October 13, 20205 yr Author 1 hour ago, trumpetfrazz1 said: I would be interested to know what the surge margins/occurrences are like and how long they can supercruise for. Still don't think they'll be flying at and all up weight of around 160 tonnes when they are at the start of their cruise though... . Early in its development the F22 supercruised with F15's and F16's chasing it. The other jest were screwed even with afterburners on. Any deviation, even just 10 degrees, form the flight path resulted in them falling back and losing the F22. The F22 can store weapons internally of course, so lower parasitic drag. Specifications below... Mach 1.82 (1,220 mph, 1,963 km/h) supercruise at altitude Range: 1,600 nmi (1,800 mi, 3,000 km) or more with 2 external fuel tanks Combat range: 460 nmi (530 mi, 850 km) clean with 100 nmi (115 mi, 185 km) in supercruise 590 nmi (679 mi, 1,093 km) clean subsonic[N 10] Quote Interestingly, the Russians wanted to buy the air intake control system from BAC to make their TU144 supercruise but the government considered it sensitive and said no. Probably just as well. They also wanted to buy our Autothrottle system...in fact I often wondered why they didn't just buy a Concorde and be done with it!! If they have managed to make it work, I wonder if they had access to any documents from the past...... Do you mean make supercruise work? Concordes supercruise was with afterburner permanently engaged I believe. Think these days its an entirely different engine design. Rolls Royce Olympus engines were not that revolutionary really, in fact used on the Vulcan. https://prattwhitney.com/-/media/project/pw/pw-internet/pwu/pwu/products/military/me_f119_engine_pcard.pdf?rev=4a35898aa4c742df8649940ca1bf7327 Quote Two Pratt & Whitney F119 engines power the U.S Air Force’s F-22 Raptor. Supercruise, the ability to operate supersonically without afterburning, gives the F-22 exceptional combat performance without compromising mission range. The F119 engine delivers unparalleled aircraft maneuverability with its unique two-dimensional pitch vectoring exhaust nozzle. This convergent/divergent nozzle vectors thrust as much as 20 degrees up or down. Nozzle position management is integrated with the F-22 flight control system and is automatically regulated by the Full-Authority Digital Electronic Control (FADEC), as are hundreds of other engine and aircraft operating parameters. The FADEC also features advanced diagnostics and on-condition management capability for maintenance awareness, autonomic logistics support and automatic field and test data processing. The F119 is equipped with a number of advanced technologies for unmatched operational performance and reliability. Its three-stage integrally bladed fan is powered by a single-stage low-pressure turbine. The engine’s counterrotating core has an aerodynamically efficient six-stage compressor driven by a single-stage high-pressure turbine featuring the latest single-crystal superalloy blades and advanced cooling technologies. The robust, yet compact, high-pressure compressor features the most advanced airfoil aerodynamics and integrally bladed rotor disks for ensured durability. On December 15, 2005, the U.S. Air Force declared the F-22 Raptor combat-ready, having achieved Initial Operational Capability (IOC) status. This milestone signified the F119-powered F-22 completed its development testing and was prepared to fly and fight in defense of the United States of America and its global interests. Just two years later, on December 12, 2007, the U.S Air Force declared Full Operational Capability (FOC) for the F-22. The proven F119 is the forefather of the advanced F135 propulsion system, which currently powers the fifth-generation F-35 Lightning II. To learn more about the F135 engine, click here. FEATURES: Unmatched combat agility Unprecedented mission flexibility Supersonic cruise without afterburning Integrated advanced stealth technology Outstanding safety and reliability https://prattwhitney.com/products-and-services/products/military-engines/f119 Edited October 13, 20205 yr by martin-w
October 13, 20205 yr @martin-w Thanks for the additional info. The term supercruise (at least where I'm from) means to cruise without reheat which yes, Concorde did every day for 27 years. Reheat was pre-engaged for take-off and turned off at noise abatement time or 500 ft if no noise abatement was required. It was then re-select for the acceleration from Mach 0.93 or 0.95 depending whether a subsonic cruise had been flown, and switched off at Mach 1.70 by which time the efficiency of the intakes had increased to out-power the wave drag of cruise. She was the only aircraft, civil or military for many, many years that was able to do this, which is why I'm curious to read about military aircraft finally catching up! Even if they still couldn't out cruise her! The Russian TU144 needed reheat to fly supersonic because they didn't have the intake control that Concorde did.
October 13, 20205 yr Author Re Concorde... I read the afterburner was still engaged at a minimal level in cruise earlier. I must have miss read it. 1997 f22 first flew so supercruise for 23 years. Rafale, Typhoon, Grippen, can all supercruise. Flanker too. It was actually the F-104 that was the first production aircraft to exceed Mach 1 in dry level flight. The English Electric Lightning prototype achieved mach 1 without reheat in 1954. Only managed Mach 1.02, but later versions exceeded that. Edited October 13, 20205 yr by martin-w
October 13, 20205 yr 13 minutes ago, martin-w said: Re Concorde... I read the afterburner was still engaged at a minimal level in cruise earlier. I must have miss read it. Ah, the reheat added less thrust during use for acceleration in flight than it did during takeoff but it was always turned off after acceleration. It would never have had the range otherwise. There was actually a time limit of 15 minutes on use of the reheat.
October 13, 20205 yr Author Come to think of it... it was the SR71 that cruised with afterburner engaged. So not supercruise. I need sleep 😆 My cats keeping me awake.
October 13, 20205 yr @martin-w are we sure they all supercruise without reheat? Not questioning you, I just don't know! I know that even if they could, when Concorde retired it was thought by those involved that she was still ahead of her time because no other aircraft could catch her. Not that we may have known everything that was possible then... Great story I've heard several times - bunch of US military guys in their (I think) U-2s spying over a certain country not far south of the States when they were asked to move so far in a certain direction. They weren't used to being told to move so when they asked why they were told it was because an airliner was going through the airspace. They thought they were being made fools of because they were up above 50,000ft and supersonic. Next thing they are told they have to move because Concorde is going past. They military pilot who was telling a Concorde pilot this still couldn't believe he had to move out of the way to let 100 people drinking champagne flying at Mach 2 go past, when he was in full space gear breathing oxygen. True story.
October 13, 20205 yr Author 1 hour ago, trumpetfrazz1 said: @martin-w are we sure they all supercruise without reheat? Not questioning you, I just don't know! Yep, read it just before I replied. Knew the F-104 did, had no idea the Lightning did though. Having witnessed the Lightning at air shows many years ago, I shouldn't be surprised, the thing was essentially two powerful engines strapped to a brick. 🙂 One day, when I was about 10 or 11 years old, my friend and me were on our way back to school after lunch. This was in the Solihull region of the UK. As we crossed a field close to our houses, two Lightning roared overhead at very low level. we were so scared we dropped down onto the floor. 😁 Remember going to an air show when I was on holiday with my ex wife. Think it may have been Barnstable or somewhere like that. The lightning headed skywards right over our heads in a vertical climb (over the crowd was allowed in those days) and engaged full reheat. I'm telling you, the noise was horrendous, you could feel it in your guts. 🙂 "The un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire powered P.1 prototype of the English Electric Lightning, exceeded Mach 1 on 11 August 1954." "The first production aircraft intended to exceed Mach 1 in dry level flight was the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter which featured a radical design, with razor-thin, stubby wings attached substantially farther back on the fuselage than most contemporary aircraft. The wing provided excellent supersonic and high-speed, low-altitude performance, but resulted in poor turning capability and high landing speeds. It was the first production aircraft to achieve Mach 2, and the first aircraft to reach an altitude of 100,000 feet after taking off under its own power. " https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supercruise#:~:text=The English Electric Lightning was,first aircraft capable of supercruise. The modern fighters I mention like Typhoon, Rafale, Grippen etc can of course. Quote Great story I've heard several times - bunch of US military guys in their (I think) U-2s spying over a certain country not far south of the States when they were asked to move so far in a certain direction. They weren't used to being told to move so when they asked why they were told it was because an airliner was going through the airspace. They thought they were being made fools of because they were up above 50,000ft and supersonic. Next thing they are told they have to move because Concorde is going past. They military pilot who was telling a Concorde pilot this still couldn't believe he had to move out of the way to let 100 people drinking champagne flying at Mach 2 go past, when he was in full space gear breathing oxygen. True story. Yes, I've heard that one. 😄 I recall I was watching a TV documentary about Concorde and one of the Concorde pilots mentioned the encounter. I wonder what's actually flying that we aren't aware of, black projects? SR-71 was flying without us being aware for some time, so was the F-117, B2 etc. Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Aurora is a reality and capable of hypersonic flight. I recall a few years back, all of the seismic sensors were triggered off the Californian coast. When they estimated the rate at which the sensors were triggered, it was at hypersonic velocity. Then we have reports of the so called "doughnuts on a rope" con trails, said to be characteristic of a pulse detonation engine. Said to sound like the sky is being unzipped. Edited October 13, 20205 yr by martin-w
October 13, 20205 yr 43 minutes ago, martin-w said: Yep, read it just before I replied. Knew the F-104 did, had no idea the Lightning did though. Having witnessed the Lightning at air shows many years ago, I shouldn't be surprised, the thing was essentially two powerful engines strapped to a brick. 🙂 "The un-reheated Armstrong Siddeley Sapphire powered P.1 prototype of the English Electric Lightning, exceeded Mach 1 on 11 August 1954." Hmm, not what I've read else where... The EEL certainly went supersonic with reheat and I have absolutely no doubt it exceeded Mach 1 dry but it was probably in a dive! The Boeing 747 was tested up to Mach 0.98 in a dive and the British test pilot who was doing the flying said it could have easily gone supersonic. I once heard a Lightening pilot say he could empty the tanks in 15 minutes so I don't think he could have beaten a Concorde to New York! I'm not a military aviation man so I'm not sure but I think the issue might be people using the term supercruise to mean different things. That and it is a very different thing to supercruise with a payload associated with 100 passengers, breathing normally and for 3 hours plus, than a small military plane. It's all so long ago that different people have different versions of the stories. I'm pleased to hear the modern fighters are supercruise capable though.
October 13, 20205 yr Author From another source. Lightning in supercruise, in level flight. No reheat. So no, not in a dive. Was also capable of Mach 2. "The first prototype, designated the P.1, took to the air on the 4th of August 1954, piloted by Roland Beamont, EE's chief test pilot. Powered by Sapphire engines, on its third flight (on the 11th) it exceeded Mach 1 in level flight, the first British aircraft to do so. Reheat (afterburner) had not been used; supercruise was here a long time before it became an American buzz word during their ATF programme!" https://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/lightning/history.php Edited October 13, 20205 yr by martin-w
October 14, 20205 yr 11 hours ago, martin-w said: From another source. Lightning in supercruise, in level flight. No reheat. So no, not in a dive. Was also capable of Mach 2. "The first prototype, designated the P.1, took to the air on the 4th of August 1954, piloted by Roland Beamont, EE's chief test pilot. Powered by Sapphire engines, on its third flight (on the 11th) it exceeded Mach 1 in level flight, the first British aircraft to do so. Reheat (afterburner) had not been used; supercruise was here a long time before it became an American buzz word during their ATF programme!" https://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/lightning/history.php Ok, in that case Concorde must have been the only aircraft to supercruise at Mach 2 for over 3000 miles because of the technology in the intake control.
October 14, 20205 yr Author 28 minutes ago, trumpetfrazz1 said: Ok, in that case Concorde must have been the only aircraft to supercruise at Mach 2 for over 3000 miles because of the technology in the intake control. Yep, guess so. I remember seeing Concorde at an air show. May have been RIAT. Probably the most beautiful aitcraft ever to fly.
October 14, 20205 yr Author I love the way they would put expensive gifts on passengers seats. 1.5 billion of tax payers money... and I dont care. The human race needs endeavours like Concorde that push the technological boundaries. Life is hard, life is stressful, with some happiness thrown in to keep us sane some of the time. We need endeavors like Concode to thrill us. And that includes Elon Musk taking us to Mars too. https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2015/07/supersonic-airplanes-concorde/396698/ Edited October 14, 20205 yr by martin-w
October 14, 20205 yr 17 minutes ago, martin-w said: Yep, guess so. I remember seeing Concorde at an air show. May have been RIAT. Probably the most beautiful aitcraft ever to fly. Without any shadow of doubt and a supreme example of if it looks good, it works good! 2 minutes ago, martin-w said: The human race needs endeavours like Concorde that push the technological boundaries. Life is hard, life is stressful, with some happiness thrown in to keep us sane some of the time. We need endeavors like Concode to thrill us. I agree although I believe that ship has now sailed. Prestige projects belong in the post-war era when the general public cared about such things. Sadly we are now in an era of selfishness (being very sweeping, I know) where people only look to their own career or financial gain - not good for team work on the scale of Concorde and in my very personal opinion, I'm not sure we could assemble a team now that could build one. Certainly not if you could put them in the same conditions of the time - no previous supersonic airliner, slide-rules no calculators, two languages and cultures coming together, a series of seemingly impossible problems to overcome etc.... Designed by artists and engineered by geniuses! By the look of the Boom publicity they are making a good go of it but they are using existing technology (from the limited research I've done on it) in an era when all the problems are known - including what in Concorde documentation is called "environmental aspects". As Brian Trubshaw says in his book, "future projects will have it easier because there will always be Concorde". There will never be such a venture in the UK now, as the money involved is just far too much for government to explain away.
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.