RSS Feeds
Vehicles
First Supersonic Flight with Synthetic Fuel Shows Air Force's True Treehugging Hippy Nature
Posted by Jesus Diaz at 1:10 PM on March 22, 2008
This week the US Air Force achieved the first supersonic flight using alternative synthetic fuel, booming a B-1B Lancer over the White Sands Missile Range airspace in New Mexico without any problems. The supersonic strategic bomber, designed to deliver atomic weapons, will be able to start Armageddon at US$30 to US$50 less per barrel while helping the environment and without depending on foreign oil. You read that well, you commie hippie treehuggers: war is getting cheaper, and it will help climate change, nuclear winter excluded. Looking at its composition, however, the synthetic fuel is certainly not as harmless as other alternatives.
Unlike other aircraft fuel efforts, like hydrogen-fuelled planes or vodka with Red Bull, the synthetic fuel used in the B-1B is actually derived from natural gas using the Fischer-Tropsch process. The 50% synthetic fuel and 50% petroleum gases mixture, however, is as capable as regular fuel, feeding with ease the B-1B's four General Electric F101-GE-102 augmented turbofans and pushing the variable sweep-winged bomber at Mach 1.25 to its objective, where it can launch AGM-69A short-range nuclear missiles, drop 24 Mk84 bombs or spread a lot of good will and clean air.
According to the USAF, the fuel is still under test after trying it successfully in this B-1B and the subsonic B-52 Stratofortress. They are aiming "to have every aircraft using synthetic fuel blends by 2011," according to Maj. Don Rhymer from the Air Force Alternative Fuels Certification Office. My favourite quote, however, comes from Captain Rick Fournier, the B-1B commander:
It's great to be part of an Air Force initiative that is also helping the environment, Captain Fournier said. "Using a fuel that is cheaper and cleaner ... what could be better?"
Rick, if Senator McCarthy was still around, you would be in jail by now. Damn you hippies in the military! Damn you! [Military.com, Boeing and Wikipedia]
Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
ruggels
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
"Using a fuel that is cheaper and cleaner ... what could be better?"
Oh I dunno... say... Not using fuel which is made from coal which has contributed significantly to increases in the price of coal which affects insignificant things like energy prices and the heating of homes stuff like that. Yup, the Airforce being the largest single fuel consuming entity in the US (per the WSJ when they last mentioned it today) Consuming huge amounts of coal to create synthetic fuel is definitely a win win situation.
It's entertaining really how articles in rags like the WSJ actually apply that critical eye to stories like this where as most internet news sites (not fingering giz, just internet news/blog sites in general) just take the article at face value, add a quip, and pretend there aren't any wide sweeping consequences.
ruggels
MadCrazy
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
A greener apocalypse, now that is mad and crazy...next they'll make everyone more easily biodegrable..Lol
MadCrazy
scarbrtj
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
Dudes, I have nothing to add except that the B-1B's commander's name is Rick Fournier
How bad would it suck to have a last name synonomous with gangrene of the balls:
[en.wikipedia.org]
scarbrtj
Mandatory_Field
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
@strider_mt2k: Meh, you're losing those anyway. May as well get some synthetic fuels out of it....
Mandatory_Field
Mandatory_Field
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
They are aiming "to have every aircraft using synthetic fuel blends by 2011,". So no need for anybody to ask "will it blend". The answer is yes, yes it will...
Mandatory_Field
GiltProto
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
I don't see what makes it greener, but if the Chicoms or Russians or OPECians or other goomers ever try to blockade or deny fuel to the US during wartime I suspect all the usual whiners in the US will be thankful that the military has an alternate source of fuel.
GiltProto
AndersonBMX
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
soviets tried to become treehuggers a since a long time ago:
"In 1988 a modified Tu-154 (dubbed Tu-155 and Tu-156) successfully flew on liquid hydrogen and in 1989 on liquified natural gas used as a fuel in its engines."
AndersonBMX
ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
The last air show here was titled "The Sound of Freedom." Awesome.
ILikeMacsWhatAboutIT
SchruteBuck
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
I can just see Ed Begley, "Dammit Mr Bush, we need flex fuel bombers to deliver our nuclear payload. I just cooked soup in a cardboard box lined with tin foil, and I will NOT tolerate nuclear bombers with a large carbon footprint. IF I HAVE TO DRIVE MY PRIUS OVER THE ENEMY I WILL!".
SchruteBuck
electrikecho
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
It would be cheaper and allow the US to operate free of foreign oil, but I doubt they would even bat an eye if it were "dirtier". It probably creates more CO2, but being able to fly anywhere outside Saudi Arabia's pocket is the selling point.
electrikecho
klew
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
But if we don't use that oil, then our enemies can use it against us!
klew
strider_mt2k
Posted 4:27 PM 22/3/08
The downside: Synthetic fuel is made of human rights.
strider_mt2k
Monty
Posted 4:30 PM 22/3/08
Woo-hoo! Let's start WWIII so we can start saving the planet with our synthetic fueled thermo nuclear vehicles.
God bless America!
Monty
HDC
Posted 5:59 PM 22/3/08
The Fischer-Tropsch process is actually quite old. Check out the Wikipedia entry on it and you'll see that it was used by Germany in WWII to help fuel their war effort. Not hippies, Nazis! But of course our Nazis are better than their Nazis, naturally.
HDC
Bachblast
Posted 5:59 PM 22/3/08
@ruggels: well, yeah, but, an eco friendly NUCLEAR (or nuculur if you are presidental) bomber! ECO FRIENDLY + NUCLEAR WEAPONS ......holy freakin' cow!
Agreed, the point is to not be beholding to imported oil, in that case kudos to the USofA
Bachblast
Balance_In_Life (PSN)
Posted 9:34 PM 22/3/08
So even our Military managed to start using synthetic fuels before GM. Whats your excuse now GM?
Balance_In_Life (PSN)
fastmike
Posted 11:04 PM 22/3/08
WOWWWWWW war at Walmart prices , bring it on , do we get a free glass with every 5 gallons?
fastmike
bitfactory
Posted 12:35 AM 23/3/08
@DelSource: You realize 'biofuel' doesn't mean jamming cheeseburgers and taco meat into the gas tank, right?
bitfactory
DelSource
Posted 12:35 AM 23/3/08
Hey, anything is better than biofuel. Using food to power cars and planes is a f***ing moral disgrace.
You know, what with several hundred million kids going to bed every night with little no food in their bellies. And the mass clearances of rainforest required to grow the precursers.
DelSource
Git Em SteveDave
Posted 12:35 AM 23/3/08
You forgot to mention using Kent's phase congigate target tracking mirror and Chris and Mitch's laser to pop popcorn inside Hathaway's house.
Git Em SteveDave
DestroyerMTL
Posted 2:10 AM 23/3/08
@strider_mt2k: You're forgetting the large amount of political apathy that needs to be mixed in there as well.
DestroyerMTL
liquidsoapdispenser
Posted 2:10 AM 23/3/08
@SchruteBuck: Prius? Ha, as if Ed Begley Jr. would drive anything other than a bicycle or a car powered by electricity or natural gas!
liquidsoapdispenser
DelSource
Posted 2:10 AM 23/3/08
@bitfactory:
I'll assume that was an attempt at some form of humour........
;o)
DelSource
fastmike
Posted 3:47 AM 23/3/08
Make that two high octane cheese burgers to go....who said theres meat in Tacos ?
fastmike
lianna_g
Posted 5:24 AM 23/3/08
I think the article is spot-on in adopting the smiley-face/strangelovian tone needed to talk about cleaner fuels and nuclear payloads in the same breath. Of course it's insane.
As far as other forms of mental illness go,
ranks up there.First of all, the US doesn't go to war with ANY country which has a significant military-at least not in the last 35 or so years. Secondly, if the "OPECians" (!?) try to blockade or deny fuel, exactly how are nuclear weapons going to get that fuel flowing? Note: I said flowing, not vaporized.
lianna_g
junyo
Posted 5:24 AM 23/3/08
@Balance_In_Life (PSN):
The fact that we don't have a bottomless pit of taxpayer dollars for R&D, the utter absence of consumer infrastructure or the negative consumer cost/benefit to deal with. That would be our excuse.
Thank you,
The GM Management Team
junyo
tehronin
Posted 5:24 AM 23/3/08
@strider_mt2k: Ouch, truth hurts.
tehronin
hoselshaft
Posted 7:25 AM 23/3/08
hippies 2.0 // we play whale songs in the meth lab
hoselshaft
hoselshaft
Posted 7:25 AM 23/3/08
soylent green biodiesel >> power from the people
hoselshaft
LEO1WOLF
Posted 7:25 AM 23/3/08
My GOD - does no one realize the TRUE tree-hugging answer here? We need to harness all the gasses being emitted from their Arses & what ever toxic/noxious gases being spewed from the masses. This would power the entire freakin' planet for (I.D.K.) an eternity AND what ever by-product that produces, we'll just fire in a pretty capsule toward the sun.
Heh-heh, I'll bet you thought I was a genious. Laugh it up, I am.
-Lone Wolf
LEO1WOLF
shatbox
Posted 12:11 PM 23/3/08
They didn't include the fact this controversial super fuel is made from coal. Liberation from foreign dependence in exchange for greater greenhouse gas emission? LA Times
shatbox
FLskydiver
Posted 5:20 PM 23/3/08
I just wanted to congratulate Jesus for the extremely high quality writing in this post. Awesome stuff, Sir.
FLskydiver
heroineworshipper
Posted 7:27 AM 24/3/08
The Chinese version flies into space on a nuclear fusion ion engine. Beat that, US.
heroineworshipper
jimothy
Posted 12:47 PM 24/3/08
The largest natural gas reserves are in Qatar. The second largest is in Iran. So much for energy independence.
jimothy
Gerxt
Posted 12:47 PM 24/3/08
OK so the story is that the US airforce is actually doing this for fuel security purposes not because they like the world.
The other thing is that aviation biofuels DO NOT USE FOOD CROPS !!! I am sick of hearing this kiddos. The are using shit. That's right. Algee made from shit.
Gerxt
thegoonie
Posted 2:20 AM 25/3/08
I can has Thermal Nuclear War cheaper?
thegoonie