This ENGINE Will Change The Aviation Industry FOREVER!
Вставка
- Опубліковано 15 чер 2024
- Subscribe for more aviation videos !!
Over the last ten years, both Boeing and Airbus have enhanced the engines of their 737 and A320 families. The fresh engines they installed are 14 to 15% more effective than the older ones, but the CFM RISE engine promises to much outperform this performance, and interestingly, we almost had this sort of engine thirty years ago. - Авто та транспорт
Subscribe for more aviation videos !!
Sorry for the mistake at 3:35, I didn't notice it while editing this video, my bad don't bully me 😅
that image looks goofy ass
Yeah like what the fuck.
@@legitusername-zl7todon’t bully him
It’s an AI channel with automated content. Don’t bother
@@handlenottakenim just saying the image is funny
Will Change The Aviation Industry FOREVER! Can't remember how many times I have heard this.
It most likely won't happen. Mainly an uncontained engine failure.
Pretty much the only event that did that was the 11th of September.
The claims about equivalent or within-regulations noise level are most likely overstated. It seems like breaking the laws of physics given that you have a giant blade next to a giant stator. There is no such thing in a ducted engine, *and* the duct contains most of the noise and sends it out the back, whereas the UDF sends it straight down to the ground. Maybe they are expecting airport noise regulation to back off given the tradeoffs.
Countless AI narrated vids all saying stuff just like this. Glad I only wasted 1 minute before bailing.
@@darrell857 there's always a stator after the fan
Dude I remember reading about this new revolution in prop planes 30 frickin years ago...
That's exactly what I was thinking!
I remember reading about the GE version in Popular Mechanics way back.
The main problem is that they are insanely loud
I interned at Boeing in the 80s and worked on the 7J7 project, which was a prop plane that looked a lot like this. It was cancelled before my internship ended.
Author never heard about Tu-95 MS? NK-12M engine made and modernized since 1956?
For some reason, this video is a copy of a video done by MentourPilot. The beginning and the story throughout is practically the same.
You noticed that too. Almost word for word copy.
Yes, and artificial voiceover
Its plagiarism. See mentour now video. Let's report this video.
This video is basically the exakt same as the one from Mentour now about the topic. Really everything
Sometimes word for word: ua-cam.com/video/ojVNOj-q3SQ/v-deo.html
"Snecma" sounds like the stuff that a plane would find on its unwashed...landing gear
In fact it stands for "Société nationale d'étude et de construction de moteurs d'aviation (S.N.E.C.M.A.)"
Founded May 29, 1945 a few weeks after end of WW2 in Europe.
bro wtf
You've watched very closely to what mentour pilot had to say about the rise engine, more than 1 year ago..
Nearly identical !
Say thumbnail just zoomed out
I was just thinking this. It’s literally a word for word rip off.
Because it’s AI generated.
Its plagiarism. See mentour now video. Let's report this video.
Can’t quite explain why but this video seems AI generated (it’s a growing trend on UA-cam these days). The voice just feels like text to speech and 3:27 are the two main indicators lol.
I'm pretty sure this is a text to speech
@@lionidor1132 yeah, and the prompt is AI too. Just chat gpt or something lol
Pretty obvious to me. I couldn't make it past ~ 0:45
yeah it is AI generated text and speech. had to stop watching after a minute.
It’s done pretty well but the speech cadence just isn’t natural in places.
Open fans gain efficiency in 2 ways:
1 - They can benefit from variable fan blade pitch, meaning optimal blade pitch at any speed as opposed to 1 desirable cruise speed
2 - Because they have no ducts, they don't need to worry about blade expansion, which means larger diameter fans become viable (without the development of more expansion-resistant materials, the duct would need to have a large gap between the blades and ducting to avoid blade collision, large gaps between ducting and fan blades reduces efficiency considerably).
Whats important to remember when talking about open fan jets is that advantage number 2 is temporary. Open fan jets became a point of interest earlier, as mentioned, but then material science caught up. Suddenly the large diameter fan afforded by an open design could be built and operated within the tolerances of a duct. Ducts improve airflow, almost always (granted they have optimal blade clearance), so as soon as a fan can be put into a duct, it will be.
That said, advantage number 1 is a bit more permanent. There are all sorts of challenges with implementing variable pitch to a ducted engine, assuming you even want to do so. As I understand, the inlet cowling design of a ducted engine can provide similar gains to variable blade pitch on an open fan or propeller. If a manufacturer wants to pursue open fans, the variable pitch has to be their long-term selling point, and they have to make sure that it provides more gain in efficiency than ducting a fan of the same diameter.
What about maintenance? Ease of access? Which would be cheaper to manufacture?
its hard to say
the gearing mechanism required for the contra-rotating fans would add a fair ammount of complexity to open fan designs. Some early jets used to have a similar fan arrangement, but it was removed as it was nit necessary within a ducted fan and added extra complexity
the pitch adjustment also adds some complexity, but I'm not sure how much@@ags911
its worth bearing in mind that it would likely be easier to manufacture an open-fan if it were electrically powered, since then you can have a motor for each fan and remove the need for a complex gearbox@@ags911
So basically a turboprop
New and improved 😀
Jet engine with an open fan which is a jet + turboprop = CFM rise
With variable stator vanes.
My thoughts exactly! 😂
Not really a turboprop is a propeller this one is an unducted fan.
People in this comment section didn’t even listen to the video. It said the noise levels of the Safran engines have been comparable to ducted designs yet everyone’s still going on about the noise.
I know they all dismiss the RISE as if the engineers at Safran haven’t done the tests and run the numbers. They wouldn’t be going all in on it if they didn’t know that it works.
@@Papershields001 I’ve always loved when a video like this comes up and suddenly half of UA-cam is talking like engineers with 20 years experience. Like an engineering company has literally told you the results of their testing, not exactly got the ability to correct them.
I dismiss it because i keep saying this is coming for years now and nothing ever comes. Just another BS invention until proven otherwise.@@Papershields001
Return of the flying bananas? I'm not holding my breath remembering the hype last time round.
The conventional engine casing is designed to contain shrapnel in case of engine failure. Unencased blades risk penetrating the fuselage in such an event and is one of the main reasons havent been used.
This is why competition is so important
What's with the Boeing A320?
Because airbus 737 is more effiecient
@@tinuvarun5806 That's not what he's asking, I assume he's questioning the 737 in the Airbus livery.
@@Oh_Ake I was just making a joke because he said " boeing a320"
How is it different with prop jet?
When I fly short distance here within Norway, I have flowen in turboprop aircrafts. They are definetly pretty loud, compared to all other commercial aircrafts used today.
The nacelle does contain some of the noise. not all.... the UDF definitely has potential - especially if the stator works.
A very good video - thank you!
What’s with the aircraft shown at 3:35? It says A320 Neo but the nose/cockpit is clearly a 737.
That's a hybrid, Boeibus A720
This seems like an AI generated vid. You can tell because it repeats itself like a 12 year old writing an essay.
What about dealing with uncontrolled blade failure?
You’re acting like turbo props dont exist
@@stephenfazekas5054there’s a reason we moved away from turbo props, even on shorter regional flights
I was thinking the same thing. Only answer that I can think of is to armor the fuselage where a loose fan blade poses the greatest risk of damage. If this comes to fruition, I'm very curious what the solution to this is.
@@xpeterson the prices of small jets went down as well as smaller high bypasses engines . Also cabin noise
@@stephenfazekas5054 yup, shoulda said there are “many” reasons. Those are among them too
What we really need is something like the NK-93 for airliners. Produce this contra-rotating geared turbofan and you have the most efficient design possible with the safety and noise suppression of a covered design. Western power sections on a design outline like this would be unbeatable. The upcoming rotating detonation gas turbine with CMC materials powering it would beat anything in the pipeline.
Good video. Thanks.
This A320neo in 3:35 looks like b737 especially with winglets and engines😮
If it’s BOEING, I ain’t going
One of the critical safety tests of a modern turbofan engine is fan-blade containment - and now we are saying it's ok for them to be uncontained?
MTU Germany developed the CRISP (Counter rotating integrated shrouded propfan) technology program in the mid-1980s. The engine concept, its feasibility was proven based on a counter-rotating fan with adjustable blades. An engine of this type would have enabled significant fuel savings, especially on long journeys, but due to the low fuel prices at the time no series production ensued. 40 years later this concept is now experiencing a revival.
all the engines with ducted fans have had to successfully complete very expensive blade containment testing. now they can just run the fans in the open? what happened to the safety concern of a blade failure?
I’d be amazed if 4 of these engines could not only make an A380 fly, but be more fuel efficient
Wouldn't it be possible with these open engines to direct the thrust vector like on helicopters? And if so, wouldn't this sort of thrust vectoring allow for smaller (or no) tail, thus smaller weight and drag?
Short answer : no, for a lot of architectural and safety problems.
A plane must be able to cruise even if the engines can't operate. Wich is a big problem if you have no way to compensate the plane direction apart of your engines that can brokes.
What about variable pitch, static stator vanes?
Just a thought.
That's exactly what they are. Look at the renders and you'll see the vanes can change pitch
I'm kind of astounded by how small the air intakes are on the CFM RISE core. You can barely see them.
Outperform this performance....wordsmithing.
The whole plane should be designed around the best mileage for the airspeed of these types engines. Lower airspeed means longer wings
Extremely optimistic on the fuel side. Hydrogen is extremely explosive and dangerous to handle, as opposed to jet fuel which is far less dangerous than gasoline. The other thing I didn't catch being mentioned is that there has to be a major redesign of the wings to accommodate the larger fan size.
What is the function of the non rotating blades on the rise engine?
I'm assuming they'll be like guide veins like what was used on the old Pratt and Whitney JT8D engine?
As I understand it the non rotating blades extract additional energy from the stream of the front rotor that would otherwise be lost. When the airflow leaves the rotor it has some rotation that can't be avoided but which took energy to create. If you add another set of blades that straightens this rotation you get some energy back and get addidtional thrust.
Reducing noise.
I’m no engineer but I was wondering: Are these open blades more vulnerable to bird strikes or hidden debris on a runway? Anybody know?
@JazzR31 Probably as vulnerable as a turboprop blades.
Unducted engines have one giant problem. They make an incredible amount of noise and that will have to be solved before these engine can ever go into service.
Did you not watch the video? He addressed that.
Wasn't this tried about 30 or 40 years ago with so little success that it remained just a research project?
Yes but now we have hi-tech composite earmuffs
@@satunnainenkatselija4478 Did you watch the video? This was addressed.
Depends how you estimate it's effectiveness.!
This video is remarkably similar to Mentour Pilot’s video on this subject from 7 months ago. In some cases, word for word even. Interesting 🧐
it is AI generated. also the voice is AI. I will report it
2:35 that name caught me off gaurd 💀
the blades of the fan floating freely in the air makes them less effecient. at best there would be what would look like 2 turbine sections.
Unducted fans are too loud for any airport near a major city. The blade tips are moving at Mach 1.4 on average on a typical turbofan. The bypass ducts have noise dampening material that absorb those shock waves. If you've ever been around a TU-95 Bear you'll get an understanding of it - and thats with a blade tip velocity of only Mach 1.05. These will be deeply supersonic to get turbofan like performance.
How many times do we see a dumb idea from the 80's try to be reinvented. Main problems with this is gearbox problems and noise.
"Snecma"... I wonder if anyone in the naming committee ever tried actually saying it out loud?
Long story short, we’re going back to propellers
Whether the most efficient way is to put the engine in front of the airplane, to make the airplane benefit from high-speed jets from the engine, regardless of aeroacoustics?
The air ejected by the jet engine has some shitty fluid properties, wich make it a bad flux for aerodynamics.
But it could have worked 😁
I have found a lot of similiarities with the Mentour Now video about this topic published 1 year ago. Like the same sentences.
a hybrid turbine would be the most recommended
Lay person here. Why is an open fan engine more efficient? Is it just the weight?
It’s the bypass ratio. The open fan can push lots and lots more air for the same energy.
Yes but why? Larger diameter?@@Papershields001
Airbus will continue its dominance
All this lovely technical detail, and not one mention of safety and blade failure?
Imagine a window seat a few feet away from those massive meat slicers! At least turbofans have a protective casing around them to protect the fuselage in event of a failure!
@@tomrogers9467 you can always design it with no passegers in those vicinities (you must sacrifice some sitting places)
Probably something to do with the fact that we already have turboprops flying today
@tomrogers9467 Mount them off of the wings at the rear of the fuselage.
It's been done a long time ago.
Uhmm, turboprops have been flying since the beginning of time. What makes this different compared to ATR72?
The problem with ductless fans is the noise, they existed as a compromise to reduce the size of engine compared to a high bypass. Want fuel efficiency design a plane from the ground up for it, odds are the engines would be mounted higher up and in the back
You really don´t want the engine mounted in the back with a traditional T tail airplane. That makes it heavier and generally reduce the fuel efficiency. (if you have the stabilizer in front, the calculation is different)
@@matsv201 by the back I mean boundary layer ingestion. Concepts that utilize this are the airbus nautilus,aurora d8, onera dragon,onera nova,boeing bwb, nasa starc-abl,tu delft. The only reason boeing is wasting tax payers money with the truss based wing concept is because they essentially are getting paid 500m to build a new wing for the 737
@@stephenfazekas5054 I think you might referring to a pusher configuration where the prop or fan is mounted aft of the engine
CFM claims the noise produced by RISE will be around the same levels as their current LEAPs, and the likes of the GE36 did pass noise regulations of their day.
Yes, but now we have state of the art earmuffs...
So if a blade breaks off it will chop through fuselage?
That's very unlikely, we've been flying with prop planes since the begining of aviation and that has never been a problem.
If something's breaking the blade off, you have bigger issues.
Maybe... But about 1980 UDF (unducted fan) was The Next Big Thing In Civil Aviation. Then by 1985 (and a lot of money spent) it was all but forgotten.
high bypass fans are not primarily for increased thrust, they provide cooling for ever increasing operating temperatures of the engine core as well as noise insulation .. increased thrust is more of a side effect
The fans aren't bigger to provide cooling - it's to produce the same amount of thrust as before with a smaller (and, yes, hotter) core, but that's about burning less fuel more efficiently. All else equal, a smaller engine core running at higher air pressure and higher temperatures will generate much more torque to turn the fan/prop/whatever. That higher-torque air-mover moves more air, which is how you go. Yes, that core of fast air blends with the hot jet exhaust as well, but honestly, we'd put up with the noise if it got better efficiency - the quieter operation is just a welcome byproduct.
Incorrect, the hottest parts of the engine core are cooled by diverting part of the compressed gasses before combustion. This is known as the "bleed air" system and is also used for various functions like heating the cabin and deicing. The bleed air gasses are much hotter than ambient but there is enough flow to get the job done.
Hey everyone!
We are going back to propellers !
So we build engine cowlings to try and contain blade failures. What happens when one of these has such a failure or hits birds? I would imagine one of those blades could slice a plane in half?
Your picture of A320 Neo is very strange. It's a mix of A320 and 737 max.
Airbus needs to design a new a380 with composite lightweight materials and these engines!
Why?
Building a new airframe and body (which is what a switch to composites would be) is very, very expensive - they'd effectively have to build a brand new A380 from scratch and then sell 250+ of them. They only sold 251 A380s, and most of those are sitting in a desert, available for a fraction of factory price -- the "500 people at a time" model just hasn't shown to be profitable. If they really wanted to make a difference, they should build an A320 out of composites, since they'll sell several thousand of those over the next 20 years.
@@kevinrusch3627 I know. But it’s still ok to have dreams, right? I’ve been so lucky to fly onboard the A380 a few times and would love to see it come back in some form.
No they need to design a A370, that would be a 1½ floor aircraft with slightly higher diameter than the A350 and a capacity of about 600PAX.
The main issue with A380 is that its a to heavy of a aircraft in terms of impact but also weight.
Something like a A370 could be powered by the same engines as a 777X but still carry 20-30% more passengers.
the a380 is a failure, it is too big, a lot of them are never able to reach capacity to even make them economical to operate. virtually all airlines are not looking to expand their 380 fleets. it is not worth it
The noise was a big problem both outside and in the cabin.
B727 UDF - un ducted fan. Been tried before
I worked with Safran on these open rotor engines 😍
Scares me that this engine has uncontained fan blades!!!
I understand, but lots of turboprops and piston engine props out there functioning everyday
I’ve flown in quite a few airplanes with propellers and they were completely safe.
It's going to be a hard sell for people today. They'll assume jet technology is going backwards
just dont stick your thing in it and you're good
It is called propeller. Back to the roots?
Impeller ? Fans ?? 😅
Props and slower travel time will be much more fuel efficient
Back in 70s this was called a U D F unducted fan tech. G E tested these alot. Just didnt fit the demand.
Swap out old engines for this
What is the purpose of the disturbing noise in the background?
Author never heard about Tu-95 MS? NK-12M engine made and modernized since 1956?
Boeing need to start making decent plains instead of manipulating their stock prices first. (Not a chance in hell of that happening)
Bet Frank Whittle already thought of it
Hope you like noise. These were tied a while back and the noise harmonics caused damage to the aircraft structure. Also the inlet of jet engines has noise abatement materials lining it so you do not hear the noise of that giant prop. I work in the aviation industry and one of the lowest aircraft I have ever seen is a turboprop. It is 3-4 times as loud as a comparable jet. Not to mention as you fly higher the open design loses efficiency. This is almost as bad as an all electric powered aircraft.
udf, old news, ive got pics of several from late 80’s early 90’s
Thought they have a speed limit??
The container the fans to reduce the sound from the engine
3:35
So, is no one going to talk about this?
The aviation especially the airliner space is very conservative for better and for worst. With such a big fear of safety they can't afford to take many risk
Won't the tail mounted engines create a C of G issue?
Not if the aircraft is designed for them, as per 727, BAC 1-11, VC10, DC-9, etc.
Nope. And you’ll notice the wings on such planes are significantly further aft to change the CoL/CoG characteristics.
fortunately Boeing don't care about that stuff
If anyone has heard an A400M flying overhead, they're very noisy.
Why is this more efficient
is this video being read by a computer? weird pauses all over the place
Why do they not use this with a hybrid system? Drive the fans with electric motors using an engine, fuel cell or battery as power source or even a combination of the three.
The turbine engine is really designed for high speed air travel. They become more efficient at high speed too.
Having a turbine engine drive a generator to drive an electric fan would probably result in a net loss of efficiency.
Batteries are too heavy to haul and to be a primary power source.
remember the last time we filled a aircraft with Hydrogen?
this engine might also be boeing's comeback
I think Rolls-Royce of achieved it already.
There are already movable stators behind the fans in high bypass engines. So this is not new. Not clear from where the 12-1 to 20-1 bypass ratio increase would come from. Also not clear if removing the fan shroud brings benefits aerodynamicslly, and how. There's assumedly no reason you cant now put a smaller number of wider chord fan blades into a high bypass engine.
Plot twist, Boeing merges with McDonnell Douglas!
This gotta be one of Noah faceless channel
3:33 😅😅😅
Unducted? You got vectors flying out the window. What thinking is this???
So, we're going back to propellers huh? Interesting.
Why not duct the whole thing to reduce noise and contain any blade failure .... which would also make it look less ugly!
Ducting the engine would destroy the bypass ratio and basically make it like the engines we have now.
@@Papershields001 Yes, I guess it would. Like the original UDF I just find the engine/ aircraft combination so bizarre looking. When the original UDF was abandoned due to noise and other issues I thought we'd seen the last of that kind of thing! From a purely aesthetic and totally non-business standpoint ..... I hope something happens that would ultimately see the end of this!
I have at most 23 years remaining in mcareer... I don't see myself flying anything beyond what is currently in the market. y
It was… planely appreciated? 😏 Whether you did that on purpose or not, I still like what you did there.
1903....The Wright borthers make the first powered flight using....Propellers.
1939....Hans von Ohain produces the first jet-powered aircraft.
1965.....the first production high-bypass turbofan, the TF39, is installed on the C-5 Galaxy
2024-----The CFM/GE RISE engine promises higher efficiency using......propellers.
Go figure.
Serrate the trailing edges of the blades.
Propellers on airliners...whats next, radial piston engines?
This thing again…
Oh, wait…. I’m old !!😂😂
2:36 Snecma ? Sounds like Smegma ? Almost as bad as AYDS weight loss candies in the 1980s.
If it weren't for the dreaded bird strike ...