F-16.net

Printed from: F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference [http://www.f-16.net]
Document title: F-119 versions - F-16.net - The Ultimate F-16 Reference
Original URL: http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-6163-sid-9b5e29174bbdf623dd36622a80797ae6.html
Printed on: 12 October 2008

Forum: F-22A Raptor

F-119 versions



Search Search  Register Register  Log in to check your private messages Log in to check your private messages
guidelines Forum Guidelines
Post new topic   Reply to topic   
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Author Message
mil_hobbyist
PostPosted: Aug 23, 2006 - 03:00 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Jul 30, 2006
Posts: 49

Status: Offline
How soon do you think we will see more powerful and/or fuel efficient variants of the F-119 engine? Imagine a motor sufficiently powerful to push the Raptor to Mach 2 with military thrust - we would then have another Concorde!
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Sponsor
New postPosted: Oct 12, 2008 - 1:44 PM Back to top
F-16.net Sponsor






This message from our sponsor will disappear if you log on as a member.
   
 
shocktroop
PostPosted: Aug 23, 2006 - 03:07 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Active Member
Active Member


Joined: May 22, 2005
Posts: 170

Status: Offline
Quote:
Imagine a motor sufficiently powerful to push the Raptor to Mach 2 with military thrust


Who said the Raptor can't go above Mach 2 with its current engines?

Public sources claim that the Raptor's top speed is about Mach 1.8, but if the Raptor can easily pass Mach 1 without using afterburner- makes you wonder what its real speed really is.

I posted a thread about the F-22s top speed a while ago, you might find some of the answers to your questions there:
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-3116.html
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
JCSVT
PostPosted: Aug 23, 2006 - 07:02 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Jul 19, 2006
Posts: 74

Status: Offline
shocktroop wrote:
Quote:
Imagine a motor sufficiently powerful to push the Raptor to Mach 2 with military thrust


Who said the Raptor can't go above Mach 2 with its current engines?


Military power is 100%. The Raptor will probably hit around Mach 1.7 in that power range at the current moment.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
mabie
PostPosted: Aug 24, 2006 - 03:33 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Enthusiast
Enthusiast


Joined: Aug 07, 2006
Posts: 24

Status: Offline
mil_hobbyist wrote:
How soon do you think we will see more powerful and/or fuel efficient variants of the F-119 engine? Imagine a motor sufficiently powerful to push the Raptor to Mach 2 with military thrust - we would then have another Concorde!


The VAATE program is projecting a 10% increase in Raptor engine thrust by 2010 if I recall right.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
sferrin
PostPosted: Aug 24, 2006 - 04:45 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite 1K
Elite 1K


Joined: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 1011

Status: Offline
JCSVT wrote:
shocktroop wrote:
Quote:
Imagine a motor sufficiently powerful to push the Raptor to Mach 2 with military thrust


Who said the Raptor can't go above Mach 2 with its current engines?


Military power is 100%. The Raptor will probably hit around Mach 1.7 in that power range at the current moment.


I think what is getting at is the Raptor has quite a bit more power DRY than either the Eagle or Tomcat had in full afterburner and they hit Mach 2+ (Obviously I'm not referring to F110 Tomcats or -229 Eagles)
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Raptor_One
PostPosted: Aug 24, 2006 - 06:03 AM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite 1K
Elite 1K


Joined: Aug 19, 2004
Posts: 1090

The F-22 might produce more MIL power than the F-15C or F-14A produce in AB at low subsonic speeds, but I doubt this is the case for the transonic regime and it certainly isn't the case for the supersonic regime. Both F-15C and F-14A can easily go past Mach 2 in AB as you stated. I haven't heard anything about the F-22 breaking Mach 2 in MIL. This will be a difficult proposition because of the physical size of the F119. The exit velocity obviously isn't enough in MIL to get the F-22 past Mach 2, so you either need a significant leap in engine technology past that of the F119 or... a physically bigger engine/airframe. Given the numerous design trade-offs that have to be made for a true "stealth fighter", the F-22's performance in MIL power is very impressive. If stealth and low speed maneuverability weren't high priorities, you could build a seriously fast interceptor based around the F119 engine. Mach 2 performance wouldn't be a problem with optimized supersonic aerodynamics and variable geometry intakes.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
sferrin
PostPosted: Aug 24, 2006 - 07:15 PM Reply with quote Back to top
Elite 1K
Elite 1K


Joined: Jul 22, 2005
Posts: 1011

Status: Offline
Raptor_One wrote:
The F-22 might produce more MIL power than the F-15C or F-14A produce in AB at low subsonic speeds, but I doubt this is the case for the transonic regime and it certainly isn't the case for the supersonic regime. Both F-15C and F-14A can easily go past Mach 2 in AB as you stated. I haven't heard anything about the F-22 breaking Mach 2 in MIL. This will be a difficult proposition because of the physical size of the F119. The exit velocity obviously isn't enough in MIL to get the F-22 past Mach 2, so you either need a significant leap in engine technology past that of the F119 or... a physically bigger engine/airframe. Given the numerous design trade-offs that have to be made for a true "stealth fighter", the F-22's performance in MIL power is very impressive. If stealth and low speed maneuverability weren't high priorities, you could build a seriously fast interceptor based around the F119 engine. Mach 2 performance wouldn't be a problem with optimized supersonic aerodynamics and variable geometry intakes.


I sometimes wonder if the next generation fighter will have something like a scaled up RATTLRS with an afterburner. It's suppose to be good for Mach 3 to 4 DRY but then it only has to last fifteen to twenty minutes so it's probably (most likely) being run right to the ragged edge of flying to pieces so to speak.
 View user's profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:     
Jump to:  
All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Post new topic   Reply to topic
View previous topic Log in to check your private messages View next topic
Copyright © 2008 Lieven Dewitte and Stefaan Vanhastel