Contents

Talk:Petrol-paraffin engine

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

South Africa: PSP SA This article is within the scope of WikiProject South Africa, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of South Africa on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.South AfricaWikipedia:WikiProject South AfricaTemplate:WikiProject South AfricaSouth Africa articles ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by Wikipedia Primary School project.

Compression ratio[edit]

I'm dubious about the 8:1 compression ratio. I think 4:1 would be nearer the mark. Biscuittin (talk) 19:52, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

TVO version of Ferguson TE20 tractor had a compression ratio of 4.5:1. [1] Biscuittin (talk) 15:47, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rumely Oil Pull, 4:1 compression ratio. [2] Biscuittin (talk) 16:23, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The section "Light aircraft applications" may not belong in this article, as Avgas engines run one type of fuel only: 100 octane gasoline. The are not petrol-paraffin engines. Confusion seems to have arisen because jet aviation fuel is similar to paraffin/kerosine. Switching between fuels on-the-go, as you do in a petrol-paraffin engine, while airborne appears risky with current technology. However, this proposal, possibly WP:OR and tagged tagged since May 2015, appears in the article. Considering deletion--86.146.175.158 (talk) 15:33, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I was wrong. US patent 20150360793 describes a method of switching fuel in flight for piston aircraft: the fuels concerned are avgas and compressed natural gas. No mention of paraffin/kerosine. Still proposing a radical trim.--86.146.175.158 (talk) 16:21, 18 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Another possible source of this confusion is that Mid-West Engines Limited, Hanger SE38, Gloucester Airport, made dual ignition, not dual fuel, aero engines (practically a requirement, for spark-ignition aero engines) and were indeed researching Wankel engines for light aircraft. This is from some EASA certification documents [3]. Still working up to a bold deletion.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 11:56, 19 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, no objections. Done.--217.155.32.221 (talk) 08:48, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

See Bob Hoover#Hoover Nozzle and Hoover Ring Hoover's piston-engined Shrike Commander was accidentally fueled with jet fuel. There was enough avgas in the system to allow it to take off. The engines quit when they ingested jet fuel and the Shrike Commander crashed, badly injuring Hoover. Jim1138 (talk) 08:57, 4 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting snippet—thanks!--217.155.32.221 (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]