What's new

Analysis: Iranian cruise missile unveiling raises questions about range

1-) My epic fail then.. :lol: though, i don't think the fault lies with me.. you could have added more info.

2-) Still, i'm not still sure about the bypass duct it can very well be the cover around the casing.

3-) We can go nowhere from here, just mention me if you got a clear pic of the fan.

ok ...
 
1-) My epic fail then.. :lol: though, i don't think the fault lies with me.. you could have added more info.

2-) Still, i'm not still sure about the bypass duct it can very well be the cover around the casing.

3-) We can go nowhere from here, just mention me if you got a clear pic of the fan.

We will.

Thank you.
 
r95-300.jpg


IHS Jane's epic failure : Soumar running on a turbojet engine !
 
So what's the big difference between turbofan and turbojet?.

From wiki: all I understood is that turbojet better in fuel consumption?.

is that all or there is something else?.
 
So what's the big difference between turbofan and turbojet?.

From wiki: all I understood is that turbojet better in fuel consumption?.

is that all or there is something else?.
Turbojet passes whole air flow through the combustion chamber while Turbofan bypasses some of the air over the chamber. That will give it better thrust and fuel economy. See Sinan's post in the second page that shows the schematic of the two. You can see the difference there.
 
Turbojet passes whole air flow through the combustion chamber while Turbofan bypasses some of the air over the chamber. That will give it better thrust and fuel economy. See Sinan's post in the second page that shows the schematic of the two. You can see the difference there.
But, the work still the same then why all this debate about turbofan and the turbojet as long as the work is the same except the economy in the fuel.
 
The booster will of course provide a good range increase but it won't reach the range of air launched version for obvious reasons.
The booster is needed to get it into the air and up to speed and altitude, it would not add range. An airlaunched version gets better mileage as it is launched at higher initial speed and altitude, where air is thinner than at ground level and resistance is less, plus just dropping it with forward speed will give it some distance on a balistic trajectory.
 
But, the work still the same then why all this debate about turbofan and the turbojet as long as the work is the same except the economy in the fuel.
If you can make fuel economy by using less fuel. You will have more fuel to burn = more range...

Jane's claim was built on "It is a TurboJet"....meaning it won't achieve the range of a Turbofan = Iran's claim of 2500km is wrong...

And it got refuted.

funny how people embarrass themselves just to try and discredit an iranian achievement.
I comment as i see. No bias.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
@SOHEIL I don't know much, but neither do you. I look at the state of affairs of a nation and judge the words of its leaders and important members of its community based on that. When big words come out of a nation that has a failed economy, is under sanctions, it's a pariah state, is a brutal dictatorship, it has a track record of lying time after time, has never done anything important in its modern history etc... the words become meaningless. You're a jackass on the internet just like me. I may not know much about military affairs, but I compensate with common sense. You compensate with emoticons and your sense of nationalism and your jingoistic attitude.

Seems like we have here the Iranian version of Uncle Ruckus. Basically, someone who hates every thing about Iranian!
 
Back
Top Bottom