dark light

Robbiesmurf

Forum Replies Created

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 473 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Military Aviation News-2015 #2196680
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    I do understand “already existing infrastructures”, I have been to a few in the past.
    I wont debate the tender issues as it is a done deal. there is no point.

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2015 #2196749
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Indeed, the arguments that Boeing made. The KC30 was a better option and wouldn’t have required that much rework to accomodate them. The Boeing airframe is also older than the A330 offering plus the original spec was written up to suit it without a competition. After the competition was brought out due to the malpractices, the Airbus won the contract first. Boeing then appealed and won, citing all sorts of points that are at best, suspect. They have the contract, let them live up to it……

    in reply to: Military Aviation News-2015 #2196758
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    The KCX procurment has been beset with many problems. There are many questions as to the way Boeing was awarded the contract, twice…..

    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    in my opinion, if what i said is wrong, it would be wrong regradless of who iam or what background i have, thus your questions to find out my background have no purpose
    anyway, what make you think iam a technician?

    so you agree that my answer about TSFC is correct ? or not?

    supersonic air will cause shock waves on the compressor blades will make the engine unusable because of large pressure fluctuations that would cause fatigue and failure of blades, and supersonic flows will also cause high drag that slow the compressor blades down as they rotated.

    i think you are confused

    Having seen many of your posts, not just to me but to others I can only say: “I name thee Troll”.
    Btw your answer to point 3 isn’t correct.

    in reply to: Vulcan XH558 spirited display at RIAT #847623
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Does it’s history make a difference, and make it more attractive to visit? Can the same be said about XM135 at Duxford?

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2197114
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    So a total PR of about 15.12:1 (static).

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2197133
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Yeah, MMPP Salyut’s AL-31F-M3 was the rival to NPO Saturn’s ‘117’ for the T-50 prototypes. Salyut was incensed that their product lost the tender despite having the superior product 3LP (BLISK); 6HP rated @ 15.2T.

    Are these the pressure ratio’s of the LP and HP compressors?

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2197286
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Thx

    The AL-41F was found lacking on important Requirement such as w/t, fuel consumption, spol-up time, TBO.

    The TBO comes from several things, but too high temp is Surely one of them..

    A couple of answers.
    Spo(o)l-up time is dependent on factors.
    The stall/surge margin of the compressor. Multi spool be it fan or pure turbo jet can be less sensitive to the over-fuelling required to accelerate the engine. The compressors are better matched and have less interference. Various stall suppression devices can be fitted, air bleed or variable stator blades to optimise the AoA in the engine.
    The mass. The more stages required to reach the pressure ratio, the higher the mass, the slower it will accelerate. Acceleration? Now I have worked on a fair number of engine types with 7 stage, 12 stage, 15 stage or 16 stage be they single spool or twin spool, pure jet or fan (bypass). Slam checks (idle to max -2%) was normally about 6 seconds. One exception was the Pegasus which could do it in about 4. These were pre-FADEC engines, so the regulation was hydro-mechanical.

    TBO is generally based on hot side wear and tear, normally turbine creep caused by high temperature and high rpm.

    in reply to: Hypersonic hopes #480267
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Kinetic heating has always been a major limiting factor in high supersonic regimes. That and the fuel used.
    There was research into the reduction of the heating by the use of unconventional insulation. I haven’t seen much info on that for a number of years.

    in reply to: Indian Air Force Thread 20 #2197342
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Nice photo of the LP comp MSphere. Blisks with ss kinks. Are they titanium?

    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Thankyou for your answer Mig-31.
    1. When I am instructing technicians I ask a few basic theory questions to gauge their technical grounding. I am looking for their understanding of the physics.
    2. SFC is always a ratio, in this case as you say lb/lb, you were vague and I wished clarification. Throwing terms around are all very well but maybe not everyone understands it. Take afterburning for instance, I call it reheat just like RR but you can also call it thrust augmentation, that as a term is also used to describe means other than reheat to increase thrust.
    3. You are correct, if the air enters the engine at supersonic speed it doesn’t work too well, but why?

    4. As I see it, you come over as someone who is very knowledgeable about how a/c fly, perform aerobatics and microwave the opponents. Also how long they use various functions. I asked about reheat because, although it does give a good boost when needed, the conditions in the pipe are very harsh. The engineers who design and build these systems have had to deal with some really strange problems. Typical examples being; sealing, modulation, ignition, insulation, suspension, flame control and of course harmonics. The answers I have seen here are obviously Wiki readings where it is stated that the pressure increases when reheat is engaged. That is incorrect. The pressure does not, cannot increase significantly otherwise the engine would stall/surge.
    I would still like to see an answer over point 3 from you. After all you do know an awful lot don’t you?

    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    glyph is new here, but why would haavarla & MSphere bother with mig-31 ?

    Because he’s a Troll? He has no real aerospace education that is very obvious, or is he masterclass in Black Ops?

    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    no it isnt , far from that , especially when you dont even understand the basic

    obviously more credible than amateur like you

    Like military Intelligence, these are a contradiction in terms.
    I asked you basic questions about propulsion. Your answers are significant. Poor, lacking in basic schooling and incorrect.
    On the positive side, you are very adept at Googling, Wiki research and cut/paste. Understanding that information however, is very vague.
    Here is something for you to cut & paste if someone asks you how an aeroplane flies.[ATTACH=CONFIG]239510[/ATTACH]

    in reply to: RIAT SAT-MON 2015 #455818
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    Very nice photo’s.

    in reply to: test pilot: "F-35 can't dogfight" #2198575
    Robbiesmurf
    Participant

    On most real life engines, entire afterburner is designed to be inside the choked flow it causes, so that increasing combustion pressure will increase the afterburner efficiency. When this high pressure air enters into divergent nozzle, ideally pressure should equalise with ambient, and all excess pressure would be converted to increasing exhaust velocity.

    Combustion in a gas turbine engine is a constant pressure cycle.
    If you look properly at the Lightning nozzle you will see it is convergent. The Avon was fitted with a con-di nozzle and put into two a/c. A Mirage III for tests and a Bristol 188 for high speed research.
    The gas velocity in the Avon 300 series (I assume that’s the one you mean due to the 68Kg/s) reheat pipe was max Mn 0.332. The thrust nozzle would accelerate it further. The compressor delivery pressure was limited to 140 psig to prevent overstressing.
    Btw, define Mach.

Viewing 15 posts - 346 through 360 (of 473 total)