AIRCRAFT ENGINES

A Brief Study - K C Avatar

Contents
1

Turbojet

1.1

History

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.2

Early designs

1.3

Design

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.1

Air intake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.2

Compressor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.3

Combustion chamber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.4

Turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.5

Nozzle

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.3.6

Thrust augmentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.4

Net thrust . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.5

Cycle improvements

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.6

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.7

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.8

References

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1.9

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Turbofan

2.1

Early turbofans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10

2.2

Low-bypass turbofan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

11

2.3

Afterburning turbofan

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

12

2.4

High-bypass turbofan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

13

2.5

Turbofan congurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2.5.1

Single-shaft turbofan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

15

2.5.2

Aft-fan turbofan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

2.5.3

Basic two spool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

2.5.4

Boosted two spool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

2.5.5

Three spool . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

2.5.6

Geared fan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

16

2.5.7

Military turbofans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

2.5.8

High-pressure turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

2.5.9

Low-pressure turbine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

Cycle improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

17

2.6

ii

CONTENTS
2.7

Thrust growth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

2.8

Technical discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

19

2.9

Recent developments in blade technology

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

20

2.10 Turbofan engine manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21

2.10.1 General Electric . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

21

2.10.2 Rolls-Royce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.3 Pratt & Whitney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.4 CFM International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.5 Williams International . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.6 Aviadvigatel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.7 Ivchenko-Progress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

22

2.10.8 Chinese turbofan manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.10.9 Japanese turbofan manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.10.10 NPO Saturn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.10.11 Klimov . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.11 Extreme bypass jet engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.12 Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

23

2.13 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

24

2.14 Notes and references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

2.15 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

25

Propfan

26

3.1

Limitations and solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27

3.1.1

Propeller blade tip speed limit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27

3.1.2

Jet aircraft fuel economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

27

3.2

Aircraft with propfans

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

28

3.3

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

28

3.4

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

29

3.5

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

30

Pulsejet

31

4.1

Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32

4.1.1

Valved pulsejets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32

4.1.2

Valveless pulsejets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32

History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32

4.2.1

Argus As 109-014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

32

4.3

Operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

34

4.4

Function . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

4.4.1

Valved design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

36

4.4.2

Valveless design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

4.4.3

Future uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

37

4.2

4.5

CONTENTS

iii

4.6

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38

4.7

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38

4.8

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

38

Valveless pulse jet

39

5.1

Basic characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

39

5.2

Basic (valved) pulsejet theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

40

5.3

Valveless pulsejet operation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

40

5.4

Practical design issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41

5.5

Jam jar jet design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41

5.6

Pros and cons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

41

5.7

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

42

5.8

References

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43

5.9

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

43

Pulse detonation engine

44

6.1

Concept . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44

6.1.1

Pulse jets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44

6.1.2

PDEs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

44

6.2

First PDE powered ight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

45

6.3

Popular culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

46

6.4

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

46

6.5

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47

6.6

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

47

Motorjet

48

7.1

Design

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48

7.2

History

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

48

7.3

Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49

7.4

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

49

Ramjet

50

8.1

History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

8.1.1

Cyrano de Bergerac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

8.1.2

Ren Lorin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

8.1.3

Albert Fon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

8.1.4

Soviet Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

51

8.1.5

Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

8.1.6

Gorgon IV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

8.1.7

Fritz Zwicky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

8.1.8

France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

52

8.2

Engine cycle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

53

8.3

Design

53

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

iv

CONTENTS
8.3.1

Inlet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

54

8.3.2

Combustor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

54

8.3.3

Nozzles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55

8.3.4

Performance and control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

55

8.4

Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

56

8.5

Integral rocket ramjet/ducted rocket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

8.6

Flight speed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

8.7

Related engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

8.7.1

Air turboramjet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

8.7.2

Scramjets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

57

8.7.3

Precooled engines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

8.7.4

Nuclear-powered ramjets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

8.7.5

Ionospheric ramjet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

8.7.6

Bussard ramjet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

8.8

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

58

8.9

Aircraft using ramjets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

59

8.10 Missiles using ramjets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

59

8.11 References

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60

8.12 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

60

Scramjet

61

9.1

History

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

62

Progress in the 2000s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

62

Design principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

64

9.2.1

Basic principles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65

9.3

Theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

65

9.4

Advantages and disadvantages of scramjets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

67

9.4.1

Advantages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

67

9.4.2

Special cooling and materials . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

67

9.4.3

Vehicle performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

68

9.4.4

Initial propulsion requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

70

9.4.5

Testing diculties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

70

Advantages and disadvantages for orbital vehicles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.1

Propellant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.2

Thrust-to-weight ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.3

Need for additional propulsion to reach orbit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.4

Reentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.5

Costs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

71

9.5.6

Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

72

9.6

Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

72

9.7

See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

72

9.8

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

72

9.1.1
9.2

9.5

CONTENTS

9.9

74

External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

10 Rocket-powered aircraft

75

10.1 History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76

10.1.1 World War II . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76

10.1.2 Cold War era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

76

10.1.3 Post Cold War era . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

77

10.2 See also . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

78

10.3 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

79

10.4 External links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

80

10.5 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81

10.5.1 Text . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

81

10.5.2 Images . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

83

10.5.3 Content license . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

85

Chapter 1

Turbojet
For the Hong Kong based ferry company, see TurboJET.
The turbojet is a jet engine, usually used in aircraft. It consists of a gas turbine with a propelling nozzle. The

Diagram of a typical gas turbine jet engine

gas turbine has an air inlet, a compressor, a combustion chamber, and a turbine (that drives the compressor). The
compressed air from the compressor is heated by the fuel in the combustion chamber and then allowed to expand
through the turbine. The turbine exhaust is then expanded in the propelling nozzle where it is accelerated to high
speed to provide thrust.[1] Two engineers, Frank Whittle in the United Kingdom and Hans von Ohain in Germany,
developed the concept independently into practical engines during the late 1930s.
Turbojets have been replaced in slower aircraft by turboprops which use less fuel. At higher speeds, where the
propeller is no longer ecient, they have been replaced by turbofans. The turbofan is quieter and uses less fuel than
the turbojet. Turbojets are still common in medium range cruise missiles, due to their high exhaust speed, small
frontal area, and relative simplicity.
The jet engine is only ecient at high vehicle speeds, which limits their usefulness apart from aircraft. Turbojet
engines have been used in isolated cases to power vehicles other than aircraft, typically for attempts on land speed
records. Where vehicles are 'turbine powered' this is more commonly by use of a turboshaft engine, a development
of the gas turbine engine where an additional turbine is used to drive a rotating output shaft. These are common in
helicopters and hovercraft. Turbojets have also been used experimentally to clear snow from switches in railyards.

1.1 History
The rst patent for using a gas turbine to power an aircraft was led in 1921 by Frenchman Maxime Guillaume.[2] His
engine was to be an axial-ow turbojet, but was never constructed, as it would have required considerable advances
over the state of the art in compressors.
1

CHAPTER 1. TURBOJET

Albert Fon's German patent for jet engines (January 1928). The third illustration is a turbojet

Practical axial compressors were made possible by ideas from A.A.Grith in a seminal paper in 1926 (An Aerodynamic Theory of Turbine Design).
The centrifugal-ow turbojet was rst patented in 1930 by Frank Whittle of the Royal Air Force, and in Germany,
Hans von Ohain patented a similar engine in 1935.[3]
The rst turbojet to run was the Power Jets WU which ran on 12 April 1937.
On 27 August 1939 the Heinkel He 178 became the worlds rst aircraft to y under turbojet power with test-pilot
Erich Warsitz at the controls,[4] thus becoming the rst practical jet plane. The rst two operational turbojet aircraft,

1.2. EARLY DESIGNS

Heinkel He 178, the worlds rst aircraft to y purely on turbojet power, using an HeS 3 engine

the Messerschmitt Me 262 and then the Gloster Meteor entered service towards the end of World War II in 1944.
Air is drawn into the rotating compressor via the intake and is compressed to a higher pressure before entering the
combustion chamber. Fuel is mixed with the compressed air and burns in the combustor. The combustion products
leave the combustor and expand through the turbine where power is extracted to drive the compressor. The turbine
exit gases still contain considerable energy that is converted in the propelling nozzle to a high speed jet.
The rst jet engines were turbojets, with either a centrifugal compressor (as in the Heinkel HeS 3), or Axial compressors (as in the Junkers Jumo 004) which gave a smaller diameter, although longer, engine. By replacing the propeller
used on piston engines with a high speed jet of exhaust higher aircraft speeds were attainable.
One of the last applications for a turbojet engine was the Concorde which used the Olympus 593 engine. At the time
of its design the turbojet was still seen as the optimum for cruising at twice the speed of sound despite the advantage
of turbofans for lower speeds. For the Concorde less fuel was required to produce a given thrust for a mile at Mach
2.0 than a modern high-bypass turbofan such as General Electric CF6 at its Mach 0.86 optimum speed.
Turbojet engines had a signicant impact on commercial aviation. Aside from giving faster ight speeds turbojets
had greater reliability than piston engines, with some models demonstrating dispatch reliability rating in excess of
99.9%. Pre-jet commercial aircraft were designed with as many as 4 engines in part because of concerns over in-ight
failures. Overseas ight paths were plotted to keep planes within an hour of a landing eld, lengthening ights. The
increase in reliability that came with the turbojet enabled three and two-engine designs, and more direct long-distance
ights.[5]
High-temperature alloys were a reverse salient, a key technology that dragged progress on jet engines. Jet engines
built in the 1930s and 1940s had to be overhauled every 10 or 20 hours due to creep failure and other types of damage
to blades. It was not until the 1950s that superalloy technology allowed more economically practical engines. [6]

1.2 Early designs

Early German turbojets had severe limitations on the amount of running they could do due to the lack of suitable high
temperature materials for the turbines. British engines such as the Rolls-Royce Welland used better materials giving
improved durability. The Welland was type certicated for 80 hours initially, later extended to 150 hours between
overhauls, as a result of an extended 500 hour run being achieved in tests.[7] A few of the original ghters still exist
with their original engines, but many have been re-engined with more modern engines with greater fuel eciency and
a longer TBO (such as the reproduction Me-262 powered by General Electric J85s).
General Electric in the United States was in a good position to enter the jet engine business due to its experience with
the high temperature materials used in their turbosuperchargers during World War II.[8]
Water injection was a common method used to increase thrust,usually during takeo, in early turbojets that were
thrust-limited by their allowable turbine entry temperature. The water, whilst it increased thrust at the temperature

CHAPTER 1. TURBOJET

Cutaway of an air start system of a General Electric J79 turbojet. The small turbine and epicyclic gearing are clearly visible

J85-GE-17A turbojet engine from General Electric (1970)

limit, prevented complete combustion often leaving a very visible smoke trail.
Allowable turbine entry temperatures have increased steadily over time both with the introduction of superior alloys,

1.3. DESIGN

and coatings, and with the introduction and progressive eectiveness of blade cooling designs. On early engines the
turbine temperature limit had to be monitored, and avoided, by the pilot, typically during starting and at maximum
thrust settings. Automatic temperature limiting was introduced to reduce pilot workload and reduce the liklehood of
turbine damage due to overtemperature.

1.3 Design
1.3.1

Air intake

An intake, or tube, is needed in front of the compressor to help direct the incoming air smoothly into the moving
compressor blades. Older engines had stationary vanes in front of the moving blades. These vanes also helped to direct
the air onto the blades. The intake is also shaped to minimise any ow losses when the compressor is accelerating the
air through the intake at zero and low aircraft speeds, and to slow the ow down for the compressor when the aircraft
is operating above Mach 1. The air owing into a turbojet engine must always be subsonic, regardless of the speed
of the aircraft itself.

1.3.2

Compressor

The compressor is driven by the turbine. It rotates at high speed, adding energy to the airow and at the same time
squeezing (compressing) it into a smaller space. Compressing the air increases its pressure and temperature. The
smaller the compressor the faster it turns. At the large end of the range the GE-90-115 fan rotates at about 2,500
RPM while a small helicopter engine compressor rotates at about 50,000 RPM.
In most turbojet-powered aircraft, bleed air is extracted from the compressor section at various stages to perform a
variety of jobs including air conditioning/pressurization, engine inlet anti-icing and turbine cooling. Bleeding air o
decreases the overall eciency of the engine, but the usefulness of the compressed air outweighs the loss in eciency.
Compressor types used in turbojets were typically axial or centrifugal.
Early turbojet compressors had overall pressure ratios as low as 5:1. Aerodynamic improvements including splitting
the compressor into two separately rotating parts, incorporating variable blade angles for entry guide vanes and stators,
enabled later turbojets to have overall pressure ratios of 15:1 or more. For comparison, modern civil turbofan engines
have overall pressure ratios of 44:1 or more.
After leaving the compressor, the air enters the combustion chamber.

1.3.3

Combustion chamber

The burning process in the combustor is signicantly dierent from that in a piston engine. In a piston engine the
burning gases are conned to a small volume and, as the fuel burns, the pressure increases. In a turbojet the air and
fuel mixture burn in the combustor and pass through to the turbine in a continuous owing process with no pressure
build-up. Instead there is a small pressure loss in the combustor.
The fuel-air mixture can only burn in slow moving air so an area of reverse ow is maintained by the fuel nozzles for
the approximately stoichiometric burning in the primary zone. Further compressor air is introduced which completes
the combustion process and reduces the temperature of the combustion products to a level which the turbine can
accept. Less than 25% of the air is typically used for combustion, as an overall lean mixture is required to keep
within the turbine temperature limits.

1.3.4

Turbine

Hot gases leaving the combustor expand through the turbine. Typical materials for turbines include inconel and
Nimonic.[9] The turbine vanes and blades have internal cooling passages. Air from the compressor is passed through
these to keep the metal temperature within limits.
In the rst stage the turbine is largely an impulse turbine (similar to a pelton wheel) and rotates because of the impact
of the hot gas stream. Later stages are convergent ducts that accelerate the gas. Energy is transferred into the shaft
through momentum exchange in the opposite way to energy transfer in the compressor. The power developed by

CHAPTER 1. TURBOJET

the turbine drives the compressor as well as accessories, like fuel, oil, and hydraulic pumps that are driven by the
accessory gearbox.

1.3.5

Nozzle

Main article: propelling nozzle

After the turbine, the gases expand through the exhaust nozzle producing a high velocity jet. In a convergent nozzle,
the ducting narrows progressively to a throat. The nozzle pressure ratio on a turbojet is high enough at higher thrust
settings to cause the nozzle to choke.
If, however, a convergent-divergent de Laval nozzle is tted, the divergent (increasing ow area) section allows the
gases to reach supersonic velocity within the divergent section. Additional thrust is generated by the higher resulting
exhaust velocity.

1.3.6

Thrust augmentation

Thrust was most commonly increased in turbojets with water/methanol injection or afterburning. Some engines used
both at the same time.
Afterburner
Main article: afterburner
An afterburner or reheat jetpipe is a combustion chamber added to reheat the turbine exhaust gases. The fuel
consumption is very high, typically four times that of the main engine. Afterburners are used almost exclusively
on supersonic aircraft, most being military aircraft. Two supersonic airliners, Concorde and the TU-144, also used
afterburners as does Scaled Composites White Knight, a carrier aircraft for the experimental SpaceShipOne suborbital
spacecraft.

1.4 Net thrust

The net thrust FN of a turbojet is given by:[10][11]
FN = ( m
air + m
f )Vj m
air V
where:
If the speed of the jet is equal to sonic velocity the nozzle is said to be choked. If the nozzle is choked the pressure
at the nozzle exit plane is greater than atmospheric pressure, and extra terms must be added to the above equation to
account for the pressure thrust.[12]
The rate of ow of fuel entering the engine is very small compared with the rate of ow of air.[10] If the contribution
of fuel to the nozzle gross thrust is ignored, the net thrust is:
FN = m
air (Vj V )
The speed of the jet Vj must exceed the true airspeed of the aircraft V if there is to be a net forward thrust on the
airframe. The speed Vj can be calculated thermodynamically based on adiabatic expansion.[13]

1.5 Cycle improvements

The operation of a typical turbojet is modelled approximately by the Brayton Cycle.
The eciency of a gas turbine is increased by raising the overall pressure ratio, requiring higher temperature compressor materials, and raising the turbine entry temperature, requiring better turbine materials and/or improved vane/blade
cooling. However, when used in a turbojet application, where the output from the gas turbine is used in a propelling

1.6. SEE ALSO

nozzle, raising the turbine temperature increases the jet velocity. This reduces the propulsive eciency giving a loss
in overall eciency, as reected by the higher fuel consumption, or SFC.[14]

1.6 See also

Air start system
Brayton Cycle
Exoskeletal engine
Jet dragster
Turbojet development at the RAE
Turbine engine failure
Variable Cycle Engine

1.7 Notes
[1] Turbojet Engine. NASA Glenn Research Center. Retrieved 2009-05-06.
[2] Maxime Guillaume,"Propulseur par raction sur l'air, French patent FR 534801 (led: 3 May 1921; issued: 13 January
1922)
[3] Experimental & Prototype US Air Force Jet Fighters, Jenkins & Landis, 2008
[4] Warsitz, Lutz: THE FIRST JET PILOT - The Story of German Test Pilot Erich Warsitz (p. 125), Pen and Sword Books Ltd.,
England, 2009, ISBN 978-1-84415-818-8
[5] Larson, George C. (AprilMay 2010), Old Faithful, Air & Space 25 (1): 80
[6] Sims, C.T., Chester, A History of Superalloy Metallurgy, Proc. 5th Symp. on Superalloys, 1984.
[7] Rolls-Royce Derwent | 1945. Flight (Flightglobal.com): 448. 1945-10-25. Retrieved 2013-12-14.
[8] Starting Something Big Robert V. Garvin ISBN1-56347-289-2, p5
[9] 1960 | Flight | Archive
[10] Cumpsty, Nicholas (2003). 3.1. Jet Propulsion (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-54144-1.
[11] Turbojet Thrust. NASA Glenn Research Center. Retrieved 2009-05-06.
[12] Cumpsty, Jet Propulsion, Section 6.3
[13] MIT.EDU Unied: Thermodynamics and Propulsion Prof. Z. S. Spakovszky - Turbojet Engine
[14] Gas Turbine Theory Cohen, Rogers, Saravanamuttoo, ISBN 0 582 44927 8, p72-73, g 3.11

1.8 References
Springer, Edwin H. (2001). Constructing A Turbocharger Turbojet Engine. Turbojet Technologies.

1.9 External links

Erich Warsitz, the worlds rst jet pilot: includes rare videos (Heinkel He 178) and audio commentaries]
NASA Turbojet Engine Description: includes a software model]

Chapter 2

Turbofan
Not to be confused with propfan.
The turbofan or fanjet is a type of airbreathing jet engine that nds wide use in aircraft propulsion. The word

Schematic diagram of a high-bypass turbofan engine

turbofan is a portmanteau of turbine and fan": the turbo portion refers to a gas turbine engine which takes
mechanical energy from combustion,[1] and the fan, a ducted fan that uses the mechanical energy from the gas turbine
to accelerate air rearwards. Thus, whereas all the air taken in by a turbojet passes through the turbine (through the
combustion chamber), in a turbofan some of that air bypasses the turbine. A turbofan thus can be thought of as a
turbojet being used to drive a ducted fan, with both of those contributing to the thrust. The ratio of the mass-ow of
air bypassing the engine core compared to the mass-ow of air passing through the core is referred to as the bypass
ratio. The engine produces thrust through a combination of these two portions working in concert; engines that
use more jet thrust relative to fan thrust are known as low bypass turbofans, conversely those that have considerably
more fan thrust than jet thrust are known as high bypass. Most commercial aviation jet engines in use today are of the
high-bypass type, and most modern military ghter engines are low-bypass. Afterburners are not used on high-bypass
turbofan engines but may be used on either low-bypass turbofan or turbojet engines.
Most of the air ow through a high-bypass turbofan is low-velocity bypass ow: even when combined with the much
8

GE90 turbofan on a Boeing 777-200LR

higher velocity engine exhaust, the net average exhaust velocity is considerably lower than in a pure turbojet. Engine
noise is largely a function of exhaust velocity, therefore turbofan engines are signicantly quieter than a pure-jet of
the same thrust. Other factors include turbine blade and exhaust outlet geometries, such as noise-reducing chevrons
seen on the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 and General Electric GEnx engines used on the Boeing 787.
Since the eciency of propulsion is a function of the relative airspeed of the exhaust to the surrounding air, propellers
are most ecient for low speed, pure jets for high speeds, and ducted fans in the middle. Turbofans are thus the most

10

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

The CFM56 medium-size turbofan

ecient engines in the range of speeds from about 500 to 1,000 km/h (310 to 620 mph), the speed at which most
commercial aircraft operate.[2][3] Turbofans retain an eciency edge over pure jets at low supersonic speeds up to
roughly Mach 1.6, but have also been found to be ecient when used with continuous afterburner at Mach 3 and
above.
The vast majority of turbofans follow the same basic design, with a large fan at the front of the engine and a relatively
small jet engine behind it. There have been a number of variations on this design, however, including rear-mounted
fans which can easily be added to an existing pure-jet design, or designs that combine a low-pressure turbine and a
fan stage in a single rear-mounted unit.

2.1 Early turbofans

Early turbojet engines were very fuel-inecient, as their overall pressure ratio and turbine inlet temperature were
severely limited by the technology available at the time. The very rst running turbofan was the German DaimlerBenz DB 670 (designated as the 109-007 by the RLM) which was operated on its testbed on April 1, 1943. The
engine was abandoned later while the war went on and problems could not be solved. The British wartime Metrovick
F.2 axial ow jet was given a fan, as the Metrovick F.3 in 1943, to create the rst British turbofan.[4]
Improved materials, and the introduction of twin compressors such as in the Bristol Olympus[5] and the later Pratt
& Whitney JT3C engine, increased the overall pressure ratio and thus the thermodynamic eciency of engines, but
they also led to a poor propulsive eciency, as pure turbojets have a high specic thrust/high velocity exhaust better
suited to supersonic ight.
The original low-bypass turbofan engines were designed to improve propulsive eciency by reducing the exhaust
velocity to a value closer to that of the aircraft. The Rolls-Royce Conway, the worlds rst production turbofan, had
a bypass ratio of 0.3, similar to the modern General Electric F404 ghter engine. Civilian turbofan engines of the
1960s, such as the Pratt & Whitney JT8D and the Rolls-Royce Spey had bypass ratios closer to 1, but were not
dissimilar to their military equivalents.

2.2. LOW-BYPASS TURBOFAN

11

View into the outer (propelling or cold) nozzle of a GEnx-2B turbofan engine

The unusual General Electric CF700 turbofan engine was developed as an aft-fan engine with a 2.0 bypass ratio.
This was derived from the General Electric J85/CJ610 turbojet (2,850 lbf or 12,650 N) to power the larger Rockwell
Sabreliner 75/80 model aircraft, as well as the Dassault Falcon 20 with about a 50% increase in thrust (4,200 lbf or
18,700 N). The CF700 was the rst small turbofan in the world to be certied by the Federal Aviation Administration
(FAA). There are now over 400 CF700 aircraft in operation around the world, with an experience base of over 10
million service hours. The CF700 turbofan engine was also used to train Moon-bound astronauts in Project Apollo
as the powerplant for the Lunar Landing Research Vehicle. The CJ805-23 was a similar, but larger, design.

2.2 Low-bypass turbofan

A high specic thrust/low bypass ratio turbofan normally has a multi-stage fan, developing a relatively high pressure
ratio and, thus, yielding a high (mixed or cold) exhaust velocity. The core airow needs to be large enough to give
sucient core power to drive the fan. A smaller core ow/higher bypass ratio cycle can be achieved by raising the
(HP) turbine rotor inlet temperature.
Imagine a retrot situation where a new low bypass ratio, mixed exhaust, turbofan is replacing an old turbojet, in a
particular military application. Say the new engine is to have the same airow and net thrust (i.e. same specic thrust)
as the one it is replacing. A bypass ow can only be introduced if the turbine inlet temperature is allowed to increase,
to compensate for a correspondingly smaller core ow. Improvements in turbine cooling/material technology would
facilitate the use of a higher turbine inlet temperature, despite increases in cooling air temperature, resulting from a
probable increase in overall pressure ratio.
Eciently done, the resulting turbofan would probably operate at a higher nozzle pressure ratio than the turbojet, but
with a lower exhaust temperature to retain net thrust. Since the temperature rise across the whole engine (intake to
nozzle) would be lower, the (dry power) fuel ow would also be reduced, resulting in a better specic fuel consumption
(SFC).
A few low-bypass ratio military turbofans (e.g., F404) have Variable Inlet Guide Vanes, with piano-style hinges, to

12

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

Schematic diagram illustrating a 2-spool, low-bypass turbofan engine with a mixed exhaust, showing the low-pressure (green) and
high-pressure (purple) spools. The fan (and booster stages) are driven by the low-pressure turbine, whereas the high-pressure compressor is powered by the high-pressure turbine

direct air onto the rst rotor stage. This improves the fan surge margin (see compressor map) in the mid-ow range.
The swing wing F-111 achieved a very high range/payload capability by pioneering this, and it was also the heart
of the famous F-14 Tomcat air superiority ghter which used the same engines in a smaller, more agile airframe to
achieve ecient cruise and Mach 2 speed.

2.3 Afterburning turbofan

Since the 1970s, most jet ghter engines have been low/medium bypass turbofans with a mixed exhaust, afterburner
and variable area nal nozzle. An afterburner is a combustor located downstream of the turbine blades and directly
upstream of the nozzle, which burns fuel from afterburner-specic fuel injectors. When lit, prodigious amounts
of fuel are burnt in the afterburner, raising the temperature of exhaust gases by a signicant degree, resulting in a
higher exhaust velocity/engine specic thrust. The variable geometry nozzle must open to a larger throat area to
accommodate the extra volume ow when the afterburner is lit. Afterburning is often designed to give a signicant
thrust boost for take o, transonic acceleration and combat maneuvers, but is very fuel intensive. Consequently
afterburning can only be used for short portions of a mission.
Unlike the main combustor, where the downstream turbine blades must not be damaged by high temperatures, an
afterburner can operate at the ideal maximum (stoichiometric) temperature (i.e., about 2100K/3780Ra/3320F). At a
xed total applied fuel:air ratio, the total fuel ow for a given fan airow will be the same, regardless of the dry specic
thrust of the engine. However, a high specic thrust turbofan will, by denition, have a higher nozzle pressure ratio,
resulting in a higher afterburning net thrust and, therefore, a lower afterburning specic fuel consumption (SFC).
However, high specic thrust engines have a high dry SFC. The situation is reversed for a medium specic thrust
afterburning turbofan: i.e., poor afterburning SFC/good dry SFC. The former engine is suitable for a combat aircraft
which must remain in afterburning combat for a fairly long period, but only has to ght fairly close to the aireld (e.g.
cross border skirmishes) The latter engine is better for an aircraft that has to y some distance, or loiter for a long
time, before going into combat. However, the pilot can only aord to stay in afterburning for a short period, before
aircraft fuel reserves become dangerously low.
Modern low-bypass military turbofans include the Pratt & Whitney F119, the Eurojet EJ200, the General Electric

2.4. HIGH-BYPASS TURBOFAN

13

F110, the Klimov RD-33, and the Saturn AL-31, all of which feature a mixed exhaust, afterburner and variable area
propelling nozzle.

2.4 High-bypass turbofan

Animation of a 2-spool, high-bypass turbofan.

A. Low-pressure spool
B. High-pressure spool
C. Stationary components
1. Nacelle
2. Fan
3. Low-pressure compressor
4. High-pressure compressor
5. Combustion chamber
6. High-pressure turbine
7. Low-pressure turbine
8. Core nozzle
9. Fan nozzle

The low specic thrust/high bypass ratio turbofans used in todays civil jetliners (and some military transport aircraft)
evolved from the high specic thrust/low bypass ratio turbofans used in such [production] aircraft back in the 1960s.
Low specic thrust is achieved by replacing the multi-stage fan with a single-stage unit. Unlike some military engines,
modern civil turbofans do not have any stationary inlet guide vanes in front of the fan rotor. The fan is scaled to achieve
the desired net thrust.
The core (or gas generator) of the engine must generate sucient core power to at least drive the fan at its design ow
and pressure ratio. Through improvements in turbine cooling/material technology, a higher (HP) turbine rotor inlet
temperature can be used, thus facilitating a smaller (and lighter) core and (potentially) improving the core thermal
eciency. Reducing the core mass ow tends to increase the load on the LP turbine, so this unit may require additional
stages to reduce the average stage loading and to maintain LP turbine eciency. Reducing core ow also increases

14

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

Schematic diagram illustrating a 2-spool, high-bypass turbofan engine with an unmixed exhaust. The low-pressure spool is coloured
green and the high-pressure one purple. Again, the fan (and booster stages) are driven by the low-pressure turbine, but more stages
are required. A mixed exhaust is often employed nowadays.

bypass ratio (5:1, or more, is now common).

Further improvements in core thermal eciency can be achieved by raising the overall pressure ratio of the core.
Improved blade aerodynamics reduces the number of extra compressor stages required. With multiple compressors
(i.e., LPC, IPC, and HPC) dramatic increases in overall pressure ratio have become possible. Variable geometry (i.e.,
stators) enable high-pressure-ratio compressors to work surge-free at all throttle settings.
The rst high-bypass turbofan engine was the General Electric TF39, designed in mid 1960s to power the Lockheed
C-5 Galaxy military transport aircraft.[3] The civil General Electric CF6 engine used a derived design. Other highbypass turbofans are the Pratt & Whitney JT9D, the three-shaft Rolls-Royce RB211 and the CFM International
CFM56; also the smaller TF34. More recent large high-bypass turbofans include the Pratt & Whitney PW4000,
the three-shaft Rolls-Royce Trent, the General Electric GE90/GEnx and the GP7000, produced jointly by GE and
P&W.
For reasons of fuel economy, and also of reduced noise, almost all of todays jet airliners are powered by high-bypass
turbofans. Although modern combat aircraft tend to use low bypass ratio turbofans, military transport aircraft (e.g.,
C-17 ) mainly use high bypass ratio turbofans (or turboprops) for fuel eciency.
The higher the bypass ratio of a turbofan, the lower the mean jet outlet velocity, which in turn translates into high
thrust lapse rates (decreasing thrust with increasing speed). Therefore, engines capable of considerably high ight
speeds (e.g., Mach 0.83) generate relatively high thrust at low speed or at idle. Among others, this increases runway
performance.
The turbofans on twin engined airliners are further more powerful to cope with losing one engine during take-o,
which reduces the aircrafts net thrust by half. Modern twin engined airliners normally climb very steeply immediately
after take-o. If one engine is lost, the climb-out is much shallower, but sucient to clear obstacles in the ightpath.
The Soviet Unions engine technology was less advanced than the Wests and its rst wide-body aircraft, the Ilyushin
Il-86, was powered by low-bypass engines. The Yakovlev Yak-42, a medium-range, rear-engined aircraft seating up
to 120 passengers introduced in 1980 was the rst Soviet aircraft to use high-bypass engines.

2.5. TURBOFAN CONFIGURATIONS

15

Cutaway diagram of the General Electric CF66 engine

2.5 Turbofan congurations

Turbofan engines come in a variety of engine congurations. For a given engine cycle (i.e., same airow, bypass ratio,
fan pressure ratio, overall pressure ratio and HP turbine rotor inlet temperature), the choice of turbofan conguration
has little impact upon the design point performance (e.g., net thrust, SFC), as long as overall component performance
is maintained. O-design performance and stability is, however, aected by engine conguration.
As the design overall pressure ratio of an engine cycle increases, it becomes more dicult to throttle the compression
system, without encountering an instability known as compressor surge. This occurs when some of the compressor aerofoils stall (like the wings of an aircraft) causing a violent change in the direction of the airow. However,
compressor stall can be avoided, at throttled conditions, by progressively:
1) opening interstage/intercompressor blow-o valves (inecient)
and/or
2) closing variable stators within the compressor
Most modern American civil turbofans employ a relatively high-pressure-ratio high-pressure (HP) compressor, with
many rows of variable stators to control surge margin at part-throttle. In the three-spool RB211/Trent the core
compression system is split into two, with the IP compressor, which supercharges the HP compressor, being on a
dierent coaxial shaft and driven by a separate (IP) turbine. As the HP compressor has a modest pressure ratio it
can be throttled-back surge-free, without employing variable geometry. However, because a shallow IP compressor
working line is inevitable, the IPC has one stage of variable geometry on all variants except the 535, which has
none.[6]

2.5.1

Single-shaft turbofan

Although far from common, the single-shaft turbofan is probably the simplest conguration, comprising a fan and
high-pressure compressor driven by a single turbine unit, all on the same shaft. The SNECMA M53, which pow-

16

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

ers Mirage ghter aircraft, is an example of a single-shaft turbofan. Despite the simplicity of the turbomachinery
conguration, the M53 requires a variable area mixer to facilitate part-throttle operation.

2.5.2

Aft-fan turbofan

One of the earliest turbofans was a derivative of the General Electric J79 turbojet, known as the CJ805-23, which
featured an integrated aft fan/low-pressure (LP) turbine unit located in the turbojet exhaust jetpipe. Hot gas from
the turbojet turbine exhaust expanded through the LP turbine, the fan blades being a radial extension of the turbine
blades. This aft-fan conguration was later exploited in the General Electric GE-36 UDF (propfan) Demonstrator of
the early 80s. One of the problems with the aft fan conguration is hot gas leakage from the LP turbine to the fan.

2.5.3

Basic two spool

Many turbofans have the basic two-spool conguration where both the fan and LP turbine (i.e., LP spool) are mounted
on a second (LP) shaft, running concentrically with the HP spool (i.e., HP compressor driven by HP turbine). The
BR710 is typical of this conguration. At the smaller thrust sizes, instead of all-axial blading, the HP compressor conguration may be axial-centrifugal (e.g., General Electric CFE738), double-centrifugal or even diagonal/centrifugal
(e.g., Pratt & Whitney Canada PW600).

2.5.4

Boosted two spool

Higher overall pressure ratios can be achieved by either raising the HP compressor pressure ratio or adding an
intermediate-pressure (IP) Compressor between the fan and HP compressor, to supercharge or boost the latter unit
helping to raise the overall pressure ratio of the engine cycle to the very high levels employed today (i.e., greater
than 40:1, typically). All of the large American turbofans (e.g., General Electric CF6, GE90 and GEnx plus Pratt
& Whitney JT9D and PW4000) feature an IP compressor mounted on the LP shaft and driven, like the fan, by the
LP turbine, the mechanical speed of which is dictated by the tip speed and diameter of the fan. The Rolls-Royce
BR715 is a non-American example of this. The high bypass ratios (i.e., fan duct ow/core ow) used in modern civil
turbofans tends to reduce the relative diameter of the attached IP compressor, causing its mean tip speed to decrease.
Consequently more IPC stages are required to develop the necessary IPC pressure rise.

2.5.5

Three spool

Rolls-Royce chose a three spool conguration for their large civil turbofans (i.e., the RB211 and Trent families),
where the intermediate pressure (IP) compressor is mounted on a separate (IP) shaft, running concentrically with the
LP and HP shafts, and is driven by a separate IP turbine. The rst three spool engine was the earlier Rolls-Royce
RB.203 Trent of 1967.
Ivchenko Design Bureau chose the same conguration for their Lotarev D-36 engine, followed by Lotarev/Progress
D-18T and Progress D-436.
The Turbo-Union RB199 military turbofan also has a three spool conguration, as do the military Kuznetsov NK-25
and NK-321.

2.5.6

Geared fan

Main article: Geared turbofan

As bypass ratio increases, the mean radius ratio of the fan and low-pressure turbine (LPT) increases. Consequently,
if the fan is to rotate at its optimum blade speed the LPT blading will spin slowly, so additional LPT stages will be
required, to extract sucient energy to drive the fan. Introducing a (planetary) reduction gearbox, with a suitable
gear ratio, between the LP shaft and the fan enables both the fan and LP turbine to operate at their optimum speeds.
Typical of this conguration are the long-established Honeywell TFE731, the Honeywell ALF 502/507, and the
recent Pratt & Whitney PW1000G.

2.6. CYCLE IMPROVEMENTS

17

Geared turbofan

2.5.7

Military turbofans

Most of the congurations discussed above are used in civilian turbofans, while modern military turbofans (e.g.,
SNECMA M88) are usually basic two-spool.

2.5.8

High-pressure turbine

Most civil turbofans use a high-eciency, 2-stage HP turbine to drive the HP compressor. The CFM56 uses an
alternative approach: a single-stage, high-work unit. While this approach is probably less ecient, there are savings
on cooling air, weight and cost. In the RB211 and Trent series, Rolls-Royce split the two stages into two discrete
units; one on the HP shaft driving the HP compressor; the other on the IP shaft driving the IP (intermediate pressure)
compressor. Modern military turbofans tend to use single-stage HP turbines.

2.5.9

Low-pressure turbine

Modern civil turbofans have multi-stage LP turbines (e.g., 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). The number of stages required depends on
the engine cycle bypass ratio and how much supercharging (i.e., IP compression) is on the LP shaft, behind the fan.
A geared fan may reduce the number of required LPT stages in some applications.[7] Because of the much lower
bypass ratios employed, military turbofans only require one or two LP turbine stages.

2.6 Cycle improvements

Consider a mixed turbofan with a xed bypass ratio and airow. Increasing the overall pressure ratio of the compression system raises the combustor entry temperature. Therefore, at a xed fuel ow there is an increase in (HP)
turbine rotor inlet temperature. Although the higher temperature rise across the compression system implies a larger
temperature drop over the turbine system, the mixed nozzle temperature is unaected, because the same amount of
heat is being added to the system. There is, however, a rise in nozzle pressure, because overall pressure ratio increases
faster than the turbine expansion ratio, causing an increase in the hot mixer entry pressure. Consequently, net thrust
increases, whilst specic fuel consumption (fuel ow/net thrust) decreases. A similar trend occurs with unmixed
turbofans.
So turbofans can be made more fuel ecient by raising overall pressure ratio and turbine rotor inlet temperature in
unison. However, better turbine materials and/or improved vane/blade cooling are required to cope with increases in

18

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

Duct work on an Dassault/Dornier Alpha Jet At subsonic speeds, the increasing diameter of the inlet duct slows incoming air,
causing its static pressure to increase.

both turbine rotor inlet temperature and compressor delivery temperature. Increasing the latter may require better
compressor materials.
Overall pressure ratio can be increased by improving fan (or) LP compressor pressure ratio and/or HP compressor
pressure ratio. If the latter is held constant, the increase in (HP) compressor delivery temperature (from raising
overall pressure ratio) implies an increase in HP mechanical speed. However, stressing considerations might limit

2.7. THRUST GROWTH

19

this parameter, implying, despite an increase in overall pressure ratio, a reduction in HP compressor pressure ratio.
According to simple theory, if the ratio turbine rotor inlet temperature/(HP) compressor delivery temperature is
maintained, the HP turbine throat area can be retained. However, this assumes that cycle improvements are obtained,
while retaining the datum (HP) compressor exit ow function (non-dimensional ow). In practice, changes to the
non-dimensional speed of the (HP) compressor and cooling bleed extraction would probably make this assumption
invalid, making some adjustment to HP turbine throat area unavoidable. This means the HP turbine nozzle guide
vanes would have to be dierent from the original. In all probability, the downstream LP turbine nozzle guide vanes
would have to be changed anyway.

2.7 Thrust growth

Thrust growth is obtained by increasing core power. There are two basic routes available:
1. hot route: increase HP turbine rotor inlet temperature
2. cold route: increase core mass ow
Both routes require an increase in the combustor fuel ow and, therefore, the heat energy added to the core stream.
The hot route may require changes in turbine blade/vane materials and/or better blade/vane cooling. The cold route
can be obtained by one of the following:
1. adding T-stages to the LP/IP compression
2. adding a zero-stage to the HP compression
3. improving the compression process, without adding stages (e.g. higher fan hub pressure ratio)
all of which increase both overall pressure ratio and core airow.
Alternatively, the core size can be increased, to raise core airow, without changing overall pressure ratio. This route
is expensive, since a new (upowed) turbine system (and possibly a larger IP compressor) is also required.
Changes must also be made to the fan to absorb the extra core power. On a civil engine, jet noise considerations mean
that any signicant increase in Take-o thrust must be accompanied by a corresponding increase in fan mass ow
(to maintain a T/O specic thrust of about 30 lbf/lb/s). To reduce noise civilian turbofans have a specially shaped
nozzle that limits the exhaust speed to subsonic speeds. This leads to a thermic clogging termed choked nozzle where
the mass ow cannot be increased beyond a certain amount. Thus, the mass ow can only be increased through the
bypass airstream, usually by increasing fan diameter. On military engines, the fan pressure ratio would probably be
increased to improve specic thrust, jet noise not normally being an important factor.

2.8 Technical discussion

1. Specic Thrust (net thrust/intake airow) is an important parameter for turbofans and jet engines in general.
Imagine a fan (driven by an appropriately sized electric motor) operating within a pipe, which is connected
to a propelling nozzle. It is fairly obvious, the higher the Fan Pressure Ratio (fan discharge pressure/fan inlet
pressure), the higher the jet velocity and the corresponding specic thrust. Now imagine we replace this set-up
with an equivalent turbofan - same airow and same fan pressure ratio. Obviously, the core of the turbofan
must produce sucient power to drive the fan via the Low Pressure (LP) Turbine. If we choose a low (HP)
Turbine Inlet Temperature for the gas generator, the core airow needs to be relatively high to compensate.
The corresponding bypass ratio is therefore relatively low. If we raise the Turbine Inlet Temperature, the core
airow can be smaller, thus increasing bypass ratio. Raising turbine inlet temperature tends to increase thermal
eciency and, therefore, improve fuel eciency.
2. Naturally, as altitude increases there is a decrease in air density and, therefore, the net thrust of an engine.
There is also a ight speed eect, termed Thrust Lapse Rate. Consider the approximate equation for net thrust
again:

20

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN
Fn = m (Vjf e Va )
With a high specic thrust (e.g., ghter) engine, the jet velocity is relatively high, so intuitively one can see that
increases in ight velocity have less of an impact upon net thrust than a medium specic thrust (e.g., trainer)
engine, where the jet velocity is lower. The impact of thrust lapse rate upon a low specic thrust (e.g., civil)
engine is even more severe. At high ight speeds, high-specic-thrust engines can pick up net thrust through
the ram rise in the intake, but this eect tends to diminish at supersonic speeds because of shock wave losses.
3. Thrust growth on civil turbofans is usually obtained by increasing fan airow, thus preventing the jet noise
becoming too high. However, the larger fan airow requires more power from the core. This can be achieved
by raising the Overall Pressure Ratio (combustor inlet pressure/intake delivery pressure) to induce more airow
into the core and by increasing turbine inlet temperature. Together, these parameters tend to increase core
thermal eciency and improve fuel eciency.
4. Some high bypass ratio civil turbofans use an extremely low area ratio (less than 1.01), convergent-divergent,
nozzle on the bypass (or mixed exhaust) stream, to control the fan working line. The nozzle acts as if it has
variable geometry. At low ight speeds the nozzle is unchoked (less than a Mach Number of unity), so the
exhaust gas speeds up as it approaches the throat and then slows down slightly as it reaches the divergent section.
Consequently, the nozzle exit area controls the fan match and, being larger than the throat, pulls the fan working
line slightly away from surge. At higher ight speeds, the ram rise in the intake increases nozzle pressure ratio
to the point where the throat becomes choked (M=1.0). Under these circumstances, the throat area dictates
the fan match and, being smaller than the exit, pushes the fan working line slightly towards surge. This is not
a problem, since fan surge margin is much better at high ight speeds.
5. The o-design behaviour of turbofans is illustrated under compressor map and turbine map.
6. Because modern civil turbofans operate at low specic thrust, they only require a single fan stage to develop
the required fan pressure ratio. The desired overall pressure ratio for the engine cycle is usually achieved by
multiple axial stages on the core compression. Rolls-Royce tend to split the core compression into two with an
intermediate pressure (IP) supercharging the HP compressor, both units being driven by turbines with a single
stage, mounted on separate shafts. Consequently, the HP compressor need only develop a modest pressure ratio
(e.g., ~4.5:1). US civil engines use much higher HP compressor pressure ratios (e.g., ~23:1 on the General
Electric GE90) and tend to be driven by a two-stage HP turbine. Even so, there are usually a few IP axial stages
mounted on the LP shaft, behind the fan, to further supercharge the core compression system. Civil engines
have multi-stage LP turbines, the number of stages being determined by the bypass ratio, the amount of IP
compression on the LP shaft and the LP turbine blade speed.
7. Because military engines usually have to be able to y very fast at Sea Level, the limit on HP compressor
delivery temperature is reached at a fairly modest design overall pressure ratio, compared with that of a civil
engine. Also the fan pressure ratio is relatively high, to achieve a medium to high specic thrust. Consequently,
modern military turbofans usually only have 5 or 6 HP compressor stages and only require a single-stage HP
turbine. Low bypass ratio military turbofans usually have one LP turbine stage, but higher bypass ratio engines
need two stages. In theory, by adding IP compressor stages, a modern military turbofan HP compressor could
be used in a civil turbofan derivative, but the core would tend to be too small for high thrust applications.

2.9 Recent developments in blade technology

The turbine blades in a turbofan engine are subject to high heat and stress, and require special fabrication. New
material construction methods and material science have allowed blades, which were originally polycrystalline (regular
metal), to be made from lined up metallic crystals and more recently mono-crystalline (i.e., single crystal) blades,
which can operate at higher temperatures with less distortion.
Nickel-based superalloys are used for HP turbine blades in almost all modern jet engines. The temperature capabilities
of turbine blades have increased mainly through four approaches: the manufacturing (casting) process, cooling path
design, thermal barrier coating (TBC), and alloy development.
Although turbine blade (and vane) materials have improved over the years, much of the increase in (HP) turbine
inlet temperatures is due to improvements in blade/vane cooling technology. Relatively cool air is bled from the
compression system, bypassing the combustion process, and enters the hollow blade or vane. The gas temperature
can therefore be even higher than the melting temperature of the blade.[8] After picking up heat from the blade/vane,

2.10. TURBOFAN ENGINE MANUFACTURERS

21

the cooling air is dumped into the main gas stream. If the local gas temperatures are low enough, downstream
blades/vanes are uncooled and not adversely aected.
Strictly speaking, cycle-wise the HP Turbine Rotor Inlet Temperature (after the temperature drop across the HPT
stator) is more important than the (HP) turbine inlet temperature. Although some modern military and civil engines
have peak RITs of the order of 1,560 C (2,840 F), such temperatures are only experienced for a short time (during
take-o) on civil engines.

2.10 Turbofan engine manufacturers

The turbofan engine market is dominated by General Electric, Rolls-Royce plc and Pratt & Whitney, in order of
market share. GE and SNECMA of France have a joint venture, CFM International which, as the 3rd largest manufacturer in terms of market share, ts between Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney. Rolls-Royce and Pratt & Whitney
also have a joint venture, International Aero Engines, specializing in engines for the Airbus A320 family. Pratt &
Whitney and General Electric have a joint venture, Engine Alliance marketing a range of engines for aircraft such as
the Airbus A380, while nally, Williams International markets a range of engines for the light jet market and cruise
missiles.

2.10.1

General Electric

GE CF6 Turbofan engine

GE Aviation, part of the General Electric Conglomerate, currently has the largest share of the turbofan engine market.
Some of their engine models include the CF6 (available on the Boeing 767, Boeing 747, Airbus A330 and more),
GE90 (only the Boeing 777) and GEnx (developed for the Boeing 747-8 & Boeing 787 Dreamliner and proposed
for the Airbus A350, currently in development) engines. On the military side, GE engines power many U.S. military
aircraft, including the F110, powering 80% of the US Air Forces F-16 Fighting Falcons, and the F404 and F414
engines, which power the Navys F/A-18 Hornet and Super Hornet. Rolls-Royce and General Electric were jointly
developing the F136 engine to power the Joint Strike Fighter, however, due to government budget cuts, the program
has been eliminated.

22

2.10.2

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

Rolls-Royce

Rolls-Royce plc is the second largest manufacturer of turbofans and is most noted for their RB211 and Trent series,
as well as their joint venture engines for the Airbus A320 and McDonnell Douglas MD-90 families (IAE V2500
with Pratt & Whitney and others), the Panavia Tornado (Turbo-Union RB199) and the Boeing 717 (BR700). The
Rolls-Royce AE 3007, developed by Allison Engine Company before its acquisition by Rolls-Royce, powers several
Embraer regional jets. Rolls-Royce Trent 970s were the rst engines to power the new Airbus A380. The famous
thrust vectoring Pegasus - actually a Bristol Siddeley design taken on by Rolls-Royce when they took over that company
- is the primary powerplant of the Harrier Jump Jet and its derivatives.

2.10.3

Pratt & Whitney

Pratt & Whitney is third behind GE and Rolls-Royce in market share. The JT9D has the distinction of being chosen
by Boeing to power the original Boeing 747 Jumbo jet. The PW4000 series is the successor to the JT9D, and
powers some Airbus A310, Airbus A300, Boeing 747, Boeing 767, Boeing 777, Airbus A330 and MD-11 aircraft.
The PW4000 is certied for 180-minute ETOPS when used in twinjets. The rst family has a 94-inch (2.4 m) fan
diameter and is designed to power the Boeing 767, Boeing 747, MD-11, and the Airbus A300. The second family
is the 100 inch (2.5 m) fan engine developed specically for the Airbus A330 twinjet, and the third family has a
diameter of 112-inch (2.8 m) designed to power Boeing 777. The Pratt & Whitney F119 and its derivative, the F135,
power the United States Air Forces F-22 Raptor and the international F-35 Lightning II, respectively. Rolls-Royce
are responsible for the lift fan which will provide the F-35B variants with a STOVL capability. The F100 engine was
rst used on the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Fighting Falcon. Newer Eagles and Falcons also come with GE F110 as an
option, and the two are in competition.

2.10.4

CFM International

CFM International is a joint venture between GE Aircraft Engines and SNECMA of France. They have created the
very successful CFM56 series, used on Boeing 737, Airbus A340, and Airbus A320 family aircraft.

2.10.5

Williams International

Williams International is a manufacturer of small gas turbine engines based in Walled Lake, Michigan, United States.
It produces jet engines for cruise missiles and small jet-powered aircraft. They have been producing engines since the
1970s and the range produces between 1000 and 3600 pounds of thrust. The engines are used as original equipment
on the Cessna CitationJet CJ1 through CJ4 and Cessna Mustang, Beechcraft 400XPR and Premier 1a and there are
several development programs with other manufacturers. The range is also very popular with the re-engine market
being used by Sierra Jet and Nextant to breath new life into aging platforms.

2.10.6

Aviadvigatel

Aviadvigatel is a Russian manufacturer of aircraft engines that succeeded the Soviet Soloviev Design Bureau. The
company currently oers[9] several versions of the Aviadvigatel PS-90 engine that powers Ilyushin Il-96300/400/400T,
Tupolev Tu-204, Tu-214 series and the Ilyushin Il-76-MD-90. The company is also developing the new Aviadvigatel
PD-14 engine for the new Russian MS-21 airliner.[10]

2.10.7

Ivchenko-Progress

Ivchenko-Progress is the Ukrainian aircraft engine company that succeeded the Soviet Ivchenko Design Bureau.
Some of their engine models include Progress D-436 available on the Antonov An-72/74, Yakovlev Yak-42, Beriev
Be-200, Antonov An-148 and Tupolev Tu-334 and Progress D-18T that powers two of the world largest airplanes,
Antonov An-124 and Antonov An-225.

2.11. EXTREME BYPASS JET ENGINES

2.10.8

23

Chinese turbofan manufacturers

Three Chinese corporations build turbofan engines. Some of these are licenced or reverse engineered versions of
European and Russian turbofans, and the other are indigenous models, but all are in development phase.
Shenyang Aircraft Corporation (manufacturer of Shenyang WS-10)
Xi'an Aero-Engine Corporation (manufacturer of Xian WS-15)
Guizhou Aircraft Industry Corporation (manufacturer of Guizhou WS-13)

2.10.9

Japanese turbofan manufacturers

Two Japanese corporations build turbofan engines. One of these is Mitsubishi Heavy Industries, that manufactured
under license the Pratt & Whitney JT8D turbofan for the Kawasaki C-1 military transport aircraft. The other is IHI
Corporation, that manufactured various turbofan engines.

2.10.10

NPO Saturn

NPO Saturn is the manufacturer of the Saturn AL-31 turbofan.

2.10.11

Klimov

Klimov is the manufacturer of the Klimov RD-33 turbofan.

2.11 Extreme bypass jet engines

In the 1970s, Rolls-Royce/SNECMA tested a M45SD-02 turbofan tted with variable pitch fan blades to improve
handling at ultra low fan pressure ratios and to provide thrust reverse down to zero aircraft speed. The engine was
aimed at ultra quiet STOL aircraft operating from city center airports.
In a bid for increased eciency with speed, a development of the turbofan and turboprop known as a propfan engine
was created that had an unducted fan. The fan blades are situated outside of the duct, so that it appears like a turboprop
with wide scimitar-like blades. Both General Electric and Pratt & Whitney/Allison demonstrated propfan engines in
the 1980s. Excessive cabin noise and relatively cheap jet fuel prevented the engines being put into service.

2.12 Terminology
Afterburner extra combustor immediately upstream of nal nozzle (also called reheat)
Augmentor afterburner on low-bypass turbofan engines.
Average stage loading constant (delta temperature)/[(blade speed) (blade speed) (number of stages)]
Bypass airstream that completely bypasses the core compression system, combustor and turbine system
Bypass ratio bypass airow /core compression inlet airow
Core turbomachinery handling the airstream that passes through the combustor.
Core power residual shaft power from ideal turbine expansion to ambient pressure after deducting core compression
power
Core thermal eciency core power/power equivalent of fuel ow
Dry afterburner (if tted) not lit
EGT Exhaust Gas Temperature

24

CHAPTER 2. TURBOFAN

EPR Engine Pressure Ratio

Fan turbofan LP compressor
Fan pressure ratio fan outlet total pressure/intake delivery total pressure
Flex temp use of articially high apparent air temperature to reduce engine wear
Gas generator engine core
HP compressor high-pressure compressor (also HPC)
HP turbine high-pressure turbine
Intake ram drag penalty associated with jet engines picking up air from the atmosphere (conventional rocket motors
do not have this drag term, because the oxidiser travels with the vehicle)
IEPR Integrated engine pressure ratio
IP compressor intermediate pressure compressor (also IPC)
IP turbine intermediate pressure turbine (also IPT)
LP compressor low-pressure compressor (also LPC)
LP turbine low-pressure turbine (also LPT)
Net thrust nozzle total gross thrust - intake ram drag (excluding nacelle drag, etc., this is the basic thrust acting on
the airframe)
Overall pressure ratio combustor inlet total pressure/intake delivery total pressure
Overall thermal eciency thermal eciency * propulsive eciency
Propulsive eciency propulsive power/rate of production of propulsive kinetic energy (maximum propulsive eciency occurs when jet velocity equals ight velocity, which implies zero net thrust!)
Specic fuel consumption (SFC) total fuel ow/net thrust (proportional to ight velocity/overall thermal eciency)
Spooling up accelerating, marked by a delay
Static pressure normal meaning of pressure. Excludes any kinetic energy eects
Specic thrust net thrust/intake airow
Thermal eciency rate of production of propulsive kinetic energy/fuel power
Total fuel ow combustor (plus any afterburner) fuel ow rate (e.g., lb/s or g/s)
Total pressure static pressure plus kinetic energy term
Turbine rotor inlet temperature gas absolute mean temperature at principal (e.g., HP) turbine rotor entry

2.13 See also

Jet engine
Turbojet
Turboprop
Turboshaft
Propfan
Axial fan design
Variable cycle engine

2.14. NOTES AND REFERENCES

25

Jet engine performance

Gas turbine
Turbine engine failure

2.14 Notes and references

[1] Marshall Brain. How Gas Turbine Engines Work. howstuworks.com. Retrieved 2010-11-24.
[2] Turbofan Engine. www.grc.nasa.gov. Retrieved 2010-11-24.
[3] Neumann, Gerhard (2004) [1984], Herman the German: Just Lucky I Guess, Bloomington, IN, USA: Authorhouse, ISBN
1-4184-7925-X. First published by Morrow in 1984 as Herman the German: Enemy Alien U.S. Army Master Sergeant.
Republished with a new title in 2004 by Authorhouse, with minor or no changes., pp. 228230.
[4] Metrovick F3 Cutaway - Pictures & Photos on FlightGlobal Airspace. Flightglobal.com. 2007-11-07. Retrieved 201304-29.
[5] 1954 | 0985 | Flight Archive. Flightglobal.com. 1954-04-09. Retrieved 2013-04-29.
[6]
[7] The geared turbofan technology - Opportunities, challenges and readiness status PDF C. Riegler, C. Bichlmaier:, 1st
CEAS European Air and Space Conference, 1013 September 2007, Berlin, Germany
[8] Spittle, Peter. Gas turbine technology Rolls-Royce plc, 2003. Retrieved: 21 July 2012.
[9] PS-90A turbofan, Aviadvigatel, 2011-01-17
[10] Turbofan Engine Family for Regional Jet, Aviadvigatel, 2011-01-17

2.15 External links

Wikibooks: Jet propulsion

Chapter 3

Propfan
Not to be confused with turboprop or turbofan.
A propfan is a type of aircraft engine related in concept to both the turboprop and turbofan, but distinct from both.

NASA / GE Unducted Fan

The engine uses a gas turbine to drive an unshielded propeller like a turboprop, but the propeller itself is designed
with a large number of short, highly twisted blades, similar to a turbofans bypass compressor (the fan itself). For
this reason, the propfan has been variously described as an unducted fan or an ultra-high-bypass (UHB) turbofan.
In technical papers it is described as a small diameter, highly loaded multiple bladed variable pitch propulsor having
swept blades with thin advanced airfoil sections, integrated with a nacelle contoured to retard the airow through
the blades thereby reducing compressibility losses and designed to operate with a turbine engine and using a single
stage reduction gear resulting in high performance. The design is intended to oer the speed and performance of a
turbofan, with the fuel economy of a turboprop. The propfan concept was rst revealed by Carl Rohrbach and Bruce
26

3.1. LIMITATIONS AND SOLUTIONS

27

Metzger of the Hamilton Standard Division of United Technologies in 1975[1] and was patented by Robert Cornell
and Carl Rohrbach of Hamilton Standard in 1979.[2] Later work by General Electric on similar propulsors was done
under the name unducted fan, which was a modied turbofan engine, with the fan placed outside the engine nacelle
on the same axis as the compressor blades.

3.1 Limitations and solutions

3.1.1

Propeller blade tip speed limit

Turboprops have an optimum speed below about 450 mph (700 km/h).[3] The reason is that all propellers lose eciency at high speed, due to an eect known as wave drag that occurs just below supersonic speeds. This powerful
form of drag has a sudden onset, and led to the concept of a sound barrier when it was rst encountered in the 1940s.
In the case of a propeller, this eect can happen any time the propeller is spun fast enough that the blade tips near
the speed of sound, even if the aircraft is motionless on the ground.
The most eective way to counteract this problem (to some degree) is by adding more blades to the propeller, allowing
it to deliver more power at a lower rotational speed. This is why many World War II ghter designs started with
two or three-blade propellers and by the end of the war were using up to ve blades in some cases as the engines
were upgraded and new propellers were needed to more eciently convert that power. The major downside to this
approach is that adding blades makes the propeller harder to balance and maintain and the additional blades cause
minor performance penalties (due to drag and eciency issues). But even with these sorts of measures at some point
the forward speed of the plane combined with the rotational speed of the propeller will once again result in wave drag
problems. For most aircraft this will occur at speeds over about 450 mph (700 km/h).

Leading
edge sweep
Swept propeller

A method of decreasing wave drag was discovered by German researchers in 1935sweeping the wing backwards.
Today, almost all aircraft designed to y much above 450 mph (700 km/h) use a swept wing. In the 1970s, Hamilton
Standard started researching propellers with similar sweep. Since the inside of the propeller is moving slower than
the outside, the blade is progressively more swept toward the outside, leading to a curved shape similar to a scimitar
- a practice that was rst used as far back as 1909, in the Chauvire make of two-bladed wood propeller used on the
Blriot XI.

3.1.2

Jet aircraft fuel economy

Jet aircraft are well known for permitting greater thrusts and higher speeds than could be achieved by conventional
propeller-driven aircraft operating within the same aerodynamic envelope. However, jet aircraft are limited in fuel
economy. In fact, for the same fuel consumption, a propeller-driven aircraft can produce greater thrust. As fuel
costs become an increasingly important aspect of commercial aviation, aircraft engine designers continue to seek an
optimal combination of jet engine thrust ratios and propeller fuel eciency.
The propfan concept was developed to deliver 35% better fuel eciency than contemporary turbofans. In static and air

28

CHAPTER 3. PROPFAN

tests on a modied Douglas DC-9, propfans reached a 30% improvement over the OEM turbofans. This eciency
came at a price, as one of the major problems with the propfan is noise, particularly in an era where aircraft are
required to comply with increasingly strict aircraft noise regulations. However, in 2012 GE expects that openrotors
can meet these noise levels by 2030 when new narrowbody generations from Boeing and Airbus become available.
Airlines consistently ask for low noise, and then maximum fuel eciency.[4]
The Hamilton Standard Division of United Technologies developed the propfan concept in the early 1970s. Numerous
design variations of the propfan were tested by Hamilton Standard, in conjunction with NASA in this decade.[5][6]
This testing led to the Propfan Test Assessment (PTA) program, where Lockheed-Georgia proposed modifying a
Gulfstream II to act as in-ight testbed for the propfan concept and McDonnell Douglas proposed modifying a DC-9
for the same purpose.[7] NASA chose the Lockheed proposal, where the aircraft had a nacelle added to the left wing,
containing a 6000 hp Allison 570 turboprop engine (derived from the XT701 turboshaft developed for the Boeing
Vertol XCH-62 program), powering a 9-foot diameter Hamilton Standard SR-7 propfan. The aircraft, so congured,
rst ew in March 1987. After an extensive test program, the modications were removed from the aircraft.[8][9]
General Electric's GE36 Unducted Fan was a variation on the original propfan concept, and appears similar to a
pusher conguration piston engine. GEs UDF has a novel direct drive arrangement, where the reduction gearbox is
replaced by a low-speed seven-stage free turbine. The turbine rotors drive the forward set of propellers, while the
rear set is connected to the free turbine stators and rotates in the opposite direction. So, in eect, the power turbine
has 14 stages. Boeing intended to oer GEs pusher UDF engine on the 7J7 platform, and McDonnell Douglas was
going to do likewise on their MD-94X airliner. The GE36 was rst ight tested mounted on the #3 engine station of
a Boeing 727-100 in 1986.[10]
McDonnell Douglas developed a proof-of-concept aircraft by modifying its company-owned MD-80. They removed
the JT8D turbofan engine from the left side of the fuselage and replaced it with the GE36. A number of test ights
were conducted, initially out of Mojave, California, which proved the airworthiness, aerodynamic characteristics,
and noise signature of the design. Following the initial tests, a rst-class cabin was installed inside the aft fuselage
and airline executives were oered the opportunity to experience the UDF-powered aircraft rst-hand. The test and
marketing ights of the GE-outtted demonstrator aircraft concluded in 1988, exhibiting a 30% reduction in fuel consumption over turbo-fan powered MD-80, full Stage III noise compliance, and low levels of interior noise/vibration.
Due to jet fuel price drops and shifting marketing priorities, Douglas shelved the program the following year.
In the 1980s, Allison collaborated with Pratt & Whitney on demonstrating the 578-DX propfan. Unlike the competing
GE36 UDF, the 578-DX was fairly conventional, having a reduction gearbox between the LP turbine and the propfan
blades. The 578-DX was successfully ight tested on a McDonnell Douglas MD-80. However, none of the above
projects came to fruition, mainly because of excessive cabin noise (compared to turbofans) and low fuel prices.[11]
The Progress D-27 propfan, developed in the U.S.S.R., is even more unconventional in layout, with the propfan blades
at the front of the engine in a tractor conguration. Two rear-mounted D-27 propfans propelled the Antonov An-180,
which was scheduled for a 1995 entry into service. Another Russian propfan application was the Yakovlev Yak-46.
During the 1990s, Antonov also developed the An-70, powered by four Progress D-27s in a tractor conguration; the
Russian Air Force placed an order for 164 aircraft in 2003, which was subsequently canceled. However, the An-70
remains available for further investment and production.
With the current high price for jet fuel and the emphasis on engine/airframe eciency to reduce emissions, there is
renewed interest in the propfan concept for jetliners that might come into service beyond the Boeing 787 and Airbus
A350XWB. For instance, Airbus has patented aircraft designs with twin rear-mounted counter-rotating propfans.[12]

3.2 Aircraft with propfans

Main category: Propfan-powered aircraft
Antonov An-70
EcoJet

3.3 See also

Ducted fan

3.4. REFERENCES

29

Progress D27 Propfans tted to an Antonov An-70

Comparable engines
Europrop TP400
General Electric GE-36 UDF
Kuznetsov NK-12
Rolls-Royce RB3011
Pratt & Whitney/Allison 578-DX
Progress D-27
Metrovick F.5
Related lists
List of aircraft engines

3.4 References
[1] Rohrback, C. and Metzger, F.B., 'The Prop-Fan, a New Look at Propulsors, AIAA paper 75-1208, presented at the
AIAA/SAE 11th Propulsion Conference, Anaheim California, September 1975.
[2] US Patent 4171183 Retrieved 28 June 2011.
[3] Spakovszky, Zoltan (2009). Unied Propulsion Lecture 1. Unied Engineering Lecture Notes. MIT. Retrieved 2009-0403.

30

CHAPTER 3. PROPFAN

[4] Croft, John. Open rotor noise not a barrier to entry: GE Flight International, 5 July 2012. Retrieved: 21 July 2012.
[5] Rohrbach, Carl, 'A Report on the Aerodynamic Design and Wind Tunnel Test of a Prop-fan Model', AIAA paper 76-667,
presented at the AIAA/SAE 12th Propulsion Conference, Palo Alto California, July 1976.
[6] Jeracki, Robert J., Mikkelson, Daniel C. and Blaha, Bernard J., 'Wind Tunnel Performance of Four Energy Ecient Propellers Designed for Mach 0.8 Cruise', SAE Paper 790573, presented at the SAE Business Aircraft Meeting and Exposition,
Wichita Kansas, April 1979.
[7] NASA-CR-166138. Retrieved 28 June 2011
[8] 'Propfan Test Assessment (PTA)' NASA-CR-185138. Retrieved 28 June 2011
[9] 'Propfan Test Assessment (PTA): Flight Test Report' NASA-CR-182278. Retrieved 28 June 2011
[10] 'The Power of Persuasion' Flight International. May 23, 1987. Retrieved 28 June 2011.
[11] Flight International (2007-07-12). Whatever happened to propfans?". Retrieved 2007-07-14.
[12] US application 2009020643, Airbus & Christophe Cros, Aircraft having reduced environmental impact, published 200901-22

General ressources
Prop fan propulsion concepts: Technology Review, Design Methodology, State-of-the-art designs and future
outlook. Raymond Scott Ciszek. University of Virginia Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering. Senior Thesis Project. March 25, 2002

3.5 External links

Green sky thinking - carbon credits and the propfan comeback?", Flight International, June 12, 2007.
The easyJet ecoJet to cut CO2 emissions by 50% by 2015
The Short, Happy Life of the Prop-fan Air & Space Magazine, September 1, 2005
open rotor jet engine
Metrovick F.5 - Open-Fan Thrust Augmenter a 1947 Flight article on an early propfan

Chapter 4

Pulsejet

Diagram of a pulsejet

A pulse jet engine (or pulsejet) is a type of jet engine in which combustion occurs in pulses. Pulsejet engines can
be made with few[1] or no moving parts,[2][3][4] and are capable of running statically.
Pulse jet engines are a lightweight form of jet propulsion, but usually have a poor compression ratio, and hence give
a low specic impulse.
One notable line of research of pulsejet engines includes the pulse detonation engine which involves repeated detonations in the engine, and which can potentially give high compression and good eciency.
31

32

CHAPTER 4. PULSEJET

4.1 Types
There are two main types of pulsejet engines, both of which use resonant combustion and harness the expanding
combustion products to form a pulsating exhaust jet which produces thrust intermittently.

4.1.1

Valved pulsejets

Valved pulsejet engines use a mechanical valve to control the ow of expanding exhaust, forcing the hot gas to go out
of the back of the engine through the tailpipe only, and allow fresh air and more fuel to enter through the intake.
The valved pulsejet comprises an intake with a one-way valve arrangement. The valves prevent the explosive gas of
the ignited fuel mixture in the combustion chamber from exiting and disrupting the intake airow, although with all
practical valved pulsejets there is some 'blowback' while running statically and at low speed, as the valves cannot close
fast enough to stop all the gas from exiting the intake. The superheated exhaust gases exit through an acoustically
resonant exhaust pipe.
The intake valve is typically a reed valve. The two most common congurations are the daisy valve, and the rectangular
valve grid. A daisy valve consists of a thin sheet of material to act as the reed, cut into the shape of a stylized daisy
with petals that widen towards their ends. Each petal covers a circular intake hole at its tip. The daisy valve is
bolted to the manifold through its center. Although easier to construct on a small scale, it is less eective than a valve
grid.

4.1.2

Valveless pulsejets

Main article: Valveless pulse jet

Valveless pulsejet engines have no moving parts and use only their geometry to control the ow of exhaust out of the
engine. Valveless pulsejets expel exhaust out of both the intakes and the exhaust, though most try to have the majority
of exhaust go out of the longer tail pipe for more ecient propulsion.
The valveless pulsejet operates on the same principle as the valved pulsejet, but the 'valve' is the engines geometry.
Fuel, as a gas or atomized liquid spray, is either mixed with the air in the intake or directly injected into the combustion
chamber. Starting the engine usually requires forced air and an ignition source, such as a spark plug, for the fuel-air
mix. With modern manufactured engine designs, almost any design can be made to be self-starting by providing the
engine with fuel and an ignition spark, starting the engine with no compressed air. Once running, the engine only
requires input of fuel to maintain a self-sustaining combustion cycle.

4.2 History
Russian inventor and artillery ocer N. Teleshov patented a pulse jet engine in 1864 while Swedish inventor Martin
Wiberg also has a claim to having invented the rst pulse jet, in Sweden, but details are unclear.
The rst working pulsejet was patented in 1906 by Russian engineer V.V. Karavodin, who completed a working
model in 1907. The French inventor Georges Marconnet patented his valveless pulsejet engine in 1908, and Ramon
Casanova, in Ripoll, Spain patented a pulsejet in Barcelona in 1917, having constructed one beginning in 1913.
Engineer Paul Schmidt, pioneered a more ecient design based on modication of the intake valves (or aps), earning
him government support from the German Air Ministry in 1933.[5]

4.2.1

Argus As 109-014

In 1934, Georg Madelung and Munich-based Paul Schmidt proposed to the German Air Ministry a ying bomb
powered by Schmidts pulse jet. Madelung co-invented the ribbon parachute, a device used to stabilise the V-1 in
its terminal dive. Schmidts prototype bomb failed to meet German Air Ministry specications, especially owing to
poor accuracy, range and high cost. The original Schmidt design had the pulsejet placed in a fuselage like a modern
jet ghter, unlike the eventual V-1 which had the engine placed above the warhead and fuselage.

4.2. HISTORY

33

Ramon Casanova and the pulsejet engine he constructed and patented in 1917

The Argus Company began work based on Schmidts work. Other German manufacturers working on similar pulsejets
and ying bombs were The Askania Company, Robert Lusser of Fieseler, Dr. Fritz Gosslau of Argus and the Siemens
company, which were all combined to work on the V-1.[5]
With Schmidt now working for Argus, the pulsejet was perfected and was ocially known by its RLM designation as
the Argus As 109-014. The rst unpowered drop occurred at Peenemnde on 28 October 1942 and the rst powered
ight on 10 December 1942.
The pulsejet was evaluated to be an excellent balance of cost and function: a simple design that performed well for
minimal cost.[5] It would run on any grade of petroleum and the ignition shutter system was not intended to last
beyond the V-1s normal operational ight life of one hour. Although it generated insucient thrust for takeo, the
V-1s resonant jet could operate while stationary on the launch ramp. The simple resonant design based on the ratio
(8.7:1) of the diameter to the length of the exhaust pipe functioned to perpetuate the combustion cycle, and attained
stable resonance frequency at 43 cycles per second. The engine produced 500 lbf (2,200 N) of static thrust and
approximately 750 lbf (3,300 N) in ight.[5]
Ignition in the As 014 was provided by a single automotive spark plug, mounted approximately 75 cm (30 in) behind
the front-mounted valve array. The spark only operated for the start sequence for the engine; the Argus As 014,
like all pulsejets, did not require ignition coils or magnetos for ignition the ignition source being the tail of the
preceding reball during the run. Contrary to popular belief, the engine casing did not provide sucient heat to cause
Diesel-type ignition of the fuel, as there is insignicant compression within a pulsejet engine.
The Argus As 014 valve array was based on a shutter system that operated at the 43 to 45 cycles-per-second frequency
of the engine.
Three air nozzles in the front of the Argus As 014 were connected to an external high pressure source to start the
engine. The fuel used for ignition was acetylene, with the technicians having to place a bae of wood or cardboard
in the exhaust pipe to stop the acetylene diusing before complete ignition. Once the engine ignited and minimum
operating temperature was attained, external hoses and connectors were removed.
The V-1, being a cruise missile, lacked landing gear, instead the Argus As 014 was launched on an inclined ramp
powered by a piston-driven steam catapult. Steam power to re the piston was generated by the violent exothermic
chemical reaction created when hydrogen peroxide and potassium permanganate (termed T-Sto and Z-Sto) are

34

CHAPTER 4. PULSEJET

Argus As 014 pulse jet engine of a V-1 ying bomb at the Royal Air Force Museum London

combined.
The principal military use of the pulsejet engine, with the volume production of the Argus As 014 unit (the rst pulsejet
engine ever in volume production), was for use with the V-1 ying bomb. The engines characteristic droning noise
earned it the nicknames buzz bomb or doodlebug. The V-1 was a German cruise missile used in World War
II, most famously in the bombing of London in 1944. Pulsejet engines, being cheap and easy to construct, were the
obvious choice for the V-1s designers, given the Germans materials shortages and overstretched industry at that stage
of the war. Designers of modern cruise missiles do not choose pulsejet engines for propulsion, preferring turbojets
or rocket engines.
Wright Field technical personnel reverse-engineered the V-1 from the remains of a V-1 that had failed to detonate in
Britain. The result was the creation of the JB-2 Loon, with the airframe built by Republic Aviation, and the Argus As
014 reproduction pulsejet powerplant made by Ford Motor Company. General Henry Harley Hap Arnold of the
United States Army Air Forces was concerned that this weapon could be built of steel and wood, in 2000 man hours
and approximate cost of US$600 (in 1943).[5]

4.3 Operation
Pulsejet engines are characterized by simplicity, low cost of construction, and high noise levels. While the thrustto-weight ratio is excellent, thrust specic fuel consumption is very poor. The pulsejet uses the Lenoir cycle which
lacking an external compressive driver such as the Otto cycle's piston, or the Brayton cycle's compression turbine,
drives compression with acoustic resonance in a tube. This limits the maximum pre-combustion pressure ratio, to
around 1.2 to 1.
The high noise levels usually make them impractical for other than military and other similarly restricted applications.[6]
However, pulsejets are used on a large scale as industrial drying systems, and there has been a resurgence in studying
these engines for applications such as high-output heating, biomass conversion, and alternative energy systems, as
pulsejets can run on almost anything that burns, including particulate fuels such as sawdust or coal powder.

4.3. OPERATION

35

Animation of a pulse jet engine.

Pulsejets have been used to power experimental helicopters, the engines being attached to the ends of the rotor blades.
In providing power to helicopter rotors, pulsejets have the advantage over turbine or piston engines of not producing
torque upon the fuselage since they don't apply force to the shaft, but push the tips. A helicopter may then be built
without a tail rotor and its associated transmission and drive shaft, simplifying the aircraft (cyclic and collective
control of the main rotor is still necessary). This concept was being considered as early as 1947 when the American
Helicopter Company started work on its XA-5 Top Sergeant helicopter prototype powered by pulsejet engines at
the rotor tips. [7] The XA-5 rst ew in January 1949 and was followed by the XA-6 Buck Private with the same
pulsejet design. Also in 1949 Hiller Helicopters built and tested the Hiller Powerblade, the worlds rst hot-cycle
pressure-jet rotor. Hiller switched to tip mounted ramjets but American Helicopter went on to develop the XA-8
under a U.S. Army contract. It rst ew in 1952 and was known as the XH-26 Jet Jeep. It used XPJ49 pulse jets
mounted at the rotor tips. The XH-26 met all its main design objectives but the Army cancelled the project because
of the unacceptable level of noise of the pulsejets and the fact that the drag of the pulsejets at the rotor tips made
autorotation landings very problematic. Rotor-tip propulsion has been claimed to reduce the cost of production of
rotary-wing craft to 1/10 of that for conventional powered rotary-wing aircraft.[6] Pulsejets have also been used in
both control-line and radio-controlled model aircraft. The speed record for control-line model aircraft is greater than
200 miles per hour (323 km/h).
A free-ying radio-controlled pulsejet is limited by the engines intake design. At around 450 km/h (280 mph) most
valved engines valve systems stop fully closing owing to ram air pressure, which results in performance loss.
Variable intake geometry lets the engine produce full power at most speeds by optimizing for whatever speed the air
is entering pulsejet at. Valveless designs are not as negatively aected by ram air pressure as other designs, as they
were never intended to stop the ow out of the intake, and can signicantly increase in power at speed.
Another feature of pulsejet engines is that their thrust can be increased by a specially shaped duct placed behind the
engine. The duct acts as an annular wing, which evens out the pulsating thrust, by harnessing aerodynamic forces in
the pulsejet exhaust. The duct, typically called an augmenter, can signicantly increase the thrust of a pulsejet with no
additional fuel consumption. Gains of 100% increases in thrust are possible, resulting in a much higher fuel eciency.

36

CHAPTER 4. PULSEJET

However, the larger the augmenter duct, the more drag it produces, and it is only be eective within specic speed
ranges.

4.4 Function

2
1

Pulse jet schematic. First part of the cycle: air ows through the intake (1), and is mixed with fuel (2). Second part: the valve (3) is
closed and the ignited fuel-air mix (4) propels the craft.

The combustion cycle comprises ve or six phases depending on the engine: Induction, Compression, (optional) Fuel
Injection, Ignition, Combustion, and Exhaust.
Starting with ignition within the combustion chamber, a high pressure is raised by the combustion of the fuel-air
mixture. The pressurized gas from combustion cannot exit forward through the one-way intake valve and so exits
only to the rear through the exhaust tube.
The inertial reaction of this gas ow causes the engine to provide thrust, this force being used to propel an airframe or
a rotor blade. The inertia of the traveling exhaust gas causes a low pressure in the combustion chamber. This pressure
is less than the inlet pressure (upstream of the one-way valve), and so the induction phase of the cycle begins.
In the simplest of pulsejet engines this intake is through a venturi which causes fuel to be drawn from a fuel supply. In
more complex engines the fuel may be injected directly into the combustion chamber. When the induction phase is
under way, fuel in atomized form is injected into the combustion chamber to ll the vacuum formed by the departing
of the previous reball; the atomized fuel tries to ll up the entire tube including the tailpipe. This causes atomized
fuel at the rear of the combustion chamber to ash as it comes in contact with the hot gases of the preceding column
of gasthis resulting ash slams the reed-valves shut or in the case of valveless designs, stops the ow of fuel until
a vacuum is formed and the cycle repeats.

4.4.1

Valved design

There are two basic types of pulsejets. The rst is known as a valved or traditional pulsejet and it has a set of one-way
valves through which the incoming air passes. When the air-fuel is ignited, these valves slam shut which means that
the hot gases can only leave through the engines tailpipe, thus creating forward thrust.
The cycle frequency is primarily dependent on the length of the engine. For a small model-type engine the frequency
may be around 250 pulses per second, whereas for a larger engine such as the one used on the German V-1 ying
bomb, the frequency was closer to 45 pulses per second. The low-frequency sound produced resulted in the missiles
being nicknamed buzz bombs.

4.5. SEE ALSO

4.4.2

37

Valveless design

Main article: Valveless pulse jet

The second type of pulsejet is known as the valveless pulsejet.[8] Technically the term for this engine is the acoustictype pulsejet, or aerodynamically valved pulsejet.
Valveless pulsejets come in a number of shapes and sizes, with dierent designs being suited for dierent functions. A
typical valveless engine will have one or more intake tubes, a combustion chamber section, and one or more exhaust
tube sections.
The intake tube takes in air and mixes it with fuel to combust, and also controls the expulsion of exhaust gas, like a
valve, limiting the ow but not stopping it altogether. While the fuel-air mixture burns, most of the expanding gas is
forced out of the exhaust pipe of the engine. Because the intake tube(s) also expel gas during the exhaust cycle of the
engine, most valveless engines have the intakes facing backwards so that the thrust created adds to the overall thrust,
rather than reducing it.
The combustion creates two pressure wave fronts, one traveling down the longer exhaust tube and one down the short
intake tube. By properly 'tuning' the system (by designing the engine dimensions properly), a resonating combustion
process can be achieved.
While some valveless engines are known for being extremely fuel-hungry, other designs use signicantly less fuel than
a valved pulsejet, and a properly designed system with advanced components and techniques can rival or exceed the
fuel eciency of small turbojet engines.
In 1909, Georges Marconnet developed the rst pulsating combustor without valves. It was the grandfather of all
valveless pulsejets. The valveless pulsejet was experimented with by the French propulsion research group SNECMA
(Socit Nationale d'tude et de Construction de Moteurs d'Aviation ), in the late 1940s.
The valveless pulsejets rst widespread use was the Dutch drone Aviolanda AT-21[9] A properly designed valveless
engine will excel in ight; as it does not have valves, ram air pressure from traveling at high speed does not cause the
engine to stop running like a valved engine. They can achieve higher top speeds, with some advanced designs being
capable of operating at Mach 7 or possibly higher.
The advantage of the acoustic-type pulsejet is simplicity. Since there are no moving parts to wear out, they are easier
to maintain and simpler to construct.

4.4.3

Future uses

Pulsejets are used today in target drone aircraft, ying control line model aircraft (as well as radio-controlled aircraft),
fog generators, and industrial drying and home heating equipment. Because pulsejets are an ecient and simple way
to convert fuel into heat, experimenters are using them for new industrial applications such as biomass fuel conversion,
boiler and heater systems, and other applications.
Some experimenters continue to work on improved designs. The engines are dicult to integrate into commercial
manned aircraft designs because of noise and vibration, though they excel on the smaller-scale unmanned vehicles.
The pulse detonation engine (PDE) marks a new approach towards non-continuous jet engines and promises higher
fuel eciency compared to turbofan jet engines, at least at very high speeds. Pratt & Whitney and General Electric
now have active PDE research programs. Most PDE research programs use pulsejet engines for testing ideas early in
the design phase.
Boeing has a proprietary pulse jet engine technology called Pulse Ejector Thrust Augmentor (PETA), which proposes
to use pulse jet engines for vertical lift in military and commercial VTOL aircraft.[10]

4.5 See also

Pulse detonation engine
Valveless pulse jet
List of aircraft engines

38

CHAPTER 4. PULSEJET

4.6 Notes
[1] Pulse Detonation Engine. Gofurther.utsi.edu. Retrieved 2014-03-03.
[2]
[3] Patent US6216446 - Valveless pulse-jet engine with forward facing intake duct - Google Patents. Google.com. Retrieved
2014-03-03.
[4] Valveless Pulsjet. Home.no. Retrieved 2014-03-03.
[5] George Mindling, Robert Bolton: US Airforce Tactical Missiles:1949-1969: The Pioneers, Lulu.com, 200: ISBN 0-55700029-7. pp6-31
[6] Jan Roskam, Chuan-Tau Edward Lan; Airplane aerodynamics and performance DARcorporation: 1997: ISBN 1-88488544-6: 711 pages
[7] Excerpt of Flight May 12, 1949. ightglobal.com. Retrieved 2014-08-31.
[8] Geng, T.; Schoen, M. A.; Kuznetsov, A. V.; Roberts, W. L. (2007). Combined Numerical and Experimental Investigation
of a 15-cm Valveless Pulsejet. Flow, Turbulence and Combustion 78 (1): 1733. doi:10.1007/s10494-006-9032-8.
[9] Jan Roskam, Chuan-Tau Edward Lan; Airplane aerodynamics and performance, DARcorporation: 1997 ISBN 1-88488544-6: 711 pages
[10] Diaz, Jesus (2011-07-28). Boeings Millennium Falcon Floats Using Nazi Technology. Wired.com.

4.7 References
Aeronautical Engineering Review, Institute of the Aeronautical Sciences (U.S.): 1948, vol. 7.
George Mindling, Robert Bolton: US Airforce Tactical Missiles:1949-1969: The Pioneers, Lulu.com, 200:
ISBN 0-557-00029-7. pp631

4.8 External links

- An international site dedicated to pulsejets, including design and experimentation. Includes an extremely
active forum composed of knowledgeable enthusiasts
- A site for hobby jet propulsion, specically valved and valveless pulsejet engines. They oer many free pulse
jet plans, and have a lot of useful information
Video of 21st century-built German reproduction Argus As 014 pulsejet testing
- A detailed guide documenting all the steps required to build ones own Pulsejet. The example created on this
site is eventually mounted onto a home-built kart and tested
Pulsejets in aeromodels
Popular Rotocraft Association
Pulse Jet Bike
Apocalyptic robotics performance group Survival Research Labs operates a collection of pulse jet engines in
some of their creations, including the Hovercraft, V1, and the Flame Hurricane.
PETA (Pulse-Ejector-Thrust-Augmentors) article
Ramon Casanovas pulsejet
American Helicopter XA-5 Flight

Chapter 5

Valveless pulse jet

A valveless pulse jet (or pulsejet) is the simplest known jet propulsion device. Valveless pulsejets are low in cost, light
weight, powerful and easy to operate. They have all the advantages (and most of the disadvantages) of conventional
valved pulse jets, but without the reed valves that need frequent replacement - a valveless pulsejet can operate for
its entire useful life with practically zero maintenance. They have been used to power model aircraft, experimental
go-karts, and unmanned military aircraft such as cruise missiles and target drones.

5.1 Basic characteristics

A pulsejet engine is an air-breathing reaction engine employing an ongoing sequence of discrete combustion events
rather than a constant level of combustion. This clearly distinguishes it from other reaction engine types such as
rockets, turbojets and ramjets, which are all constant combustion devices. All other reaction engines are driven
by maintaining high internal pressure; pulsejets are driven by an alternation between high and low pressure. This
alternation is not maintained by any mechanical contrivance, but rather by the natural acoustic resonance of the rigid
tubular engine structure. The valveless pulsejet is, mechanically speaking, the simplest form of pulsejet, and is, in
fact, the simplest known air-breathing propulsion device that can operate statically, i.e. without forward motion.
The combustion events driving a pulsejet are often informally called "explosions"; however, the preferred term is
"deagrations". They are not the violent, very high energy detonations employed in "Pulse Detonation Engines
(PDEs)"; rather, deagration within the combustion zone of a pulsejet is characterized by a sudden rise in temperature and pressure followed by a rapid subsonic expansion in gas volume. It is this expansion that performs the
main work of moving air rearward through the device as well as setting up conditions in the main tube for the cycle
to continue.
A pulsejet engine works by alternately accelerating a contained mass of air rearward and then breathing in a fresh mass
of air to replace it. The energy to accelerate the air mass is provided by the deagration of fuel mixed thoroughly into
the newly acquired fresh air mass. This cycle is repeated many times per second. During the brief mass acceleration
phase of each cycle, the engines physical action is like that of other reaction engines gas mass is accelerated
rearward, resulting in an application of force forward into the body of the engine. These pulses of force, rapidly
repeated over time, comprise the measurable thrust force of the engine.
Some basic dierences between valved and valveless pulsejets are:
Valveless pulsejet engines have no mechanical valve, eliminating the only internal moving part of the conventional pulsejet;
In valveless engines, the intake section has an important role to play throughout the entire pulsejet cycle;
Valveless engines produce thrust forces in two distinct but synchronized mass acceleration events per cycle,
rather than just one.
39

40

CHAPTER 5. VALVELESS PULSE JET

5.2 Basic (valved) pulsejet theory

In a conventional valved pulsejet, like the engine of the infamous V-1 buzz bomb of World War II, there are two
ducts connected to the combustion zone where the explosions occur. These are generally known as the intake (a
very short duct) and the tailpipe (a very long duct). The function of the forward-facing intake is to provide air (and
in many smaller pulsejets, the fuel/air mixing action) for combustion. The purpose of the rear-facing tailpipe is to
provide air mass for acceleration by the explosive blast as well as to direct the accelerated mass totally rearward. The
combustion zone (usually a widened chamber section) and tailpipe make up the main tube of the engine. A exible,
low mass one-way valve (or multiple identical valves) separates the intake from the combustion zone.
At the beginning of each cycle, air must be pulled into the combustion zone. At the end of each cycle, the tailpipe must
be reloaded with air from the surrounding atmosphere. Both of these basic actions are accomplished by a signicant
drop in pressure that occurs naturally after the deagration expansion, a phenomenon known as the Kadenacy eect
(named after the scientist who rst fully described it). This temporary low pressure opens the metal valve and draws
in the intake air (or air/fuel mixture). It also causes a reversal of ow in the tailpipe that draws fresh air forward to
re-ll the pipe. When the next deagration occurs, the rapid pressure rise slams the valve shut very quickly, ensuring
that almost no explosion mass exits in the forward direction so the expansion of the combustion gases will all be used
to accelerate the replenished mass of air in the long tailpipe rearward.

5.3 Valveless pulsejet operation

The valveless pulsejet is not really valveless it just uses the mass of air in the intake tube as its valve, in place
of a mechanical valve. It cannot do this without moving the intake air outward, and this volume of air itself has
signicant mass, just as the air in the tailpipe does therefore, it is not blown away instantly by the deagration
but is accelerated over a signicant fraction of the cycle time. In all known successful valveless pulsejet designs, the
intake air mass is a small fraction of the tailpipe air mass (due to the smaller dimensions of the intake duct). This
means that the intake air mass will be cleared out of contact with the body of the engine faster than the tailpipe mass
will. The carefully designed imbalance of these two air masses is important for the proper timing of all parts of the
cycle.
When the deagration begins, a zone of signicantly elevated pressure travels outward through both air masses as
a "compression wave". This wave moves at the speed of sound through both the intake and tailpipe air masses.
(Because these air masses are signicantly elevated in temperature as a result of earlier cycles, the speed of sound
in them is much higher than it would be in normal outdoor air.) When a compression wave reaches the open end of
either tube, a low pressure rarefaction wave starts back in the opposite direction, as if reected by the open end.
This low pressure region returning to the combustion zone is, in fact, the internal mechanism of the Kadenacy eect.
There will be no breathing of fresh air into the combustion zone until the arrival of the rarefaction wave.
The wave motion through the air masses should not be confused with the separate motions of the masses themselves.
At the start of deagration, the pressure wave immediately moves through both air masses, while the gas expansion
(due to combustion heat) is just beginning in the combustion zone. The intake air mass will be rapidly accelerated
outward behind the pressure wave, because its mass is relatively small. The tailpipe air mass will follow the outgoing
pressure wave much more slowly. Also, the eventual ow reversal will take place much sooner in the intake, due to its
smaller air mass. The timing of the wave motions is determined basically by the lengths of the intake and main tube
of the engine; the timing of mass motions is determined mostly by the volumes and exact shapes of these sections.
Both are aected by local gas temperatures.
In the valveless engine, there will actually be two arrivals of rarefaction waves rst, from the intake and then from
the tailpipe. In typical valveless designs, the wave that comes back from the intake will be relatively weak. Its main
eect is to begin ow reversal in the intake itself, in eect pre-loading the intake duct with fresh outdoor air. The
actual breathing of the engine as a whole will not begin in earnest until the major low pressure wave from the tailpipe
reaches the combustion zone. Once that happens, signicant ow reversal begins, driven by the drop in combustion
zone pressure.
During this phase, too, there is a dierence in action between the very dierent masses in the intake and tailpipe.
The intake air mass is again fairly low, but it now almost totally consists of outside air; therefore, fresh air is available
almost immediately to begin re-lling the combustion zone from the front. The tailpipe air mass is also pulled,
eventually reversing direction as well. The tailpipe will never be completely purged of hot combustion gases, but at
reversal it will be easily able to pull in fresh air from all sides around the tailpipe opening, so its contained mass will

5.4. PRACTICAL DESIGN ISSUES

41

be gradually increasing until the next deagration event. As air ows rapidly into the combustion zone, the rarefaction
wave is reected rearward by the front of the engine body, and as it moves rearward the air density in the combustion
zone naturally rises until the pressure of the air/fuel mixture reaches a value where deagration can again commence.

5.4 Practical design issues

In practical designs there is no need for a continuous ignition system the combustion zone is never totally purged of
combustion gases and free radicals, so there is enough chemical action in the residue in the combustion zone to act as
an igniter for the next blast once the mixture is up to a reasonable density and pressure: the cycle repeats, controlled
only by the synchronization of pressure and ow events in the two ducts.
While it is theoretically possible to have such an engine without a distinct combustion chamber larger than the
tailpipe diameter, all successful valveless engines designed so far have a widened chamber of some sort, roughly
similar to that found in typical valved engine designs. The chamber typically takes up a fairly small fraction of the
overall main tube length.
The acceleration of air mass back through the intake duct doesnt make sense for engine thrust if the intake is aimed
forward, since the intake thrust is a fairly large fraction of the tailpipe thrust. Various engine geometries have been
used to make the thrust forces from the two ducts act in the same direction. One simple method is to turn the engine
around and then put a U-bend in the tailpipe, so both ducts are spouting rearward, as in the Ecrevisse and Lockwood
(also known as Lockwood-Hiller) types. The Escopette and Kenteld designs use recuperators (U-shaped auxiliary
tubes) mounted in front of the front-ring intakes to turn the intake blast and ow rearward. The so-called Chinese
and Thermojet styles simply mount the intake on the chamber in a rear-spouting direction, leaving the front face of
the chamber unbroken. The basic internal operation of the engine with these geometries is no dierent from that
described above, however. The Lockwood is unique in one respect, namely, its very large diameter intake the
thrust from this large tube is no less than 40 percent of the engine thrust as a whole. The tailpipe volume of this
design is quite large, though, so the imbalance of the contained masses is still clearly seen.

5.5 Jam jar jet design

Most pulse jet engines use independent intake and exhaust pipes. A physically simpler design combines the intake
and exhaust aperture. This is possible due to the oscillating behaviour of a pulse engine. One aperture can act as
exhaust pipe during the high-pressure phase of the work cycle and as intake during the aspiration phase. This engine
design is less ecient in this primitive form due to its lack of a resonant pipe and thus a lack of reected compressing
and sucking acoustic waves. However it works fairly well with a simple instrument such as jam jar with a pierced lid
and fuel inside, hence the name.
Successful versions of the jam jar jet have been run in a plastic bottle. The bottle is far less ecient than the jam jar
versions and is unable to sustain a decent jet for more than a few seconds. It is theorized that the alcohol that was
used to operate the simple jet was acting as a barrier to stop the heat getting all the way through to the plastic. For
the jam jar jet design to work the propellant must be vaporised to ignite which is most often done by a shaking of the
jet which causes the propellant to coat the container, therefore giving the theory some validity.

5.6 Pros and cons

Successful valveless pulsejets have been built from a few centimeters in length to huge sizes, though the largest and
smallest have not been used for propulsion. The smallest ones are only successful when extremely fast-burning fuels
are employed (acetylene or hydrogen, for example). Medium and larger sized engines can be made to burn almost
any ammable material that can be delivered uniformly to the combustion zone, though of course volatile ammable
liquids (gasoline, kerosene, various alcohols) and standard fuel gases (LPG, propane, butane, MAPP gas) are easiest
to use. Because of the deagration nature of pulsejet combustion, these engines are extremely ecient combustors,
producing practically no hazardous pollutants, even when using hydrocarbon fuels. With modern high-temperature
metals for the main structure, engine weight can be kept extremely low. Without the presence of a mechanical valve,
the engines require practically no ongoing maintenance to remain operational.
Up to the present, the physical size of successful valveless designs has always been somewhat larger than valved engines

42

CHAPTER 5. VALVELESS PULSE JET

Work mechanism of jam jar jet. (b) Mixture of air and fuel vapors could ignite using external igniter or by residual free radicals
from last work cycle. (a) The previous jet expelled more air than conform to equilibrium pressure in chamber, thus some of the fresh
air is sucked back. The pressure drop in this case is caused more by cooling of the gas in chamber than by gas inertia. Gas inertia
can not be used well in this design because of lack of exhaust (resonator) pipe and very dissipative aerodynamics of the aperture.

for the same thrust value, though this is theoretically not a requirement. Like valved pulsejets, heat (engines frequently
run white hot) and very high operational noise levels (140 decibels is possible) are among the greatest disadvantages
of these engines. An ignition system of some sort is required for engine startup. In the smallest sizes, forced air at
the intake is also typically needed for startup. There is still much room for improvement in the development of really
ecient, fully practical designs for propulsion uses.
One possible solution to the ongoing problem of pulse jet ineciency would be to have two pulse jets in one, with each
blast compressing the mixture of fuel and air in the other, and both ends discharging into a common chamber through
which air ows only one way. This could potentially allow much higher compression ratios, better fuel eciencies,
and greater thrust.[1]

5.7 See also

Gluhare Pressure Jet

5.8. REFERENCES

43

5.8 References
[1] Ogorelec, Bruno. Blast Compression Valveless Pulsejet Engine (A Laymans Concept)". Retrieved 2013-05-29.

5.9 External links

http://www.pulse-jets.com/ - An international site dedicated to pulsejets, including design and experimentation.
Includes an extremely active forum composed of knowledgeable enthusiasts.
http://www.PulseJetEngines.com/ - A site for hobby jet propulsion, specically valved and valveless pulsejet
engines. They oer many free pulse jet plans, and have a lot of useful information.
Valveless you can nd under Pulso

Chapter 6

Pulse detonation engine

A pulse detonation engine, or PDE, is a type of propulsion system that uses detonation waves to combust the fuel
and oxidizer mixture.[1][2] The engine is pulsed because the mixture must be renewed in the combustion chamber
between each detonation wave initiated by an ignition source. Theoretically, a PDE can operate from subsonic up to
a hypersonic ight speed of roughly Mach 5. An ideal PDE design can have a thermodynamic eciency higher than
other designs like turbojets and turbofans because a detonation wave rapidly compresses the mixture and adds heat
at constant volume. Consequently, moving parts like compressor spools are not necessarily required in the engine,
which could signicantly reduce overall weight and cost. PDEs have been considered for propulsion for over 70
years.[3] Key issues for further development include fast and ecient mixing of the fuel and oxidizer, the prevention
of autoignition, and integration with an inlet and nozzle.
To date, no practical PDE has been put into production, but several testbed engines have been built and one was
successfully integrated into a low-speed demonstration aircraft that ew in sustained PDE powered ight in 2008. In
June 2008, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) unveiled Blackswift, which was intended to
use this technology to reach speeds of up to Mach 6.[4] However the project was cancelled soon afterward, in October
2008.

6.1 Concept
6.1.1

Pulse jets

The basic operation of the PDE is similar to that of the pulse jet engine. In the pulse jet, air is mixed with fuel to
create a ammable mixture that is then ignited in an open chamber. The resulting combustion greatly increases the
pressure of the mixture to approximately 100 atmospheres (10 MPa),[5] which then expands through a nozzle for
thrust.
To ensure that the mixture exits to the rear, thereby pushing the aircraft forward, a series of shutters are used to close
o the front of the engine. Careful tuning of the inlet ensures the shutters close at the right time to force the air to
travel in one direction only through the engine. Some pulse jet designs used a tuned resonant cavity to provide the
valving action through the airow in the system. These designs normally look like a U-shaped tube, open at both
ends.
In either system, the pulse jet has problems during the combustion process. As the fuel burns expands to create thrust,
it is also pushing any remaining unburnt charge rearward, out the nozzle. In many cases some of the charge is ejected
before burning, which causes the famous trail of ame seen on the V-1 ying bomb and other pulse jets. Even while
inside the engine, the mixtures volume is constantly changing which ineciently converts fuel into usable energy.

6.1.2

PDEs

All regular jet engines and most rocket engines operate on the deagration of fuel, that is, the rapid but subsonic
combustion of fuel. The pulse detonation engine is a concept currently in active development to create a jet engine
44

6.2. FIRST PDE POWERED FLIGHT

45

that operates on the supersonic detonation of fuel. Because the combustion takes place so rapidly, the charge (fuel/air
mix) does not have time to expand during this process, so it takes place under almost constant volume. Constant
volume combustion is more ecient than open-cycle designs like gas turbines, which leads to greater fuel eciency.
As the combustion process is so rapid, mechanical shutters are dicult to arrange with the required performance.
Instead, PDEs generally use a series of valves to carefully time the process. In some PDE designs from General
Electric, the shutters are eliminated through careful timing, using the pressure dierences between the dierent areas
of the engine to ensure the shot is ejected rearward.
Another side eect, not yet demonstrated in practical use, is the cycle time. A traditional pulsejet tops out at about
250 pulses per second due to the cycle time of the mechanical shutters, but the aim of the PDE is thousands of pulses
per second, so fast that it is basically continuous from an engineering perspective. This should help smooth out the
otherwise highly vibrational pulsejet engine many small pulses will create less volume than a smaller number of
larger pulses for the same net thrust. Unfortunately, detonations are many times louder than deagrations.
This is said to increase the amount of heat produced per unit of fuel above any other engines, although conversion
of that energy into thrust would remain inecient. A combustion process able to produce more heat per unit of fuel
would, of course, be incredibly valuable in countless applications.
The major diculty with a pulse-detonation engine is starting the detonation. While it is possible to start a detonation
directly with a large spark, the amount of energy input is very large and is not practical for an engine. The typical
solution is to use a deagration-to-detonation transition (DDT)that is, start a high-energy deagration, and have it
accelerate down a tube to the point where it becomes fast enough to become a detonation. Alternatively the detonation
can be sent around a circle and valves ensure that only the highest peak power can leak into exhaust.
This process is far more complicated than it sounds, due to the resistance the advancing wavefront encounters (similar
to wave drag). DDTs occur far more readily if there are obstacles in the tube. The most widely used is the "Shchelkin
spiral", which is designed to create the most useful eddies with the least resistance to the moving fuel/air/exhaust
mixture. The eddies lead to the ame separating into multiple fronts, some of which go backwards and collide with
other fronts, and then accelerate into fronts ahead of them.
The behavior is dicult to model and to predict, and research is ongoing. As with conventional pulsejets, there are
two main types of designs: valved and valveless. Designs with valves encounter the same dicult-to-resolve wear
issues encountered with their pulsejet equivalents. Valveless designs typically rely on abnormalities in the air ow to
ensure a one-way ow, and are very hard to achieve in a regular DDT.
NASA maintains a research program on the PDE, which is aimed at high-speed, about Mach 5, civilian transport
systems. However most PDE research is military in nature, as the engine could be used to develop a new generation
of high-speed, long-range reconnaissance aircraft that would y high enough to be out of range of any current antiaircraft defenses, while oering range considerably greater than the SR-71, which required a massive tanker support
eet to use in operation.
While most research is on the high speed regime, newer designs with much higher pulse rates in the hundreds of
thousands appear to work well even at subsonic speeds. Whereas traditional engine designs always include tradeos
that limit them to a best speed range, the PDE appears to outperform them at all speeds. Both Pratt & Whitney
and General Electric now have active PDE research programs in an attempt to commercialize the designs.
Key diculties in pulse detonation engines are achieving DDT without requiring a tube long enough to make it
impractical and drag-imposing on the aircraft (adding a U-bend into the tube extinguishes the detonation wave);
reducing the noise (often described as sounding like a jackhammer); and damping the severe vibration caused by the
operation of the engine.

6.2 First PDE powered ight

The rst ight of an aircraft powered by a pulse detonation engine took place at the Mojave Air & Space Port on
January 31, 2008.[6] The project was developed by the Air Force Research Laboratory and Innovative Scientic Solutions, Inc. The aircraft selected for the ight was a heavily modied Scaled Composites Long-EZ, named Borealis.[7]
The engine consisted of four tubes producing pulse detonations at a frequency of 80 Hz, creating up to 200 pounds of
thrust (890 newtons). Many fuels were considered and tested by the engine developers in recent years, but a rened
octane was used for this ight. A small rocket system was used to facilitate the lifto of the Long-EZ, but the PDE
operated under its own power for 10 seconds at an altitude of approximately 100 feet (30 m). Obviously, this ight
took place at a low speed whereas the appeal of the PDE engine concept lies more at high speeds, but the demon-

46

CHAPTER 6. PULSE DETONATION ENGINE

In-ight picture of the pulsed detonation powered, and heavily modied, Rutan Long-EZ on January 31, 2008.

stration showed that a PDE can be integrated into an aircraft frame without experiencing structural problems from
the 195-200 dB detonation waves. No more ights are planned for the modied Long-EZ, but the success is likely
to fuel more funding for PDE research. The aircraft itself has been moved to the National Museum of the United
States Air Force for display.[8]

6.3 Popular culture

In the sci- novel Aelita (1923), two Russians travel to Mars in a pulse detonation rocket utilizing a ne powder
of unusual explosive force (p. 19).
In the drama television series JAG, the Season Nine episode The One That Got Away (original air date October 17, 2003) features the Aurora which in the show is a super-secret hypersonic aircraft under development
by the CIA that uses a pulse-detonation engine.
In the movie Stealth (2005), the advanced ghters use pulse-detonation engines with scramjet boosters.
The PDE has been used as a story point in a number of modern novels such as Dan Brown's thriller, Deception
Point (the second page of the book states that all technologies in the story are non-ctional and exist, albeit
without referencing any sources), and Victor Koman's science ction polemic, Kings of the High Frontier.
In X-COM (UFO: Enemy Unknown), the initial basic Interceptor aircraft, containing only completely humandeveloped technology (as opposed to later craft that incorporate reverse-engineered alien technology), is equipped
with dual pulse detonation engines, capable of sustained ight speed of 2100 knots, minimal speed of about
1000 knots.
In the SyFy television series, Eureka, season 4 episode 10 features a ying sleigh described as being powered
by a PDE.

6.4 See also

Scramjet
Nuclear pulse propulsion

6.5. REFERENCES

47

6.5 References
[1] Kailasanath, K., Review of Propulsion Applications of Detonation Waves, AIAA Journal, Vol. 39, No. 9, pp. 1698-1708,
2000.
[2] Roy, G.D., Frolov, S.M., Borisov, A.A., and Netzer, D.W., Pulse Detonation Propulsion: Challenges, Current Status, and
Future Perspective, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Vol. 30, No. 6, pp. 545-672, 2004.
[3] Homann, N., Reaction Propulsion by Intermittent Detonative Combustion, German Ministry of Supply, Volkenrode Translation, 1940.
[4] Shachtman, Noah (June 24, 2008). Explosive Engine Key to Hypersonic Plane. Wired (magazine) (San Francisco,
California: Cond Nast Publications). Retrieved 2009-06-27.
[5] Pulse Detonation Engines, An interview with Dr John Hoke, head researcher from Innovative Scientic Solutions Incorporated PDE program under contract to the United States Air Force Research Laboratory, broadcast on New Zealand
radio, 14th April 2007
[6] Norris, G., Pulse Power: Pulse Detonation Engine-powered Flight Demonstration Marks Milestone in Mojave, Aviation
Week & Space Technology, Vol. 168, No. 7, 2008, pp. 60.
[7] Borealis display poster text at Museum of USAF
[8] Pulse Detonation Engine Flies Into History, Air Force Print News Today, May 16, 2008, accessed August 16, 2008

6.6 External links

Innovative Scientic Solutions Inc.
Pulse Detonation Engines
Popular Science
1952 Pulse Detonation Jet Propulsion Patent by William Bollay
Apparatus powered using laser-supplied energy, US patent Issued on August 6, 1996 Boyd B. Bushman
(Video) The high detonation temperature inside the tube of an experimental PDE causes the seals to heat up
and catch re.
(Video) An experimental PDE operating with a detonation frequency of 1 Hz where the pulses are clearly
dened.
(Video) An experimental PDE operating with a detonation frequency of 25 Hz.
2-D pulse-detonation engine simulation
Fox News report on the Blackswift
DARPA May 2009 notes on PDE

Chapter 7

Motorjet
Thermojet redirects here. For the type of pulsejet, see pulse jet engine.
A motorjet is a rudimentary type of jet engine which is sometimes referred to as thermojet, a term now commonly

Main components of motorjet-powered aircraft; the propeller is absent on some designs

used to describe a particular and completely unrelated pulsejet design.

7.1 Design
At the heart the motorjet is an ordinary piston engine (hence, the term motor), but instead of (or sometimes, as well
as) driving a propeller, it drives a compressor. The compressed air is channeled into a combustion chamber, where
fuel is injected and ignited. The high temperatures generated by the combustion cause the gases in the chamber to
expand and escape at high velocity from the exhaust, creating a thermal reactive force that provides useful thrust.
Motorjet engines provide greater thrust than a propeller alone mounted on a piston engine; this has been successfully
demonstrated in a number of dierent aircraft. A jet engine also can provide thrust at higher speeds where a propeller
becomes less ecient or even ineective; in fact, a jet engine gains eciency as speed rises, while a propeller loses it
(outside of a certain design range). This gives better eciency in either operating range than an aircraft powered by
just a propeller or a jet. The same is true of the dual-powerplant aircraft experimented with after the turbojet became
practicable, which were equipped with both a piston-driven propeller and a turbojet engine.

7.2 History
In 1908 French inventor Ren Lorin proposed using a piston engine to compress air that would then be mixed
with fuel and burned to produce pulses of hot gas that would be expelled through a nozzle to generate a pro48

7.3. NOTES

49

pelling force.[1]
In 1917, O. Morize of Chateaudun, France, proposed the Morize ejector scheme in which a reciprocating engine drove a compressor supplying air to a liquid-fueled combustion chamber which discharged into
a convergent-divergent tube and ultimately out into the atmosphere.
The term motor jet was established in a patent led in Britain by J.H. Harris of Esher, U.K., in 1917.
It was next explored by Secondo Campini in the early 1930s, although it was not until 1940 that an aircraft, the
Caproni Campini N.1 (sometimes referred to as C.C.2), would y powered by his engine. Campini established
the misnomer thermojet at this time to describe his motorjet.
NACA engineer Eastman Jacobs was actively pursuing thermojet research in the early 1940s for a project that
came to be known as Jakes jeep which was never completed as turbojet technology overtook it.
Japanese engineers developed the Tsu-11 motorjet engine to power Ohka aircraft as an alternative to the solidfuel rocket engines that these aircraft were then using.
The Soviet Mikoyan-Gurevich I-250 (N) designed in 1944 used a piston engine to drive both a propeller at the
nose of the plane, and a motorjet compressor leading to a jet exhaust at the tail. Between 10 and 50 I-250
(a.k.a. MiG-13) aircraft were produced, serviced, and own by the Soviet Navy through 1950. A similar
Sukhoi Su-5 plane had been designed, but never produced.
Canadian inventor Mark Nye (Nye Thermodynamics Corporation) built a successful thermojet based on a
single-stage axial fan of his own design driven by a V6 automobile engine in 2002. The jet pipe consisted
of three 55-gallon drums welded together with a cable-operated variable-area nozzle and a fabricated ame
holder. This gasoline-fueled, 85 lbf (0.38 kN) thrust design was used to power his three-wheeled dragster to
victory on Discovery Channels JunkYard Wars in Los Angeles in August 2002.
Motorjet research was nearly abandoned at the end of World War II as the turbojet was a more practical solution to
jet power as it used the jet exhaust to drive a gas turbine, providing the power to drive the compressor without the
additional weight of a piston engine that generated no thrust. One of the primary advantages of the motorjet layout was
that the reciprocating engine provided power for the compressor and no turbine power section was needed. However,
metallurgy and understanding of the design of turbines had advanced to a point after WWII where it was feasible to
create a turbine to operate reliably in the high-velocity hot-gas environment downstream of the combustor, and the
motorjet idea lost focus.

7.3 Notes
[1] Reithmaier, Larry (1994). Mach 1 and Beyond. McGraw-Hill Professional. p. 74. ISBN 0-07-052021-6.

7.4 External links

A motorjet history and research webpage
Nye Thermodynamics Thermojet

Chapter 8

Ramjet
For other uses, see Ramjet (disambiguation).
A ramjet, sometimes referred to as a ying stovepipe or an athodyd (an abbreviation of aero thermodynamic

Inlet
(M>1)

Compression
(M<1)

Fuel injection
Flame holder

Combustion
chamber

Nozzle
(M=1)

Exhaust
(M>1)

Simple ramjet operation, with Mach numbers of ow shown

duct), is a form of airbreathing jet engine that uses the engines forward motion to compress incoming air without a
rotary compressor. Ramjets cannot produce thrust at zero airspeed; they cannot move an aircraft from a standstill.
A ramjet powered vehicle, therefore, requires an assisted take o like a JATO to accelerate it to a speed where it
begins to produce thrust. Ramjets work most eciently at supersonic speeds around Mach 3. This type of engine
can operate up to speeds of Mach 6.
Ramjets can be particularly useful in applications requiring a small and simple mechanism for high-speed use, such
as missiles or artillery shells. Weapon designers are looking to use ramjet technology in artillery shells to give added
range; a 120 mm mortar shell, if assisted by a ramjet, is thought to be able to attain a range of 22 mi (35 km).[1] They
have also been used successfully, though not eciently, as tip jets on the end of helicopter rotors.[2]
Ramjets are frequently confused with pulsejets, which use an intermittent combustion; however, ramjets employ a
continuous combustion process. They are also confused with scramjets, a similar system designed for higher speeds
that uses a supersonic airow in its combustion chamber. While a scramjet works with the same technology, the
combustion process diers slightly, resulting in a higher cruise speed.
50

8.1. HISTORY

51

8.1 History
8.1.1

Cyrano de Bergerac

L'Autre Monde: ou les tats et Empires de la Lune (Comical History of the States and Empires of the Moon) was the
rst of three satirical novels written by Cyrano de Bergerac, that are considered among the rst science ction stories.
Arthur C Clarke credited this book for inventing the ramjet,[3] and being the rst example of a rocket-powered space
ight.

Albert Fon's ramjet-cannonball from 1915

8.1.2

Ren Lorin

The ramjet was conceived in 1913 by French inventor Ren Lorin, who was granted a patent for his device. Attempts
to build a prototype failed due to inadequate materials.[4]

8.1.3

Albert Fon

In 1915, Hungarian inventor Albert Fon devised a solution for increasing the range of artillery, comprising a gunlaunched projectile which was to be united with a ramjet propulsion unit, thus giving a long range from relatively low
muzzle velocities, allowing heavy shells to be red from relatively lightweight guns. Fon submitted his invention
to the Austro-Hungarian Army, but the proposal was rejected.[5] After World War I, Fon returned to the subject
of jet propulsion, in May 1928 describing an air-jet engine which he described as being suitable for high-altitude
supersonic aircraft, in a German patent application. In an additional patent application, he adapted the engine for
subsonic speed. The patent was nally granted in 1932 after four years of examination (German Patent No. 554,906,
1932-11-02).[6]

8.1.4

Soviet Union

In the Soviet Union, a theory of supersonic ramjet engines was presented in 1928 by Boris Stechkin. Yuri Pobedonostsev, chief of GIRD's 3rd Brigade, carried out a great deal of research into ramjet engines. The rst engine, the
GIRD-04, was designed by I.A. Merkulov and tested in April 1933. To simulate supersonic ight, it was fed by air
compressed to 200 atmospheres, and was fueled with hydrogen. The GIRD-08 phosphorus-fueled ramjet was tested
by ring it from an artillery cannon. These shells may have been the rst jet-powered projectiles to break the speed
of sound.
In 1939, Merkulov did further ramjet tests using a two-stage rocket, the R-3. In August of that year, he developed the
rst ramjet engine for use as an auxiliary motor of an aircraft, the DM-1. The worlds rst ramjet-powered airplane
ight took place in December 1939, using two DM-2 engines on a modied Polikarpov I-15. Merkulov designed a
ramjet ghter Samolet D in 1941, which was never completed. Two of his DM-4 engines were installed on the
Yak-7 PVRD ghter, during World War II. In 1940, the Kostikov-302 experimental plane was designed, powered by
a liquid fuel rocket for take-o and ramjet engines for ight. That project was cancelled in 1944.

52

CHAPTER 8. RAMJET

In 1947, Mstislav Keldysh proposed a long-range antipodal bomber, similar to the Snger-Bredt bomber, but powered
by ramjet instead of rocket. In 1954, NPO Lavochkin and the Keldysh Institute began development of a trisonic
ramjet-powered cruise missile, Burya. This project competed with the R-7 ICBM being developed by Sergei Korolev,
and was cancelled in 1957.

8.1.5

Germany

In 1936, Hellmuth Walter constructed a test engine powered by natural gas. Theoretical work was carried out at BMW
and Junkers, as well as DFL. In 1941, Eugen Snger of DFL proposed a ramjet engine with a very high combustion
chamber temperature. He constructed very large ramjet pipes with 500 millimetres (20 in) and 1,000 millimetres (39
in) diameter and carried out combustion tests on lorries and on a special test rig on a Dornier Do 17Z at ight speeds
of up to 200 m/s (720 km/h, 450 mph). Later, with petrol becoming scarce in Germany due to wartime conditions,
tests were carried out with blocks of pressed coal dust as a fuel, which were not successful due to slow combustion.[7]

8.1.6

Gorgon IV

The Gorgon IV mounted on the wing of a P-61 Black Widow in preparation for ight testing

The US Navy developed a series of air-to-air missiles under the name of "Gorgon" using dierent propulsion mechanisms, including ramjet propulsion. The ramjet Gorgon IVs, made by Glenn Martin, were tested in 1948 and 1949
at Naval Air Station Point Mugu. The ramjet engine itself was designed at the University of Southern California
and manufactured by the Marquardt Aircraft Company. The engine was 7 ft long and 20 in in diameter and was
positioned below the missile (see photo).

8.1.7

Fritz Zwicky

Eminent Swiss astrophysicist Fritz Zwicky was research director at Aerojet and holds many patents in jet propulsion.
U.S. Patent 5121670 is for the Ram Accelerator and U.S. Patent 4722261 is the Extendable Ram Cannon. The U.S.
Navy would not allow Fritz Zwicky to publicly discuss his own invention, U.S. Patent 2,461,797 for the Underwater
Jet, a ram jet that performs in a uid medium. Time chronicles Fritz Zwickys work in the Missed Swiss, July 11,
1955, and the Underwater Jet in the March 14, 1949 issue.

8.1.8

France

In France, the works of Ren Leduc were notable. Leducs Model, the Leduc 0.10 was one of the rst ramjet-powered
aircraft to y, in 1949.

8.2. ENGINE CYCLE

53

Leduc 022

The Nord 1500 Grion reached Mach 2.19 in 1958.

8.2 Engine cycle

Fresh Air

Exhaust
gasses

co
ns

t.

t.

co
n

st.

q in
s

ns

Turbine

2
co

Work
out

s=

Compressor

q in
p

Combustion

Fuel

q out

P-v Diagram

2
1

p=

co

t.
ns

q out

T-s Diagram

Brayton cycle

Main article: Brayton cycle

The Brayton cycle is a thermodynamic cycle that describes the workings of the gas turbine engine, the basis of
the airbreathing jet engine and others. It is named after George Brayton (18301892), the American engineer who
developed it, although it was originally proposed and patented by Englishman John Barber in 1791.[8] It is also
sometimes known as the Joule cycle.

8.3 Design
A ramjet is designed around its inlet. An object moving at high speed through air generates a high pressure region
upstream. A ramjet uses this high pressure in front of the engine to force air through the tube, where it is heated

54

CHAPTER 8. RAMJET

A typical ramjet

by combusting some of it with fuel. It is then passed through a nozzle to accelerate it to supersonic speeds. This
acceleration gives the ramjet forward thrust.
A ramjet is sometimes referred to as a 'ying stovepipe', a very simple device comprising an air intake, a combustor,
and a nozzle. Normally, the only moving parts are those within the turbopump, which pumps the fuel to the combustor
in a liquid-fuel ramjet. Solid-fuel ramjets are even simpler.
By way of comparison, a turbojet uses a gas turbine-driven fan to compress the air further. This gives greater compression and eciency and far more power at low speeds, where the ram eect is weak, but is also more complex,
heavier and expensive, and the temperature limits of the turbine section limit the top speed and thrust at high speed.

8.3.1

Inlet

Ramjets try to exploit the very high dynamic pressure within the air approaching the intake lip. An ecient intake will
recover much of the freestream stagnation pressure, which is used to support the combustion and expansion process
in the nozzle.
Most ramjets operate at supersonic ight speeds and use one or more conical (or oblique) shock waves, terminated
by a strong normal shock, to slow down the airow to a subsonic velocity at the exit of the intake. Further diusion
is then required to get the air velocity down to a suitable level for the combustor.
Subsonic ramjets do not need such a sophisticated inlet since the airow is already subsonic and a simple hole is usually
used. This would also work at slightly supersonic speeds, but as the air will choke at the inlet, this is inecient.
The inlet is divergent, to provide a constant inlet speed of Mach 0.5.

8.3.2

Combustor

As with other jet engines, the combustors job is to create hot air, by burning a fuel with the air at essentially constant
pressure. The airow through the jet engine is usually quite high, so sheltered combustion zones are produced by
using 'ame holders' to stop the ames from blowing out.
Since there is no downstream turbine, a ramjet combustor can safely operate at stoichiometric fuel:air ratios, which
implies a combustor exit stagnation temperature of the order of 2400 K for kerosene. Normally, the combustor
must be capable of operating over a wide range of throttle settings, for a range of ight speeds/altitudes. Usually, a
sheltered pilot region enables combustion to continue when the vehicle intake undergoes high yaw/pitch during turns.
Other ame stabilization techniques make use of ame holders, which vary in design from combustor cans to simple
at plates, to shelter the ame and improve fuel mixing. Overfuelling the combustor can cause the normal shock
within a supersonic intake system to be pushed forward beyond the intake lip, resulting in a substantial drop in engine
airow and net thrust.

8.3. DESIGN

55

Subsonic intakes on ramjets are relatively simple.

8.3.3

Nozzles

The propelling nozzle is a critical part of a ramjet design, since it accelerates exhaust ow to produce thrust.
For a ramjet operating at a subsonic ight Mach number, exhaust ow is accelerated through a converging nozzle.
For a supersonic ight Mach number, acceleration is typically achieved via a convergent-divergent nozzle.

8.3.4

Performance and control

Although ramjets have been run from as low as 45 m/s (162 km/h, 100 mph)[9] upwards, below about Mach 0.5, they
give little thrust and are highly inecient due to their low pressure ratios.
Above this speed, given sucient initial ight velocity, a ramjet will be self-sustaining. Indeed, unless the vehicle
drag is extremely high, the engine/airframe combination will tend to accelerate to higher and higher ight speeds,
substantially increasing the air intake temperature. As this could have a detrimental eect on the integrity of the
engine and/or airframe, the fuel control system must reduce engine fuel ow to stabilize the ight Mach number and,
thereby, air intake temperature to reasonable levels.
Due to the stoichiometric combustion temperature, eciency is usually good at high speeds (Mach 2-3), whereas at
low speeds the relatively poor pressure ratio means the ramjets are outperformed by turbojets, or even rockets.

56

CHAPTER 8. RAMJET

One of the two Bristol Thor ramjet engines on a Bristol Bloodhound missile

8.4 Types
Ramjets can be classied according to the type of fuel, liquid or solid; and the booster.[10]
In a liquid fuel ramjet (LFRJ), hydrocarbon fuel (typically) is injected into the combustor ahead of a ameholder which
stabilises the ame resulting from the combustion of the fuel with the compressed air from the intake(s). A means
of pressurizing and supplying the fuel to the ramcombustor is required, which can be complicated and expensive.
Arospatiale-Celerg designed an LFRJ where the fuel is forced into the injectors by an elastomer bladder which
inates progressively along the length of the fuel tank. Initially, the bladder forms a close-tting sheath around the
compressed air bottle from which it is inated, which is mounted lengthwise in the tank.[11] This oers a lower-cost
approach than a regulated LFRJ requiring a turbopump and associated hardware to supply the fuel.[12]
A ramjet generates no static thrust and needs a booster to achieve a forward velocity high enough for ecient operation
of the intake system. The rst ramjet-powered missiles used external boosters, usually solid-propellant rockets, either
in tandem, where the booster is mounted immediately aft of the ramjet, e.g. Sea Dart, or wraparound where multiple
boosters are attached alongside the outside of the ramjet, e.g. SA-4 Ganef. The choice of booster arrangement
is usually driven by the size of the launch platform. A tandem booster increases the overall length of the system,
whereas wraparound boosters increase the overall diameter. Wraparound boosters will usually generate higher drag
than a tandem arrangement.
Integrated boosters provide a more ecient packaging option, since the booster propellant is cast inside the otherwise
empty combustor. This approach has been used on solid, for example SA-6 Gainful, liquid, for example ASMP, and
ducted rocket, for example Meteor, designs. Integrated designs are complicated by the dierent nozzle requirements
of the boost and ramjet phases of ight. Due to the higher thrust levels of the booster, a dierently shaped nozzle is
required for optimum thrust compared to that required for the lower thrust ramjet sustainer. This is usually achieved
via a separate nozzle, which is ejected after booster burnout. However, designs such as Meteor feature nozzleless
boosters. This oers the advantages of elimination of the hazard to launch aircraft from the ejected boost nozzle
debris, simplicity, reliability, and reduced mass and cost,[13] although this must be traded against the reduction in
performance compared with that provided by a dedicated booster nozzle.

8.5. INTEGRAL ROCKET RAMJET/DUCTED ROCKET

57

8.5 Integral rocket ramjet/ducted rocket

Main article: Air-augmented rocket
A slight variation on the ramjet uses the supersonic exhaust from a rocket combustion process to compress and react
with the incoming air in the main combustion chamber. This has the advantage of giving thrust even at zero speed.
In a solid fuel integrated rocket ramjet (SFIRR), the solid fuel is cast along the outer wall of the ramcombustor. In this
case, fuel injection is through ablation of the propellant by the hot compressed air from the intake(s). An aft mixer
may be used to improve combustion eciency. SFIRRs are preferred over LFRJs for some applications because
of the simplicity of the fuel supply, but only when the throttling requirements are minimal, i.e. when variations in
altitude or Mach number are limited.
In a ducted rocket, a solid fuel gas generator produces a hot fuel-rich gas which is burnt in the ramcombustor with
the compressed air supplied by the intake(s). The ow of gas improves the mixing of the fuel and air and increases
total pressure recovery. In a throttleable ducted rocket, also known as a variable ow ducted rocket, a valve allows the
gas generator exhaust to be throttled allowing control of the thrust. Unlike an LFRJ, solid propellant ramjets cannot
ame out. The ducted rocket sits somewhere between the simplicity of the SFRJ and the unlimited throttleability of
the LFRJ.

8.6 Flight speed

Ramjets generally give little or no thrust below about half the speed of sound, and they are inecient (less than 600
seconds) until the airspeed exceeds 1000 km/h (600 mph) due to low compression ratios. Even above the minimum
speed, a wide ight envelope (range of ight conditions), such as low to high speeds and low to high altitudes, can
force signicant design compromises, and they tend to work best optimised for one designed speed and altitude (point
designs). However, ramjets generally outperform gas turbine-based jet engine designs and work best at supersonic
speeds (Mach 24).[14] Although inecient at slower speeds, they are more fuel-ecient than rockets over their entire
useful working range up to at least Mach 6.
The performance of conventional ramjets falls o above Mach 6 due to dissociation and pressure loss caused by
shock as the incoming air is slowed to subsonic velocities for combustion. In addition, the combustion chambers
inlet temperature increases to very high values, approaching the dissociation limit at some limiting Mach number.

8.7 Related engines

8.7.1

Air turboramjet

Main article: Air turboramjet

Another example of this is the air turboramjet, which has a compressor powered by a gas heated via a heat exchanger
within the combustion chamber.

8.7.2

Scramjets

Main article: Scramjet

Ramjets always slow the incoming air to a subsonic velocity within the combustor. Scramjets, or supersonic combustion ramjet are similar to ramjets, but some of the air goes through the entire engine at supersonic speeds. This
increases the stagnation pressure recovered from the freestream and improves net thrust. Thermal choking of the
exhaust is avoided by having a relatively high supersonic air velocity at combustor entry. Fuel injection is often into a
sheltered region below a step in the combustor wall. Although scramjet engines have been studied for many decades,
only recently have small experimental units been ight tested and then only very briey (e.g. the Boeing X-43).[15]
As of May, 2010, this engine has been tested to attain Mach 5 for 200 seconds on the X-51A Waverider.[16]

58

CHAPTER 8. RAMJET

8.7.3

Precooled engines

Main article: Precooled jet engine

A variant of the pure ramjet is the 'combined cycle' engine, intended to overcome the limitations of the pure ramjet.
One example of this is the SABRE engine; this uses a precooler, behind which is the ramjet and turbine machinery.
The ATREX engine developed in Japan is an experimental implementation of this concept. It uses liquid hydrogen
fuel in a fairly exotic, single-fan arrangement. The liquid hydrogen fuel is pumped through a heat exchanger in the air
intake, simultaneously heating the liquid hydrogen, and cooling the incoming air. This cooling of the incoming air is
critical to achieving a reasonable eciency. The hydrogen then continues through a second heat exchanger position
after the combustion section, where the hot exhaust is used to further heat the hydrogen, turning it into a very high
pressure gas. This gas is then passed through the tips of the fan to provide driving power to the fan at subsonic speeds.
After mixing with the air, it is burned in the combustion chamber.
The Reaction Engines Scimitar has been proposed for the LAPCAT hypersonic airliner, and the Reaction Engines
SABRE for the Reaction Engines Skylon spaceplane.

8.7.4

Nuclear-powered ramjets

Main article: Project Pluto

During the Cold War, the United States designed and ground-tested a nuclear-powered ramjet called Project Pluto.
This system used no combustion; a nuclear reactor heated the air instead. The project was ultimately canceled because
ICBMs seemed to serve the purpose better, and because a low-ying radioactive missile could cause problems for
any allied soldiers.

8.7.5

Ionospheric ramjet

The upper atmosphere above about 100 km contains monatomic oxygen produced by the sun through photochemistry.
A concept was created by NASA for recombining this thin gas back to diatomic molecules at orbital speeds to power
a ramjet.[17]

8.7.6

Bussard ramjet

Main article: Bussard ramjet

The Bussard ramjet is a space drive concept intended to fuse interstellar wind and exhaust it at high speed from the
rear of the vehicle.

8.8 See also

Aircraft engines
Bussard ramjet
Gas turbine
Hypersonic
Jet aircraft
Jet engine
Jet Engine Performance
Jetboat

8.9. AIRCRAFT USING RAMJETS

Liquid air cycle engine/Reaction Engines SABRE
Precooled jet engine/Reaction Engines Scimitar
Ram accelerator
Scramjet
Spacecraft propulsion
Supercharger
Turbocharger
Turbofan
Turbojet
Turboprop
Turboshaft
Wikibooks: Jet propulsion

8.9 Aircraft using ramjets

Hiller Hornet (a ramjet-powered helicopter)
Focke-Wulf Super Lorin
Focke-Wulf Ta 283
Focke-Wulf Triebgel
Leduc experimental aircraft
Lockheed D-21
Lockheed X-7
Nord 1500 Grion
Republic XF-103
SR-71 Blackbird (Turbojet engines that function as ramjets at mach 1+ speeds.)
Skoda-Kauba Sk P.14

8.10 Missiles using ramjets

Bomarc
BrahMos
MBDA Meteor
Bristol Bloodhound
Bendix RIM-8 Talos
Orbital Sciences GQM-163 Coyote
North American SM-64 Navaho
P-270 Moskit

59

60

CHAPTER 8. RAMJET
Akash missile
Sea Dart missile
2K11 Krug
MBDA ASMP

8.11 References
[1] McNab, Chris; Hunter Keeter (2008). Tools of Violence: Guns, Tanks and Dirty Bombs. Osprey Publishing. p. 145. ISBN
1-84603-225-3.
[2] Here Comes the Flying Stovepipe. TIME. 26 November 1965. Retrieved 2008-03-09.
[3] Savien Cyrano de Bergerac (1619-1655)
[4] Zucker, Robert D.; Oscar Biblarz (2002). Fundamentals of gas dynamics. John Wiley and Sons. ISBN 0-471-05967-6.
[5]

Gyorgy, Nagy Istvan (1977). Albert Fono: A Pioneer of Jet Propulsion. "International Astronautical Congress,
1977. IAF/IAA.

[6] Dugger, Gordon L. (1969). Ramjets. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. p. 15.
[7] Hirschel, Ernst-Heinrich; Horst Prem; Gero Madelung (2004). Aeronautical Research in Germany. Springer. pp. 242243.
ISBN 3-540-40645-X.
[8] according to Gas Turbine History.
[9] RAMJET PRIMER.
[10] A Century of Ramjet Propulsion Technology Evolution, AIAA Journal of Propulsion and Power, Vol. 20, No. 1, January
February 2004.
[11] Arospatiale studies low-cost ramjet, Flight International, 1319 December 1995.
[12] Hughes homes in on missile pact, Flight International, 1117 September 1996.
[13] Procinsky, I.M., McHale, C.A., Nozzleless Boosters for Integral-Rocket-Ramjet Missile Systems, Paper 80-1277, AIAA/SAE/ASME
16th Joint Propulsion Conference, 30 June to 2 July 1980.
[14] 11.6 Performance of Jet Engines.
[15] Boeing: History Chronology 20022004.
[16] USAF vehicle breaks record for hypersonic ight.
[17] PRELIMINARY SURVEY OF PROPULSION USING CHEMICAL ENERGY STORED IN THE UPPER ATMOSPHERE By Lionel V, Baldwin and Perry L. Blackshear.

8.12 External links

NASA ramjet information and model
Riding The Ramjet January 1949, Popular Mechanics article that covers the USAF rst experiment with
ramjets on a P-80 ghter
The Boeing Logbook: 20022004
Design notes on a ramjet-powered helicopter

Chapter 9

Scramjet

Inlet body

Fuel injection

Supersonic
Compression

Combustion

Nozzle

Supersonic
Exhaust

A scramjet (supersonic combusting ramjet) is a variant of a ramjet airbreathing jet engine in which combustion takes
place in supersonic airow. As in ramjets, a scramjet relies on high vehicle speed to forcefully compress the incoming
air before combustion (hence ramjet), but a ramjet decelerates the air to subsonic velocities before combustion, while
airow in a scramjet is supersonic throughout the entire engine. This allows the scramjet to operate eciently at
extremely high speeds: theoretical projections place the top speed of a scramjet between Mach 12 (8,400 mph;
14,000 km/h) and Mach 24 (16,000 mph; 25,000 km/h).
The scramjet is composed of three basic components: a converging inlet, where incoming air is compressed; a
combustor, where gaseous fuel is burned with atmospheric oxygen to produce heat; and a diverging nozzle, where
the heated air is accelerated to produce thrust. Unlike a typical jet engine, such as a turbojet or turbofan engine, a
scramjet does not use rotating, fan-like components to compress the air; rather, the achievable speed of the aircraft
moving through the atmosphere causes the air to compress within the inlet. As such, no moving parts are needed in a
scramjet. In comparison, typical turbojet engines require inlet fans, multiple stages of rotating compressor fans, and
multiple rotating turbine stages, all of which add weight, complexity, and a greater number of failure points to the
engine.
Due to the nature of their design, scramjet operation is limited to near-hypersonic velocities. As they lack mechanical
compressors, scramjets require the high kinetic energy of a hypersonic ow to compress the incoming air to operational conditions. Thus, a scramjet-powered vehicle must be accelerated to the required velocity (usually about Mach
4) by some other means of propulsion, such as turbojet, railgun, or rocket engines.[1] In the ight of the experimental
scramjet-powered Boeing X-51A, the test craft was lifted to ight altitude by a Boeing B-52 Stratofortress before
being released and accelerated by a detachable rocket to near Mach 4.5.[2] In May 2013, another ight achieved an
increased speed of Mach 5.1.[3]
While scramjets are conceptually simple, actual implementation is limited by extreme technical challenges. Hypersonic ight within the atmosphere generates immense drag, and temperatures found on the aircraft and within the
engine can be much greater than that of the surrounding air. Maintaining combustion in the supersonic ow presents
61

62

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

additional challenges, as the fuel must be injected, mixed, ignited, and burned within milliseconds. While scramjet
technology has been under development since the 1950s, only very recently have scramjets successfully achieved
powered ight.[4]

9.1 History
During World War II, a tremendous amount of time and eort were put into researching high-speed jet- and rocketpowered aircraft, predominantly by the Germans. After the war, the US and UK took in several German scientists and
military technologies through Operation Paperclip to begin putting more emphasis on their own weapons development,
including jet engines. The Bell X-1 attained supersonic ight in 1947 and, by the early 1960s, rapid progress towards
faster aircraft suggested that operational aircraft would be ying at hypersonic speeds within a few years. Except
for specialized rocket research vehicles like the North American X-15 and other rocket-powered spacecraft, aircraft
top speeds have remained level, generally in the range of Mach 1 to Mach 3.
In the 1950s and 1960s a variety of experimental scramjet engines were built and ground tested in the US and the
UK. In 1964, Dr. Frederick S. Billig and Dr. Gordon L. Dugger submitted a patent application for a supersonic
combustion ramjet based on Billigs Ph.D. thesis. This patent was issued in 1981 following the removal of an order
of secrecy.[5]
In 1981 tests were made in Australia under the guidance of Professor Ray Stalker in the T3 ground test facility at
ANU.[6]
The rst successful ight test of a Scramjet was performed by Russia in 1991. It was an axisymmetric hydrogenfueled dual-mode scramjet developed by Central Institute of Aviation Motors (CIAM), Moscow in the late 1970s.
The scramjet ight was own captive-carry atop the SA-5 surface-to-air missile that included an experiment ight
support unit known as the Hypersonic Flying Laboratory (HFL), Kholod.[7] Then from 1992 to 1998 an additional
6 ight tests of the axisymmetric high-speed scramjet-demonstrator were conducted by CIAM together with France
and then with NASA, USA.[8][9] Maximum ight velocity greater than Mach 6.4 was achieved and Scramjet operation
during 77 seconds was demonstrated. These ight test series also provided insight into autonomous hypersonic ight
controls.

9.1.1

Progress in the 2000s

Main article: Scramjet programs

In the 2000s, signicant progress was made in the development of hypersonic technology, particularly in the eld of
scramjet engines.
US eorts are probably the best funded, and the Hyper-X team claimed the rst ight of a thrust-producing scramjetpowered vehicle with full aerodynamic maneuvering surfaces in 2004 with the X-43A.[10][11] However, the rst group
to demonstrate a scramjet working in an atmospheric test was a project by a joint British and Australian team from
UK defense company QinetiQ and the University of Queensland.[12]
The HyShot project demonstrated scramjet combustion on July 30, 2002. The scramjet engine worked eectively
and demonstrated supersonic combustion in action. However, the engine was not designed to provide thrust to propel
a craft. It was designed more or less as a technology demonstrator.
On Friday, June 15, 2007, the US Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA), in cooperation with the
Australian Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO), announced a successful scramjet ight at Mach
10 using rocket engines to boost the test vehicle to hypersonic speeds.[13]
A series of scramjet ground test were completed at NASA Langley Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility (AHSTF) at
simulated Mach 8 ight conditions. These experiments were used to support HIFiRE ight 2.[14]
On May 22, 2009, Woomera hosted the rst successful test ight of a hypersonic aircraft in HIFiRE. The launch
was one of 10 planned test ights. The series of up to 10 planned hypersonic ight experiments are part of a joint
research program between the Defence Science and Technology Organisation and the US Air Force, designated as
the Hypersonic International Flight Research Experimentation (HIFiRE).[15] HIFiRE is investigating hypersonics
technology (the study of ight exceeding ve times the speed of sound) and its application to advanced scramjetpowered space launch vehicles the objective is to support the new Boeing X-51 scramjet demonstrator while also

9.1. HISTORY

63

Artists conception of the NASA X-43 with scramjet attached to the underside

building a strong base of ight test data for quick-reaction space launch development and hypersonic quick-strike
weapons.[15]
On 22 and 23 March 2010, Australian and American defence scientists successfully tested a (HIFiRE) hypersonic
rocket. It reached an atmospheric velocity of more than 5,000 kilometres per hour after taking o from the
Woomera Test Range in outback South Australia.[16][17]
On May 27, 2010, NASA and the United States Air Force successfully ew the X-51A Waverider for approximately
200 seconds at Mach 5, setting a new world record hypersonic airspeed. The Waverider ew autonomously before
losing acceleration for an unknown reason and destroying itself as planned. The test was declared a success. The
X-51A was carried aboard a B-52, accelerated to Mach 4.5 via a solid rocket booster, and then ignited the Pratt &
Whitney Rocketdyne scramjet engine to reach Mach 5 at 70,000 feet.[18] However, a second ight June 13, 2011 was
ended prematurely when the engine lit briey on ethylene but failed to transition to its primary JP7 fuel, failing to
reach full power.[19][20]
On 16 November 2010, Australian scientists successfully demonstrated that the high-speed ow in a naturally nonburning scramjet engine can be ignited using a pulsed laser source.[21]
A further X-51A Waverider test failed on August 15, 2012. The attempt to y the Scramjet, carried by a B-52 for
a prolonged period at Mach 6 was cut short when, only 15 seconds into the unmanned ight, the X-51A craft lost
control and broke apart, falling into the Pacic Ocean north-west of Los Angeles. The cause of the failure was blamed
on a faulty control n.[22]
In May 2013 an unmanned X-51A WaveRider reached 4828 km/h (Mach 5.1) during a three-minute ight under
scramjet power. The WaveRider was dropped at 50,000 feet from a B-52 bomber, and then accelerated to Mach 4.8
by a solid rocket booster which then separated before the WaveRiders scramjet engine came into eect.[23]
On 9 January 2014 US surveillance satellites observed a supersonic ying object at a speed of Mach 5 up to Mach
10 in around 100 kilometers height. Following Chinese statements the preliminary designation for this object is WU-

64

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

14. In the rst phase this unmanned vehicle was brought to its operating height and speed by a military long-range
missile.[24][25]

9.2 Design principles

(a)

(b)

(c)

Compression

Combustion

Expansion

The compression, combustion, and expansion regions of: (a) turbojet, (b) ramjet, and (c) scramjet engines.

Scramjet engines are a type of jet engine, and rely on the combustion of fuel and an oxidizer to produce thrust.
Similar to conventional jet engines, scramjet-powered aircraft carry the fuel on board, and obtain the oxidizer by
the ingestion of atmospheric oxygen (as compared to rockets, which carry both fuel and an oxidizing agent). This
requirement limits scramjets to suborbital atmospheric ight, where the oxygen content of the air is sucient to
maintain combustion.

9.3. THEORY

9.2.1

65

Basic principles

Scramjets are designed to operate in the hypersonic ight regime, beyond the reach of turbojet engines, and, along with
ramjets, ll the gap between the high eciency of turbojets and the high speed of rocket engines. Turbomachinerybased engines, while highly ecient at subsonic speeds, become increasingly inecient at transonic speeds, as the
compressor fans found in turbojet engines require subsonic speeds to operate. While the ow from transonic to
low supersonic speeds can be decelerated to these conditions, doing so at supersonic speeds results in a tremendous
increase in temperature and a loss in the total pressure of the ow. Around Mach 34, turbomachinery is no longer
useful, and ram-style compression becomes the preferred method.[26]
Ramjets utilize high-speed characteristics of air to literally 'ram' air through an inlet nozzle into the combustor. At
transonic and supersonic ight speeds, the air upstream of the nozzle is not able to move out of the way quickly
enough, and is compressed within the nozzle before being diused into the combustor. Combustion in a ramjet
takes place at subsonic velocities, similar to turbojets, but the combustion products are then accelerated through
a convergent-divergent nozzle to supersonic speeds. As they have no mechanical means of compression, ramjets
cannot start from a standstill, and generally do not achieve sucient compression until supersonic ight. The lack of
intricate turbomachinery allows ramjets to deal with the temperature rise associated with decelerating a supersonic
ow to subsonic speeds, but this only goes so far: at near-hypersonic velocities, the temperature rise and ineciencies
discourage decelerating the ow to the magnitude found in ramjet engines.[26]
Scramjet engines operate on the same principles as ramjets, but do not decelerate the ow to subsonic velocities.
Rather, a scramjet combustor is supersonic: the inlet decelerates the ow to a lower Mach number for combustion,
after which it is accelerated to an even higher Mach number through the nozzle. By limiting the amount of deceleration, temperatures within the engine are kept at a tolerable level, from both a material and combustive standpoint.
Even so, current scramjet technology requires the use of high-energy fuels and active cooling schemes to maintain
sustained operation, often using hydrogen and regenerative cooling techniques.[27]

9.3 Theory
All scramjet engines have an intake which compresses the incoming air, fuel injectors, a combustion chamber, and
a divergent thrust nozzle. Sometimes engines also include a region which acts as a ame holder, although the high
stagnation temperatures mean that an area of focused waves may be used, rather than a discrete engine part as seen in
turbine engines. Other engines use pyrophoric fuel additives, such as silane, to avoid such issues. An isolator between
the inlet and combustion chamber is often included to improve the homogeneity of the ow in the combustor and to
extend the operating range of the engine.
A scramjet is reminiscent of a ramjet. In a typical ramjet, the supersonic inow of the engine is decelerated at the inlet
to subsonic speeds and then reaccelerated through a nozzle to supersonic speeds to produce thrust. This deceleration,
which is produced by a normal shock, creates a total pressure loss which limits the upper operating point of a ramjet
engine.
For a scramjet, the kinetic energy of the freestream air entering the scramjet engine is large comparable to the energy
released by the reaction of the oxygen content of the air with a fuel (say hydrogen). Thus the heat released from
combustion at Mach 25 is around 10% of the total enthalpy of the working uid. Depending on the fuel, the kinetic
energy of the air and the potential combustion heat release will be equal at around Mach 8. Thus the design of a
scramjet engine is as much about minimizing drag as maximizing thrust.
This high speed makes the control of the ow within the combustion chamber more dicult. Since the ow is
supersonic, no downstream inuence propagates within the freestream of the combustion chamber. Thus throttling
of the entrance to the thrust nozzle is not a usable control technique. In eect, a block of gas entering the combustion
chamber must mix with fuel and have sucient time for initiation and reaction, all the while traveling supersonically
through the combustion chamber, before the burned gas is expanded through the thrust nozzle. This places stringent
requirements on the pressure and temperature of the ow, and requires that the fuel injection and mixing be extremely
ecient. Usable dynamic pressures lie in the range 20 to 200 kilopascals (2.9 to 29.0 psi), where

q=

1 2
v
2

where

66

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

Computational uid dynamics (CFD) image of the NASA X-43A with scramjet attached to the underside at Mach 7

q is the dynamic pressure of the gas

(rho) is the density of the gas
v is the velocity of the gas
To keep the combustion rate of the fuel constant, the pressure and temperature in the engine must also be constant.
This is problematic because the airow control systems that would facilitate this are not physically possible in a
scramjet launch vehicle due to the large speed and altitude range involved, meaning that it must travel at an altitude
specic to its speed. Because air density reduces at higher altitudes, a scramjet must climb at a specic rate as it
accelerates to maintain a constant air pressure at the intake. This optimal climb/descent prole is called a constant
dynamic pressure path. It is thought that scramjets might be operable up to an altitude of 75 km.[28]
Fuel injection and management is also potentially complex. One possibility would be that the fuel be pressurized
to 100 bar by a turbo pump, heated by the fuselage, sent through the turbine and accelerated to higher speeds than
the air by a nozzle. The air and fuel stream are crossed in a comb like structure, which generates a large interface.
Turbulence due to the higher speed of the fuel leads to additional mixing. Complex fuels like kerosene need a long
engine to complete combustion.
The minimum Mach number at which a scramjet can operate is limited by the fact that the compressed ow must be
hot enough to burn the fuel, and have pressure high enough that the reaction be nished before the air moves out the
back of the engine. Additionally, in order to be called a scramjet, the compressed ow must still be supersonic after
combustion. Here two limits must be observed: Firstly, since when a supersonic ow is compressed it slows down,
the level of compression must be low enough (or the initial speed high enough) not to slow the gas below Mach 1. If
the gas within a scramjet goes below Mach 1 the engine will choke, transitioning to subsonic ow in the combustion
chamber. This eect is well known amongst experimenters on scramjets since the waves caused by choking are easily
observable. Additionally, the sudden increase in pressure and temperature in the engine can lead to an acceleration
of the combustion, leading to the combustion chamber exploding.
Secondly, the heating of the gas by combustion causes the speed of sound in the gas to increase (and the Mach number
to decrease) even though the gas is still travelling at the same speed. Forcing the speed of air ow in the combustion
chamber under Mach 1 in this way is called thermal choking. It is clear that a pure scramjet can operate at Mach
numbers of 6-8,[29] but in the lower limit, it depends on the denition of a scramjet. There are engine designs where a
ramjet transforms into a scramjet over the Mach 3-6 range, known as dual-mode scramjets.[30] In this range however,
the engine is still receiving signicant thrust from subsonic combustion of the ramjet type.

9.4. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SCRAMJETS

67

The high cost of ight testing and the unavailability of ground facilities have hindered scramjet development. A
large amount of the experimental work on scramjets has been undertaken in cryogenic facilities, direct-connect tests,
or burners, each of which simulates one aspect of the engine operation. Further, vitiated facilities, storage heated
facilities, arc facilities and the various types of shock tunnels each have limitations which have prevented perfect
simulation of scramjet operation. The HyShot ight test showed the relevance of the 1:1 simulation of conditions in
the T4 and HEG shock tunnels, despite having cold models and a short test time. The NASA-CIAM tests provided
similar verication for CIAMs C-16 V/K facility and the Hyper-X project is expected to provide similar verication
for the Langley AHSTF,[31] CHSTF[32] and 8 ft (2.4 m) HTT.
Computational uid dynamics has only recently reached a position to make reasonable computations in solving scramjet operation problems. Boundary layer modeling, turbulent mixing, two-phase ow, ow separation, and real-gas
aerothermodynamics continue to be problems on the cutting edge of CFD. Additionally, the modeling of kineticlimited combustion with very fast-reacting species such as hydrogen makes severe demands on computing resources.
Reaction schemes are numerically sti requiring reduced reaction schemes.
Much of scramjet experimentation remains classied. Several groups, including the US Navy with the SCRAM
engine between 1968 and 1974, and the Hyper-X program with the X-43A, have claimed successful demonstrations
of scramjet technology. Since these results have not been published openly, they remain unveried and a nal design
method of scramjet engines still does not exist.
The nal application of a scramjet engine is likely to be in conjunction with engines which can operate outside
the scramjets operating range. Dual-mode scramjets combine subsonic combustion with supersonic combustion
for operation at lower speeds, and rocket-based combined cycle (RBCC) engines supplement a traditional rockets
propulsion with a scramjet, allowing for additional oxidizer to be added to the scramjet ow. RBCCs oer a possibility
to extend a scramjets operating range to higher speeds or lower intake dynamic pressures than would otherwise be
possible.

9.4 Advantages and disadvantages of scramjets

9.4.1

Advantages

1. Does not have to carry oxygen

2. No rotating parts makes it easier to manufacture than a turbojet
3. Has a higher specic impulse (change in momentum per unit of propellant) than a rocket engine; could provide
between 1000 and 4000 seconds, while a rocket only provides 450 seconds or less
4. Higher speed could mean cheaper access to outer space in the future

9.4.2

Special cooling and materials

Unlike a rocket that quickly passes mostly vertically through the atmosphere or a turbojet or ramjet that ies at much
lower speeds, a hypersonic airbreathing vehicle optimally ies a depressed trajectory, staying within the atmosphere
at hypersonic speeds. Because scramjets have only mediocre thrust-to-weight ratios,[33] acceleration would be limited.
Therefore time in the atmosphere at hypersonic speed would be considerable, possibly 1530 minutes. Similar to a
reentering space vehicle, heat insulation would be a formidable task, with protection required for a duration longer
than that of a typical space capsule, although less than the space shuttle.
New materials oer good insulation at high temperature, but they often sacrice themselves in the process. Therefore studies often plan on active cooling, where coolant circulating throughout the vehicle skin prevents it from
disintegrating. Often the coolant is the fuel itself, in much the same way that modern rockets use their own fuel and
oxidizer as coolant for their engines. All cooling systems add weight and complexity to a launch system. The cooling
of scramjets in this way may result in greater eciency, as heat is added to the fuel prior to entry into the engine, but
result in increased complexity and weight which ultimately could outweigh any performance gains.

68

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

The specic impulse of various engines

9.4.3

Vehicle performance

The performance of a launch system is complex and depends greatly on its weight. Normally craft are designed to
maximise range ( R ), orbital radius ( R ) or payload mass fraction ( ) for a given engine and fuel. This results
in tradeos between the eciency of the engine (takeo fuel weight) and the complexity of the engine (takeo dry
weight), which can be expressed by the following:

e + f +

1
=1

Where :
e =

mempty
minitial

is the empty mass fraction, and represents the weight of the superstructure, tankage and engine.

mfuel
f = m
is the fuel mass fraction, and represents the weight of fuel, oxidiser and any other materials which
initial
are consumed during the launch.
minitial
is initial mass ratio, and is the inverse of the payload mass fraction. This represents how much
= m
payload
payload the vehicle can deliver to a destination.

A scramjet increases the mass of the engine e over a rocket, and decreases the mass of the fuel f . It can be
dicult to decide whether this will result in an increased (which would be an increased payload delivered to a
destination for a constant vehicle takeo weight). The logic behind eorts driving a scramjet is (for example) that
the reduction in fuel decreases the total mass by 30%, while the increased engine weight adds 10% to the vehicle
total mass. Unfortunately the uncertainty in the calculation of any mass or eciency changes in a vehicle is so great
that slightly dierent assumptions for engine eciency or mass can provide equally good arguments for or against
scramjet powered vehicles.
Additionally, the drag of the new conguration must be considered. The drag of the total conguration can be considered as the sum of the vehicle drag ( D ) and the engine installation drag ( De ). The installation drag traditionally

9.4. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF SCRAMJETS

69

results from the pylons and the coupled ow due to the engine jet, and is a function of the throttle setting. Thus it is
often written as:
De = e F Where:
e is the loss coecient
F is the thrust of the engine
For an engine strongly integrated into the aerodynamic body, it may be more convenient to think of ( De ) as the
dierence in drag from a known base conguration.
The overall engine eciency can be represented as a value between 0 and 1 ( 0 ), in terms of the specic impulse of
the engine:

0 =

Thrust Power
g0 V0
Isp =
hP R
Chemical energy rate

Where:
g0 is the acceleration due to gravity at ground level
V0 is the vehicle speed
Isp is the specic impulse
hP R is fuel heat of reaction
Specic impulse is often used as the unit of eciency for rockets, since in the case of the rocket, there is a direct
relation between specic impulse, specic fuel consumption and exhaust velocity. This direct relation is not generally
present for airbreathing engines, and so specic impulse is less used in the literature. Note that for an airbreathing
engine, both 0 and Isp are a function of velocity.
The specic impulse of a rocket engine is independent of velocity, and common values are between 200 and 600
seconds (450s for the space shuttle main engines). The specic impulse of a scramjet varies with velocity, reducing
at higher speeds, starting at about 1200s, although values in the literature vary.
For the simple case of a single stage vehicle, the fuel mass fraction can be expressed as:
(V 2

V2
2i + g dr
(
)
e
0 hP R 1 D+D
F
initial

f = 1 exp

Where this can be expressed for single stage transfer to orbit as:
[

(
g0 r0 1
(
f = 1 exp
0 hP R 1

1 r0
2 r
)
D+De
F

or for level atmospheric ight from air launch (missile ight):

[

g0 R
f = 1 exp
CL
0 hP R (1 e ) C
D

Where R is the range, and the calculation can be expressed in the form of the Breguet range formula:
f = 1 eBR
g0
B=
CL
0 hP R (1 e ) C
D
Where:

70

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET
CL is the lift coecient
CD is the drag coecient

This extremely simple formulation, used for the purposes of discussion assumes:
Single stage vehicle
No aerodynamic lift for the transatmospheric lifter
However they are true generally for all engines.

9.4.4

Initial propulsion requirements

A scramjet cannot produce ecient thrust unless boosted to high speed, around Mach 5, although depending on the
design it could act as a ramjet at low speeds. A horizontal take-o aircraft would need conventional turbofan or
rocket engines to take o, suciently large to move a heavy craft. Also needed would be fuel for those engines, plus
all engine-associated mounting structure and control systems. Turbofan engines are heavy and cannot easily exceed
about Mach 2-3, so another propulsion method would be needed to reach scramjet operating speed. That could be
ramjets or rockets. Those would also need their own separate fuel supply, structure, and systems. Many proposals
instead call for a rst stage of droppable solid rocket boosters, which greatly simplies the design.

9.4.5

Testing diculties

Test of Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne SJY61 scramjet engine for the Boeing X-51

Unlike jet or rocket propulsion systems facilities which can be tested on the ground, testing scramjet designs use
extremely expensive hypersonic test chambers or expensive launch vehicles, both of which lead to high instrumentation
costs. Tests using launched test vehicles very typically end with destruction of the test item and instrumentation.

9.5. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES FOR ORBITAL VEHICLES

71

9.5 Advantages and disadvantages for orbital vehicles

9.5.1

Propellant

An advantage of a hypersonic airbreathing (typically scramjet) vehicle like the X-30 is avoiding or at least reducing
the need for carrying oxidizer. For example the space shuttle external tank holds 616,432 kg of liquid oxygen (LOX)
and 103,000 kg of liquid hydrogen (LH2) while having an empty weight of 30,000 kg. The orbiter gross weight
is 109,000 kg with a maximum payload of about 25,000 kg and to get the assembly o the launch pad the shuttle
uses two very powerful solid rocket boosters with a weight of 590,000 kg each. If the oxygen could be eliminated,
the vehicle could be lighter at lifto and maybe carry more payload. That would be an advantage, but the central
motivation in pursuing hypersonic airbreathing vehicles would be to reduce cost.
On the other hand, scramjets spend more time in the atmosphere and require more hydrogen fuel to deal with aerodynamic drag. Whereas liquid oxygen is quite a dense uid, liquid hydrogen has much lower density and takes up
much more volume. This means that the vehicle using this fuel becomes much bigger and gives even more drag.[34]

9.5.2

Thrust-to-weight ratio

One issue is that scramjet engines are predicted to have exceptionally poor thrust-to-weight ratio of around 2, when
installed in a launch vehicle.[35] A rocket has the advantage that its engines have very high thrust-weight ratios (~100:1),
while the tank to hold the liquid oxygen approaches a tankage ratio of ~100:1 also. Thus a rocket can achieve a very
high mass fraction, which improves performance. By way of contrast the projected thrust/weight ratio of scramjet
engines of about 2 mean a very much larger percentage of the takeo mass is engine (ignoring that this fraction
increases anyway by a factor of about four due to the lack of onboard oxidiser). In addition the vehicles lower thrust
does not necessarily avoid the need for the expensive, bulky, and failure prone high performance turbopumps found
in conventional liquid-fuelled rocket engines, since most scramjet designs seem to be incapable of orbital speeds in
airbreathing mode, and hence extra rocket engines are needed.

9.5.3

Need for additional propulsion to reach orbit

Scramjets might be able to accelerate from approximately Mach 5-7 to around somewhere between half of orbital
velocity and orbital velocity (X-30 research suggested that Mach 17 might be the limit compared to an orbital speed of
Mach 25, and other studies put the upper speed limit for a pure scramjet engine between Mach 10 and 25, depending
on the assumptions made). Generally, another propulsion system (very typically, a rocket is proposed) is expected to
be needed for the nal acceleration into orbit. Since the delta-V is moderate and the payload fraction of scramjets
high, lower performance rockets such as solids, hypergolics, or simple liquid fueled boosters might be acceptable.

9.5.4

Reentry

The scramjets heat-resistant underside potentially doubles as its reentry system if a single-stage-to-orbit vehicle using
non-ablative, non-active cooling is visualised. If an ablative shielding is used on the engine it will probably not be
usable after ascent to orbit. If active cooling is used with the fuel as coolant, the loss of all fuel during the burn to
orbit will also mean the loss of all cooling for the thermal protection system.

9.5.5

Costs

Reducing the amount of fuel and oxidizer does not necessarily improve costs as rocket propellants are comparatively
very cheap. Indeed, the unit cost of the vehicle can be expected to end up far higher, since aerospace hardware cost
is about two orders of magnitude higher than liquid oxygen, fuel and tankage, and scramjet hardware seems to be
much heavier than rockets for any given payload. Still, if scramjets enable reusable vehicles, this could theoretically
be a cost benet. Whether equipment subject to the extreme conditions of a scramjet can be reused suciently many
times is unclear; all own scramjet tests only survive for short periods and have never been designed to survive a ight
to date.
The eventual cost of such a vehicle is the subject of intense debate since even the best estimates disagree whether a
scramjet vehicle would be advantageous. It is likely that a scramjet vehicle would need to lift more load than a rocket

72

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

of equal takeo weight in order to be equally as cost ecient (if the scramjet is a non-reusable vehicle).

9.5.6

Issues

Space launch vehicles may or may not benet from having a scramjet stage. A scramjet stage of a launch vehicle
theoretically provides a specic impulse of 1000 to 4000 s whereas a rocket provides less than 450 s while in the
atmosphere,[36][37] potentially permitting much cheaper access to space. A scramjets specic impulse decreases
rapidly with speed, however, and the vehicle would suer from a relatively low lift to drag ratio.
The installed thrust to weight ratio of scramjets compares very unfavorably with the 50-100 of a typical rocket engine.
This is compensated for in scramjets partly because the weight of the vehicle would be carried by aerodynamic lift
rather than pure rocket power (giving reduced 'gravity losses'), but scramjets would take much longer to get to orbit
due to lower thrust which greatly osets the advantage. The takeo weight of a scramjet vehicle is signicantly
reduced over that of a rocket, due to the lack of onboard oxidiser, but increased by the structural requirements of the
larger and heavier engines.
Whether this vehicle would be reusable or not is still a subject of debate and research.

9.6 Applications
An aircraft using this type of jet engine could dramatically reduce the time it takes to travel from one place to another,
potentially putting any place on Earth within a 90-minute ight. However, there are questions about whether such a
vehicle could carry enough fuel to make useful length trips, and there are heavy FAA regulations regarding aircraft
that create sonic booms over United States land.[38][39]
Scramjet vehicle has been proposed for a single stage to tether vehicle, where a Mach 12 spinning orbital tether would
pick up a payload from a vehicle at around 100 km and carry it to orbit.[40]

9.7 See also

Single-stage to orbit
Liquid air cycle engine
Precooled jet engine
List of emerging technologies
Atmospheric reentry
Busemanns Biplane
Pulse detonation engine
Shcramjet
The Hy-V Scramjet Flight Experiment

9.8 References
Notes
[1] Segal 2009, pp. 1.
[2] Calaguori, Nancy; Kidder, Bryan (2 May 2010). Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne Scramjet Powers Historic First Flight of
X-51A WaveRider. Press Releases. Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne. Retrieved 1 July 2010.
[3] Experimental Air Force aircraft goes hypersonic. Associated Press. 3 May 2013. Retrieved 4 May 2013.

9.8. REFERENCES

73

[4] Segal 2009, pp. 311.

[5] Frederick S. Billig, Ph.D. (1933-2006)". Innovation Hall of Fame. University of Maryland. Retrieved 30 April 2010.
[6] Milestones in the history of scramjets UQ News Online The University of Queensland. University of Queensland,
UQ News. Retrieved 18 August 2009.
[7] Roudakov, A.S., Y. Schickhman, V. Semenov, Ph. Novelli, and O. Fourt, Flight Testing an Axisymmetric Scramjet:
Russian Recent Advances, 44th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Oct. 1622, 1993, Graz, Austria
[8] A.Roudakov, V.Semenov, V.Kopchenov, J.Hicks Future Flight Test Plans of an Axisymmetric Hydrogen-Fueled Scramjet
Engine on the Hypersonic Flying Laboratory AIAA 96-4572. 7th International Spaceplanes and Hypersonics Systems &
Technology Conference November 1822, 1996/Norfolk, Virginia
[9] A.Roudakov, V.Semenov, J.Hicks Recent Flight Test Results of the Joint CIAMNASA Mach 6.5 Scramjet Flight Program NASA/TP-1998-206548
[10] Dr. Phillip T. Harsha, Lowell C. Keel, Dr. Anthony Castrogiovanni, Robert T. Sherrill, X-43A Vehicle Design and Manufacture (pdf), AIAA 2005-3334
[11] C. McClinton. X-43Scramjet Power Breaks the Hypersonic Barrier (pdf).
[12] Challoner, Jack (2009). 1001 Inventions That Changed the World. Cassell Illustrated. p. 932. ISBN 978-1-84403-611-0.
[13] Scramjet hits Mach 10 over Australia, New Scientist, 15 June 2007, accessed 17 November 2010.
[14] Cabell, Karen; Hass, Neal; Storch, Andrea; Gruber, Mark. HIFiRE Direct-Connect Rig (HDCR) Phase I Scramjet Test
Results from the NASA Langley Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility. NASA Langley Research Center. NASA Technical
Reports Server. Retrieved 21 September 2011.
[15] Woomera hosts rst HIFiRE hypersonic test ight. Daily Telegraph. 2009-05-24.
[16] Scientists conduct second HIFiRE test. Sydney Morning Herald Online. 2010-03-22.
[17] "'Success for hypersonic outback ight. ABC Online. 2010-03-23.
[18] X-51A races to hypersonic record. C-Net News. 27 May 2010.

[19] Hypersonic X-51A Scramjet Failure Perplexes Air Force http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/07/29/hypersonic-x-51a-scramjet-failure-p

[20] X-51A Waverider Test Falls Shorthttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-mMLZPoU8JU
[21] Researchers put spark into scramjets. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, ABC News. 16 November 2010.
[22] Hypersonic jet Waverider fails Mach 6 test. British Broadcasting Corporation, BBC News. 16 August 2012.
[23] AP (2013-05-06). Experimental hypersonic aircraft hits 4828 km/h. The Sydney Morning Herald. Fairfax Media.
Retrieved 2013-05-09.
[24] Want China Times: PLA tests high-speed missile
[25] The Washington Free Beacon: China Conducts First Test of New Ultra-High Speed Missile Vehicle
[26] Hill & Peterson 1992, pp. 21.
[27] Segal 2009, pp. 4.
[28] Scramjets. Orbitalvector.com. 2002-07-30. Retrieved 2009-08-18.
[29] Paull, A.; Stalker, R.J.; Mee, D.J. (1995). Experiments on supersonic combustion ramjet propulsion in a shock tunnel.
Jfm 296: 156-183.
[30] Voland, R.T., Auslender, A.H., Smart, M.K., Roudakov, A.S., Semenov, V.L., Kopchenov, V. CIAM/NASA Mach 6.5
scramjet ight and ground test, AIAA-99-4848.
[31] The Langley Arc-Heated Scramjet Test Facility Brochure. Wte.larc.nasa.gov. 2005-11-17. Retrieved 2009-08-18.
[32] The Langley Combustion-Heated Scramjet Test Facility Brochure. Wte.larc.nasa.gov. 2005-11-17. Retrieved 2009-0818.
[33] Rathore, Mahesh (2010). Thermal Engineering. Tata McGraw-Hill Education. p. 966. ISBN 9780070681132. Retrieved
14 September 2014. A scramjet has very poor thrust to weight ratio (~2).

74

CHAPTER 9. SCRAMJET

[34] States, United; Assessment, Oce of Technology; Congress, (2003-05-14). pg 78. Books.google.com. ISBN 978-1-42892233-4. Retrieved 2009-08-18.
[35] Varvill, R., Bond, A. "A Comparison of Propulsion Concepts for SSTO Reuseable Launchers", JBIS, Vol 56, pp 108-117,
2003. Figure 7.
[36] Kors, D.L. Design considerations for combined air breathing-rocket propulsion systems., AIAA Paper No. 90-5216,
1990.
[37] Varvill, R., Bond, A. "A Comparison of Propulsion Concepts for SSTO Reuseable Launchers", JBIS, Vol 56, pp 108-117,
2003. Figure 8.
[38] http://elr.info/news-analysis/3/10067/faa-promulgates-strict-new-sonic-boom-regulation
[39] http://www.risingup.com/fars/info/part91-817-FAR.shtml
[40] Hypersonic Airplane Space Tether Orbital Launch (HASTOL) System

Bibliography
Segal, Corin (2009). The Scramjet Engine: Processes and Characteristics. New York: Cambridge University
Press. ISBN 978-0-521-83815-3.
Hill, Philip; Peterson, Carl (1992). Mechanics and Thermodynamics of Propulsion (2nd ed.). New York:
Addison-Wesley. ISBN 0-201-14659-2.
Billig, FS SCRAM-A Supersonic Combustion Ramjet Missile, AIAA paper 93-2329, 1993.
Ingenito A. and Bruno C Physics and Regimes in Supersonic Combustion, AIAA Journal, Volume 48, Number 3, 2010.
On the trail of the Scramjet - the Lab. ABC Science Online. 17 October 2002
Revolutionary jet engine tested BBC News. bbc.co.uk 25 March 2006
French Support Russian SCRAMJET Tests.
David Schneider (NovemberDecember 2002). A Burning Question. American Scientist. Retrieved August
13, 2011.
Hypersonic Scramjet Projectile Flys in Missile Test. SpaceDaily September 4, 2001
NASA website for National Hypersonics Plan
X-43A NASA
Hyshot Centre for Hypersonics, University of Queensland, Australia
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070615/tc_nm/australia_jet_dc;_ylt=AjD55nNEoWlZGJ2UcFk9PrHQn6gB

9.9 External links

X-51 Sets World Record. Space.com. Retrieved May 5, 2010.
Variable geometry inlet design for scram jet engine. US Patent & Trademark Oce. Retrieved October 7,
2005.
Liquid Air Cycle Rocket Equation Henry Spencer Comment. Propulsion Systems. Island One Society. Retrieved December 27, 2005.
The break through. - space.com
Revolutionary jet engine tested
British company claims biggest engine advance since the jet "
Scramjet combustor development-PDF le
Aerojet has new Mach 7 plus reusable hypersonic vehicle plans

Chapter 10

Rocket-powered aircraft

Messerschmitt Me 163

A rocket-powered aircraft or rocket plane is an aircraft that uses a rocket for propulsion, sometimes in addition to
airbreathing jet engines. Rocket planes can achieve much higher speeds than similarly sized jet aircraft, but typically
for at most a few minutes of powered operation, followed by a glide. Unhindered by the need for oxygen from the
atmosphere they are suitable for very high altitude ight. They are also capable of delivering much higher acceleration
and shorter takeos.
Rockets have been used simply to assist the main propulsion in the form of Jet Assisted Take O (JATO) also known
as Rocket Assisted Take O (RATO or RATOG). Not all rocket planes are of the conventional takeo like normal
aircraft. Some types have been air-launched from another plane, while other types have taken o vertically - nose in
the air and tail to the ground ("tail-sitters"). It is also possible, that rocket planes launch vertically without changing
their orientation.
Because of the heavy propellant use and the various practical diculties of operating rockets, the majority of rocket
75

76

CHAPTER 10. ROCKET-POWERED AIRCRAFT

planes have been built for experimental use, as interceptor ghters and space aircraft.

10.1 History
Rocket-powered ight was pioneered in Germany. The rst aircraft to y under rocket power was the Lippisch Ente,
in 1928.[1] The Ente had previously been own as a glider. The next year, in 1929, the Opel RAK.1 became the rst
purpose-built rocket plane to y.

10.1.1

World War II

The Heinkel He 176 was the worlds rst aircraft to be propelled solely by a liquid-fuelled rocket, making its rst
powered ight on 20 June 1939 with Erich Warsitz at the controls.[2]
The rst rocket plane ever to be mass-produced was the Messerschmitt Me 163 interceptor in 1944, one of several
German World War II attempts at rocket-powered aircraft.[3] The Bachem Ba 349 Natter vertical takeo manned
rocket interceptor aircraft ew in prototype form. Projects which never even reached the prototype stage include the
Zeppelin Rammer, the Fliegende Panzerfaust and the Focke-Wulf Volksjger.[4]
The Japanese also produced approximately 850 Yokosuka MXY7 Ohka rocket-powered suicide attack aircraft in
World War II.
Other experimental aircraft included the Russian Bereznyak-Isayev BI-1 that ew in 1942 while the Northrop XP-79
was originally planned with rocket engines but switched to jet engines for its rst and only ight in 1945. A rocket
assisted P-51D Mustang was developed by North American Aviation that could attain 515 mph.[5][6] The engine ran
on fumaric acid and aniline, stored in two 75 gallon under wing drop tanks.[6] The plane was tested in ight in April
1945. The rocket engine could run for about a minute.[6]
Of much larger size, the Silbervogel antipodal bomber spaceplane was planned by the Germans late in World War II,
however later calculations showed that it would not have worked, and would have been destroyed during reentry.[7]

10.1.2

Cold War era

In 1946, the Soviet Mikoyan-Gurevich I-270 was built partly using technology developed by Sergei Korolev in 1943
and 1932.[8][9]
In 1946 the rocket-powered Bell X-1 was the rst aircraft to break the speed of sound in level ight and the rst of
a seris of NACA/NASA rocket-powered aircraft.[10] The North American X-15 and X-15A2 designs were used for
around a decade and eventually reached Mach 6.7 and over 100 km in altitude.[11]
In the 1950s the British developed mixed power designs to cover the performance gap that existed in then-current
turbojet designs. The rocket was the main engine for delivering the speed and height required for high speed interception of high level bombers and the turbojet gave increased fuel economy in other parts of ight, most notably to
make sure the aircraft was able to make a powered landing rather than risking an unpredictable gliding return. The
Saunders-Roe SR.53 was a successful design and was due to be developed into production when economics forced
curtailment of most British aircraft programmes in the late 1950s. The advancement of the turbojet engine output,
the advent of missiles, and advances in radar had made a return to mixed power unnecessary.
The development of Soviet rockets and satellites was the driving force behind the development of NASAs space
program. In the early 1960s, American research into the Boeing X-20 Dyna-Soar spaceplane was cancelled due
to lack of purpose; later the studies contributed to the Space Shuttle, which in turn motivated the Russian Buran
(spacecraft). Another similar program was ISINGLASS which was to be a rocket plane launched from a Boeing
B-52 Stratofortress carrier, which was intended to achieve Mach 22, but this was never funded. ISINGLASS was
intended to overy the USSR. No images of the vehicle conguration have been released.[12]
The Lunar Landing Research Vehicle was a mixed powered vehicle- a jet engine cancelled 5/6 of the force due to
gravity, and the rocket power was able to simulate the Apollo lunar lander.[13]
Various versions of the Reaction Motors XLR11 rocket engine powered the X-1 and X-15, but also the Martin
Marietta X-24A, Martin Marietta X-24B, Northrop HL-10, Northrop M2-F2, Northrop M2-F3, and the Republic
XF-91 Thunderceptor, either has a primary or axillary engine.

10.1. HISTORY

77

The X-15s XLR99 rocket engine used ammonia and liquid oxygen.

The Northrop HL-10, Northrop M2-F2 and Northrop M2-F3 were examples of a lifting body which are aircraft
which have very little if any wing and simply obtain lift from the body of the vehicle. Another example is backslider
rockets in amateur rocketry.

10.1.3

Post Cold War era

The EZ-Rocket research and test airplane was rst own in 2001. EZ-Rocket was the rst privately built and own
rocket-powered airplane.[14]
A second privately-developed rocket-powered aircraft ew just two years later, in 2003. SpaceShipOne functions
both as a rocket-powered aircraftwith wings and aerodynamic control surfacesas well as a spaceplanewith
RCS thrusters for control in the vacuum of space.
The Rocket Racing League has developed three rocket racer aircraft since 2001, after initially evaluating and testing
the EZ-Rocket in 2001. None are currently in production however.

Planned rocket-powered aircraft

Reaction Engines Skylon
Spaceship Two
Lynx rocketplane
ARES (martian rocketplane)
Zero Emission Hyper Sonic Transport

78

CHAPTER 10. ROCKET-POWERED AIRCRAFT

The Lockheed NF-104A had rocket and air-breathing turbojet engines, shown here climbing with rocket power. The rocket used
hydrogen peroxide and JP-4 jet fuel.

10.2 See also

List of rocket aircraft
List of vehicle speed records
Rocket Racing League (RRL)

10.3. REFERENCES

79

The Martin Aircraft Company X-24 lifting body built as part of a 1963 to 1975 experimental US military program

Zero-length launch, launching air-breathing aircraft with rockets

10.3 References
Notes
[1] Lippisch Ente. The Internet Encyclopedia of Science: Experimental Aircraft. Retrieved: 26 September 2011.
[2] Warsitz, Lutz. The First Jet Pilot: The Story of German Test Pilot Erich Warsitz. London: Pen and Sword Books Ltd., 2009.
ISBN 978-1-84415-818-8.
[3] The Messerschmitt Me-163 Komet. plane-crazy.net. Retrieved: 26 September 2011.
[4] Fliegende Panzerfaust - Luft'46
[5] Larry Davis - DEVELOPING THE XP-86
[6] Santiago - The Rocket-Boosted P-51 Mustang - Tuesday, December 28, 2010
[7] Parsons, Zach. My Tank is Fight. London: Citadel, 2006. ISBN 978-0-8065-2758-1.
[8] Bille and Lishock 2004, p. 9.
[9] 1943
[10] Bell X-1. allstar.u.edu. Retrieved: 26 September 2011.
[11] North American X-15 High-Speed Research Aircraft. Aerospaceweb.org, 24 November 2008.
[12] Day, Dwayne. A bat outta Hell: the ISINGLASS Mach 22 follow-on to OXCART. The Space Review, 12 April 2010.
Retrieved: 26 September 2011.

80

CHAPTER 10. ROCKET-POWERED AIRCRAFT

[13] Matranga, Gene J., C. Wayne Ottinger and Calvin R. Jarvis with C. Christian Gelzer. Aerospace History #35 NASA
SP-2004-4535: Unconventional, Contrary, and Ugly: The Lunar Landing Research Vehicle. NASA, 2005.
[14] Knapp, Alex (2014-06-18). Bootstrapping To The Stars. Forbes. Retrieved 2014-06-19.

Bibliography
Bille, Matt and Erika Lishock. The First Space Race: Launching the Worlds First Satellites. College Station,
Texas: Texas A&M University Press, 2004. ISBN 978-1-58544-374-1.
Caidin, Martin. Wings into Space: The History and Future of Winged Space Flight. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston Inc., 1964.
Dornberger, Walter R. The Rocket-Propelled Commercial Airliner. Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons
System, Research Report No 135.. Minneapolis, Minnesota: University of Minnesota, Institute of Technology,
1956.
Geiger, Clarence J. History of the X-20A Dyna-Soar. Vol. 1: AFSC Historical Publications Series 63-50I, Document ID ASD-TR-63-50-I. Wright Patterson AFB, Ohio: Aeronautical Systems Division Information
Oce, 1963.
Godwin, Robert, ed. Dyna-Soar: Hypersonic Strategic Weapons System. Burlington, ON: Apogee Books, 2003.
ISBN 1-896522-95-5.
Yenne, Bill. The Encyclopedia of US Spacecraft. London: Bison Books, 1985. ISBN 978-5-551-26650-1.

10.4 External links

The ocial Erich Warsitz website (worlds rst jet pilot) about the worlds rst liquid-fuelled rocket aircraft,
the legendary Heinkel He 176

10.5. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

81

10.5 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.5.1

Text

Turbojet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbojet?oldid=627718398 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Bryan Derksen, Europrobe, Olivier,

Tannin, Rlandmann, Andrewa, Julesd, GCarty, Wolfgang Kufner, Tempshill, JorgeGG, Eternal, Fredrik, Pibwl, Modulatum, SchmuckyTheCat, Fuelbottle, Eliashedberg, Wizzy, Greyengine5, Wolfkeeper, Mark.murphy, No Guru, Abqwildcat, Bobblewik, Alanl, Beatnick,
HorsePunchKid, Icairns, Karl Dickman, Fluzwup, Michael Zimmermann, ZeroOne, Kbh3rd, Rcsheets, Meggar, Atlant, Bantman, Suruena, Alanhwiki, Dan100, Sylvain Mielot, DonPMitchell, Alanmak, Titoxd, FlaBot, Rz350, Chobot, YurikBot, Retaggio, Huw Powell,
Wiki alf, Bjf, Speedevil, Djdaedalus, Warfreak, Fenrus, Eog1916, Sardanaphalus, SmackBot, Emoscopes, Jdoniach, Incnis Mrsi, Sanjay ach, Burbank, Srnec, Chris the speller, Thumperward, Mexcellent, Snowmanradio, Kcordina, Mugaliens, Mhrogers, Nakon, The
PIPE, DohCam, LanternLight, ThurnerRupert, Vgy7ujm, LWF, Gm1121983, Bonzi, -js-, Stwalkerster, Octane, CmdrObot, RottweilerCS, Kablammo, Louis Waweru, Dtgriscom, Woody, Paquitotrek, Robzz, Ktappe, B7582, MER-C, .anacondabot, Magioladitis, Je
Dahl, Swpb, Sodabottle, BilCat, Styrofoam1994, MartinBot, Red Sunset, Catmoongirl, Ianboggs, Pete6982, Msadraey, Philip Trueman, TXiKiBoT, Shreditor, Raryel, Greswik, Andy Dingley, Rleach1, SieBot, Lightmouse, Jongleur100, Zenibo, Mygerardromance,
Dolphin51, SidewinderX, Loren.wilton, ClueBot, Lawrence Cohen, Boss344, Mild Bill Hiccup, Nimbus227, Rkiga, SoHome, Jellysh
dave, Rivertown, Dvikram, Wikiuser100, MystBot, Wyatt915, Addbot, Luzingit, Fi11222, M.nelson, Peti610botH, Tide rolls, Luckasbot, Amirobot, AnomieBOT, The High Fin Sperm Whale, ArthurBot, LilHelpa, Clohuigt, .45Colt, Jgscala, Celebration1981, Mnmngb,
Prari, Firstjetpilot, Surv1v4l1st, Inc ru, AchimD, Secret 0000, AstaBOTh15, Pinethicket, Hamtechperson, Muc is so cool, Full-date
unlinking bot, Mono, Pilot850, Tbhotch, DexDor, Klantry01, Wham Bam Rock II, ShinyGee, Mmeijeri, Benjamin1414141414141414,
Brandmeister, ChuispastonBot, Rememberway, ClueBot NG, Naynay253, Alonso 4ever, Frietjes, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot, Mightyname,
BG19bot, Milk5000, Dexbot, Fireandair, Pieter1963, Tobatar, Adirlanz, Monkbot, Utrutrzr and Anonymous: 138
Turbofan Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbofan?oldid=629137006 Contributors: Maury Markowitz, Xlation, Stevertigo, Zocky,
Tannin, Sannse, Rlandmann, Julesd, GCarty, Choster, Doradus, Airboyd, Donreed, JosephBarillari, K1br, Rsduhamel, Mat-C, Wolfkeeper, BenFrantzDale, Iceberg3k, Bobblewik, Alanl, WhiteDragon, Iantresman, Trevor MacInnis, N328KF, Rich Farmbrough, Avriette,
Andros 1337, Qutezuce, Adam850, Alistair1978, Kbh3rd, SElefant, Diomidis Spinellis, Deicas, Meggar, Smalljim, JDB1983, Clawson,
Stahlkocher1, Arcenciel, The RedBurn, Amorymeltzer, Cmprince, Pauli133, Gene Nygaard, Dan100, Jimgeorge, Bobrayner, Xanthar,
Nuno Tavares, Brhaspati, Pol098, Schzmo, GregorB, Mhiley, GraemeLeggett, Mandarax, BD2412, Mendaliv, Josh Parris, Ketiltrout,
MichiK, Wiarthurhu, FlaBot, Dowlingm, Ysangkok, Mark83, Wgfcrafty, Chobot, YurikBot, Retaggio, Daverocks, Los688, Jaxl, Nick,
Voidxor, Ospalh, Kashkhan, Dictoon, IrfanFaiz, Sardanaphalus, Attilios, SmackBot, Emoscopes, Reedy, Marc Lacoste, Ariedartin, Burbank, Zephyris, Hmains, Chris the speller, Thumperward, Angrist, CSWarren, Colonies Chris, Buttered Bread, Snowmanradio, Huon,
Robma, The PIPE, Richard0612, Vina-iwbot, Ulfmichel, John, Twredsh, Jaganath, MilborneOne, Mbeychok, Cacetudo, P199, DagErlingSmrgrav, Mikes1988, JoeBot, CP\M, Daedalus969, McVities, Starcity ai, SithiR, Shannon.g, RottweilerCS, Kozuch, Nick Challoner,
Thijs!bot, Epbr123, Barticus88, Kubanczyk, Drpixie, AndrewDressel, Robincross224, Dpenguinman, AntiVandalBot, Seaphoto, HolyT,
Bongwarrior, 28421u2232nfenfcenc, BilCat, Wardie9025, Lilac Soul, RockMFR, Grim Revenant, Unnamedkid, Ayecee, Jiahui1992,
Dawright12, HornColumbia, Clerks, StephenML, Chilukuri, C1010, Serge925, FEVB, Potatoswatter, Ldebain, Alterrabe, JCG33, Itsfullofstars, Je G., TobyDZ, Linefeed, Philip Trueman, Isaac Sanolnacov, TXiKiBoT, Davehi1, Shreditor, Cpzphantom, Someguy1221,
Raryel, Nuance 4, Tangobar, Rouhiheki, K. Aainsqatsi, Pmarshal, SieBot, Altadena1, SilverbackNet, Lightmouse, Senor Cuete, Fratrep,
Heimsdalgaten, Hamiltondaniel, Anyeverybody, Dolphin51, SidewinderX, YSSYguy, ClueBot, Binksternet, Ariadacapo, Nimbus227,
Three-quarter-ten, Ondras999r, Schnieder69, Jiawei 91, Mgw89, Awbergh, DumZiBoT, Aaron north, Jht4060, Solarsail, Dave1185,
Addbot, Fi11222, Jasper Deng, Mdnavman, Fireaxe888, NoJo15, HatemElattar, Apteva, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Grebaldar, Wikipedian2,
Nallimbot, AnomieBOT, Dreidecker, The High Fin Sperm Whale, Xqbot, Sionus, MiniBill, Scrooke, GliderMaven, Rgvis, Gallium9,
Pinethicket, I dream of horses, Abductive, MastiBot, Tupsumato, Horsewack, DexDor, TGCP, EmausBot, WikitanvirBot, Dewritech,
Sp33dyphil, Agent L, NorthernKnightNo1, Mmeijeri, F, Rexprimoris, Tim Zukas, ChuispastonBot, Teapeat, Rememberway, Stevenghetto257, JetBlast, Frietjes, Helpful Pixie Bot, Westnest, Mightyname, BG19bot, United7471, Metricopolus, Zedshort, 220 of Borg,
Duxwing, Khazar2, Prj1991, JYBot, Mogism, Kbog, Pi64600, Ginsuloft, DonoNS, 1ndrw, Trackteur and Anonymous: 191
Propfan Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propfan?oldid=627718466 Contributors: Maury Markowitz, Rlandmann, Mirv, Justanyone, Fuelbottle, Mor, Abqwildcat, Xmnemonic, PDH, Mzajac, Ericg, N328KF, Rich Farmbrough, Violetriga, Stahlkocher1, Jlascar,
Admiral Valdemar, Dan100, Rossheth, Bruce89, Dgnelson, Hawaiian717, Wolfmankurd, Arado, Hydrargyrum, Ksyrie, CPColin, SmackBot, Burbank, Commander Keane bot, Trekphiler, KaiserbBot, Alexmcre, Fitzhugh, The PIPE, Lester, , Jmrog, Fnlayson, Cancun771, Mwhiz, Dricherby, Nikevich, BilCat, Aeroweanie, Afromme, Duch, STBotD, Bonadea, JavierMC, Amikake3, Youngvariety,
Lamro, Senor Cuete, Dolphin51, Cochonfou, Mild Bill Hiccup, Nimbus227, Carriearchdale, Tkrocks11, LordJesseD, XLinkBot, Addbot, Jgrosay, Lightbot, A300st, The Bushranger, Luckas-bot, Wodawik, The High Fin Sperm Whale, , Webwat, PistaLibreSV, Plane
Person, TGCP, WikitanvirBot, Mmeijeri, Hoeksas, Frietjes, Therightmannigs, Kweetal, BattyBot, Ilkcs, Kbog and Anonymous: 52
Pulsejet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulsejet?oldid=629119005 Contributors: Mav, Bryan Derksen, Tarquin, Ap, Maury Markowitz,
DrBob, Winelight, Ericd, Xoder, Patrick, RTC, Tannin, Rlandmann, Aarchiba, GCarty, Stone, David Latapie, Omegatron, Flockmeal,
Robbot, Gregors, Fredrik, Justanyone, Fuelbottle, Xanzzibar, Cyrius, Greyengine5, Wolfkeeper, Abigail-II, Everyking, Leonard G.,
Brockert, Bobblewik, Gadum, Eregli bob, Sonett72, Trevor MacInnis, Rich Farmbrough, Pjacobi, Michael Zimmermann, Bobo192,
Walkiped, Foobaz, Pearle, A2Kar, Danski14, Linmhall, Velella, Gunter, Gene Nygaard, Mindmatrix, Uncle G, Kelisi, David Levy,
Nightscream, G Clark, Caseman, YurikBot, Gyre, Hellbus, Hydrargyrum, Manegonel, Mslenc, WebPilot, GraemeL, Fram, Garion96, Benandorsqueaks, Groyolo, Sardanaphalus, KnightRider, SmackBot, Anarchist42, RedSpruce, Arny, Boris Barowski, Septegram, Gilliam,
Keegan, Thumperward, Xchbla423, Trekphiler, Tsca.bot, Jumping cheese, Radagast83, ProtocolOH, Derek R Bullamore, The PIPE,
NeilFraser, EdC, Matt S., KerryVeenstra, Unionhawk, Egmonster, W.F.Galway, Nabokov, Omicronpersei8, Thijs!bot, Shirt58, Mack2,
Gkhan, JAnDbot, AniRaptor2001, Mark Rizo, Igodard, Father Goose, Jim Douglas, Bernd vdB, Simonxag, BilCat, Jonsg, Trusilver, ISC PB, Ramcharanr, Nwbeeson, Israel Walker, VolkovBot, BeckTechnologies, Cootiequits, Donarnold, No1likesme, Andy Dingley, SieBot, Lightmouse, Superbeecat, Ariadacapo, NiD.29, Starstylers, Nimbus227, DumZiBoT, XLinkBot, Rror, SilvonenBot, Magus732, TristramPW, CarsracBot, The Bushranger, Legobot, Luckas-bot, Yobot, AnomieBOT, DemocraticLuntz, Ciphers, JackieBot,
LilHelpa, Xqbot, Idegmcsa, Chaheel Riens, Hyperboreer, FrescoBot, Vinceouca, , PigFlu Oink, Calmer Waters, Skyerise, RedBot,
Salvidrim!, Dinamik-bot, Begoon, Aerothermodynamic, Weedwhacker128, DexDor, EmausBot, John of Reading, Pahazzard, Thkvortsov,
ZroBot, Whoop whoop pull up, Rememberway, ClueBot NG, Jack Greenmaven, Frietjes, Danim, Curtb60, Ghb3, ChrisGualtieri,
Jcrbmc, Undead182, Monkbot, Mm.roy and Anonymous: 132

82

CHAPTER 10. ROCKET-POWERED AIRCRAFT

Valveless pulse jet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valveless_pulse_jet?oldid=592685637 Contributors: Waveguy, Leonard G.,

Brockert, Neilc, Pjacobi, Twiek, Devil Master, TheParanoidOne, Wildstar2501, Bushytails, Woohookitty, GrundyCamellia, Dullg,
Gaius Cornelius, Manegonel, Zephalis, SmackBot, Thumperward, Stepho-wrs, Larry Cottrill, Jumping cheese, Radagast83, Robosh,
Sabate, Arch dude, Father Goose, JanGB, AtholM, Random Passer-by, BeckTechnologies, Biscuittin, Hertz1888, ProkopHapala, Celique,
EoGuy, Snaxalotl, Mumiemonstret, Cerireid, Addbot, Cannizzaro S, Mike1975, La vita dolce, LilHelpa, Xqbot, DingleNutZ, FoxBot,
Rathkennamike, Slightsmile, Whoop whoop pull up, Rammaum, ClueBot NG, Schuy B., OrnJonasar, Astragon67 and Anonymous: 26
Pulse detonation engine Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pulse_detonation_engine?oldid=628226012 Contributors: Maury Markowitz,
Rlandmann, JidGom, Wik, Rei, Omegatron, Wernher, Yosri, Fuelbottle, Wolfkeeper, Tom harrison, Leonard G., N328KF, Cfailde, Meggar, Milovoo, Anthony Appleyard, Malo, Cal 1234, Gene Nygaard, Uncle G, Rjwilmsi, Arnero, Harmil, Gurch, Triku, StuOfInterest,
Anders.Warga, Nae'blis, Tierce, SmackBot, Nkrupans, Twerges, Chris the speller, Trebor, OrphanBot, Jbergquist, A5b, Robosh, Iridescent, CP\M, Will Pittenger, Butakun, Ldussan, Oosh, AntiVandalBot, Akradecki, Planofool, Krishvanth, Dricherby, Singularity, BilCat,
LorenzoB, Wxcvbn, R'n'B, CommonsDelinker, Jwigton, Erisie, HirschiDude, Rondanielove, Ng.j, Chiongryan, GeiwTeol, Dravecky,
Cyfal, Sfan00 IMG, EMBaero, Arakunem, Rosuav, Ajyo15, Davismargaret, Wahunga, XLinkBot, Qulser, Addbot, Twinzor, Cesiumfrog, Creolejazz, Luckas-bot, GB fan, ArthurBot, LilHelpa, Xqbot, GrouchoBot, FrescoBot, Augurar, Whoop whoop pull up, Sudip2118,
Virtualerian, Shivamsetu, Blue predetor, Engineering Physicist Martin and Anonymous: 77
Motorjet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorjet?oldid=627718539 Contributors: Maury Markowitz, Rlandmann, Cherkash, GCarty,
Roo72, Mathrick, Hellbus, Adamrush, Salmanazar, Sardanaphalus, Chris the speller, Thumperward, After Midnight, Swpb, BilCat,
Squids and Chips, VolkovBot, Tamorlan, AlleborgoBot, SieBot, BobShair, Lightmouse, Dolphin51, Muhends, Binksternet, Nimbus227,
BobKawanaka, RP459, Addbot, Lightbot, Citation bot, Horiapaun, .45Colt, Mark Nye, Altes2009, DexDor, WikitanvirBot, Sumsum2010, Mmeijeri, Teaktl17, Frietjes, Helpful Pixie Bot, Shar946, Marigold100, Astragon672 and Anonymous: 13
Ramjet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramjet?oldid=630943821 Contributors: TwoOneTwo, Robert Merkel, Maury Markowitz,
Edward, Patrick, Arpingstone, Egil, Rlandmann, Aarchiba, Julesd, Xgkkp, Maximus Rex, Omegatron, Ed g2s, Pibwl, Justanyone, Meelar,
Bkell, Fuelbottle, Kent Wang, Seano1, Diberri, Mor, Ploums, Matt Gies, Greyengine5, Wolfkeeper, Mboverload, Bobblewik, Tagishsimon, Quadell, Gem fr, NoPetrol, Hugh Mason, Deglr6328, Trevor MacInnis, Rich Farmbrough, LoganCale, Pjacobi, YUL89YYZ,
Femto, WorldDownInFire, Bobo192, DarylC, Savvo, Bobbis, Eric Kvaalen, Atlant, Snowolf, Babble, M3tainfo, Cal 1234, Pauli133,
Deror avi, Siafu, DonPMitchell, Benbest, Schzmo, GregorB, SeventyThree, Rjwilmsi, Woodsja, SMC, CQJ, Taskinen, Bmicomp, Chobot,
The Rambling Man, YurikBot, Daverocks, Dreammaker182, Witan, Hellbus, Ksyrie, Shaddack, Los688, Kyorosuke, Rbarreira, Catchiestzero, Vivaldi, Salmanazar, Some guy, Oldhamlet, Torgo, Sardanaphalus, SmackBot, Emoscopes, Hkhenson, Burbank, Commander
Keane bot, Folajimi, Chris the speller, TimBentley, Hibernian, Colonies Chris, Stevekirk, Downwards, A5b, NeilFraser, Special-T, Iridescent, Ossifer, CmdrObot, Im.a.lumberjack, Pgr94, Fl295, Meno25, Yuzz, Mr pipps, RottweilerCS, Optimist on the run, JamesAM,
Thijs!bot, Lanik42, Mack2, Canadian-Bacon, JAnDbot, Alexpg, Husond, MER-C, Albany NY, PhilKnight, Bongwarrior, SwiftBot,
RegIP, MetsBot, BilCat, Archolman, Flo422, Sheila Rogers, J.delanoy, Hans Dunkelberg, Zedmelon, RenniePet, CeilingCrash, Remi0o,
MatP, Plenumchamber, MrBeck, Petebutt, Crazymapleleaf, Cryonic07, SieBot, Mikemoral, Chiongryan, Cypoet, AMCKen, Callidior,
Ravi tanwar80, Racergr, De728631, AnnEditor, GreyTrafalgar, Ariadacapo, Jmn100, 718 Bot, Barbarinaz, Vanished User 1004, DumZiBoT, Mr Larrington, Sajana rpg, Rameshaero168, Addbot, John Chamberlain, Tassedethe, Lightbot, Zorrobot, Luckas-bot, Tangopaso,
Efa, Piano non troppo, Xufanc, Citation bot, Xqbot, Gigemag76, Idegmcsa, RibotBOT, Celebration1981, MrChrisRodriguez, LucienBOT, HJ Mitchell, Hawkingsstudent, Citation bot 1, HRoestBot, RedBot, MastiBot, Tupsumato, Gmkung, Deweyboy, RjwilmsiBot,
DexDor, Alph Bot, Jackehammond, Sp33dyphil, Mmeijeri, Wikipelli, ZroBot, Djapa84, TYelliot, Will Beback Auto, Rememberway,
ClueBot NG, Senthilvel32, Frietjes, Helpful Pixie Bot, KLBot2, Saurabh.agrawal92, CitationCleanerBot, YFdyh-bot, Bradleyjohnsontv,
Dr.x38, Pieter1963, Suzukisue, JamesHawthorne, Razibot, MopSeeker, Monkbot, Agupta22 and Anonymous: 159
Scramjet Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scramjet?oldid=628227067 Contributors: The Epopt, Maury Markowitz, Edward, SGBailey, Gbleem, Egil, Rlandmann, Julesd, Whkoh, Mulad, Wik, Natevw, Rei, Lichtkind, Jerzy, Finlay McWalter, Donreed, Justanyone,
Hadal, Jcmiller1215, Fuelbottle, Xanzzibar, Giftlite, Wolfkeeper, Gracefool, Mackerm, Bobblewik, Wmahan, Erich gasboy, Xmnemonic,
WhiteDragon, Robert Brockway, Piotrus, Rdsmith4, Jmeppley, Peter bertok, LQ, DmitryKo, Noisy, Solitude, Rich Farmbrough, Guanabot, Ibagli, TerraFrost, Chairboy, Bobo192, Dreish, Apyule, Zwilson, Aquillion, Towel401, Mpeisenbr, Shadoks, Mrzaius, Etxrge, Rujholla, Ignatzmous, Atlant, Keenan Pepper, Doopokko, Rptb1, M3tainfo, Deacon of Pndapetzim, Cal 1234, Gene Nygaard, Siafu, Richard
Arthur Norton (1958- ), Mindmatrix, Jason Palpatine, Brunnock, Uncle G, Rainmaker, SDC, SeventyThree, GraemeLeggett, Mandarax,
RedBLACKandBURN, Rnt20, Mendaliv, Josh Parris, Nightscream, Hulagutten, FlaBot, Arnero, Nomadtales, Chobot, DVdm, YurikBot, Wavelength, Piet Delport, Epolk, Stephenb, David Woodward, Gaius Cornelius, Ksyrie, Gcapp1959, Voidxor, Jeremy Visser, Alex
Law, Oliverdl, NorsemanII, Bayerischermann, Tarkovsky, Smurrayinchester, AKAF, Defufna, Knowledgeum, IrfanFaiz, That Guy, From
That Show!, Luk, Oldhamlet, Tinlv7, KnightRider, SmackBot, Emoscopes, Atomota, Brossow, Burbank, Gilliam, Hmains, Chris the
speller, Mbrandall, Motterstatter, Trebor, Thumperward, Huge Bananas, Hibernian, Neo-Jay, Egg plant, Joema, KenFehling, Hkuenzi,
Soumyasch, Iska, JHunterJ, Kothog, Yashesh, Iridescent, Timothykinney, Tony Fox, Pathosbot, Chetvorno, David Gates, FireFrie, Cofax48, N2e, Cydebot, Butakun, UncleBubba, Thijs!bot, Kubanczyk, Sagaciousuk, Andyjsmith, Smiklas, Dafydd Williams, I do not exist,
Seaphoto, Instinct, Chanakyathegreat, Demophon, Johnwwatson, Yomin, Bongwarrior, Professor marginalia, Swpb, Mike409, Rivertorch, Dinosaur puppy, BilCat, A3 nm, Gwern, Brilliand, R'n'B, J.delanoy, Pharaoh of the Wizards, Javawizard, Lordofthe9, Rod57,
Clerks, Dfoofnik, Underjack, Vanished user 39948282, Treisijs, Morganma, Random Passer-by, Fagiolonero, Bastian Friedrich, Jackfork, Agonyips, Squalk25, Hmwith, Cthulhu985, TYLER, Billjc, Cablehorn, Cypoet, Denisarona, SidewinderX, ClueBot, AnnEditor,
GreyTrafalgar, Arentath8, ElectricalTill, Uqhyper, CounterVandalismBot, Chimesmonster, Detroiterbot, TMV943, Noca2plus, ResidueOfDesign, Barbarinaz, ChesterTheWorm, Erudhalion, Noxia, Chaosdruid, MelonBot, Heyzeuss, DumZiBoT, Rpassaro, Jcaule, Orbnauticus, Jasynnash2, Addbot, Xp54321, DOI bot, Ronhjones, Ionia23, Doniago, R3ap3R, The Bushranger, StandardPerson, Ben Ben, Yobot,
EnochBethany, Richard.e.morton, AnomieBOT, Guynk, John Holmes II, Efa, TheAMmollusc, Injust, Msskamel, Pnuematics, Lee6597,
, Eugene-elgato, JasonCW, GliderMaven, FrescoBot, Beaber, Hokies499, W Nowicki, Citation bot 1, Pinethicket, Tom.Reding,
Jcsbija, RichardWayneSmith, Sachinkilkile, Jujutacular, Enemenemu, Suryamp, ArwinJ, Roman123456, DexDor, Iy6, Beyond My
Ken, Advantecon, John of Reading, GoingBatty, JustinTime55, Sp33dyphil, Mmeijeri, Solomonfromnland, Chasrob, Space25689,
TDGA, Tlwm, Donner60, Rangoon11, ChuispastonBot, Wakebrdkid, ImaXami, Whoop whoop pull up, Rememberway, ClueBot NG, Incompetence, Brieschenk1985, Skywarrior.saravanan, Senthilvel32, Sudip2118, Frietjes, James T Farmer Jr, Bored873, Dakilla68, Widr,
Hypersonic68, Pilotmario, Nevadaone, Helpful Pixie Bot, Virtualerian, BendelacBOT, 155blue, Xlicolts613, Go ahead punk, Nitrobutane, Cwobeel, DaltonCastle, Makecat-bot, Vishnuvardhanmana, Epicgenius, HappyDa, Lmcq, Monkbot and Anonymous: 303
Rocket-powered aircraft Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rocket-powered_aircraft?oldid=627718509 Contributors: Lexor, Rlandmann, Wolfkeeper, Monedula, Eequor, N328KF, Rich Farmbrough, A2Kar, Wendell, Alansohn, DonPMitchell, WadeSimMiser, GraemeLeggett, Palica, Allen3, Titoxd, YurikBot, Gaius Cornelius, Ospalh, Archer7, Sinus, SmackBot, Chris the speller, Carnby, J 1982, N2e,

10.5. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

83

Themightyquill, Steelpillow, JAnDbot, Txomin, Bzuk, Swpb, Nono64, Kott3670, Tatrgel, Joshua Issac, Sdsds, Muro de Aguas, SieBot,
Lightmouse, Foofbun, Ramif 47, PixelBot, Posix memalign, NuclearWarfare, Addbot, Montgomery '39, Victor-435, The Bushranger,
Yobot, AnomieBOT, Jim1138, Xufanc, Aldebaran, Sophus Bie, Fotaun, GliderMaven, Firstjetpilot, RedBot, DexDor, WikitanvirBot,
Wikipelli, Hoeksas, Rememberway, Frietjes, Helpful Pixie Bot, Daydreamers, Swaxx, Writingalltheway, Filedelinkerbot and Anonymous: 24

10.5.2

Images

File:Air_Canada_GE90_Boeing_777-200LR.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/19/Air_Canada_GE90_

Boeing_777-200LR.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Kristoferb
File:Air_starter_GE_J79-11A_by_BMW.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/Air_starter_GE_J79-11A_
by_BMW.JPG License: CC-BY-SA-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sovxx
File:Albert_Fono{}s_Patents_for_jet_engines_1928.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/37/Albert_Fono%27s_
Patents_for_jet_engines_1928.jpg License: ? Contributors:
I created this work entirely by myself.
Original artist:
Albert Fon
File:Albert_Fono{}s_ramjet-cannonball_in_1915.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/Albert_Fono%
27s_ramjet-cannonball_in_1915.png License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by
User:RandomStringOfCharacters using CommonsHelper.
Original artist: Albert Fon. Original uploader was 718 Bot at en.wikipedia
File:Alpha_Jet_E47_2.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bf/Alpha_Jet_E47_2.JPG License: CC-BYSA-3.0 Contributors: photo taken by EyOne Original artist: EyOne
File:Argus_As14_RAFM.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3e/Argus_As14_RAFM.jpg License: Public
domain Contributors: Own work Original artist: Nimbus227
File:Aviacionavion.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/68/Aviacionavion.png License: Public domain Contributors:
Turkmenistan.airlines.frontview.arp.jpg Original artist: Turkmenistan.airlines.frontview.arp.jpg: elfuser
File:Axial_compressor.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Axial_compressor.gif License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/K-12/airplane/caxiala.html Original artist: NASA
File:Bloodhound_thor_arp_750pix.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/23/Bloodhound_thor_arp_750pix.
jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Originally from en:wikipedia, its description page is/was here Original artist: Original uploader
was en:User:Arpingstone at en:wikipedia
File:Brayton_cycle.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3c/Brayton_cycle.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:CF6-6_engine_cutaway.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/CF6-6_engine_cutaway.jpg License:
Public domain Contributors: http://lessons.air.mmac.faa.gov/l2/NAL27/fig4/ Original artist: This image is a work of an unknown Federal
Aviation Administration employee.
File:CFM56_P1220759.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e9/CFM56_P1220759.jpg License: CC-BYSA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Monniaux
File:Commons-logo.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Commons-logo.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Edit-clear.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/Edit-clear.svg License: ? Contributors: The Tango! Desktop
Project. Original artist:
The people from the Tango! project. And according to the meta-data in the le, specically: Andreas Nilsson, and Jakub Steiner (although
minimally).
File:Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Folder_Hexagonal_Icon.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Ge_cf6_turbofan.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Ge_cf6_turbofan.jpg License: CC-BY-SA3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sanjay Acharya
File:Geared_Turbofan_NT.PNG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9f/Geared_Turbofan_NT.PNG License:
CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Tosaka
File:GorgonIV_on_BlackWidow.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/08/GorgonIV_on_BlackWidow.png
License: Public domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Micki using CommonsHelper.
Original artist: Original uploader was John Chamberlain at en.wikipedia
File:J85_ge_17a_turbojet_engine.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/J85_ge_17a_turbojet_engine.jpg
License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Sanjay Acharya
File:Jar-jar-jet.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/15/Jar-jar-jet.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: English Wikipedia Original artist: ProkopHapala
File:Jet_engine.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4c/Jet_engine.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0-2.5-2.0-1.0
Contributors: self-made, vector version of en:Image:FAA-8083-3A Fig 14-1.PNG which comes from an FAA handbook Original artist:
Je Dahl

84

CHAPTER 10. ROCKET-POWERED AIRCRAFT

File:Leduc_022.JPG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e0/Leduc_022.JPG License: CC-BY-SA-2.5 Contributors: Own work (Bourget museum, in France) Original artist: Deep silence (Mikal Restoux)
File:Me163efJM.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/56/Me163efJM.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:NF-104.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/NF-104.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
File:Nasa_ge_udf.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c1/Nasa_ge_udf.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transfer was stated to be made by User:Duch.seb.
Original artist: NASA Glenn Research Center (NASA-GRC) Original uploader was A300st at en.wikipedia
File:Ohain_USAF_He_178_page61.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1e/Ohain_USAF_He_178_page61.
jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Outer_nozzle_of_GEnx-2B_turbofan_engine.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/Outer_nozzle_
of_GEnx-2B_turbofan_engine.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Olivier Cleynen
File:PDE_LongEZ_AFRL.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/PDE_LongEZ_AFRL.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2008/03/05/222008/us-afrl-proves-pulse-detonation-engine-can-power-aircraft.
html (states the image is from the AFRL) Original artist: Air Force Research Laboratory
File:Pitotintake.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/87/Pitotintake.svg License: ? Contributors:
self-made
Original artist:
K. Aainsqatsi
File:Portal-puzzle.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fd/Portal-puzzle.svg License: ? Contributors: ? Original
artist: ?
File:Progress_D-27_propfan_(Antonov_An-70).jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Progress_D-27_
propfan_%28Antonov_An-70%29.jpg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: An-70_takeo.jpg <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/
wiki/File:An-70_takeoff.jpg' class='image'><img alt='An-70 takeo.jpg' src='//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/
An-70_takeoff.jpg/50px-An-70_takeoff.jpg' width='50' height='33' srcset='//upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/
An-70_takeoff.jpg/75px-An-70_takeoff.jpg 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/An-70_takeoff.jpg/100px-An-70_
takeoff.jpg 2x' data-le-width='2600' data-le-height='1733' /></a>
Original artist: An-70_takeo.jpg: Original uploader was Marianivka at en.wikipedia
File:Puls1Motor_en.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2c/Puls1Motor_en.gif License: CC-BY-3.0-rs Contributors: Puls1Motor.gif <a href='//commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Puls1Motor.gif' class='image'><img alt='Puls1Motor.gif' src='//upload.
wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Puls1Motor.gif/50px-Puls1Motor.gif' width='50' height='39' srcset='//upload.wikimedia.
org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Puls1Motor.gif/75px-Puls1Motor.gif 1.5x, //upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/
50/Puls1Motor.gif/100px-Puls1Motor.gif 2x' data-le-width='489' data-le-height='386' /></a>
Original artist: Puls1Motor.gif: The original uploader was Aleksej fon Grozni at Serbian Wikipedia
File:Pulse_Jet_Engine.PNG Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/44/Pulse_Jet_Engine.PNG License: CC-BYSA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Tosaka
File:Pulse_Jet_schematic.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/21/Pulse_Jet_schematic.svg License: CCBY-SA-3.0 Contributors:
Pulse_jet.png Original artist: Pulse_jet.png: User:Topory
File:Question_book-new.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Question_book-new.svg License: ? Contributors:
Created from scratch in Adobe Illustrator. Based on Image:Question book.png created by User:Equazcion Original artist:
Tkgd2007
File:Ramjet_P280b.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f5/Ramjet_P280b.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4404/app-b7.htm Original artist: NASA
File:Ramjet_operation.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6c/Ramjet_operation.svg License: CC-BY-SA3.0 Contributors: Based on Image:Ramjet operation.png Original artist: Vector image made by Cryonic07. Source
File:Ramon_Casanova_and_the_pulsejet_engine_he_constructed_and_patented_in_1917.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/
wikipedia/commons/e/e8/Ramon_Casanova_and_the_pulsejet_engine_he_constructed_and_patented_in_1917.jpg License: CC-BY-3.0
Contributors: family picture Original artist: Jcrbmc
File:SJX61_1EngineTest20070221_TransitionToJP7.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/SJX61_1EngineTest20070221_
TransitionToJP7.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://www.aiaa.org/documents/industry/presentations/MG_Bedke_High_
Speed_Weapons.ppt Original artist: Maj Gen Curt Bedke, US Air Force
File:Scramjet_operation_en.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/22/Scramjet_operation_en.svg License:
CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors:
Scramjet_operation.png Original artist: Scramjet_operation.png: en:User:Emoscopes
File:Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4f/Specific-impulse-kk-20090105.
png License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Kashkhan at English Wikipedia
File:Swept-propeller7.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/Swept-propeller7.svg License: CC-BY-SA3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: Wolfmankurd
File:Symbol_list_class.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/db/Symbol_list_class.svg License: ? Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?

10.5. TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

85

File:Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Text_document_

with_red_question_mark.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Created by bdesham with Inkscape; based upon Text-x-generic.svg
from the Tango project. Original artist: Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham)
File:Turbo_ram_scramjet_comparative_diagram.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/57/Turbo_ram_scramjet_
comparative_diagram.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: GreyTrafalgar
File:Turbofan3_Labelled.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e5/Turbofan3_Labelled.gif License: CC-BYSA-3.0 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Micki using CommonsHelper.
Original artist: Richard Wheeler (Zephyris). Original uploader was Zephyris at en.wikipedia
File:Turbofan_operation.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/75/Turbofan_operation.svg License: CC-BY2.5 Contributors: Own work Original artist: K. Aainsqatsi
File:Turbofan_operation_lbp.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/77/Turbofan_operation_lbp.svg License:
CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: Own work Original artist: K. Aainsqatsi
File:Turbojet_operation-_axial_flow.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Turbojet_operation-_axial_
flow.png License: CC-BY-2.5 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Turbojet_operation-_centrifugal_flow.png Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ce/Turbojet_operation-_
centrifugal_flow.png License: CC-BY-2.5 Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:Turboreacteur_anime.gif Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9e/Turboreacteur_anime.gif License: CCBY-SA-2.0-fr Contributors: Transferred from fr.wikipedia; transferred to Commons by User:Padawane using CommonsHelper. Original
artist: Original uploader was Daniel BONNERUE at fr.wikipedia
File:WRDK.svg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b4/WRDK.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: ?
Original artist: ?
File:X-15_flying.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a3/X-15_flying.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original artist: ?
File:X-43A_(Hyper_-_X)_Mach_7_computational_fluid_dynamic_(CFD).jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/
5/55/X-43A_%28Hyper_-_X%29_Mach_7_computational_fluid_dynamic_%28CFD%29.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http:
//www.dfrc.nasa.gov/Gallery/Photo/X-43A/HTML/ED97-43968-1.html Original artist: NASA
File:X24.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/61/X24.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: ? Original
artist: ?
File:X43a2_nasa_scramjet.jpg Source: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/X43a2_nasa_scramjet.jpg License: Public domain Contributors: http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap040329.html [1] Original artist:
Original uploader was Milks Favorite Cookie at en.wikipedia

10.5.3

Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0