<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: TurboElectric</title>
	<atom:link href="http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html</link>
	<description>Discussion and opinions about the trucking industry</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 02 Dec 2008 20:55:02 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
	<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris</title>
		<link>http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html#comment-2148</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 01:46:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html#comment-2148</guid>
		<description>I have often wondered why they didn't put a turbine in a truck since I have gotten out of the military (I drove an M1 tank, turbine powered).  After studying more about it, there are a few more reasons that a turbine would be a problem.

A turbine is quite efficient at a steady rpm.  When you have to change the throttle setting a lot, like going up and down slight grades, it becomes much less efficient.

We haul engines for Northwest Airlines.  One of their requirements to hauling an engine is that you cannot drive with chains installed or over "washboard" snowpack.  Their concern is for the bearings in the engine.  While operating, the turbine may have very little vibration, but it can't withstand the same amount that a ICE can either.

With the new focus on "hybrid" technology, their may be a place for turbines there.  A turbine that runs at a constant speed coupled to batteries to an electric motor to your drivetrain may be feasable.

Another area that may have some merit is in the APU market.  Again, as a hybrid, or as straight power generation.  Neither of which would require changing the running speed much.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have often wondered why they didn&#8217;t put a turbine in a truck since I have gotten out of the military (I drove an M1 tank, turbine powered).  After studying more about it, there are a few more reasons that a turbine would be a problem.</p>
<p>A turbine is quite efficient at a steady rpm.  When you have to change the throttle setting a lot, like going up and down slight grades, it becomes much less efficient.</p>
<p>We haul engines for Northwest Airlines.  One of their requirements to hauling an engine is that you cannot drive with chains installed or over &#8220;washboard&#8221; snowpack.  Their concern is for the bearings in the engine.  While operating, the turbine may have very little vibration, but it can&#8217;t withstand the same amount that a ICE can either.</p>
<p>With the new focus on &#8220;hybrid&#8221; technology, their may be a place for turbines there.  A turbine that runs at a constant speed coupled to batteries to an electric motor to your drivetrain may be feasable.</p>
<p>Another area that may have some merit is in the APU market.  Again, as a hybrid, or as straight power generation.  Neither of which would require changing the running speed much.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donna</title>
		<link>http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html#comment-1489</link>
		<dc:creator>Donna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:15:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://lifeontheroad.com/2008/03/31/turboelectric/569.html#comment-1489</guid>
		<description>Cool post!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cool post!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
