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.

 

F-22 Afterburner

page: 1
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 04:03 PM
link   
I've done some research on the P&W F119 engine for the F-22. While it's supercruise ability is a well-known fact (M1.5+ using Mil-Power), does the F119 also have afterburning capability? What would be the assessed speed using the "blower"?

Supporting link would be appreciated. Thanks!

-Misunderestimated




posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Yes, the F-22 does have afterburning capability. I think that you'll find this link helpful.

Pratt & Whitney F-119 Engine

Anything else you want to know about the F-22 you can probably find on this site as well.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by BlackThorn311]



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 05:09 PM
link   
Whats amazing is that they have released a ton of info on the engine, but all the best assests are still classified. I would love to know the maximum afterburning thrust and mach numbers of the engine. This motor rocks and they might have it under wraps for quite a while.

Train



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 05:34 PM
link   
Odds are, it can hit higher speeds than the airframe can physically sustain. It's an unusually clean aircraft, has plenty of gas, and unprecedented thrust. But I doubt the skin would take heating too well.



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 06:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by ORIEguy
But I doubt the skin would take heating too well.


Why?
The majority of the Raptor is Titanium.
People say this all the time, why do people think the Blackbirds speed was limited by its skin temp.


Titanium's melting point is over 3,000 degrees F.
The nose of an aircraft at mach 3 is a mere 572 degrees.
mach 6 is around 1,325 degrees.

I have seen no proof at all, that the skin temps are holding back speed limits in aircraft.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Murcielago]



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   
The big argument I keep hearing is that it's not the SKIN temp, it's the CANOPY temp. The skin can withstand the temps just fine, but the canopy starts to weaken around Mach 3.something. Personally I'm going to take the word of Brian Schull on the Blackbird, and just wait to see what the F-22 will do.



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Originally posted by ORIEguy
But I doubt the skin would take heating too well.


Why?
The majority of the Raptor is Titanium.
People say this all the time, where people think the Blackbirds speed was limited by its skin temp.


Titanium's melting point is over 3,000 degrees F.
The nose of an aircraft at mach 3 is a mere 572 degrees.
mach 6 is around 1,325 degrees.

I have seen no proof at all, that the skin temps are holding back speed limits in aircraft.

It's also worth mentioning then that the rise in temperature isn't due to friction either, but the rapid compressing of air. I can only imagine the effects of that much friction, well, imagine with an industrial belt sander maybe...

Structural limits do apply though, as the faster you go, the harder you have to push, and the more stress is encountered on the parts doing the pushing. On the other hand, fighter aircraft tend to be structurally overbuilt so they can do silly things like 9-20G turns. So I suppose the engine might burn out first.



posted on Jan, 18 2006 @ 09:21 PM
link   
The Pratt & Whitney F119 is an afterburning low bypass turbofan. It's not meant for high speeds. It's designed for supersonic cruise without the afterburner. Maximum cruise velocity of an F-22 with F119s without using the afterburners should be around Mach 1.72. Maximum attainable velocity of an F-22 with F119s using the afterburners should be around Mach 2.42+ (1,600+ MPH). Data per Lockheed. That is still very impressive.

Heat is a big problem at higher Mach numbers. The cockpit and canopy is indeed an area that gets too hot. It generally requires special materials, and additional cooling, for the increased temperatures of the higher velocities.

New materials are being developed to allow higher temperatures and velocities, for aircraft and missiles.

Note: At speeds near Mach 2, the paint starts to peel or burn off of an aircraft, particularly at the tail end. I know there are newer coatings for aircraft now, but I've never seen anything about how they get around this problem.



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Couple of points I want to make:

1) Afterburners use a whole lot of fuel and would cut into partol combat time

2) The shock diamonds created by an afterburner will show up on radar. The SR-71's used an additive which Ben Rich described as "Panther Piss" to Ionise the trail behind the aircraft. However, im not sure if it did anything to the shock diamonds.


Shock Diamonds

3) The heat bloom thrown off by a full afterburner would allow any adversary with an IRST pod to pick it up at a much greater distance that its radar would.



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 03:30 PM
link   
This is what I want to see

I want to see a test with an f-14, f-15 and f-18 and maybe an f-16 even though it is single engined, and I want to see all 4 or 5 jets flying at level right next to each other all at about 400-500 mph at about 300-500 feet off the ground and then I want them all to smash the throttles and pull it str8 up, I want to see which bird blows to the highest altitude straight up, which has the greater accel and which has peak velocity and I want to see it on Discovry HD theater taken with the same cameras used to view a space shuttle launch so we can have a real show.

Who else would want this?

Train



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by BigTrain
Who else would want this?



Me!!


Bet it doesn't happen though



Actually, straight up wouldn't really be fair, as its purely a case of T/W. T/Drag would be fairer - kind of like a drag race.

For a start the F-18 would be slaughtered, its crap speedwise in all variants, so we don't even need to consider it.


My line up would be:

F-14
F-15
F-16
F-22
SR-71 (for the laugh)
MiG-31
MiG-23
Su-27 (or some variant)
BAe Lightning
Mirage 4000


anyother speed demons out there?



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 05:14 PM
link   
I have the TSR 2 restored for this race, wouldn't beat the SR-71 but might surprise the others with its huge Olympus' engines and small frontal area






posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:25 PM
link   
I would have to agree with the TSR-2 for this list, but the SR-71/A-12 would be out. the airframe was not designed for any major G-forces assosiated with such a rapid pullup. Fast as hell yes, just don't do any ACM in it...



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 07:51 PM
link   
I would also put the B-1 into the fray for T/D ratio. Four F-16 engines, aerodynamic...AND NO EXTERNALS!



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 09:22 PM
link   
well, if we're bringing the SR-71 into this, I would want to see all planes do the same accel but not moving vert, just horizontal and as all the planes are approaching their top ends, the SR, which has been building speed from farther back blows by at top end, smashing the others into oblivion.

Train



posted on Jan, 19 2006 @ 11:29 PM
link   
It would be cool to have a Mig-25 burn into its engines exploded and pilot has to eejct the plane.
That way once and for all we could know if it could catch up a Blackbird or not...

That would be awesome.

BTW My money would be with the F-22...

In my opinion those engines hide more power than what they give out



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 11:36 AM
link   
The orig line up of the 15 14 18 and 16 I'd say that it would be between the 15 and 14. I think though that the 15 would take it as it is a lighter airframe then the 14 due to the extra weight from the landing gear etc.



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Verticle, the F-22, F-15, and newer models of the Flanker would be the only real contenders. The F-15 and Super Flankers each have a T/W of about 1.6:1.

Now, a horizontal drag race might be fun. Let's see...

F-22
F-15
SU-35
F-16
B-1B
SR-71
Mig-25
F-4
Mig-31
F-5

That ought to be a reasonably well rounded field. All supersonic capable, and a wide range of weight catergories. However, to be fair, we need to drop the starting speed to 300-350 knots, instead of the 400-500 suggested. What fun is it if almost the entire race occurs in supersonic flight?



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 12:56 PM
link   
How about 747 versus 777 and C-17 trying to go vert!! maybe through a b-52 and a c-141 in there, that would be INSANE!



posted on Jan, 20 2006 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Murcielago

Originally posted by ORIEguy
But I doubt the skin would take heating too well.


Why?
The majority of the Raptor is Titanium.
People say this all the time, why do people think the Blackbirds speed was limited by its skin temp.


Titanium's melting point is over 3,000 degrees F.
The nose of an aircraft at mach 3 is a mere 572 degrees.
mach 6 is around 1,325 degrees.

I have seen no proof at all, that the skin temps are holding back speed limits in aircraft.

[edit on 18-1-2006 by Murcielago]


It's not just the temperature but also the effects of that temperature on the structurals. Metals expand, especially at those temperatures. Some kind of relief has to be provided to take care of expansion, just like the gaps in a rail. The SR-71 used to leak fuel on the tarmac due to these gaps, which is why the JP73 had to specially designed for it.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2 >>

log in

join