TR Propulsion Systems

[Anmdt]

We should expect an engine with comparable performance to LM500. But I doubt it since even the small LM500 is based on a larger airliner engine. Maybe they will use it in a dual configuration who wonders..

Edit: Looked up on LM500, its based on CF34 which has 8000lbs thrust. We can expect further versions of TF6000 to be similar with it.

LM500 suits to FACs not frigates or destroyers. LM2500,LM500 all relies on the same core* with additions but i am not an airliner guy so @Nilgiri may explain differences on how they attain a larger shaft output (all that matters on a ship) by adding new disks.

*LM2500 based on CF6
*LM500 based on CF34

 

[Cabatli_TR]

KTJ-1750

 

[Oublious]

Each time a information about a engine is shared means another milestone is achieved..

 

[Nilgiri]

LM500 suits to FACs not frigates or destroyers. LM2500,LM500 all relies on the same core* with additions but i am not an airliner guy so @Nilgiri may explain differences on how they attain a larger shaft output (all that matters on a ship) by adding new disks.

*LM2500 based on CF6
*LM500 based on CF34

Technically different cores, CF6 is much larger....I would say the core is approx twice the diameter and 4 times the flow area and max flow rate etc.

That in essence is how you get much larger thrust (or output shaftpower) in the gas turbine.... you just process (compress, heat, expand, extract) significantly more air per second.

Larger the engine, the more powerful it becomes (keeping the same design philosophy within it constant etc)

Very much similar to otto or diesel cycle internal combustion engines as well (where things are elected to be done in parallel rather than in series)

Number of discs essentially are equivalent conceptually to number of cylinders (since these work on and extract from the working fluid).

Disc + flow diameter is broadly similar to bore diameter (and engine displacement)

Having twin spool instead of single spool is similar to having a supercharger or turbocharger (you are feeding extra compression potential by segregating one set of rpm just to optimize that)

These all affect the amount of air being changed thermodynamically in significant way....and thus determine the final max output power (or thrust) the engine can accomplish.

Power is simply energy converted per second after all.

 

[Cabatli_TR]

TEI-TF6000

 

[Zafer]

TEI-TF6000
View attachment 45653

The closest we've got to turbofan engine self reliance.
Most critical short term project at the moment, on par with Kızılelma.

 

[Bogeyman]

Turkish continuous detonation wave engine prototype

TÜBİTAK SAGE'de bir başarılı ateşleme daha!

"Türkiye'nin Uzay Yolculuğu" başlıklı panelinde TÜBİTAK SAGE Enerjik Sistemler Grup Koordinatörü Dr. Bülent SÜMER ve ROKETSAN İleri Teknolojiler ve Sistemler Genel Müdür Yardımcısı Dr. Sartuk KARASOY konuşmacı olarak yer aldı.

www.defenceturk.net

The first ignition of the engine happened yesterday.

Continuous Detonation engine architecture is a promising futuristic technology. I'm posting an article on the subject so you have an idea.

1 file shared with you

This file shared with BlackHole. Send any file using blockchain technology.

app.blackhole.run

In summary, we can say that Turkey has developed the first prototype of an engine that can reach speeds like hypersonic or mach 4.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1542969197055168512

Prof. Dr. İsmail DEMİR: "TÜBİTAK-SAGE is working in the field of hypersonic missiles."

We can now say that Tübitak SAGE has performed the ignition of the first scramjet engine prototype.

 

[Bogeyman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1542969197055168512

Prof. Dr. İsmail DEMİR: "TÜBİTAK-SAGE is working in the field of hypersonic missiles."

We can now say that Tübitak SAGE has performed the ignition of the first scramjet engine prototype.

@Cabatli_53 @Anmdt @TheInsider @what @Zafer @Nilgiri @Yasar @OPTIMUS @Fuzuli NL @Stuka @Saithan @Ryder @neosinan @Stimpy75 @T-123456 @Ecderha

 

[TheInsider]

SAGE did the first ignition of the continuous-wave detonation engine prototype a few weeks ago.
If there is a scramjet engine it has to be a prototype geared toward scientific studies, unlike the SAGE ramjet engine prototype which is an industrial product.

 

[Zafer]

Detonations engines and scramjets come to mind. Now that the ramjet work is ripe we can expect progress in these two areas. It may still be at a very readiness level but once you have your one foot in the door you can as well get both of them before long. I am wishing for detonation engines for space applications first.

 

[Bogeyman]

SAGE did the first ignition of the continuous-wave detonation engine prototype a few weeks ago.
If there is a scramjet engine it has to be a prototype geared toward scientific studies, unlike the SAGE ramjet engine prototype which is an industrial product.

But İsmail Demir announced that they are working on the hyperosonic missile project. Before they can make a hypersonic missile, they must develop a scramjet engine. Because there is no hypersonic wind tunnel in our country. So the rest of the project should be waiting in the background for now. So the most likely possibility would be that they are working on a scramjet engine.

We can say that we have gone beyond the first prototype ignition in the Ramjet engine project. Therefore, working on the same speed regime over and over will only waste resources for now.

 

[Ryder]

Turkish hypersonic missiles!!

Cant wait!!

 

[Yasar_TR]

@Cabatli_53 @Anmdt @TheInsider @what @Zafer @Nilgiri @Yasar @OPTIMUS @Fuzuli NL @Stuka @Saithan @Ryder @neosinan @Stimpy75 @T-123456 @Ecderha

As you would know, you don’t need a scramjet engine to reach hypersonic speeds with a ballistic missile. Almost all SRBMs can attain hypersonic speeds during their flight. A good example is the Russian Kinzhal missile. It is supposedly a 8-10 Mach speed missile.
At 50-60000m altitude with very little air drag these missiles can attain hypersonic speeds. But when their fuel is expended and as they start to dive back to earth, their speed start to decline due to air drag. This speed is governed by terminal velocity equation whereby you need heavier and very aerodynamically designed missiles to sustain somewhat lower hypersonic speeds.
Ballistic missiles on their downward trajectories are not propelled by their engines. Their weight and their aerodynamic geometry gives them the sought after hypersonic speeds. However a missile with scramjet engine, by design, could have propulsion during it’s atmospheric flight and theoretically achieve hypersonic speeds while at lower atmosphere. But this would create mechanical , heating and guidance problems. US is still trying to overcome some of these problems. I would love to hear our Indian members’ views on the matter regarding Brahmos 2. @Nilgiri ?

 

[Nilgiri]

However a missile with scramjet engine, by design, could have propulsion during it’s atmospheric flight and theoretically achieve hypersonic speeds while at lower atmosphere. But this would create mechanical , heating and guidance problems. US is still trying to overcome some of these problems. I would love to hear our Indian members’ views on the matter regarding Brahmos 2. @Nilgiri ?

Any scramjet in todays science + engineering realm poses a significant challenge to overcome. Specifically the various precise local breakdowns in science + engineering when it comes to supersonic combustion (the enthalpy addition specifics in a medium no longer able to handle such conventionally like before).

The greatest driving underlying factor (that nearly all else, including those you mention, stem from) is the actual speed of sound, given what this represents to information flow in a control volume that involves supersonic flow and the resultant intensity/capacity for enthalpy addition to produce work/power.

If air is in subsonic regime, it is essentially always "in communication" with itself as to say what lies up ahead in a flow and let natural optimisation/consequence (w.r.t its own physical limits) establish. Matters we have long observed, studied and employed.

This essentially means we are able to take many matters for granted (that we often dont quite realise) by way of robustly known + broadly applied science and engineering with this intrinsic "self-ability" nature of the working fluid itself when its travelling below the speed of sound.

But this all changes with supersonic flows. The air no longer has the same signalling ability to itself ....say from a fuel nozzle strut dynamic with the flame (and the cascading effects pas that too)....like it would have enjoyed if it was travelling below the speed of sound.

This makes most of the great chasm (in system results and realisation we have accomplished) between a ramjet (which sees only subsonic regime within the combustion process) and a scramjet (which requires supersonic combustion).

i.e we can no longer harness much of what nature did itself (especially in such complete, reliable and near instantaneous way) once we cross the sonic threshold for a medium. This takes new proportions for something like combustion stability and sustainability (which involves two material interaction with pressure and heat).

The relative "blindness" (loss of natural medium info-matrix ability) past this threshold (in especially this combustion objective) is thus something for human understanding and experience in this regime to more slowly bridge and address.

Each thing that could be taken for granted earlier has to be re-understood and re-applied....each cascade of this has to also be checked and re-applied to the feedback loop. Each iteration of this throws up new constraints and challenges that then need more time to solve.

It takes a great deal of time compared to nature simply having it "built in" to do these things like is the case below the sonic threshold, especially for something like combustion.

It is the basic reason why supersonic combustion is only recently being more extensively researched, broached and tested.....compared to the duration we have had supersonic travel more broadly (but were careful to harness natural reliable physics to its maximum by keeping combustion subsonic etc)

Given nature no longer provides this massive intrinsic assistance (in combustion)....a whole new level of substitution for it by way of iterative engineering and detailed scientific enquiry at increasingly higher resolution is the sole approach that can be foreseeably taken.

Given the physical finite limits of air (especially its compressibility), It is only with (yet to be) reliably realised supersonic combustion that (non gravitational) hypersonic flight be achieved (with an internal combustion engine process)....i.e scramjets.

Conventional ramjets are largely bounded to supersonic flight only given hypersonic (entry) air cannot be compressed sufficiently (with say internal shockwaves) and slowed down to subsonic speeds for the combustion process that ramjets employ in the more conventional fashion on offer.

@Anmdt @MisterLike @Cabatli_53 @T-123456 @Test7 @Gessler @Joe Shearer @Paro et al.

 

[Gessler]

If we compare it, TEI is superior. I believe they are almost 30 years busy with the program so people who are talking bad about TEI should think twice what kind tecnology we are dealing with.

HTFE-25 program is less than 10 years old. You are thinking of Kaveri.

ther was a engine program for ther fighter and still are they working on that. Maybe it was that Kaveri, it was 5 years ago when i read about ther engine program.

Yes you're thinking of Kaveri aka GTX-35VS. It's a different class of engine compared to HTFE-25 though - it had 52 kN dry thrust and 81 kN with afterburner, its in F404 class of engine, first ground test was conducted in 1996. But ultimately it could only achieve about 76 kN wet but not without the vibration & noise issues getting out of hand, making it unsuitable for operational use. On top of that, they were trying to make it capable of changing the volume of air flow on the fly i.e. variable cycle. They were trying to do too much with too little.

There is a new, non-afterburning variant with about 45-50kN that's currently in testing for future use on drone programs like the Ghatak flying wing. This shouldn't have too many problems as dry thrust was already test flown & certified on the old Kaveri using Gromov Institute Il-76 engine testbed back in 2010:

But there are certain new components on this version to make it more reliable so flight testing will happen again to re-certify I presume. Currently it seems to be in ground tests:

 

[Bogeyman]

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1394748986561531904

ASPİLSAN had announced that it is working on hydrogen-powered PEM fuel cells and the sub-types of PEM, DMFC (Direct Methanol Fuel Cell) and DEFC (Direct Ethanol Fuel Cell).

These technologies are used especially in submarines.

Fuel Cell Systems for Submarines (Vestel Defense Industry)

Abstract: The high seas have long avoided air emission regulations, while fuel cell cars promise reduced emissions on land as well as reduced foreign dependency on fuel. There is no effective way to regulate pollution emissions from ships, but the fuel cell has a significant future for underwater as the best alternative to nuclear power. The fuel cell has many advantages for submarines, while the most attractive one is that it provides completely silent and air independent operation and can stay underwater for a long time without snorkel compared to that of the battery. Unlike other non-nuclear submarine variants such as gas turbines and diesel engines, fuel cells, while costly in themselves, can also be deployed on a ship for greater design flexibility, which can reduce shipbuilding costs.

Keywords: Fuel cells; Submarine; Air independent propulsion; AIP; Methanol.

5th International Hydrogen Technologies Congress May 26-28, 2021 page 79

https://hidrojenteknolojileri.org/ihtec2021/IHTEC_2021-Proceedings-v1.pdf

 

[Windchime]

Dr Aksit is definItely a brain and asset this country has produced that needs to be respected. But he does like to blow his own trumpet a bit too much at times, and whilst doing that exaggerates to a certain degree. There are engine producers like GE, P&W, RR and Safran that are in a league of their own. There is also CFM ( a conglomerate of GE and Safran) that specialises in passenger plane engine manufacturing.
Another top player is MTU Aeroengines of Germany (wholly owned by Kohlberg Kravis Robert’s) that produces complete engines as well as parts for P&W, GE and CFM. MTU, produces engines like EJ200, F110, F414, LM500 etc. as well as being a growth partner of engines like PW4000 engine, that power Boeing 747-400 and Airbus A300.
In the East, IHI of Japan works very similar to TEI. But is far ahead of us as they can produce complete turbofan engines like XF5 and XF9 engines.
These make 7 top manufacturers of western built jet engines. We are not there yet. When our TF6000 starts to fly, and our indigenous MMU engine materialises, then we may think about taking 8th position at best.

You should not forget Avio Aero(formerly Fiat) and GKN Aerospace Engines (formerly Volvo Aero). Avio Aero has for long been a leading manufacturer of gas turbine gear boxes whereas Volvo in casing and liners. Also apart from IHI, JAEC member companies, esepcially MHI is heavily involved in gas turbines, including gas turbines for aero engines and have reputable technology. Honorable mention goes for ITP of Spain.

I am not gonna argue with Big 4 in Aero engine business but Also MTU does not have any modern aero engine design they fully own its IPs. They are huge subcontractor but Not an Engine designer.

CFM is also joint venture among big 4 in order to increase their profit rather than compete with each others in its field. It wont enter another field of aero engine business unless its parent companies decides. So Neither of these 2 companies is or will be competing for aero engine business in general sense.

Yes, IHI is ahead of TEI and it is that simple. But that doesn't mean TEI isn't fighting for the 5th position.

You'r not doing any justice to what MTU means in the industry. They have been the industry leaders in devloping and manufacturing Blisks, a lot of breakthroughs originating from their labs and factories. Moreover, you shouldn't confuse yourself between if a country/company is not trying or cannot try. Lots of European nations, notably Germany, Italy and Sweden, are a core part of integral global gas turbine industry eco system.

There are big 3;
GE, P&W, RR
Then comes French Safran and Japanese IHI
Rest it similar. TEI slowly climbs up the ladder with its own designs. There is no way to catch the top 3 unless you jump the train of a paradigm-changing technology like composite turbine blades early on. The US companies are moving to adaptive cycle engines, and RR is tasked to develop the engine of Tempest. If we can successfully develop the engine of TFX we can consider ourselves more or less at the level of Safran and IHI.

The best TEI can do is to match Safran. Big 3 is untouchable.

Yeah, that's just delusional. IHI has already showcased their abilities of developing and manufacturing an extremely efficient turbofan with 2050K class TIT, aka XF-9. Where's Türkiye? Oh right, 1700K. The Japanese were important industry suppliers for decades, especially in the field of gas turbine shafts. They have also been RSPs of high-profile gas turbine programs. They are part of the leading edge of material science and engineering, pioneering composites and CMC. Not to forget they've partnered with UK in the past to bid for engine supplies for B737, although they ultimately lost out to CFM. Türkiye is not in any way comparable to any of the countries mentioned above. Don't even think of Safran.

That's not to say that Türkiye has done nothing. They've shown and is showing very respectable progress in the fields of gas turbine but in the same time, you shall not get ahead of yourself. No one's standing still.

 

[Zafer]

You should not forget Avio Aero(formerly Fiat) and GKN Aerospace Engines (formerly Volvo Aero). Avio Aero has for long been a leading manufacturer of gas turbine gear boxes whereas Volvo in casing and liners. Also apart from IHI, JAEC member companies, esepcially MHI is heavily involved in gas turbines, including gas turbines for aero engines and have reputable technology. Honorable mention goes for ITP of Spain.


You'r not doing any justice to what MTU means in the industry. They have been the industry leaders in devloping and manufacturing Blisks, a lot of breakthroughs originating from their labs and factories. Moreover, you shouldn't confuse yourself between if a country/company is not trying or cannot try. Lots of European nations, notably Germany, Italy and Sweden, are a core part of integral global gas turbine industry eco system.



Yeah, that's just delusional. IHI has already showcased their abilities of developing and manufacturing an extremely efficient turbofan with 2050K class TIT, aka XF-9. Where's Turkey? Oh right, 1700K. The Japanese were important industry suppliers for decades, especially in the field of gas turbine shafts. They have also been RSPs of high-profile gas turbine programs. They are part of the leading edge of material science and engineering, pioneering composites and CMC. Not to forget they've partnered with UK in the past to bid for engine supplies for B737, although they ultimately lost out to CFM. Turkey is not in any way comparable to any of the countries mentioned above. Don't even think of Safran.

Turkey is showing very respectable progress in the fields of gas turbine but don't get ahead of yourself. No one's standing still.

View attachment 46389

This situation is just for now.

 

[Windchime]

This situation is just for now.

And will continue to be. Like I've said, no one stands still.

 

[Rodeo]

And will continue to be. Like I've said, no one stands still.

For me the most important thing for us is to become independent from other countries for our aerial platforms. They(our "allies") shouldn't have the power to pull the plug on our projects by not delivering engines and making us their bitch. I don't give rats ass about what our ranking is among the top etc. For us to have an independent foreign policy we have to be self sufficient.

Civilian sector is a whole different game. We are already a significant part of the ecosystem. We make billions of dollars from our contracts for the most used engines in the world. To get more workload or more added value, we'd have to cooperate more. And invest more on material science and on developing more advanced manufacturing techniques.