Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Iranian Defence Forum' started by Rukarl, Aug 29, 2016.
mapna group... rd-33...
owj production and assembling line
Amazing how far Iran has come
guys i found something interesting, general electric T-64 engine which powers our ch-53 helicopters, has turbine inlet temperature equal to max 800 centigrade degrees, on the other hand we know that general electric j85 engines that we make under the name of owj, has turbine inlet temperature equal to 977 degrees, so i assume hypothetically we can make something like this right??
just look at this babe if we manage to produce something like this, it would pave the way to produce our own ch-53 and ch-47 or even gunships.
that is what u found.......sabas...
turboshafts/props are basically a turbojet with extra independent turbine stages. what really matters is the turbine inlet temperature also they have more compressor stages to supply fresh air to combustion chambers.
Unfortunately this sort of undertaking first requires having the political will necessary to implement the program,without that very little can ever be achieved,and sadly we all know that rouhani considers programs like this to have virtually little or no value....unless of course its for a photo op[sad lol!].
guys i did some digging and find out that my theory actually realised ages ago and it's not just theory. look at these:
P&W JT-12 was a US made turbojet engine which was very similar to j-85 in terms of thrust, weight, length, diameter, specific fuel consumption and air mass flow. but the funny fact is that they turned it to a turboshaft engine named P&W JFTD-12, an engine with 4500HP output power. and they used that to power a huge helicopter, the Sikorsky S-64 Skycrane with maximum takeoff weight of 19 tons.
P&W JT-12 turbojet engine:
P&W JFTD-12 turboshaft engine:
or another example is czechoslovakian made TJ-100 mini turbojet engine with 1.3KN output thrust (which we know as toloue 10 engine and used in our s-191 drone) and they managed to produce a turboshaft version of it known as TS-100. this engine produces 240HP (two of this engines can power a bell 206 or shahed 285 helicopters).
TJ-100 turbojet engine:
TS-100 turboshaft engine:
as i said before the owj/j-85 is not just a turbojet to power our f-5 clones, we can convert them to turboshafts, turboprops and turbofans and make cargo planes, gunships, transport helicopters and better fighter jets. the upcoming j90 engine (turbofan version) gonna be a equivalent of Rolls-Royce Turbomeca Adour mk 102 but lighter with better fuel economy.
Some of the tools and equipment that they were using didn't even exist till decades after the J-85 was 1st produced so to me it's a bit of waist of resources to put all that effort and equipment on such an outdated low thrust small diameter engine that compared to it's thrust is far less efficient than J79's in fact per thrust the difference between them in efficiency is almost the same as the difference between a J79 and an RD-33 Turbofan engine
Fuel consumption per thrust(Max military thrust (dry)):
J85 at max military thrust ~0.96 lb/(lbf·h)
J79 at max military thrust ~0.85 lb/(lbf·h)
RD-33 at max military thrust ~0.77 lb/(lbf·h)
F404 at max military thrust ~0.81 lb/(lbf·h)
Which makes J-85's really bad engines in terms of thrust and consumption per thrust with little room to upgrade due to size while J79 leave a lot of room for upgrades. Fact is for fighter engines people put too much emphasis on the fan of Turbofan's and not enough emphasis on everything else like allowing for air breathing low by pass, higher turbine inlet temperatures, the design & materials of your compressors, turbines & combustion chamber, additional subsystems of your engine, ball brings,.....
FYI the difference in the turbine inlet temperature of a J79 compared to an RD-33 is over 800F so addressing that alone will allow you to improve your combustion chamber & turbines that will allow for a more efficient engine per thrust
Fact is Iran should have moved passed the useless J85's and on to either J79's or AL-21's to improve upon
actually i once asked one of people familiar with our aviation industry about bigger engines with better efficiency he said we can't produce better combustion chambers to withstand intense pressure and temperature. about j79 i think they don't want to produce them and they want to acquire rd-33.
Iran is a relatively large country that's filled with all types of minerals and natural resources and we have more than enough highly educated people in the right fields so that just leaves the will to do it, the tools & funding
We need helium plasma reactors capable of achieving extreme temperatures and vacuumed ovens and presses and various other tools to allow our scientist to combine various minerals and composites for trial and error test to be able to build better composites.
So to me whomever says we can't is a fool because we sure as hell can if we simply put a little effort and funding behind it.
Fact is we will never build better jet engines without achieving higher turbine inlet temperatures and since J79 leave a lot of room for upgrades I just don't see why anyone would say Iran doesn't want to build them especially since improving their efficiency by 10% alone is all we need to achieve to remain independent when it comes to jet engines.
RD-33's are good engines for a twin engine fighter but I just don't see the U.S. allowing Russia to provide Iran with the RD-33 in enough quantities where Iran would be able to use them on a domestically built fighters so to me an improved J-79 would be far superior for Iran than an imported RD-33
that's true but he meant right now we can't otherwise we couldn't make j-85 ten years ago, about j-79 as i know saha produce them in low quantity but to be honest it's an old engine and unlike j-85 we don't have a platform to use it in that so if there is a chance that we get rd-33 with TOT, why waste your money on j-79?? according to that source i mentioned before we are producing rd-33 right now in mapna company with a licence.
akhgar smart munition engine:
max output thrust: 18.5 kg~0.181 kn~42 lbf
specific fuel consumption: 2.96 lb/lbf.h
the SFC varies based on the type of fuel. i used kerosene density to find the number.
Small doc about DESA diesel engines
مستند چهل ستاره
ساخت و تعمیر موتورهای دیزلی - چهل ستاره - 08 اردیبهشت 1398