Adaptive engine my ars! So what's new? Since WW2 it's been burn a hydrocarbon fuel and then use the generated heat to accelerate a gas. Time to stop playing with the Brayton cycle. The only substantive change was the GE nuke engine of the mid 50's. Time to stop playing with electrons and use the nucleus! Heat isn't the only way to accelerate mass.
Awesome video, it set my heart pounding and my patriotic fervor through the roof. *_(Would have been even better if it explained what an Adaptive Cycle Engine actually is)_*
These people don't know, and they have only been told buzz words. They have good voices and are good looking. They are, however, idiots. You do not want an intelligent person talking about your tech advances because then you only get one year to file your patent if they spill the beans.
Dynamic control of the bypass ratio... clearly this video wasn't made for those that don't understand this fundamental characteristic of these types of powerplants.
We're getting there but ACEs are a step up from current fielded and proven technology while pulse detonation is still in a mixture of testing and theoretical. They aren't far off though.
@@georgevantuyl5837 Rocket engines are orders of magnitude easier to do than high pressure/high temperature turbofan hot cores. Think about the thermal range and tight-fitting blades spinning at unbelievable RPMs, with substantial levels of pressure flowing through those stages. Pratt & Whitney has been doing single crystal blades since the 1980s, with tolerances that would make Tesla engineers shudder. Additive can’t do that, not even close.
@@LRRPFco52 Additionally the operational time on jet engines is a huge factor that makes material development difficult. You not only need something to survive the tolerances, you need something to survive the tolerances again, and again, and again so you can leave it on-aircraft as long as possible.
@@mcshakycheese7396 Yup. I’ve been in aerospace and defense since the 1970s, specific to fighters mostly at the USAF Flight Test Center at Edwards AFB. We were more focused on avionics and weapons, but propulsion guys are right there too of course. One of my close friends worked for Pratt & Whitney on developmental programs on the F-15 and F-16, to include the STOL MTD F-15. I watched the days from TF30 and early F100 all the way through DEEC, FADEC, F101 on the B-1B, F110, F100-PW-220, F100-PW-229, etc. Nobody does HPHT turbine cores like the US. Our MTBF is the world standard to beat. We pushed ahead past the Improved Performance Engine with F119 and then even more with F135 motors. Russians and Chinese are trying to catch up to where we were in the early 1980s with F101, and failing. They’ve reached the thrust, but not the durability/reliability.
@@LRRPFco52 I did some work with Pratt & Whitney commercial-side on their Next Generation Product Family (NGPF) line of jet engines developing Application Software for their FADECs. One thing that has become increasingly interesting over the last two decades on commercial side is the need for more software-heavy predictive maintenance algorithms/LRUs on-board the engine (or via data upload by fleets as they operate and pass it to ground stations). It felt like on the commercial front, while there have been some leaps in hardware (and will continue to be as aircraft electrification/hybrids are pursued), a huge factor in keeping the engine on longer is your supportive software capabilities which let you narrow down *exactly* when is most efficient to do activities vs. going off an X-month inspection approach. Currently doing some work towards this Adaptive Life Cycle concept, but coming off commercial I wanted to brief myself on the total objectives haha. You don't always get program managers who tell you anything about the big picture other than WE'RE BEHIND SCHEDULE AHHHHH, OUR MONEY AHHHHH.
Current F135-PW-100 engine in the F-35A is 43,000lbs of trust in max burner, and 28,000lbs in military dry power, de-rated for longevity to 40,000/25,000. Pratt & Whitney already made a drop-in hot core stage that can be incorporated into the depot-level scheduled overhauls that delivers 47,300lbs of thrust, with 6% fuel burn reduction, and that was done years ago. They have another program that improves those numbers even more, especially the fuel efficiency by 20%, with 15% thrust improvement. That would mean 49,450lb of thrust in max burner, 32,400lb in dry power.
Yes. These were developed specifically to fit into the F-35, but they are also going to be used in the B-21. The theory is that they will also be used in NGAD, but instead of one engine like the F-35 has, NGAD will have two of these.
Would have more respect fpr GE of they didnt leak their turbine technology to thr chinese, enabling them to leverage their nuclear reactors to be more efficient in submarines and other applications....
XA100 OR XA101 are designed to fit the F-35, iirc they plan to reengine starting in 2027. A further evolution of them will probably power NGAD (PCA) . B-21 uses a upscaled F-135 to my knowledge
@@myusername3689 Well if you weren't an absolute plebeian you'd know that the B-2 essentially makes use of 4 F-110 engines with their afterburner removed. So this wouldn't seem surprising much like it isn't to others
@@stealth225 It’s just a joke, the taliban would accidentally break this within seconds of acquiring it. They’ve already crashed a couple of helicopters.
It's nothing new to improve an aircraft's performance by changing to a new engine. The P-51 Mustang went from an Allison to a Rolls-Royce Merlin and the F-16 went from its original Pratt and Whitney to its current GE engines. As for what some of the new terms mean like Adaptive Cycle, well it could mean nothing or it could mean they would have to kill you after you heard it.
It's really not that complicated. The engine can basically change gears to deflect air through different channels, high-pressure, fuel-efficient, and cooling. This allows the airplane to maintain not just different modes, but being able to cycle different hybrid configurations between them in milliseconds, like a shape-shifting Transformer. When you combine this with other technologies like VTOL and thrust-vectoring, this could eventually lead to something we can really argue is a real-life Transformer in machine at least.
I truly miss working in this field 😔 We used to test Military, Commercial, and Land & Marine engines at a GE overhaul/test facility in the mid 90s
God bless the fine engineers at GE
Jet engines, always on cutting edge of materials and engineering . Please safe guard you advances GE.
It's amazing y'all hit production level so early, I can't wait to see it outfitted. The F135 was already amazing.
Adaptive engines are truly the future. Need to be given the chance to be developed as ACEs will become mainstream soon enough.
Adaptive engine my ars! So what's new? Since WW2 it's been burn a hydrocarbon fuel and then use the generated heat to accelerate a gas. Time to stop playing with the Brayton cycle. The only substantive change was the GE nuke engine of the mid 50's. Time to stop playing with electrons and use the nucleus! Heat isn't the only way to accelerate mass.
Awesome video, it set my heart pounding and my patriotic fervor through the roof.
*_(Would have been even better if it explained what an Adaptive Cycle Engine actually is)_*
These people don't know, and they have only been told buzz words. They have good voices and are good looking. They are, however, idiots. You do not want an intelligent person talking about your tech advances because then you only get one year to file your patent if they spill the beans.
Dynamic control of the bypass ratio... clearly this video wasn't made for those that don't understand this fundamental characteristic of these types of powerplants.
Amazing work guys all the best for the success and for the safety and effectiveness of the forces
"the tyranny of distance".. i like it
Someone please explain this to me does the adaptive part just mean they are changing the bypass ratio?
Amazing, pls see to that china doesn't hack your vital data democracies need you best wishes from India
Adaptive engines are a step back from truly revolutionary engines like a pulse destination drive.
We're getting there but ACEs are a step up from current fielded and proven technology while pulse detonation is still in a mixture of testing and theoretical. They aren't far off though.
@@terrestrialextra4790 in short, pulse drive is still far away
Did you mean "pulsed *detonation* drive"?
I wonder what they're going to do with this engine now.
Mind-blowing
Could someone explain to me what the phrase "really kind of" means?
It’s dumbed-down speak for, “I repeat stupid things I heard from people who are supposed to be smart, but never mastered basics of English."
3D print compressor & turbine disks will be soon ??
Musk is already doing this. All of his rocket engines are 3D printed.
@@georgevantuyl5837 Rocket engines are orders of magnitude easier to do than high pressure/high temperature turbofan hot cores. Think about the thermal range and tight-fitting blades spinning at unbelievable RPMs, with substantial levels of pressure flowing through those stages. Pratt & Whitney has been doing single crystal blades since the 1980s, with tolerances that would make Tesla engineers shudder. Additive can’t do that, not even close.
@@LRRPFco52 Additionally the operational time on jet engines is a huge factor that makes material development difficult. You not only need something to survive the tolerances, you need something to survive the tolerances again, and again, and again so you can leave it on-aircraft as long as possible.
@@mcshakycheese7396 Yup. I’ve been in aerospace and defense since the 1970s, specific to fighters mostly at the USAF Flight Test Center at Edwards AFB. We were more focused on avionics and weapons, but propulsion guys are right there too of course. One of my close friends worked for Pratt & Whitney on developmental programs on the F-15 and F-16, to include the STOL MTD F-15.
I watched the days from TF30 and early F100 all the way through DEEC, FADEC, F101 on the B-1B, F110, F100-PW-220, F100-PW-229, etc.
Nobody does HPHT turbine cores like the US. Our MTBF is the world standard to beat. We pushed ahead past the Improved Performance Engine with F119 and then even more with F135 motors. Russians and Chinese are trying to catch up to where we were in the early 1980s with F101, and failing. They’ve reached the thrust, but not the durability/reliability.
@@LRRPFco52 I did some work with Pratt & Whitney commercial-side on their Next Generation Product Family (NGPF) line of jet engines developing Application Software for their FADECs. One thing that has become increasingly interesting over the last two decades on commercial side is the need for more software-heavy predictive maintenance algorithms/LRUs on-board the engine (or via data upload by fleets as they operate and pass it to ground stations). It felt like on the commercial front, while there have been some leaps in hardware (and will continue to be as aircraft electrification/hybrids are pursued), a huge factor in keeping the engine on longer is your supportive software capabilities which let you narrow down *exactly* when is most efficient to do activities vs. going off an X-month inspection approach. Currently doing some work towards this Adaptive Life Cycle concept, but coming off commercial I wanted to brief myself on the total objectives haha. You don't always get program managers who tell you anything about the big picture other than WE'RE BEHIND SCHEDULE AHHHHH, OUR MONEY AHHHHH.
Like Indirect instruction
If I had a dollar for every time they say warfighter....
they should say, "soldiers, sailors, airmen, marines, and guardians" every time instead
You would have four dollars.
Buzz word to make the Acquisition brass in the USAF get all hot and bothered.
Each time they say warfighter Congress increases their budget
How much power does it generate and how fast it is
50,000k lbs thrust
1,200 watts. It can power a toaster, but thats abt it.
@@dwizzleusa4202 50 million pounds? That's some engine.
Current F135-PW-100 engine in the F-35A is 43,000lbs of trust in max burner, and 28,000lbs in military dry power, de-rated for longevity to 40,000/25,000. Pratt & Whitney already made a drop-in hot core stage that can be incorporated into the depot-level scheduled overhauls that delivers 47,300lbs of thrust, with 6% fuel burn reduction, and that was done years ago. They have another program that improves those numbers even more, especially the fuel efficiency by 20%, with 15% thrust improvement.
That would mean 49,450lb of thrust in max burner, 32,400lb in dry power.
Engine for NGAD ?
Now for the new F-35s!!! This will allow more energy to mount laser weapons and plasma hologram to dodge infrared weapons!
Yes. These were developed specifically to fit into the F-35, but they are also going to be used in the B-21. The theory is that they will also be used in NGAD, but instead of one engine like the F-35 has, NGAD will have two of these.
Contract lost right?
Why is it called "adaptive cycle"? Is it just branding?
Would have more respect fpr GE of they didnt leak their turbine technology to thr chinese, enabling them to leverage their nuclear reactors to be more efficient in submarines and other applications....
Ilove for F35 engine...for Indo- Pacific region....!
Looks like they snuck a hotdog in there…beats putting a roast under the hood on a long drive.
ให้แรงที่เกิดตรงกันข้ามกัน
Now add an ramjet bypass.
F135より 推力高くなるのかな
!!❤🤍💙!!
It suck so bad that they decided to go with the F-135 upgrade instead of this, what a shame
It's not about it sucking or not. It's about dollars. How much does it cost to add all the logistical requirements on top of an existing supply chain.
No information about cost? I guess this will be in b21 or PCA, maybe f35s? god we dont need any of this though
XA100 OR XA101 are designed to fit the F-35, iirc they plan to reengine starting in 2027. A further evolution of them will probably power NGAD (PCA) . B-21 uses a upscaled F-135 to my knowledge
Uhhhh why tf would they be putting a 6th gen fighter engine in a subsonic stealth bomber?
@@myusername3689 Well if you weren't an absolute plebeian you'd know that the B-2 essentially makes use of 4 F-110 engines with their afterburner removed. So this wouldn't seem surprising much like it isn't to others
It's mostly for the next generation fighter
@@fokjohnpainkiller Hmmm supersonic engines for a subsonic bomber
Just a self promoting add 👎
The Taliban will be very successful with this technology ;-)
you made my day
How tf are taliban related to this?
@@stealth225 It’s just a joke, the taliban would accidentally break this within seconds of acquiring it. They’ve already crashed a couple of helicopters.
It will be fielded against us by Ukraine in 15-20 years.
It's nothing new to improve an aircraft's performance by changing to a new engine. The P-51 Mustang went from an Allison to a Rolls-Royce Merlin and the F-16 went from its original Pratt and Whitney to its current GE engines. As for what some of the new terms mean like Adaptive Cycle, well it could mean nothing or it could mean they would have to kill you after you heard it.
It's really not that complicated. The engine can basically change gears to deflect air through different channels, high-pressure, fuel-efficient, and cooling. This allows the airplane to maintain not just different modes, but being able to cycle different hybrid configurations between them in milliseconds, like a shape-shifting Transformer. When you combine this with other technologies like VTOL and thrust-vectoring, this could eventually lead to something we can really argue is a real-life Transformer in machine at least.
easy china copy
Warfighter Bullshit Bingo
ฉันคิดว่าอุตสาหกรรมการบินหลังโควิด 19 ต้องการการดูแลเพื่อให้ฟื้นตัวฉันคิดว่าชิ้นส่วนอะไรที่ต้องเปลี่ยนบ่อยๆมันก็น่าสนใจคุณพิจารณาดู