Page 2 of 4

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 30 Mar 2019, 22:51
by spazsinbad
sferrin wrote:
spazsinbad wrote:Who has hysteria? Now we have numbers for 'class', 'installed', 'uninstalled' and 'no qualifier'. Then we have the 'test number' uninstalled at high temperatures (not used in F-35) without other equipment NOT taking power from engine. One would assume that 'uninstalled' means no equipment taking power from the engine? 'TEG' answered that somewhere here.


One would assume that, special circumstances aside, published values by the engine maker would be on a bench. That they're almost universally "bench" (test stand) values. So when GE claims a 10% improvement without saying over what it's a useless statement.

Ten percent of whatever the thrust is? Shirley that is significant. Ten percent of anything is not bad at all. I want it now.

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 30 Mar 2019, 23:07
by sferrin
Sure. But you can get a 7.5% bump just by changing your source from Lockheed Martin to Pratt & Whitney. No money or time required. :wink:

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 31 Mar 2019, 00:22
by wrightwing
If they're using P&W numbers, then it's a 10% increase from 43K (~47.3K.)

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 31 Mar 2019, 00:25
by spazsinbad
sferrin wrote:Sure. But you can get a 7.5% bump just by changing your source from Lockheed Martin to Pratt & Whitney. No money or time required. :wink:

:devil: Just run the engine hotter (like Ruskie Engyns) and your uncle is bob. :doh: No waiting for engine failure though. :roll:

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 31 Mar 2019, 14:12
by sferrin
spazsinbad wrote:
sferrin wrote:Sure. But you can get a 7.5% bump just by changing your source from Lockheed Martin to Pratt & Whitney. No money or time required. :wink:

:devil: Just run the engine hotter (like Ruskie Engyns) and your uncle is bob. :doh: No waiting for engine failure though. :roll:


Not quite what I meant. :)

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 31 Mar 2019, 18:54
by zero-one

Just thought some of you might want to see the promo ad

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 01 Apr 2019, 13:31
by mixelflick
Have to hand it to GE, great video.

One of the best facets of capitalism is competition, and the great engine war between GE and Pratt and Whitney is a fine example. Both companies have produced killer engines. Oh how the Chinese and Russians would love to get their hands on one of these. The F-35 is only going to get more capable, thanks to these advanced motors...

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 03 Apr 2019, 21:01
by steve2267
zero-one wrote:
Just thought some of you might want to see the promo ad


Except... that the bit @ 1:11, “It’s the only engine...” is patently false.

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2019, 02:08
by jetblast16


Fascinating video, where Vago interviews Dave Tweedie, the vice president for advanced combat engine programs at GE Aviation, about the history and future of three-stream variable-cycle turbofan engines

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2019, 02:43
by quicksilver
At what thrust level does the need arise to change the inlet geometry? Just wonderin’...

Would be interesting to see the analysis of what happens to the surge margins throughout the envelope as thrust increases.

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2019, 05:51
by optimist
I think the inlet applies to top speed more than acceleration. The f-35 is already speed limited, so I doubt it would have much effect.

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 16 Jun 2019, 18:25
by quicksilver
Mass flow. Engine has to breathe...

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2019, 06:06
by Corsair1963
Could we see the winner of a future 6th Generation Engine Program. (XA-100 or XA-101) Going to one or both of the NGAD and/or PCA. While, the loser could upgrade the F-35??? Especially, if the loser is the XA-101? (P&W)




hmmm

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2019, 07:02
by popcorn
jetblast16 wrote:

Fascinating video, where Vago interviews Dave Tweedie, the vice president for advanced combat engine programs at GE Aviation, about the history and future of three-stream variable-cycle turbofan engines


What engine. Is being referred to at the 7:52 mark?

Re: GE Aviation’s future fighter engine TECHNOLOGY XA100

Unread postPosted: 17 Jun 2019, 07:30
by Dragon029
Corsair1963 wrote:Could we see the winner of a future 6th Generation Engine Program. (XA-100 or XA-101) Going to one or both of the NGAD and/or PCA. While, the loser could upgrade the F-35??? Especially, if the loser is the XA-101? (P&W)


The engine that goes into the F-35 and the engine that goes into the NGAD / PCA have been regarded as separate in past discussions. The XA100 / XA101 is currently designed more or less specifically for the F-35, while the next gen will either get the same engine (F110/F100 style on the F-15/F-16), or a variation (F119/F135 style) tailored for the NGAD / PCA (perhaps with some component commonality).

Regardless though, the winner of the AETP program is probably going to want the F-35 contract; it is a single engine fighter, but 1x 3500+ engines > 2x 500-1000 engines. The loser and winner will likely get to re-compete over the other programs as there'll be a few extra years to make improvements to reliability, cost, etc and potentially come up with something that's even better value.

popcorn wrote:What engine. Is being referred to at the 7:52 mark?


https://www.aviationtoday.com/2018/10/1 ... nbaa-2018/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric_Affinity