![]() |
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
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Orval Fairbairn wrote in message .. .
In article , Jim Yanik wrote: "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote in : http://www.f-16.net/reference/versions/f16_79.html I've read that the F-104's speed is really limited by the compressor inlet temperature on the J79, and that the airframe itself supports much higher speeds. Since the J79 fits (modified) in a F-16, what then if we were to fit a GE-F110 type engine with closer to twice the thrust? Regards... What's the point? It's still not going to handle all that well,perhaps worse with the extra speed. And probably not worth the money spent on the project. BTW,would the F-104's inlets then become the major restriction for airflow into the engine? I believe the jets that use the newer engines have much larger inlets. The speed limitation due to the (fixed geometry) inlets arises from the fact that, going too fast, the inlet will swallow the shockwave, resulting in compressor stall and other engine misbehavior. While it is fesible, and it is a possibility to modify the inlets...you would get to the point where you have to ask yourself "it is worth it, or is it cheaper to design a new aircraft". |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|