Forum: F-35 Engine

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.asp ... 510370.xml

I didn't realize how big an issue heat management actually is.. informative article.

F-16.net Sponsor

neurotech wrote:

strykerxo wrote:

With the new engine and fighter design on the horizon, is there any talk of a variable geometry inlet? Serpentine ducts, bleed valves and ducts, fuel management are what I have read. The complexity and cost of a VI are understood but with the advantages of controlling airflow might outweigh the drawbacks.

Variable geometry inlets aren't exactly low RCS, and the F-22 does fine with fixed intakes up to Mach 2.4

The F-22 example is correct and mach 2.4 is pushing materials, inlet shape etc. Has there been research into maybe a stealth variable inlet. My understanding is the more air the more thrust, in a 6th gen aircraft stealth variable inlets could push AC even faster, except for the above restrictions.

strykerxo wrote:

neurotech wrote:

strykerxo wrote:

With the new engine and fighter design on the horizon, is there any talk of a variable geometry inlet? Serpentine ducts, bleed valves and ducts, fuel management are what I have read. The complexity and cost of a VI are understood but with the advantages of controlling airflow might outweigh the drawbacks.

Variable geometry inlets aren't exactly low RCS, and the F-22 does fine with fixed intakes up to Mach 2.4

The F-22 example is correct and mach 2.4 is pushing materials, inlet shape etc. Has there been research into maybe a stealth variable inlet. My understanding is the more air the more thrust, in a 6th gen aircraft stealth variable inlets could push AC even faster, except for the above restrictions.

Wait, so it's Mach 2.4 now? I remember when the F-22's top speed was Mach 1.8, 2.0, 2.2... what's going on? Are we gonna see something similar with the F-35?

1st503rdsgt wrote:

Quote:

General Electric and Pratt & Whitney have been selected over Rolls-Royce for the U.S. Air Force Research Laboratory’s Adaptive Engine Technology Development (AETD) program to mature fuel-efficient, high-thrust powerplants for post-2020 Lockheed Martin F-35 upgrades and sixth-generation combat aircraft...

The 48-month AETD has four goals. The first is to design a new combat-aircraft engine with 25% lower thrust-specific fuel consumption, but 5% more military power and 10% higher maximum thrust than the Pratt F135 now powering the F-35...

“We will take that engine through preliminary design review,” Reed says. The engine must be sized to fit in the F-35 with “only modest modifications,” he says.

...?

United Technologies Corp., Pratt and Whitney Military Engines, East Hartford, Conn., is being awarded an $81,870,798 cost-plus-fixed-fee contract for services and materials for the preliminary design, detailed design, and engine performance testing in support of the F135 Fuel Burn Reduction Program. The objective of the program is to demonstrate a 5 percent mission weighted fuel burn reduction in a F135 experimental engine configuration. Work will be performed in East Hartford, Conn., and is expected to be completed in July 2016. Contract funds will not expire at the end of the current fiscal year. This contract was competitively procured via Broad Agency Announcement; three offers were received. The Naval Air Warfare Center Aircraft Division, Lakehurst, N.J., is the contracting activity (N68335-13-C-0005).
Smile

popcorn wrote:

http://www.aviationweek.com/Article.aspx?id=/article-xml/AW_11_05_2012_p79-510370.xml

I didn't realize how big an issue heat management actually is.. informative article.

Yep. Check out the Air Force SBIR list -- there are a whole bunch of calls for new heat rejection tech.

Gums wrote:

Salute!

Where is TEG?

I understand some of the airflow concepts for the new engines, but he can explain it without referring to a lot of gossip and rumor.

Gums asks....

Copy that! I've sent an email to <a href="http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_profile-mode-viewprofile-u-6848.html">That_Engine_Guy</a> asking to help clear this out.

Looking back at the image of the ADVENT ending mock-up (on the second page of this thread), I've been wondering if it was more intended for the Long Range Bomber than for the F-35. The exhaust in particular looks more like something that would go in a B-2 stile flying wing.

count_to_10 wrote:

Looking back at the image of the ADVENT ending mock-up (on the second page of this thread), I've been wondering if it was more intended for the Long Range Bomber than for the F-35. The exhaust in particular looks more like something that would go in a B-2 stile flying wing.

Maybe some stealth HALE UAV? Global Hawk/U-2/RQ-170 replacement?

Forum: F-35 Engine

A New Engine?