avatar_Scotaidh

Old designs with modern engines

Started by Scotaidh, July 11, 2025, 01:52:16 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

kerick

Quote from: Weaver on Today at 06:24:46 AM
Quote from: Mossie on Today at 05:56:07 AMAnother similar aged type that's proven incredibly useful is the WB-57, if in very small numbers. What might that get re-engined with if NASA wanted it to carry on indefinitely? At least there should be plenty of TF-33 spares now.

We've already seen pilots flying their father's planes: we might yet see somebody flying their grandfather's B-52.  :o

QuoteMartin Baker also have kept two Meteors running due to them being really well suited as an ejection seat testbed and nothing newer being quite right for the niche role. So what might replace the Derwents if they needed to keep them going?

A pair of Williams FJ-44-4s would work. They're short enough to fit between the fore and aft wing spars, produce exactly the same thrust as a Derwent 8, and are about 30% lighter.

And far more fuel efficient too I'll bet!
" Somewhere, between half true, and completely crazy, is a rainbow of nice colours "
Tophe the Wise

Mossie

Bet there isn't an original part on the Derwents. It would make an interesting whiff, tiny nacelles on a Meteor.

I remember MB had been looking for a replacement many years ago and found there was nothing fast enough with the intakes placed far enough away (to prevent gas injection) for reasonable purchase and running costs. The only other type that offered a similar spec was the MiG-21.

Diamondback

Quote from: Weaver on Today at 06:24:46 AM
Quote from: Mossie on Today at 05:56:07 AMAnother similar aged type that's proven incredibly useful is the WB-57, if in very small numbers. What might that get re-engined with if NASA wanted it to carry on indefinitely? At least there should be plenty of TF-33 spares now.

We've already seen pilots flying their father's planes: we might yet see somebody flying their grandfather's B-52.  :o
Already happened in GWOT, IIRC.

The problem with keeping 'em going will be attrition. without a line to build more at some point we won't be able to maintain operational strength and we're already WAY below our "Two MRC" doctrine so if both our Europe and Pacific treaty obligations go hot at once, one set of allies will have to be shafted for the other.

And if we start building more the Homosexual Pedophile Under The Oniondomes is going to throw a screaming hissyfit despite that wiping their arse with arms control treaties has been The Russian Way since such treaties were first conceived...

Weaver

Quote from: Mossie on Today at 08:03:59 AMBet there isn't an original part on the Derwents. It would make an interesting whiff, tiny nacelles on a Meteor.

I remember MB had been looking for a replacement many years ago and found there was nothing fast enough with the intakes placed far enough away (to prevent gas injection) for reasonable purchase and running costs. The only other type that offered a similar spec was the MiG-21.

They'd probably leave the nacelles alone to avoid messing with the aerodynamics: just fit the new engines with new internal ducts.

The other thing to do would be to adopt Me 262 style underwing pods, as in the Metrovick test aircraft. In that case, the length of the new engine wouldn't be so critical, but it's diameter would be, since ground clearance would then be an issue.
"Things need not have happened to be true. Tales and dreams are the shadow-truths that will endure when mere facts are dust and ashes, and forgot."
 - Sandman: A Midsummer Night's Dream, by Neil Gaiman

"I dunno, I'm making this up as I go."
 - Indiana Jones