F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Contains threads on Joint Service equipment of the past, present and future.
User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Ron5 wrote: It was just not reiterated. So it remains as an AoR (Aspiration of Record).
Paraphrased in Nixon-speak:
The statement is operative, until "I" have said it is inoperative :)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Bit sad it takes a yank to post this ..


Anthony58
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: 14 Feb 2021, 19:23
United Kingdom

Britain’s Royal Air Force chief talks F-35 tally and divesting equipment

Post by Anthony58 »

https://www.defensenews.com/interviews/ ... equipment/

Also on Royal Navy board re Re: Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers - News and Discussion

User avatar
RichardIC
Senior Member
Posts: 1371
Joined: 10 May 2015, 16:59
United Kingdom

Re: Britain’s Royal Air Force chief talks F-35 tally and divesting equipment

Post by RichardIC »

We don't need a new thread for this. There's already an F35 thread.

User avatar
The Armchair Soldier
Site Admin
Posts: 1747
Joined: 29 Apr 2015, 08:31
Contact:
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by The Armchair Soldier »

RichardIC wrote:We don't need a new thread for this. There's already an F35 thread.
Indeed. Merged the topics.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by seaspear »

There have been some reports on the testing of the XA-100 engine as a replacement for the Pratt and Whitney f-135 stating increased range and loitering time. I'm not aware if this would be a candidate for the f35b in providing significant range but would certainly address some of the concerns raised previously
https://www.geaviation.com/press-releas ... proves-out

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I wonder how much of this
"innovations increase thrust 10%"
translates to increased lift - and hence a larger max payload?
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:I wonder how much of this
"innovations increase thrust 10%"
translates to increased lift - and hence a larger max payload?
25% increase in fuel efficiency is pretty amazing tho it must be greatly influenced by flight profile.

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

Wonder what the trade off is for the increased thrust and fuel efficiency?

Sometimes these would be associated with reduced speed and a reduction in service intervals and increased parts replacement. Will be interesting

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

SW1 wrote:Wonder what the trade off is for the increased thrust and fuel efficiency?
Sounds like this will not be an a/c equivalent of
Wankel rotary engine vs. piston engines
- by maintaining high rpms you get a high output, but a lesser fuel efficiency

Here, miraculously you get both
... have come a long way from a simple rocket that creates thrust by making fuel burn directed trough a simple tube

BTW: these performance measures have been touted for 2-3 years. But now we are close to having the 'real thing'
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by SW1 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:
SW1 wrote:Wonder what the trade off is for the increased thrust and fuel efficiency?
Sounds like this will not be an a/c equivalent of
Wankel rotary engine vs. piston engines
- by maintaining high rpms you get a high output, but a lesser fuel efficiency

Here, miraculously you get both
... have come a long way from a simple rocket that creates thrust by making fuel burn directed trough a simple tube

BTW: these performance measures have been touted for 2-3 years. But now we are close to having the 'real thing'
There’s a number of things they can do just interesting to know what they did orders of magnitude performance improvement require changes.

Sometimes you can get more thrust by running the engine hotter, which causes wear ect.

Sometimes it’s material changes or weight reductions ect. Again can have durability issue

Doubt they’ll ever say in public even on civil engines the three big primes don’t reveal much in public

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

The engine in my car is hughley more efficient than the one I owned 10 years ago. I'm not aware of any trade-offs that had an impact on me, the customer. I just save money at the pumps.

As for the new engine, I thought the principles behind a variable bypass engine that lead to higher efficiency are rather well known.

inch
Senior Member
Posts: 1311
Joined: 27 May 2015, 21:35

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by inch »

Well especially for the f35b these upgraded engines would be a critical first thing to upgrade , especially for our carrier reach to actually achieve missions and keep carrier out of harm's way ,25% increase would be fantastic

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

While high bypass rate turbofan engines are used in civil aviation due to their high efficiency, low bypass ratio turbofan engines are preferred in military platforms due to their high thrust/weight ratio.
- What if we could combine these two features in a single-engine and use them on military platforms?

Have high performance and fuel efficiency, achieved by the same engine... well, easy to say, but hard to do
- we are just about to get it, regardless. So the question which is of high relevance to our fleet: How much can lift be improved?

Also
inch wrote: for our carrier reach to actually achieve missions and keep carrier out of harm's way ,25% increase would be fantastic
- digging up the reference book giving the combat ranges of the 'C' and the 'B' respectively
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

Does the article actually mention this as an alternative engine for the F-35? UI cannot see any mention of it myself. The description of some of the innovations sound similar to those Rolls Royce is developing for its advances military engine that could go into the result of TEMPEST. I think if we are waiting for greater performance from the F-35 we will be looking at improved versions of the original engine, rather than a completely new one. I rather think this new engine type is destines for the new platforms the USAF and others are developing.

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by seaspear »


Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

@LordJim Yes you are correct that the article did not mention F-35 but that aircraft is the initial target for the new engine as this article from Flight describes:
GE Aviation finishes testing on first XA100 adaptive cycle engine

GE Aviation has wrapped up testing on its first XA100 prototype, an adaptive cycle engine.

An adaptive cycle engine is a novel turbine that can change air flow through three different air streams, depending on an aircraft’s need for efficiency or extra power. The US Air Force (USAF) has been funding development of the engine type since 2007.

An adaptive cycle engine like GE Aviation’s XA100 could extend the reach of the F-35 stealth fighter

Testing on the XA100 started in December 2020. The prototype showed performance and mechanical behaviour were consistent with pre-test predictions, says GE Aviation on 13 May. The engine met the USAF Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP) objectives, the company says.

“We were exceptionally pleased with how the engine performed throughout the test,” says David Tweedie, GE Edison Works’ general manager for advanced combat engines. “We’re looking forward to working with the Air Force and other stakeholders to identify the next steps toward bringing this revolutionary capability out of the test cell and into the hands of the warfighter.”

The USAF is interested in re-engining the Lockheed Martin F-35A stealth fighter with an adaptive engine to increase the aircraft’s 1,200nm (2,222km) range, which is viewed as too short for attacking targets within China. The fighter currently is powered by the Pratt & Whitney F135 turbine engine.

Adaptive engines work by changing the volume of air flow that bypasses the turbine core by opening a third stream when flying in cruise mode. This third flow – in addition to the core flow and bypass turbofan flow – increases the engine’s efficiency. Alternatively, in high-thrust mode the engine directs the majority of air through the engine’s core and bypass turbofan streams, delivering greater thrust for combat manoeuvring. The third flow also has a cooling effect, allowing the core to run hotter which further increases fuel efficiency.

GE Aviation claims an adaptive cycle engine could deliver to an aircraft a 50% improvement in loiter time, 35% increase in range, 25% reduction in fuel consumption, 10% increase in thrust and 60% more heat absorption. It is thought that additional cooling capacity could be useful for managing heat coming off directed energy weapons, such as lasers.

The XA100 was developed using ceramic matrix composites, polymer matrix composites and additive manufacturing, says GE Aviation. The company says it was able to learn a lot from its initial test regime.

“This was the most heavily instrumented engine test in both GE and US Air Force history,” Tweedie says. “We were able to obtain an immense amount of high-quality test data proving out the engine’s capabilities and demonstrating a good return on the Air Force’s investment.”

Assembly of the second prototype XA100 engine is underway, says GE Aviation. Testing on that engine planned to start later in 2021 and when finished would conclude the major deliverables of the AETP programme.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

inch wrote:Well especially for the f35b these upgraded engines would be a critical first thing to upgrade , especially for our carrier reach to actually achieve missions and keep carrier out of harm's way ,25% increase would be fantastic
According to Flight, range increase up to 35% so even better :thumbup: :thumbup:

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Lord Jim wrote:Does the article actually mention this as an alternative engine for the F-35?
While the prgrm has changed names 'often' we have discussed it here for 2-3 years - and one of the peculiar features of the dvlmnt has been that in can be fitted into the space envelope for the current engine
- may be the 6th gen will get the same... in a bigger version
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Anthony58
Member
Posts: 64
Joined: 14 Feb 2021, 19:23
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Anthony58 »

I don't think it can be fitted in the F-35B, due to the lift fan.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Anthony58 wrote:I don't think it can be fitted in the F-35B, due to the lift fan.
You are probable right... I have not caught any sight of such conversation (for or against)
- but then again, the engine has been a USAF prgrm ('A's only) and certainly with an eye on making the 6th gen as sharp as possible
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

Anthony58 wrote:I don't think it can be fitted in the F-35B, due to the lift fan.
It's only a prototype right now but I'm not aware of any reason it could not be modified for the lift fan. Plenty of "B" customers these days so there would be a demand.

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 7249
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
United States of America

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Ron5 »

I'm leaving before I get to be the victim of a blue on blue post!

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by Lord Jim »

As the current prototype is also the technical demonstrator for the programme, we will have to wait to see which aircraft receive engines with this new technology. Despite the USAF stating that they want to replace the existing F-35A engine, until the try to build one that will fit in said aircraft using the new technology this cannot be seen as a certainty. Of course they could they could go all in and decide to modify the airframe to ensure they can get it to fit the new engine but then that would make their F-35A fleet unique.

That is just one train of thought though, it might also be that any new engine could fit the engine bay of the F-35 perfectly and can also take the drive shaft etc. for the lift fan. the resulting greater output to the lift fan as well as the rear nozzle in this case it would bring not just an increase in range but also greater take off weight and landing weight.

As I mentioned above I wonder how this compares to what RR is working on for its next generation engine? Could they partner up to produce any new engine for the F-35B?

seaspear
Senior Member
Posts: 1779
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 20:16
Australia

Re: F-35B Lightning (RAF & RN)

Post by seaspear »

This article suugests other claims for the XA100 engine and possible usage on future sixth-generation fighters achieving between 2.5 and mach 3
https://daydaynews.cc/en/military/472242.html

Post Reply