Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker.

F110 high thrust proposals

Always wondered why the F-16 has a tailhook, or how big a bigmouth F-16's mouth really is ? Find it out here !
Senior member
Senior member
Posts: 475
Joined: 15 May 2011, 18:54

by viperzerof-2 » 17 Nov 2022, 23:14

I was wondering if anyone had some knowledge of two enhanced F110 engines

Even though the F110 is one of the highest thrust fighter engines in operation, GE has developed plans for further performance increases, should our customers need them. We have defined three growth steps that could increase F110 thrust to more than 40,000 pounds (178 kilo- Newtons ). The first step would deliver a 15 to 20 percent thrust increase to about 33,000 to 35,000 pounds (156 kilo- Newtons ). Engine ratings will depend on customer requirements. As an alternative, this step could provide a 40 percent increase in engine parts life at current thrust levels. Development work is already underway, and the engine will be qualified in 1998. Hardware modifications would include the high efficiency three stage integrally bladed disk - or blisk - fan adapted from the F118 engine on the B-2 bomber. We would also apply an advanced augmentor design using air-cooled radial flameholder and spraybar assemblies adopted from the YF120 and F414 engines. This low cost derivative design will greatly extend flameholder life. Survivability features could be incorporated to reduce engine thermal and radar signatures.

Our second growth step would build on Step One to deliver performance in the 36 to 37 thousand pound thrust range (about 160 kilo- Newtons ). To accomplish this, we would employ the latest CFM56 high-efficiency core. Dual use of this advanced engine core will lead to lower development costs and improved reliability for both engine programs. We would also introduce a long-life combustor with a laser-drilled multi-hole cooling pattern ; an air-cooled low pressure turbine, and a dual channel FADEC. While increasing performance and reliability, we also expect to cut engine acquisition cost compared with today’s F110 engine. This will be done by using Quality Function Deployment and Design to Cost methods to select those technologies that satisfy critical customer requirements at the lowest life cycle cost. In the third growth step, we could provide 40 thousand pounds of thrust by simply scaling up the blisk fan. However, the increased fan diameter and higher airflow would demand a larger inlet and structural modifications to existing F110 applications. Variable cycle engine technology, as first employed on our YF120 for the Advanced Tactical Fighter program, may also be used on the F110. A variable cycle engine can provide thrust tailoring throughout the flight envelope and delivers greater flexibility than a fixed cycle turbofan of the same size.

https://web.archive.org/web/20170525214 ... urs_13.htm

Now the first engine is the F110-GE-132, the second seems to be the maximum thrust growth option of that engine often site as 36500, basically a F110-ge-132 with a CFM56-7 core. But the last one is interesting, a 40000lbf F110 with variable cycle capabilities. Does anyone know anything about this engine? I’m curious how much bigger the fans would have to have been and how much airflow it would have needed.

It seems both of these where JSF engine candidates.

https://www.flightglobal.com/jast-engin ... 70.article
The Congressional edict means that, for the US Air Force and Navy conventional take-off and landing variants of the JAST, GE will be given an opportunity to challenge P&W, although the F119 may remain the power plant of choice for the US Marine Corps and Royal Navy ASTOVL variants.

GE, with Allison Engines, is offering JAST designers growth variants of the F110 engine, which now powers the Lockheed Martin F-16 and Northrop Grumman F-14, and the YF120, which was beaten by the F119 in the competition to power the Lockheed Martin/Boeing F-22.

Two F110 growth steps are being offered, the DF3/DF6 providing 20-25% more power than the 130kN (29,000lb)-thrust F110-129, by using the up-rated core from the latest CFM56-7 commercial turbofan and the DV2/DV3 providing 35-40% more thrust, through the use of a higher-airflow bladed-disc (blisk) fan and variable-cycle core.

https://books.google.com/books?id=t01KA ... son%20jast



General Electric plans to test an improved performance fan that could boost the durability of the F110-100 engine by as much as 30%.
The new, three-stage, integrally bladed disk (blisk) fan is based on the improvedefficiency, wide-chord-fan technology developed for the Fl18—the engine that powers the B-2 bomber.
The fan will be mounted on an Fl 101 29 improved performance engine for the test this September at GE's Evendale, Ohio, facility. If successful, the fan could be retrofitted into existing Fl 10-1 29s beginning as early as 1998. The FI 10s would receive the new fans as their current components near the end of their cyclic lives, Robert Griswold, FI 10 project manager, said.
General Electric and the U.S. Air Force hope to retrofit FI 10-129 powerplants with blisk fans to extend the engine's life and increase its resistance to foreign object damage. GE estimates that the Fl 1 8-derived fan could boost the life of the F1 1 0's core to 6,000 total accumulated cycles, an increase of 1,500 cycles from the current 4,500-cycle limit. If applied toward thrust, the increased-efficiency fan could boost engine power by about 15% compared with the Fl 10-1 29.
The company also is investigating a new radial augmenter for the Fl 1 0 and could begin developing the component before year-end. It would be based on technology developed for the YF1 20 engine that has already been incorporated into the F414, which will power the F/A-l 8E/F.
Radial augmentors use cooling air to reduce fuel spraybar temperatures and increase component life. The cooled spraybars also reduce coking, which improves component performance, Griswold said.
Taken together, the upgraded fan and the increased-durability augmenter constitute the first step of a three-step growth path. This plan details how the company's existing engines could be modified to satisfy current and evolving military propulsion requirements. Each of the improvements is directed at lowering maintenance or acquisition costs, improving specific fuel consumption or increasing thrust.
The improved FI 10 engine is being targeted at existing aircraft such as the F-15 and F-16. In addition to satisfying retrofit markets, GE believes new sales of these aircraft could develop if the Joint Advanced Strike Technology (JAST) program is delayed.
The second Fl 1 0 growth step builds on the first set of improvements. It swaps the existing Fl 1 0 core for one based on the CFM56-7 powerplant. Even though the existing FI 10 and CFM56-7 core engines have nearly the same airflow capacities, the newer CFM56-7 core is more efficient and therefore better poised for growth, Griswold said. Specifically, the CFM56-7 core would allow the company to moderately boost engine thrust without cooling the first stage of the lowpressure turbine.
Also being considered for inclusion in the second growth step is a new engine control system, which would be based on
technology defined for the YF1 20 and incorporated into the GE F414. According to Griswold, the F414's controller is the next step in technology. "It is a 'smarter' controller and has more diagnostic capability to reduce maintenance costs."
THE NEW CONTROLLER and increased-efficiency core together could boost FI 10 thrust as much as 20-25% beyond that of the current FI 10-129, allowing the powerplant to generate as much as 36,000 lb. of thrust. Even more thrust could be generated if the FI 10 incorporated some variable engine features, he said.
The company's third projected growth step would allow the FI 10 to produce nearly 40,000 lb. of thrust by adding an
increased airflow blisk fan. The diameter of this higher airflow fan would be larger than that of the current Fl 10-1 29, departing from the strategy of the first two
growth steps. Adding the larger diameter fan would change the installation diameter of the upgraded Fl 1 0 and require aircraft fitted with the new engine to have a higher flow inlet. The need for a bigger inlet would severely limit or exclude use of the upgraded engine in existing airframes. Consequently, the real market for the powerplant would be a conventional version of JAST, Griswold said.
In addition to defining a roadmap for its FI 10 engine, GE has tentative plans for increasing the thrust of its F414 powerplant. The first step would be to raise engine thrust by about 1 0% around 2005.
This would be accomplished by increasing engine temperatures and adding higher temperature turbine alloys to maintain component life, Dennis Williams, vice president and general manager of GE Aircraft Military Engines, said.
THE COMPANY ALSO WOULD add an allblisk compressor. Integrally bladed disks are currently used in the first three stages of the F414's seven-stage compressor.
The second of the F414's projected growth steps would provide about 15% more thrust than today's F41 4. GE engineers would accomplish this by combining the improved core developed under the first growth step with a larger fan and a new low-pressure turbine. Despite the thrust increase, the engine would continue to fit into the F/A-l 8 E/F's installation envelope.
The final step would target an engine in the 29,000-lb.-thrust class. To generate this thrust level, the engine would maintain the core and fan developed under the earlier growth steps and add a new two-stage low-pressure turbine. Afterburner and nozzle modifications also would be necessary.
Markets for this engine could be a new aircraft or a significantly modified version of the F/A-l 8E/F that featured a new inlet, Williams said.

I’m curious about the big 40000lb engine. It sounds like it needed a bigger inlet and a wider diameter fan that it wouldn’t fit on a F-16 or F-15E but I was curious if it might work on an F-16Xl or F-16at. It was a JSF candidate engine. Anyone know much about it?

Posts: 33
Joined: 25 Mar 2021, 01:48

by allesmorobranna » 24 Nov 2022, 11:51

Back in the good old days, when the power was a keypoint in the tactical fighter business, these developents were in the main focus. This late 90's years were the last golden era of the engine development. In the industry, there were a lot of very good and capable engineers, from the 80's, with the knowledge of the 70's, 80's experience and the promoses of upcoming orders for the highly uprated thrust requirements after 2000.

Well, all of these promises left just promises. The market and the industry turned to the gizmos, such as EW, stealth, weapons, sensors, softwares and so on. After 2000, the thrust, the raw power was not a key section in the development anymore. The power porn era was ended.

The very last engine development process was the F135 vs F136 and that's all. Nowadays, the increased power/efficiency development is a big challenge, even if everything is just based on a 20-30 years old projects.
Even if the F110GE132 was available from the early 2000 (it is 20 years old now!), the latest and greatest F-16 block 70 is just manufactured with the 30 years old F110GE129. The F-15EX is same.

The engine development is very expensive. The sensor/EW/software/network warfare development takes the most of the money and time, so for the engines not much left. That's why in the F-15EX brochure one of the key marketing bullshit is the "ZERO Additional jet engine development time required" - which means: we are just using a very old design without any significant upgrade.

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests