It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

the green flame

page: 39
29
<< 36  37  38    40 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

She can probably get a little faster, but from what I heard the cost to go even a little faster was a big jump.




posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

That makes sense. Thanks man.



Wonder what numbers they could get using something like a j58 or f135/119 if you slapped one of the AFRE kits onto it. Upper single digits maybe brushing close to the double digits mark?

Hey i gotta question for you. Engine prefix names why the 58 got a "J" in front but other enfibes got a "F". Since both examples are from P&W why the change. Is F only intended for fighters? Do they not really have a system when naming their models. Why not just PW58 and PW 135/119. Finally why the huge junp in numbers from the f119 to the f135. The f135s based on the f119. Were there like 26 models of jet engine they designed between the 22 and the 35s engines?



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Is it cos ones an after-burning engine and the other isnt ?
I dunno, just putting a crazy thought out there



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:31 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

The internal designations are PW. It's a lot simpler than that actually. From what I've read, the J series engines are turbojet engines, while the F series are turbofans.

As for your other question, turbofans have a very low upper limit mach number. It's usually around mach 2.

The military designation is separate from the internal designation. They usually draw numbers and throw darts at enlisted to come up with them.
edit on 7/15/2016 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:44 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I get why they use turbofans for jets lately with the efficiency from the bypass and that it dovetails nicely with advent. But given certain developments do you think we will see a resurgence of turbojets all be it slightly modified in the future.

Why not use a seperate intake for the bypass on the turbo fan instead of a giant fan in front of the turbine. Can you combine a by pass sonehow with a turbo jet?



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:50 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

They don't necessarily have huge fans on them. The F119 and F135 are turbofans, and have small fans on the front. It depends on their use.

Ramjets and scramjets are coming into their own finally. There will be more of them in the years to come.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

The use of borane 'zip' fuels (the stuff that makes it glow green) is a liability, not a benefit. Super toxic and difficult to handle, and really expensive engine rebuilds.

Define really expensive to a government black project. Time is probably, but why rebuild it might as well just keep slapping new ones in!

Tax dollars lighting up the night sky GREEN!!! Just burning money.


edit on 15-7-2016 by mikell because: Smell Check



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BASSPLYR

...Ramjets and scramjets are coming into their own finally. There will be more of them in the years to come.


Like the "Blue Streak" ??



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I bet they are! I wonder if the same alluded to rig will be able to be efficient at sub mach speeds? Really bring back the era of the turbojet....sorta.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BASSPLYR

...Ramjets and scramjets are coming into their own finally. There will be more of them in the years to come.


Like the "Blue Streak" ??



The old missile?



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:08 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

No. There's no way to accelerate the air to the needed speed at even low mach speeds.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: BASSPLYR

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: BASSPLYR

...Ramjets and scramjets are coming into their own finally. There will be more of them in the years to come.


Like the "Blue Streak" ??


The old missile?

More along the lines of the H-Scramjet tech being developed to go past 10, reliably.


edit on 7/15/2016 by Krakatoa because: formatting



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

So this new rig cant do its "thing" in any capacity to aid efficiency at sub mach?



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

Right now no. Eventuality it probably will.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

I bet they will! The potential advantages for range and fuel efficiency (+ other things a loitering or low speed craft might want) will probably create a strong drive to develop the rig so that it can be slapped on sub mach aircraft.



posted on Jul, 15 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR

There have been a few ideas thrown around that would radically change the engine world if they could get them to work. The fuel burn improvements would make ADVENT look minor.



posted on Jul, 20 2016 @ 04:25 AM
link   
More faster than a Blackbird, she is it in the same size range ?



posted on Jul, 20 2016 @ 02:02 PM
link   
a reply to: darksidius

Nope sidius, the green lady is a sub mach long loitering airballoon.



posted on Jul, 20 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: BASSPLYR




posted on Jul, 24 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I just remeber someone here calling this "the green rabbit" Instead of the green lady.



new topics

top topics



 
29
<< 36  37  38    40 >>

log in

join