukraine was announced and it didn’t include the Ground Launched Small Diameter Bomb (GLSDB), which is basically a HIMARS rocket with about twice the range.
GLSDB is a relatively new system that combines two existing systems — the GBU-39 Small Diameter Bomb (SDB) with the M26 rocket motor. Its range is 150 kilometers, which brings all of Russian-occupied Ukraine except for southern Crimea into range.
The explanation at the time was that the GLSDB, as a new weapon, would have to be funded through USAI, a bureaucratic hurdle.
Well, the problems have apparently been worked out.
The new package still does not include the ATACMS missile system.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
The US Considers Sending GLSDB to Ukraine -- But What Is It?
injinji
Well-Known Member
Just this week the wife and I were talking about that time I started the chimney fire at her house in town. In my defense I was cleaning all the bark (from the woodpile) off the porch and just burned a little too much of it at once. And she is still the diplomat. She had the grace to say, "well, we did get a heat pump afterward, so it wasn't all bad."
Fogdog
Well-Known Member
cedar burns clean.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I didn’t know that; thanks
OldMedUser
Well-Known Member
Cedar will make more creosote in a damped down airtight stove than almost any other wood. Lots of oily sap in cedar that makes it smell so good. We burn a lot of cedar and pine at the cabin as that's what most of the trees are up there. Stuff a bunch of alder in there in the morning and leave the vent open to burn it all out and warm up the cabin fast. Get that old percolator hopping too.
Damn I miss it up there and hope to get out this year and do some decent trout fishing. Got more fur and feathers so will be tying up some new flies to try out on grandpa's old fly rod when I go.
Roger A. Shrubber
Well-Known Member
they'll run a long time on it, but they'll run a little slower, and a little less efficiently, and require more maintenance. all of that equates to more down time and higher fuel consumption, in a vehicle that already has a lot of down time and consumes a lot of fuel.
DIY-HP-LED
Well-Known Member
It looks like liberal democracies squaring off against autocracies moving forward and we are making more friends than they are. Autocracies always end up the same way, so do liberal democracies, when they can survive.
www.cbsnews.com
As China and Russia get "closer" and Beijing invests in nuclear weapons, NATO focuses on new "friends"
"China is not our adversary," Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said, "but we must understand the scale of the challenge and work together to address it."
www.cbsnews.com
Last edited:
BudmanTX
Well-Known Member
yeah i see a nice little bloc, with China, Russia, and NK all being within that bloc, now if you can get the rest of the oblates to rise up, that will block thatIt looks like liberal democracies squaring off against autocracies moving forward and we are making more friends then they are. Autocracies always end up the same way, so do liberal democracies, when they can survive.
As China and Russia get "closer" and Beijing invests in nuclear weapons, NATO focuses on new "friends"
"China is not our adversary," Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said, "but we must understand the scale of the challenge and work together to address it."