The tractor paraffin, is it coloured red?
Gas turbines normally had atomisers. An exception I know of was the AS Sapphire series engines which had vapourisers (‘hockey sticks’) and a couple of atomisers for starting. The combustion chamber was annular.

So we have a caveman claiming to be a pilot, who says F-35 cannot do energy maneuverability, and that is based on maneuvers done in high AOA controllability test? Lets just dismiss it as yet another BS from another pilot quote and be done with it. To be honest, I doubt an actual pilot can be so ignorant.

You do meet so many who claim to be professionals, and yet, they are unable to answer a simple question in their field of expertise…..

Would that be US gallons or Imperial gallons?

Is it an African or European Swallow?
Fortunately, US and imperial pounds are the same.

Interesting points about fuel, certainly with turbine engines. The specific mass is indicative of it’s calorific value (heat it produces). AVTUR = 0.78, AVTAG = 0.76, AVCAT 0.80 Diesel = 0.82. Sfc is expressed in lb fuel/lb thrust/hr for piston engines gr/kW/hr. The stoichiometric ratio for fossil fuel engines is about 15:1 (15lbs of air to 1lb of fuel) The gallons tells you how much to pay, the weight tells you how far you can go..
The problem with shoving AVTUR into an AVGAS engine is the fuel needs to be better atomised (high pressure).

This one too?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]240927[/ATTACH]

I don’t see how the aircraft speed comes in to it ?
It would suggest that if the aircraft were stationary the engine would produce no power.

Isn’t it more to do with the mass flow ( of air ) through the engine ?

Thrust = Mass airflow x velocity differential (forward speed of a/c and rearward speed of airflow). For the first couple of hundred knots, thrust actually decreases. At about 300 knots you start to get ‘ram recovery’. As the speed increases, the pressure in the intake increases. The pressure ratio is dependant on the rpm, and the ram pressure.
By designing the intake correctly you can increase the total pressure ratio dramatically.
The variable geometry intake on Concorde increased the ambient pressure to 6:1 at Mn2.0. The engine pressure ratio is 10:1 at cruise rpm. Total pressure ratio is then 60:1 (6 x 10). Simply put, you shove a lot more air in the engine (mass) when moving fast. Also, the higher the pressure, the better the thermal efficiency (added heat turned into oomf).
I have read somewhere that the SR71 was producing a pressure ratio in the intake to 34:1 at operational speed (Mn3.2). The engine had a pressure ratio of some 7.5:1. It was actually a turbo-ram jet. The engine itself was effectively a ‘flow inducer’ at high speed. It was only producing about 15% of the total thrust. The rest was produced by the intake, bypass section and reheat pipe

Guys……..

I posted the EE P1 photos tongue-in-cheek – I didn’t intend to start a flame war.

Ken

Ken

My thoughts too, that’s why I replied to the Bf 109 pic…
The Lightning already had a vortex reducing feature on the mainplane. The later versions (F6 & 2a) had kinked & cambered LE’s.
I’m not after a flame war, I just asked a question.
Nice pic btw.

True, but they were automatic…..