Correct. Stanlow at Ellesmere Port is a terminal for the pipelines to most major airports. Originally set up in WW2 to enable fuel for RAF stations to be delivered quickly without need for road tankers.Er.... Not the whole story. The tank farm near Heathrow is fed by pipelines from one or two refineries (can't recall which ones - I've been asleep several times since I had dealings with the project but I think Stanlow was involved).
Fuel is then distributed to the aircraft stands via a pipework and hydrant system, which is why you don't see endless fuel tankers on the apron.
I found all this out when I got involved many years ago. The Heathrow Hydrant Company wanted to upgrade their control systems and metering (needed bloody accurate and repeatable meters for pressure too. As well as needing fiscal accuracy flow metering, they tested for leaks by shutting in sections of pipeline and watching for pressure drops).
We quoted for the project but didn't get it, unfortunately, as it had looked like a fun one.
The whole enterprise was divvied up with one company running the tankage, another the pipeline's and another the hydrants, iirc. All designed so the money went round and round too fast for the tax man to siphon off very much.
Tut, tut..... you havent been paying attention, see post #37Not absolutely true, BAE have an aircraft Zephyr S its solar powered and has been airborne for 26 days! Rolls Royce ACCEL is a 300mph, 200 mile range aircraft. Bet the pilot is busting for a wee ?
Given that Aberdeen pretty much owes its livelihood to the Oil & Gas industry, such a partnership wasn't unexpected.Partnered with the oil and gas giant BP. Says it all.
Er... Some major airports don't use tankers to fuel airplanes. There's usually a pipeline distribution system sending fuel from a tank farm to fuelling hydrants at aircraft stands. Simples.Solving the supply problems just at major airports would be much easier.
Given that Aberdeen pretty much owes its livelihood to the Oil & Gas industry, such a partnership wasn't unexpected.![]()
Batteries are already better for aircraft.Hydrogen may make sense for commercial aircraft, if battery technology cannot provide the required power/energy per kg. It would mean at least no pollution at altitudes.
Solving the supply problems just at major airports would be much easier.
The Oil & Gas industry are throwing $billions at Hydrogen to save their bacon, so yes a fantasy plane exists. No matter how much money you throw at it, you cannot change the laws of physics relating to H2. Cost, storage and volume each make it impractical before you think ofJohn, I've already given you a link to a commercial hydrogen plane. It is happening, whether you believe it or not.
There are indeed small electric aircraft with a 30 minute range and all the disadvantages of the heavy batteries having to be lugged up into cruise altitude and then landed again.
At this point in time, electric planes will simply not happen unless the two major obstacles of energy density and battery cost are sorted.
You see? It is easy to rubbish one side.