MILITARY AIRCRAFT ENGINES

What is the best fighter aircraft engine in the world? How do you even judge that? Trust? Range per gallon of fuel?

Attached: 1523754577586.webm (408x306, 1.26M)

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13a
ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-06-13/pw-outlines-new-plan-f-35-engine-upgrades
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

>How do you even judge that?
Max output, reliability, efficiency, ease of replacement during wartime, etc..

Certainly not russian engines.

I'd say usually whatever the latest American fighter jet engine is probably the worldwide gold standard. The P&W F135 with 43k pounds of thrust gives me a boner just thinking about it.

What's your opinion on pic related?

Attached: AETP2.png (640x479, 209K)

The F135 is a beauty for sure.

Attached: f135.jpg (1500x1128, 210K)

Is that one China stole or is it being loaded on a Russian transport?

That's a nice engine.

>Trust?

I'd say trust is a big part, you don't want an engine that's going to double-cross you.

Potential is the best metric.

For example, the Chinese engine is very young but is considered far more impressive than the newest Russian one. Give it 2-3 years and it will over take the American engine as the best in the world.

Attached: 1527746345002.png (1073x386, 338K)

Good bait frendo

Quantum engines?

>Maximum thrust
>Overall pressure ratio
>Specific fuel consumption
>Thrust-to-weight ratio

And there are also additional features like stealth characteristics, TVC, Variable Cycle Engine etc.

>medium
>EJ 200 - Eurofighter
>large
>F119 - F22

>that gape

Americans just have access to better materials and maintenance. Russian engines are superior from engineering point of view.

What are you talking about

Attached: tu95_russian_hello.png (1024x1262, 101K)

>Russian engines are superior from engineering point of view.
The fuck?

Attached: CmhR4O4VIAAD5c8.png (1500x981, 2.78M)

Attached: 1444637638887.jpg (1417x1121, 334K)

Attached: 1444638823603.jpg (3008x1960, 968K)

This thread is in serious lack of actual numbers and comparisons at this point.

F-135 is better than the F-119

Actually, no.

>Americans just have access to better materials

Yea because of engineering...

Differences in design are getting smaller and smaller, nowadays material science and QA is what makes a good engine.

>sub 35k lblet
lmaoing@ your life rn

cool story

Eurogays Slavs and Chinks struggle to even put out a thrust to weight of 9. Meanwhile Americans slam 11.5 in that pussy shit mu dude.

Please, this is a blue board.

Name of it?

Don't forget Thrust to Weight ratio.

F119.

Attached: gripen engine.jpg (1920x1080, 608K)

All depends upon the plane's purpose.

The Nazis were masturbating so hard to pic related that one of them came up with the idea for a ramjet-propelled interceptor:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13a
However, the flame that burns twice as bright sucks twice as much cock, so there you have it.

Then you have the fact that turboprops are better at lower speed regimes than turbojets, yadda yadda yadda.

Attached: Ancap Ball 08.jpg (500x537, 60K)

The problem with the F-135 is its size (or more accurate its diameter). Surface-area-to-volume ratio doesn't favour larger engines, that's also the main reason why fighters generally apply two engines instead of one large engine.

The F-22's engine is supppses to be awesome. There was talk of upgrading the B-1b bomber to use them. The B-1b is actually a nerfed version of what the B-1a was supposed to be. But costs were too high so they lowered the top speed requirements by a lot.

Now an engine that meets the thrust requirements and size requirements exists because of the F-22. So it would be possible to bring the B-1 up to its original performance goals.

You just look at this shit and wonder "HOW?"

Garfield?

I'm not a cat.

Attached: X31 engine fit check.jpg (1280x1023, 177K)

If the 15% increase actually happened of the EJ200 for the Eurofighter tranche as replacement of the German Tornados then the upgraded EJ200 would exceed the F119 as most advanced engine out there.

This.
If we look only at thrust-to-weight ratio then the F135 engines in the F-35 has the highest mark at 7.47:1 (dry) and 11.467:1 (wet/afterburning). If the people behind the Eurofighter's EJ200 engines can deliver the 15-30 % increase that they say they will then it will be close (right now they're at 6.11:1 (dry) and 9.17:1 (wet)

p&w already has an upgrade for the F-135 giving it a 10% power boost and 5% better fuel burn.

ainonline.com/aviation-news/defense/2018-06-13/pw-outlines-new-plan-f-35-engine-upgrades

Attached: F135-STOVL-at-test[1].jpg (3000x2034, 851K)

>The engine evolved off the other with far higher thrust output is worse
What are you smoking? The F135 is an upgrade of the F119 design.

I see you like talking out of your fourth point of contact.

IIRC the B-21 will have 4 F135s.

2 F-135s...

Engine of the 100% indigenous HAL Tejas. Its the most impressive.

Ahem.

Attached: J58_Afterburner.jpg (1564x982, 447K)

>Burns red
Weak.

Attached: F135_Outdoors.jpg (2250x1083, 519K)

It will be a nonab dertivitive.

The skin of the aircraft around the engines would go transparent at max power...

Attached: 1487972459043.jpg (960x655, 174K)

Red is for rockets not jets.

Flame color is determined by heat, and efficiency the fuel is burned.

Also determined, first and foremost, by the fuel it is using.

pretty sure this is bait, but from our engine software, to the first high bypass engine, the US has had a consistent fuckhuge lead on engine performance when it comes to jets, in every single aspect. To this day, nations still work to accomplish what our engines did 20 years ago, and for every euro nation, they do so on the foundation of what we have done. Well, China too, but that goes without saying.

Russians are fantastic at creating disruptive technology though. 10/10 when it comes to "changing the game entirely"

Lol.

Attached: tu-22m3 (6).jpg (1280x979, 528K)

Lol.

Attached: russkie jet engines.png (681x488, 195K)

>No arguments
Lol.

Attached: tu-160 (28).jpg (1120x544, 297K)

It's accurate though.

>No arguments
>Literally a direct comparison of equivalent aircraft's engine maintenance cycles

All the krokodil must've eaten through poor vodka user's brainstem already.

Attached: 1529771045317.jpg (206x226, 20K)

>Still no arguments
Lol.

Attached: al-41f (1).jpg (1305x695, 546K)

>23% greater thrust output over F119
>Same 46" diameter
Yeah, still talking out your ass.

Shit, I think Armatard's back.

>Literally still no arguments
Lol, why are fatniks so pathetic?

Attached: tu-22m3 (2).jpg (1200x773, 458K)

Literally all he can do is shout "no argument" while shutting his eyes.

Attached: 1528163738755.jpg (798x445, 189K)

Tf104ge110, used in tandem

Impotent fatnik squeals are not an argument. You are yet to refer to any of the engines I posted, mutt.

Attached: tu-22m3 (27).jpg (1856x1028, 192K)

Old ge 110,s

Attached: image.jpg (640x960, 118K)

The argument is that the superior quality of American engines and the resulting longer lifespan makes them better than the cheap, short-lasting Russian "equivalents" of similar price and dimensions.

Attached: proof bird.png (331x331, 9K)

Lol.
>No arguments
Lol.

Attached: al-41f (2).jpg (978x636, 379K)

Yep, it's definitely Armatard.

Attached: 1492575990407.jpg (531x640, 61K)

Am I the only one that likes the F100? I know it's not the best but sometimes the older stuff is more interesting to me and the F100 is still pretty powerful and generally reliable.

Attached: Engine.f15.arp.750pix.jpg (750x501, 93K)

>Still no arguments
Lol, impotent fatnik mutt.

Attached: nk-32.jpg (1500x922, 482K)

Soviet engine metallurgy was dogshit and I see someone's already posted the chart that details the MiG-29 and F-16's engines. In this case a Soviet engine goes through nine times more overhauls and is replaced 3 times as often than a comparable US engine.

>You are yet to refer to any of the engines I posted

You mean the pictures? Yeah, come back with an actual argument and not just some pictures of planes you think look super cool. Those engines are pieces of junk that fall apart without loads of overhauls and still need to be replaced fairly often. Next to the poor maintenance making their subs noisy, their engines after the third gen were easily one of their worst technical failings.

Attached: snab.jpg (720x787, 39K)

>Still hasn't actually said anything to argue against and has fallen back into his standard of lame, bloodless insults
I hope the high Krokodil is worth the brain damage.

Russia has the same access, are you retarded?

>N-no, let's not talk about the engines you posted, let's talk about old poolandish engines with no spare parts
Lol, impotent fatnik squeals.
>You mean the pictures?
I mean the engines, mutt.
>Still no arguments
Lol.

Attached: al-41f (3).jpg (1000x560, 94K)

>al-41f
>cant even match F-119

Not even close to best in the world.

>Still not making any arguments about anything concrete, just more "LOOK AT DIS!" posting of a pair of engines

>let's talk about old poolandish engines with no spare parts

They had parts, they just weren't burning through them at the rate of the Soviet Air force. The Soviet Union was one of the only places in the world where it was acceptable to build engines that badly. By the way, that isn't something to be proud of.

>I mean the engines

The engines are constructed from inferior materials and with poor quality control, they're bad, real bad. Pictures don't show the fact the engines need to be maintained constantly so they aren't flying to pieces, shit like this does

Attached: 1517899003706.jpg (1199x831, 133K)

Dumb stupid Americans no appreciate strong Russia engine!

Attached: MiG-29.jpg (640x436, 145K)

>bbbrrrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaappp

>AL-41F not matching F119
True, 18000 kgf doesn't really match 16000 kgf.
>Still no arguments
Lol.
>Still no arguments regarding the engines I posted
Lol.

Attached: mig-1.44 (5).jpg (1500x943, 1.03M)

Attached: tr.jpg (651x327, 73K)

mfw fatnik mutt make squel over superior russia make engines.

Attached: High precision inefficient combustion.jpg (898x628, 23K)

Lel MTBO of 1000 hrs for AL-41F vs 6000 for F119

>Wet fatnik fantasies
Lol.

What causes those circles to form?

The afterburner fairies.

Gremlins.

Attached: Bad engines.jpg (1280x866, 168K)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_diamond

For what it's worth, Russia's turboprop game seems to be strong...

Attached: 2d1046ea-e5e4-446c-952d-4e922da7b162.Full.jpg (1473x587, 125K)

Horniness.

Attached: 1482657895183067959.jpg (1000x1000, 34K)

Thats usually been the case, those kuznetsov engines with nearly 15,000 shp are nuts. They even put them on an airliner, though I don't think the passengers appreciated it.

Attached: 3.jpg (800x1131, 194K)