Questions about military jets.....

gay_pilot18

New Member
Okay guys I'm doin a class project. Were supposed to design a new airplane.

It can be an airline type airplane or a military type plane. Well I choose to to create a supersonic air-air to fighter.

My question is this. I was considering putting afterburning " high bypass" engines on my supersonic interceptor.

Now my instructor is kinda strict he doesn't just allow us to just make stuff up.

So would afterburning high bypass engines work out well for a supersonic capable military interceptor, verses low bypass afterburning engines?

If so what would be the major differences (pro's and cons) between the two types high bypass afterburners vs. low bypass afterburners on a supersonic fighter?

And lastly are high bypass afterburing engines even a reality?

Thanks guys in advance.



Everett
 
I think high bypass engines would create too much drag to be possible.

Go buy Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators if you don't already have it. It's got tons of info about design and how it effects performance
 
The powerplants in most modern fighter aircraft are classified as medium-bypass turbofans. I'm not aware of any high-bypass afterburning engine, I'm wondering if the bypass air is hot enough to ignite the fuel. I suspect not. On top of that, you've got size, drag, and radar cross-section issues.
 
Don't forget about shockwave issues as well. You'd lose a horrible amount of efficiency at supersonic speeds with a higher bypass turbofan as the air hit the fan. I'm sure it's feasable if you designed a veeery efficient inlet duct, but is it worth the trouble?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Don't forget about shockwave issues as well. You'd lose a horrible amount of efficiency at supersonic speeds with a higher bypass turbofan as the air hit the fan. I'm sure it's feasable if you designed a veeery efficient inlet duct, but is it worth the trouble?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ever notice how all of Boeing's Sonic Cruiser drawings never show the inlets?
 
Back
Top