![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I want to apologize to anyone I offended with my "Dog Whistle" remark about
the Silent jet glider. I have long held a disparaging view of small turbines based largely on their huge cost, noise level, awful specific fuel economy and short lifespan. There's also the safety issue of a compressor wheel turning at 115,000 RPM - you really don't want to ingest any debris. This, I now find, is a very out-of-date viewpoint. It's easy to have missed the huge advances in microjet technology unless you are an active part of the radio controlled aircraft hobby. I decided to surf through the web looking for information about these and it's an eye opener. These guys are building and flying small centrifugal compressor turbojets of amazing sophistication. Tiny FADEC systems completely manage start and run functions. All safety issues seem to have been satisfactorily dealt with. Even with this success, the microjet boffins are not satisfied. Even better engines are in development. I think that Mike Borgelt is exactly right when says, "I have seen the future of soaring". At small turbojet self launcher does make a awful lot of sense. The fuel consumption and engine life issues are not a factor since the engine in not expected to operate more than a few minutes at a time. The concern I alluded to about poor initial acceleration is real but there is a solution - afterburners! The RC model guys have done this too. A 5 -10 minute engine run for a 2000 foot AGL launch seems about right. This might consume about 10 gallons of kerosene even with an afterburner used for the ground roll. As a strictly self-launcher, the residual weight of the engine, empty fuel tank and support systems, is quite small. Dealing with the hot exhaust will be an issue but not a show stopper. Two engines canted a few degrees to the side would do it or even a single engine with a "Y" tailpipe that deflect the exhaust to the sides of the fin. The self launch operation will be simplicity itself. The pilot just pushes a button and holds it in. The engine starts and goes to full power and stays there until the fuel is exhausted or the pilot releases the button. Contemplating air re-starts or trying for a sustainer capability will raise the level of complexity and residual weight considerably but it's probably doable. Bill Daniels |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
This week's AW&ST: apparently THAAD will have some ABM (as in anti- *ICBM*) capability. | Scott Ferrin | Military Aviation | 29 | August 31st 04 04:20 AM |
Newbie questions Rail / Ejector launchers | AL | Military Aviation | 19 | November 14th 03 07:47 PM |