Re:Dude, where's my supersonic jet?
by credit_guy on Sunday January 11, 2026 @08:47PM
(#46582850)
You are absolutely right. My 22% was a mistake, the correct number is indeed 36.5% lower volumetric energy density. But that strengthens my argument, doesn't it?
Wikipedia lists LNG as 53.6 MJ/kg and 22.2 MJ/L and jet fuel as 43MJ/kg and 35MJ/L.
53.6 / 43 = 1.247
22.2 / 35 = 0.634
Energy density by mass is higher than jet fuel. But it is higher by less than jet fuel's energy density by volume is higher than LNG. And LNG requires heavier tanks.
So all in all, if it's not absolutely needed because of the cooling advantages, LNG can store less energy in the fuel tanks.