If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Andy Dingley writes: On Thu, 26 Aug 2004 20:54:01 +1000, "The Raven" wrote: Just to add another question, how did it compare to the EE Lightning which was known as a pretty good interceptor performance wise? No comparison. Their engines are a generation apart. Yeah - the Skyray used a Pratt & Whitney JT3B (J57) 2-spool high pressure turbojet with reliable variable-area nozzles and a reliably lighting afterburner. The Lightning used a single-spool, low pressure ratio Rolls Avon, and whenever one would take off or climb, there were always bets on wheter both, one, or no afterburners (reheat, it's a Brit after all) would light. The J57 provided much better fuel economy, and it, and the JT3D turbofan flavor that followed it, are still pushing airplanes around all over the world. (Now, if you were to talk about the XF4D prototype's original Westinghouse J40 - well, an engine design might be screwed up if it were a GE, but you can be sure if it's a Westinghouse.) Aircraft of the Skyray's period, if not the Lightning, were airframes way ahead of engine technology. Although some did have quite high performance, they couldn't maintain it owing to their high fuel consumption. Engines had to become more powerful and more fuel efficient (and better reliability helped too) before they stopped being by far the weakest link. Uhm, if you look at the consumption numbers for more modern engines, you'll see that they are only more efficient when they aren't using reheat. The greater ram drag of a turbofan means that they don't deliver the non-afterburning thrust at high speeds that a straight turbojet does. The extra unburned mass flow from the fan section allow for higher afterburning thrust, but at a serious cost in fuel flow. Consider, if you will, the example of the TOrnado, which can be routinely outrun by a Tu-95 when it's not using reheat. The solution to long supersonic endurance has been to make it big enough and clean enough to fly supersonically on a relatively small ampunt of thrust while carrying a lot of gas (SR-71, B-58, F-111, A-5, Mirage IV), or make it able to cruise without reheat. (Concorde, F-22 - although the Concorde needs reheat for acceleration and climb) -- Pete Stickney A strong conviction that something must be done is the parent of many bad measures. -- Daniel Webster |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Douglas Pitcairn, Luftwaffe Pilot | JDupre5762 | Military Aviation | 14 | July 7th 05 04:03 PM |
FS: 1992 "McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle" Hardcover Edition Book | J.R. Sinclair | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | August 25th 04 06:12 AM |
Historic aviation and aeronautics books for sale | Martin Bayer | Aviation Marketplace | 0 | April 24th 04 09:30 PM |
Douglas Bader-Colditz | RON | Military Aviation | 7 | February 19th 04 09:58 PM |