Rolls Royce Goshawk engine - The Air Forces - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Warships1 and NavWeaps Discussion Boards - Message Board - Yuku

RSS
Email

0 Kudo

Rolls Royce Goshawk engine

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Author	Comment
PMN1	Rolls Royce Goshawk engine	Lead	[-]
Posts: 3409 (30-Mar-2008 17:37:13) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	From what i've read on this, it was hoped that steam cooling would offer weight saving over water cooling, what kind of weight saving was there for the vulnerabilities of the system to be accepted?
BenRoethig		#1	[-]
Posts: 1740 (30-Mar-2008 18:17:44) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	I can't see any difference in weight between 100 series Adour and the 800/F405 series
bager1968		#2	[-]
Posts: 2877 (30-Mar-2008 19:06:53) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	The lightest Adour is the mk 861, at 1,282 lb (second-lightest is the mk 151 at 1,299 lb), and the heaviest are the mk 851 & 106 at 1,360 lb. The F405 (both -400 & -401) is 1,306 lb. At least according to Jane's and this site: http://www.jet-engine.net/miltfspec.html Last Edited By: bager1968 30-Mar-2008 19:09:23. Edited 2 times.
PMN1		#3	[-]
Posts: 3410 (30-Mar-2008 19:11:19) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Ahh, I meant the 1920's Goshawk engine.
NewGolconda		#4	[-]
Posts: 3229 (30-Mar-2008 22:07:37) Commonwealth Moderator Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	Wieght saving? I read drag savings. Around 1930, cooling drag was a major draw back of the in line watercooled engine. RR hoped that steam cooling, with its condensor, would elliminate pr significantly reduce coolling drag. As it turns out, advances in radiator design, flowing through from the auto makers, presserised glycol cooling, and the design of adjustable, and later low drag radiator mountings that actually generated thrust from the flow of waste heat were designed, negating the cooling drag penalty of the water cooled engine. "British Piston Aero Engines, and their aircraft." p29 - amongst others.
PMN1		#5	[-]
Posts: 3416 (31-Mar-2008 19:19:45) Reply Quote More My Recent Posts Message Me Connection Blocking Invite Ignore User's Posts	NewGolconda wrote: Wieght saving? I read drag savings. Around 1930, cooling drag was a major draw back of the in line watercooled engine. RR hoped that steam cooling, with its condensor, would elliminate pr significantly reduce coolling drag. As it turns out, advances in radiator design, flowing through from the auto makers, presserised glycol cooling, and the design of adjustable, and later low drag radiator mountings that actually generated thrust from the flow of waste heat were designed, negating the cooling drag penalty of the water cooled engine. "British Piston Aero Engines, and their aircraft." p29 - amongst others. Ahh, that makes sense, I was misunderstanding the weight refernces in what i had read.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Quick Reply