Eurofighter engine for land speed record car

Aero engines have featured quite heavily in LSR vehicles. The Liberty engine was used in aircraft cars and boats. An interesting story is that of ‘Triplex’, a vehicle powered by no less than three Liberty engines. The car was incredibly dangerous and killed its driver, Lee Bible. The first person on the scene of the accident was Henry Seagrave, who vowed to never attempt the Land Speed Record again. Instead, he concentrated on the Water Speed Record. It was when attempting the WSR record that Seagrave had the accident that which resulted in his death.

From what I have been told, I would be most surprised if the Quicksilver Project ever comes to fruition. I do hope that Bloodhound is a winner, I just hope that it doesn’t end in a fashion similar to Parry Thomas, who met his end on Pendine Sands. It is encouraging to see that Britain still has the will to carry on with projects such as LSR, harking back to the early days of LSR and WSR (not to mention the Air Speed Record, I highly recommend Faster Than The Sun by Peter Twiss, a great read) when men took on these challenges just because somebody said it couldn’t be done. If only we could foster this spirit more in modern britain, an admirable aspect of the Bloodhound Project is its education prorgramme, bringing young and old alike into engineering.

Waffle over.

Dean

i see they’ve updated the CGI images, it now looks like a silver version of bluebird with some small changes, i think they’ve changed the design too, it now looks totally different to the initial concept.

i think there might be a reason that the water speed record is still just over 300mph – i think it holds the highest fatality rate out of all speed records… someone once said the fatality rate was about 60%…

Ah the amazing Quicksinker to be driven by the Coniston Cowboy :diablo: Hasn’t Ken Warby the current holder already got a new boat ready to up the record?

For more info on the Quicksilver project: http://www.quicksilver-wsr.co.uk/

Thurst to weight ratio for the EJ200 is approx 10:1
Thurst to weight ratio for the Spey is approx 5:1

That’s a pretty important factor too.

Intake design and aerodynamics are more important.

EJ200 approx 20,000lb static full reheat
RB168 (Spey 202) Approx 20,500Lb static full reheat
Thrust SSC had two Spey’s the Bulldog 1 EJ200 (plus a rocket of course).
I think the aerodynamics are going to be the most important aspect.
The engine intake will also play a role, those on Thrust SSC were quite restrictive.

Thurst to weight ratio for the EJ200 is approx 10:1
Thurst to weight ratio for the Spey is approx 5:1

That’s a pretty important factor too.

[QUOTE=dcollins103;1318946]

Both this and the previous SSC designs will have been evaluated extensively on supercomputers. I remember from the SSC book they re-looked at the Thrust 2 design with computer fluid dynamics software and discovered that at its maximum record speed, they were close to it being very aerodynamically unstable – which they didn’t know at the time, hence the different design for SSC. Just makes you think!

Its a very risky business.

couldnt agree more for myself id prefer both power units mounted either side of the main body rather than this cofiguration,it reminds me of bluebirds design which cost campell as we all remember at least thet have the benefit of IT to at least have an idea what could happen.thanks for the info.

[QUOTE=repcobrab;1318936]

have computer evaloation tests been carried out on the design as the engines are to be rear mounted in a stacked cofiguration is this less stable than mounting the units side by side or is this not feasable given the different engine types as there could be a possibility of a “take off” scenario given the speeds involved ?

Both this and the previous SSC designs will have been evaluated extensively on supercomputers. I remember from the SSC book they re-looked at the Thrust 2 design with computer fluid dynamics software and discovered that at its maximum record speed, they were close to it being very aerodynamically unstable – which they didn’t know at the time, hence the different design for SSC. Just makes you think!

Its a very risky business.

[QUOTE=dcollins103;1318793]

I think it’s a long time since the Land Speed Record was held by a “vehicle” with driven wheels. Would it be technically possible (transmission units etc) at over 1000mph?QUOTE]

These LSR vehicles are more an excercise in stable aerodynamics and control systems these days. Richard noble is behind it again, so its likely to get the best out of British engineering against all odds!

have computer evaloation tests been carried out on the design as the engines are to be rear mounted in a stacked cofiguration is this less stable than mounting the units side by side or is this not feasable given the different engine types as there could be a possibility of a “take off” scenario given the speeds involved ?

[QUOTE=RPSmith;1318743]I think it’s a long time since the Land Speed Record was held by a “vehicle” with driven wheels. Would it be technically possible (transmission units etc) at over 1000mph?QUOTE]

I don’t think so. You hit a “barrier” in the physical strength of the rotating components, and how much force they can transmit, especially the wheels. You could look at it as the difference between propellor and jet driven aircraft for comparison, and their respective speeds.

It will be interesting to see if the wheel design can be improved to withstand the centrifugal forces imposed on them? I have read the Thrust SSC book, and this seems to have been a big limiting factor in their maximum rotational speed. Also, the previous SSC steered with its rear wheels, because steering the front wheels that are turning at high RPM will create high gyroscopic forces, that would make the car directionally unstable to say the least. I wonder if this new one will be rear steering also?

These LSR vehicles are more an excercise in stable aerodynamics and control systems these days. Richard noble is behind it again, so its likely to get the best out of British engineering against all odds!

For more info on the Quicksilver project: http://www.quicksilver-wsr.co.uk/

that would be the quicksilver project, they own the bucc ant bournemouth hurn that was used for the foxhunter trials

Technically, I’d be careful calling it a car…since its wheels are not being directly driven by the power unit…it doesn’t have any sort of transmission (or reverse) and steering is limited.

A jet-powered vehicle it may be…but a car?

I think it’s a long time since the Land Speed Record was held by a “vehicle” with driven wheels. Would it be technically possible (transmission units etc) at over 1000mph?

Roger Smith.

PS what happened to the new Water Speed Record contender that was being built – it’s frame was on show at the R-R anniversery event at Castle Donnington a few years back?

The whole thing seems to me to be a contender for the Darwin Awards. 😀

What a Bleep pointless thing to do.IMO. Sorry but my gast is flabberd.

John

EJ200 approx 20,000lb static full reheat…

Don’t forget it’s got an 800 horsepower V12 too…..just to power the rocket fuel pump! 😀

We just hope it doesn’t become a surface to air car then?

The EJ200 should give them plenty of power over the afterburnng Spey engines that were fitted to Thrust SSC.

EJ200 approx 20,000lb static full reheat
RB168 (Spey 202) Approx 20,500Lb static full reheat
Thrust SSC had two Spey’s the Bulldog 1 EJ200 (plus a rocket of course).
I think the aerodynamics are going to be the most important aspect.
The engine intake will also play a role, those on Thrust SSC were quite restrictive.

Technically, I’d be careful calling it a car…since its wheels are not being directly driven by the power unit…it doesn’t have any sort of transmission (or reverse) and steering is limited.

A jet-powered vehicle it may be…but a car?

only using the EJ200 for the first phase of the acceleration from 0-300 ish mph, then a rocket is going to kick in

(one hell of a kick in the butt?)

We just hope it doesn’t become a surface to air car then?

The EJ200 should give them plenty of power over the afterburnng Spey engines that were fitted to Thrust SSC.

Apparently the vehicle is to be called Bloodhound…..named after a certain surface-to-air missile!

Been covered on another thread I think. Delevopment build EJ200 engine left over from the prototype/trials airframes.

thanks for that appreciate it.