Citations have electrically heated panels on the inboard leading edge as well.

I would guess the number is more like 250. Diesel auto engines are somewhere around 40% efficient. But I think the majority of the waste heat goes out the exhaust.

I would guess the number is more like 250. Diesel auto engines are somewhere around 40% efficient. But I think the majority of the waste heat goes out the exhaust.

I would guess the number is more like 250. Diesel auto engines are somewhere around 40% efficient. But I think the majority of the waste heat goes out the exhaust.

In the steady state you have to remove all of the waste heat the engine produces or the coolant temperature will rise. The thermodynamics must balance so heat into the coolant from the engine must equal heat removed from the coolant by the rest of the system.

In the steady state you have to remove all of the waste heat the engine produces or the coolant temperature will rise. The thermodynamics must balance so heat into the coolant from the engine must equal heat removed from the coolant by the rest of the system.

Piping engine coolant to leading edges for anti-icing is certainly an attractive idea. I toyed with it myself in my days of drawing planes in study hall. But it gave me pause when I couldn't find any real airplanes that used this obvious idea. Surface radiators were used for racing planes (Schneider Cup, He 100, et al.) but not for anti-icing. Where heated wings were used against ice they used either exhaust or dedicated supplemental fuel burners. The Ju 88 had liquid-cooled engines but heated the wings against ice with exhaust heat, not coolant. It seems like such an obvious win, you have to wonder why no real airplane designers chose to use it.

So set a minimum power in icing conditions in the AFMS just like jets have.

Lots of diesels in vehicles have ways to restrict their exhaust so that the engine can produce excess power to keep itself warm while not doing anything useful with it.

Increased complexity and weight of a (pressurized) liquid cooling system and the increased risks of bad things happening in the event of a leak.

Using waste heat from the exhaust is probably lower weight, less complex and lower risk in the event of a leak.

1940 NACA report on using exhaust for anti-icing
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi ... 014183.pdf

I fly liquid cooled airplanes quite a bit, and it is the Achilles heel of the airplane. If you are flying a Mustang and not thinking about the cooling system, you're not doing your job.

Having a cooling system with 1 pipe to and 1 from the radiator is scary. Having a system where the radiator plumbing carries coolant all over the airplane and the radiator is subjected to flexing and bird strikes is terrifying....

What that would do is drastically increase the volume of the cooling system. Water is heavy, heat exchangers are heavy, pipes are heavy. Water pump would have to be sized up, that is heavy. It's a fundamentally flawed idea.

my grandfather always said, if one was sending a picture home to a girl it was better to have a mustang or spitfire but for people shooting at you, stick with the P47

Or, "a water cooled airplane makes as much sense as an air-cooled submarine."

17KW?? You sure about that? A 17 KW generator will power a house....