Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Variable bypass?

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
2 things:

1. I used to work on the J58 used on the SR-71 as a manufacturing engineer at P&W. It DID have a bypass of sorts, in the form of 6 gigantic tubes from the compressor to the afterburner, bypassing the combustion chamber and turbines. Not TRUE bypass of the type one would see in a turbofan, but some air did go from the compressor straight to the afterburner. The bypass amount could be changed based on engine operating needs. This is independent of the moving cone mentioned earlier that manages inlet shocks and keeps the oblique shock from the cone properly placed at the lip of the inlet.

http://aerostories2.free.fr/acrobat/technique/J58/J58A_genesis_eng.pdf

2. The GE F-120 turbofan, their contender for the Advanced Tactical Fighter (now known as the F-22 Raptor), had a variable bypass, their solution to efficiently adjust the engine between the needs of lower-speed flight and supercruise (Mach 1+ flight without afterburner). They never released drawings of the bypass valves, afaik. I was working on its competitor, the Pratt and Whitney F-119, which was selected, presumably due to its simpler, easier to maintain design (although, like any other military contract selection, the reasons are sometimes murky).
 
Last edited:
hindsight2020 said:
whoa fellas, the SR-71 does not have a "variable bypass ratio" engine at all. Just like the MIG-21, they both have pure turbojet engines (read NO bypass) with variable GEOMETRY inlets.

Yep, that's what I thought. Quite a few jets have variable-geometry inlets... the Tomcat and Concorde come to mind... or am I thinking bleed-air doors.... I'm over my head here without doing research, but suffice it to say that intake engineering can get pretty complex. It's also interesting to note how most intakes are offset a couple inches from the fuselage (perhaps most notably on the F-4/F-16) in order to avoid sucking from the boundary layer. If I'm not mistaken, the Raptor does NOT incorporate this design (i.e. the intakes are blended to the fuselage)..... wonder what the rationale is in that case....
 
9GClub said:
It's also interesting to note how most intakes are offset a couple inches from the fuselage (perhaps most notably on the F-4/F-16) in order to avoid sucking from the boundary layer. If I'm not mistaken, the Raptor does NOT incorporate this design (i.e. the intakes are blended to the fuselage)..... wonder what the rationale is in that case....

If you look at this picture of the F-22 Raptor:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/f-22-1999043-f-0000l-001.jpg

Here's an even better photo:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/f-22-990167a.jpg

You'll see that the inlets actually do have some gap from the side of the fuselage that is used to split off bloundary layer air.

You may be thinking of Lockheed-Martin's F-35 (the JSF aircraft). They claim to have built a new inlet design with a "bump" on the wall of the inlet that somehow excludes the boundary layer without the use of a splitter (sorry, I don't know how). It simplifies the stealth design, apparently, eliminating a cavity which is hard to design without radar reflections, and helps to shield the fan face of the engine. You can see it best in this artist's conception.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/jsf200a.jpg

You can also see it in this photo of the X-35C photo:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/aircraft/images/x-35c-0606_5.jpg
 
Last edited:
ok I reversed it
the question is not invalidated about variable amounts of air sent through vs fanned outside.
i am guessing from the responses that its not been done and that the reason is that 'it's just not needed' or the expense to benefit ratio is not there.
thanks
 
O.K dungeons & Dragon players, it's time get out of the basement and go look for some girls.
 
fletch717 said:
O.K dungeons & Dragon players, it's time get out of the basement and go look for some girls.

Sure, we plan to be out and about while you and the rest of your swingin' jock friends are down at the clinic getting swabs pushed up your urethra to see what fun new STD you got this week from chasin all those women...
 

Latest resources

Back
Top