Talk:Aviation fuel

This article is within the scope of theAviation WikiProject.If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists ofopen tasksandtask forces.To use this banner, please see thefull instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the followingcriteriafor B-class status:
Referencing and citation:criterion not met Coverage and accuracy:criterion not met Structure:criterion met Grammar and style:criterion not met Supporting materials:criterion not met

taxes

There should be something about the debate over the lack of taxes on aviation fuel and the pollution and distorted prices it causes.ROGNNTUDJUU!12:19, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aviation spirit

From our talk pages:

Hello, Mr Shearer,

I am readingConvoy HX-106,which I see you created, and I note the use of "aviation spirit". Am I correct in believing this to beaviation fuel?Before I linked it I wanted to be sure.

Thank you,

--Badger151(talk)15:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The good old days when one could write an article without listing sources. I am not sure where I got the information from!

A quick Google turns up lots of links about aviation spirit. The following two links should make it possible for you to should allow you to make the decision ifaviation spiritshould be redirected toaviation fuelorAvgas(clearly an American name) or whatever you judge to be the best fit.Link oneSee the paragraph that starts "The earliest British specification for aviation fuel was..." anda second linkp. 182, also 183.

The term seems to have been in common use in World War II and is used in oral histories seethis article"During mid February 1942 we had loaded a full cargo of aviation spirit and petrol in 45 gallon drums at Balik Papan, then Pladju, all destined for use by the allied forces in the defence of Singapore." Fromthis link(a page generated from one by the UKDepartment of Enterprise, Trade and Investment(http:// detini.gov.uk) it is still the correct British term for aviation fuels. --Philip Baird Shearer(talk)21:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

TheOxford English Dictionaryunder "aviation" has the quote "1920Flight26 Feb. 252/1 The Anglo-American Oil Co., Ltd., announce the present retail price of..Pratt's aviation spirit, 4s. 1d. per gallon. "so the term aviation spirit may predate" aviation fuel "(of which there is no mention in the OED). --Philip Baird Shearer(talk)21:12, 2 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, thanks for the quick, and extensive reply. It looks like the aviation fuel article is broad enough to encompass aviation spirit, so I'll hook up the link. --Badger151(talk)04:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The term 'aviation spirit' was the usual descriptor for British and Empire aircraft fuels, both in the refineries, and in cargo movements, e.g., shipping. 1929ShellFlightadvert for 'Shell Aviation Spirit' here:[1]and a 1979 one here:[2]

1918 use of the term 'aviation spirit' here:[3]— Precedingunsignedcomment added by2.24.215.150(talk)18:45, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

jet fuel as a solvent

In the early days of the jet age, it was discovered that jet fuel acts as a solvent of petroleum-based runway surfaces (asphault, &c). As a result, aircraft fueling was soon restricted to a few designated areas, to reduce damage to runways and taxiways (apparently, it was done wherever convenient in the prop days). I would add this to the "safety" section but I do not know if it still obtains. Can another reader familiar with modern air ops let me know if jet fuel spills are still a concern for runway damage? (in addition to the environmental issues, of course).165.91.64.244(talk)RKH—Precedingundatedcomment was added at08:44, 12 December 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Use of biofuels in ultralight trike engines

Engines like the Radne and Vittorazi can probably be made to function on ethanol. Mention this in article. Seehere KVDP(talk)08:23, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ASTM standards naming convention

ASTM itself identifies its standards with no space between the letter and numbers (for example,ASTM D910). Even the pageASTM Internationalidentifies a page without the superfluous space. I realize that it is fairly common usage to insert a space. But the space contributes nothing to readability or clarity. I think that the nomenclature by which an organization identifies its own standards should prevail.75.208.197.7(talk)00:05, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]