>Don't know whether the military JP formula has more
>lubricating ability and is closer to #2 diesel or all
>the military diesels are set up to run on #1 style
>fuel. I do know the JP designation has changed since
>my days flying in the Navy. That is probably not
>surprizing with all the improvements in chemistry and
>fuel additive technology.
The common US Military jet fuels are JP-4, JP-5, and JP-8. JP-4 is
a 1:1 mixture of heavy naptha fractions (essentially, gasoline) and
kerosene. It's not really a substitute for diesel; though it will
work for short term use. It's essentially the same as civilian
Jet-B, except that JP-4 always contains anti-icing and anti-corrosion
additives. Jet-B may or may not, depending on supplier and where
it's procured. JP-5 and JP-8 are both 100% kerosene blends; they're
very close to being the same fuel, except that JP-5 has a higher
flash point (something about the navy being paranoid about fire on
ships). They are suitable diesel substitutes. They're also
equivalent to civilian Jet-A-1, except, again, for the additive
package. (Jet-A is also much the same thing, except that it's got a
higher freeze point) JP-8 is what the US military are standardizing
on as the single fuel for battlefield operations (except on aircraft
carriers) for air and land vehicles. I don't know how far they've
actually gotten with the plan, though. Jet-A-1 is the universally
available civilian jet fuel (except in the US, where Jet-A is more
common.)
I'd expect that in the event of a really serious, sustained war that
they'd revert to using JP-4 in aircraft(they stopped in the late
80's, I think, due to safety concerns), as it's a wider cut of crude
(that is, more gallons of jet fuel per barrel of oil).
David
_______________________________________________
LRO mailing list
LRO@land-rover.team.net
http://land-rover.team.net/mailman/listinfo/lro
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Apr 12 2003 - 02:10:28 EDT