BladeLWS Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 P&W F135, 40,000 lbs of thrust in AB during the test, most ever from a jet fighter engine. Also P&W has just upped the rating of the engine to 43,000 lbs capable. http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Mighty_F_35_Lightning_2_Engine_Roars_To_Life_999.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mobius1 Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Coooooooool. :D:pilotfly: Stupid thermals... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-konkussion Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Nice- I hope it's quieter than the Pegasus...:D My ears are still ringing from 1992... [sIGPIC]http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.php?attachmentid=43337&d=1287169113[/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force_Feedback Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Man, check the size of that engine, it's like a 777 Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 That will put to a rest any criticism anyone had about its T/W. Im curious to know at what speed it can supercruise now. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Scythe Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 That will put to a rest any criticism anyone had about its T/W. Im curious to know at what speed it can supercruise now. Thought the F-35+"single most powerful engine in fighter"-thing was old news. If it wasn't designed to supercruise, it probably won't be very good at it. The Eurofighter can supercruise at Mach 1.3, but it needs AB to get it there first. I'll guess low Mach 1 for the F-35 at best, if any at all (not that I think it is kinematically challenged in the first place). Besides, who says the engine will push 43 000 lbs at 30 000ft and Mach 1 anyway? ;) For all we know, it can still have the same dry thrust as before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Dry thrust generally gets pushed up a percentage of a max AB thrust increase from what I have seen when the F-16 was getting new uprated engines nearly every few years. IMO the F-35 needs all the power it can get looking at is T/W stats. And on a side note, imagine a pair of F135s @ 43k each in the Raptor! Man all that power on tap, just pure utopia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Yes there are no reason to up just the sfterburner without up the dry thruster burners too. It wouldnt make much sense to spend more fuel in afterburner where the benifit form dry thrust is more important. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force_Feedback Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Dry thrust generally gets pushed up a percentage of a max AB thrust increase from what I have seen when the F-16 was getting new uprated engines nearly every few years. IMO the F-35 needs all the power it can get looking at is T/W stats. And on a side note, imagine a pair of F135s @ 43k each in the Raptor! Man all that power on tap, just pure utopia. Yes, the Raptor would need some good silicone sealant and a high pressure compressor, that way, you can blow up the frame, and add the engines. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Scythe Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Dry thrust generally gets pushed up a percentage of a max AB thrust increase from what I have seen when the F-16 was getting new uprated engines nearly every few years. And that applies to the F-35's engine...how? The fact that it produces 43 000lb of thrust in a specific environment (specific speed, altitude, etc.) doesn't mean that the engine would automatically scale the same in every part of its flight envelope. And on a side note, imagine a pair of F135s @ 43k each in the Raptor! Man all that power on tap, just pure utopia. The F119 already produces something like 39 000lb of thrust AB, and 28 000lb dry. Disregarding everything else except pure thrust for a moment, the F119 probably outpowers the F135 in certain portions of the flight envelope already. Now add the fact that the F119 was designed to supercruise. If you take older engines, like the F100-PW-220 on the F-15 (14K dry, 23.8K AB) or the F100-PW-229 (17K dry, 29K AB), you'll see that their dry thrusts only provides about 60% of the power available in AB. Last I checked, the F135 wasn't a supercruising engine, so I doubt it would be much different. Again, keep in mind these figures are highly situation-dependent. In comparison, the F119 dry produces over 70% of the thrust available to it in AB in the same conditions above. Put it in a supercruise, and there's no doubt in my mind that it'll absolutely leave the other engines in the dust. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 When did the F-119 get upratted, last I saw it was 35,000lbs. I saw some people quoting 38k but I thought this was pure speculation. Is 39k the thrust class it is in now? If so the Raptor is going to be a true rocket. I'd love to see some time to climb records. Not going to happen for some time I'm sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
britgliderpilot Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 If it wasn't designed to supercruise, it probably won't be very good at it. Some silver-haired gentlemen from English Electric would like to talk to you ;) http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v121/britgliderpilot/BS2Britgliderpilot-1.jpg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted September 22, 2006 Share Posted September 22, 2006 Some silver-haired gentlemen from English Electric would like to talk to you ;) :megalol: Nice one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 When did the F-119 get upratted, last I saw it was 35,000lbs. I saw some people quoting 38k but I thought this was pure speculation. Is 39k the thrust class it is in now? If so the Raptor is going to be a true rocket. I'd love to see some time to climb records. Not going to happen for some time I'm sure. Its the F-135 thats getting UP'ed. The F-119 is slightly different and has a bigger bypass ratio. Could be more difficult to Up it because of this. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Its the F-135 thats getting UP'ed. The F-119 is slightly different and has a bigger bypass ratio. Could be more difficult to Up it because of this. Ahhh...so the F-35 is going to be louder than the F-22. :D Cool beans! Heh...I've personally experienced the loudest-ever US aircraft over my head...the F-106. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 well the Raptor has 2 of them so Im not so sure of that. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Well...an F-16 is louder than an F-18. But, then again, their respective engines' by-pass ratios are HUGELY different. :D I guess the only test will be to see the two in an airshow in 2008. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Scythe Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 When did the F-119 get upratted, last I saw it was 35,000lbs. I saw some people quoting 38k but I thought this was pure speculation. Is 39k the thrust class it is in now? If so the Raptor is going to be a true rocket. I'd love to see some time to climb records. Not going to happen for some time I'm sure. The actual thrust for the F119 was never publically released AFAIK. All (reliable) sources simply state a thrust output in the "35 000lb class," even in the YF-22/23 days. Quite vague, don't you think? ;) However, IAPR did state that Pratt & Whitney uprated the F119 since the YF-22, since at that time General Electric's F120 was the more powerful engine. Pratt&Whitney, however, made the case that the F119 was more mature and that they could scale the F119 up to F120-levels (or above) performance if desired. I haven't been able to come across a source that definitively confirmed the USAF did choose to uprate the F119, but most state (or assume) that this had been the case. I personally think that the F119 has been uprated since the YF-22, but by how much, I have no idea. The reason I think this is the case is that the F119-powered YF-22 could barely break Mach 1.5 in supercruise, but the current F-22As with F119s can push Mach 1.7 in a supercruise no sweat. Something must've changed ;) Its the F-135 thats getting UP'ed. The F-119 is slightly different and has a bigger bypass ratio. Could be more difficult to Up it because of this. Actually, the F135, if anything, was DOWN-rated. Some sources stated that the prototype engine which equipped the Boeing and Lockheed Martin JSF prototypes produced upwards of 50 000lb of thrust according to some public sources (the highest figure I heard quoted was 52 000lb of thrust actually). I honestly expected more than 43 000lbs of thrust from the F135, but such an output is impressive nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cobra360 Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Here are two F-135 static engine tests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yellonet Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Sounds like high-maintenance costs with that engine... i7-2600k@4GHz, 8GB, R9 280X 3GB, SSD, HOTAS WH, Pro Flight Combat Pedals, TIR5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmonaut Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Check this out .. “the internet jet” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u8IlCRX2eMY&NR Cozmo. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Minimum effort, maximum satisfaction. CDDS Tutorial Version 3. | Main Screen Mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Cool vids Cosmonaut! :thumbup: My god she's beautiful...all engine, reminds me of the F-104. I won't be suprpised if the AF and/or NASA uses at least one to break TTA records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Force_Feedback Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Lets hope it won't be the scam the F-104 was ;) Although I'm almost certain key goverment and military officials got a respectable sum on some Swiss/Caribean account, just for their 'moral' support. Yes, LM was that much of a pair player in the past, and such habits don't disappear, and the over budget and slow progress confirm it. At least the F-35 is having some new technologies in it, and not just 'stealthier, faster and more agile' kind of "progress" like we see on every other next gen jet. Creedence Clearwater Revival:worthy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 The F-104 was not a scam. It was a very potent supersonic interceptor. But if you tried to use it for anything else? ... owwie. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted September 23, 2006 Share Posted September 23, 2006 Not to mention that it wasn't LM at all back then...it was just Lockheed. I think many in European countries might disagree that it was a "scam". Trivia: Colorado Springs, Colorado has a street named Kelly Johnson Boulevard. :D The JetStar...now THAT was a lemon. She's a great aircraft, as long as you're only planning a VERY short trip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts