Reaction Engines precooler heat exchanger successfully achieved all test objectives in the first phase of high-temperature testing designed to directly replicate supersonic flight conditions and future tests are planned at even higher temperatures.
The company say that the precooler is a key element of Reaction Engines revolutionary SABRE engine and is a potential enabling technology for advanced propulsion systems and other commercial applications.
The ground-based tests saw Reaction Engines precooler successfully quench the 420°C (~788°F) intake airflow in less than 1/20th of a second. The intake temperature replicates thermal conditions corresponding to Mach 3.3 flight, or over three times the speed of sound.
Mach 3.3 matches the speed record of the SR-71 Blackbird aircraft, the world’s fastest jet-engine powered aircraft produced to date and is over 50% faster than the cruising speed of Concorde.
In the recent tests, the compact precooler achieved all test objectives and achieved 1.5 MW of heat transfer, the equivalent to the energy demand of 1,000 homes; successfully cooling incoming air from a temperature at which hot steel starts to glow.
The tests are the first phase in an extensive test programme which will see the precooler test article (HTX) exposed to high-temperature airflow conditions in excess of the 1,000°C (~1800°F) expected during Mach 5 hypersonic flight.
The significant testing milestone occurred at Reaction Engines’ recently commissioned TF2 test facility located at the Colorado Air and Space Port, US. The TF2 test facility has been constructed by Reaction Engines to undertake ground based ‘hot’ testing of its precooler technology. The technology has already passed an extensive range of tests in the UK where its performance was fully validated at ambient air temperatures.
Commenting, Mark Thomas, Chief Executive, Reaction Engines, said:
“This is a hugely significant milestone which has seen Reaction Engines’ proprietary precooler technology achieve unparalleled heat transfer performance. The HTX test article met all test objectives and the successful initial tests highlight how our precooler delivers world-leading heat transfer capabilities at low weight and compact size.
This provides an important validation of our heat exchanger and thermal management technology portfolio which has application across emerging areas such as very high-speed flight, hybrid electric aviation and integrated vehicle thermal management.”
To replicate the conditions the precooler will experience at hypersonic speeds, the TF2 test facility uses a General Electric J79 turbojet engine formerly used in a McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom aircraft to provide high-temperature airflow.
Engineers at Reaction Engines’ Culham headquarters constructed the HTX precooler test article and after initial testing it was shipped to Colorado at the end of 2018, and ‘hot’ tests commenced in early March 2019.
In addition to the hot precooler tests being conducted in the US, Reaction Engines is in the final stage of constructing its TF1 test facility at Westcott, Buckinghamshire, UK, where it will undertake ground-based testing of a SABRE engine core.
Over the last four years Reaction Engines say it has raised over £100m from public and private sources and has secured investment from BAE Systems, Rolls-Royce and Boeing HorizonX.
A truly astonishing piece of technology!
Brilliant news, especially as this is the latest iteration of pre-cooler. About five years ago they used a prototype pre-cooler to feed a Rolls Royce Avon and it raised its thrust by a minimum of 50%. Come on Rolls Royce lets see what it could do to a EJ200.
Great news.
A great piece of British technology.
which looks set to join the list of other british technologies that we are going to hand to the americans
That being said, because this is so common, I believe it will be guarded against considerably.
I do hope so Frank, but the trend says otherwise.
It will join ARM, GKN, just the two latest UK technology companies sold unless we protect our strategic / national technology interests. .Depressingly common and long term trend, ARM is now in the hands of the Chinese when the UK government should have know such a move was planned at the time Softbank took it for a steal. Softbank is very close to PRC in many business acquisitions. GKN facilities now being closed and tecknology transferred to the USA.
Described as an amazing bit of advanced kit. Sounds fantastic. Great work lads.
The French and Germans wouldn’t have let an ‘ARM’ slip out of ‘national control’.
For a nation of xenophobic isolationists we do well selling off everything we have to all and sundry.
Softbank is Japanese and Melrose (which acquired GKN), while an asset stripper, is a British company.
And Softbank then turned all the cell phone chip patents for chips used in China over to….. China, while Melrose is closing the aircraft canopy manufacturing facility in the UK and selling to who…..
Yes, not even for a profit it seems.
https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/06/softbank_offloads_51_per_cent_of_arm_china_for_a_bargain_7752m/
Or the French……..
This isn’t a dig at you. If you think you can use it then credit to you.
It is a dig at our spineless leaders that won’t create job opportunities and revenue for our people
no we don’t think we invented everything. Just 53% of everything.
Curious. What tech has been handed to the UK from the US? Serious question not a dig or anything like that. I can list several the other way going back to World War 2.
The PWR1 reactor used in our 1st gen subs and also got us out of a hole with the CAD design of Astute class
What I would love to know is, what is the potential market for this inter cooler and/or engine likely to be worth in the future? Will the technology be protected so Reaction gets 100% market share, or will others likely be able to copy it? The cynical part of me is just waiting to be told ‘reaction sold to Boeing’ or similar and see all the potential financial and economic benefits go to another country, or for the Chinese to steal it!
But great news and well done to all involved,a really exciting developement and one I’m following closely.
Boeing already have a share in the project… However we really need to thank ESA for them getting this far as they were funding it initially… British investors are too risk averse to put money into something that has not been fully proven which is why we lose so much tech to foreign investors.
Exactly right. It’s nothing to do with selling of our ideas, it’s just a fact that UK investors / VC’s are very risk averse.
Or have the Chinese already stolen the tech
https://www.popsci.com/chinas-hybrid-spaceplane-could-reset-21st-century-space-race
Unfortunately, we all know the answer to THAT…
Cheers.
No, article states it uses a separate rocket booster, not combined like the reaction engine
Will this, if a success stay a british advantage for our companies and nation in gen, or will it go abroad and gain scant benefit to us as usual. Yeah i admit i am a bit of a sceptic nowadays. Still this looks blinking amazing in it potential.
I share your scepticism. Our amazing technical genius has been frittered away since ww2 (actually since 1890) because of lack of investment from British investors! Ask Rees-Smogg (the ultimate patriot) where he advises his clients to invest their money….
Herodotus – I think you should either repeat what you believe that ‘advice’ to be, prove it was JRM that gave that advice or withdraw. Innuendo is not an attractive trait.
JRM owns some 15% of SCM, he is not employed by them and does not advise clients as he is not covered by SCM’s licence to give financial advice issued by the FCA and cannot in any case by reason of being an MP and the obvious conflict of interest as he could be party to lawmaking affecting outside interests.
Its like me owning 15% of Tesco and you blaming me for the price of ham.
I do not normally take part these days but I find these unfounded and inferred slurs on people is simply unacceptable.
An interesting response! I have no proof of anything of the sort…I merely suggested that those that claim to be patriots find that their business interests might be in conflict with the development of British industry. As for the content of your (attempted bullying) communication ….I really had no idea…perhaps you could enlighten us?
Not a good forum….really weak and unprincipled. Come back CPW…at least you had some spunk!
‘Attempted bullying’?
I challenged your innuendo and gave some facts as to why I challenged it. Note I challenged the innuendo not YOU personally. There is a difference but if you can’t see it I can’t explain it.
Not sure how I can bully an innuendo … but at least you admit it is without proof.
Thank you for demonstrating so well why I stopped commenting on here a long time ago.
I thought I would dip the literary toes back in the UKDJ waters but evidently it is still as abusive and pointless as it used to be.
For the record my Mum died aged 98 2 years ago and she was a staunch and proud Tory. As I am. That is about the only true words you have written so far …
It seems a Corbyn Momentum Keytappers and their way of ‘discussing’ matters has entered UKDJ.
So I am done here …. again
Sorry about your mum….mine died 22 years ago. I don’t think that Corbyn has much to do with this website. I’m considered to be left-wing and I vote Lib-dem!!!! However, the likes of Rees Mogg, Johnson and sloppy gob have a lot to answer for. The shit that we have been put through over the last 3 years is down to their own personal ambition. Nothing to do with the the fortunes of the this country. A lot of people find this pretty distasteful….I wish you well!
I often vote Conservative but I totally agree with you about Reese-Mogg. He is typical of a politician looking after his own interests above that of the country he is supposed to serve. I find him a horrible character and hope he leaves politics. However he is not the only one and there are others like him on all sides…
However slinging around insults about other posters is not classy…
Good to have you back Chris, you have been missed on here, hope you’re well.
@SoleSurvivor – Thank you and yes I am still vertical and OK thanks! Likewise yourself I hope.
I second that. Chris H, pleased to see you comment. And also pleased you still “lurk” and keep up with things here.
@ Daniele – Hah yes the writing stopped but the reading never did. As I said elsewhere UKDJ is required reading before other deeper sources like Janes or whatever.
There have been some almighty clashes here concerning Brexit. You’re expertise and ability to debunk the debunkers was sorely missed! We did try to hold the fort!
Thirded
Amazing isn’t it the City of London one of the two major World investment centres yet as usual high tech or anything innovative never seems to get the investment if needs from it unlike all those years when Britain was growing on its innovation. I guess investment in property to sell to rich foreigners increasing costs for the rest of us is far safer with greater rewards. OF course it will all run out in the end and we have little to fall back on. Even Sir Herman Hauser lambasted the sale of Arm abroad over British investment in it to exploit its true potential. Utter short termism sadly.
That is how UK business operates in general. Poor management and poor forward thinking has left many of our companies in a bad state. People like to blame the EU for many of our issues but most of them are 100% home made…
Ultimately that is how the economy is run – it’s not about building large firms but about growing profit in the City of London. Banks, VCs, pension funds etc invest in small companies, watch them grow, and when they reach a certain size, sell off their shares and collect the profit and reinvest in the next big thing. Of course, the buyer will be a foreign firm and the small British startup will become a wholly owned subsidiary. It’s ability to grow and innovate will be curtailed, it will follow the corporate practices and direction of the umbrella firm, it won’t be allowed to develop into areas already covered by existing divisions of the group, and all future profits and returns will be siphoned off to group HQ.
But the City is happy because it had its fun, and that’s all that matters.
And HMG is happy because the City is happy and the economy is based on the health of the City, and any foreign purchase of UK assets is foreign direct investment and that’s a good thing because that’s money coming into our economy and a “big vote of confidence in UK plc” etc etc. Never mind that companies like ARM could, with a bit of nurturing, be global behemoths and rake in billions for the UK economy each year, but hey-ho.
Are you aware of how many foreign acquisitions British companies make each year?
The UK accounted for £91.4bn in outward foreign direct investment in 2017, just under the £92.4bn of inward FDI for the same period. This follows three years of UK outward disinvestment that plummeted to -£100bn in 2014. We are now 5th behind the USA, Hong Kong, Germany and the Netherlands in terms of share of world outward FDI (after occupying the #2 spot between 2000 and 2015 – a period when the City of London was at its peak).
But while UK companies do invest heavily overseas as the above figures show, this is driven by the City of London trading with other global financial centres, rather than British corporations taking over foreign rivals. This is evident from the list of top 5 destinations for the UK’s outward FDIs: USA, Hong Kong, Germany, Luxembourg and Sweden (although quite why Sweden is so high is beyond me).
Now, this is not say that there aren’t large British corporations that have bought up firms overseas. I’m not ignoring the fine work that BAE Systems has done in buying up all those US defence firms so it can win contracts from the Pentagon, or Diageo’s stranglehold on the international drinks trade, or Ineos or BAT or G4S (who seem to have pretty much every bank and ATM in the developing world under their protection) expanding in various markets. But my original point was that it is very hard for startups in the UK to flourish because our economy is not geared up to develop them.
The UK economy is based around finance and the City: the City buys and sells to turn a profit while also financing takeover deals for foreign firms investing in UK companies. The destinations for the UK’s FDI support this. The fact that the UK invested more money in UK offshore islands than in South Africa – the only BRICS country to make the top ten – speaks volumes.
@spyinthesky – I am not sure that is 100% accurate but I fully understand, and even agree with, your general point about how our financial system works.
But some context is needed. Banks are constrained by regulations to ensure unnecessary risk is not passed on to taxpayers a la 2008. They require supporting securities and assets before lending. Other financing institutions have both security and fiduciary constraints and again cannot just be reckless investors much as they want to be. Other countries have different views and Governments will support private investment acting as guarantors. EU rules forbid this as it is classed as ‘State Aid’. The Americans don’t like it when others do it although they are past masters at it themselves. Witness Boeing vs EU vs Airbus @ WTO for the last 14 years.
To counter all that possible negativity SABRE have actually attracted over £100 Mn of direct risk investment funding so something works. They are also now supported by 3 major manufacturers which itself shows businesses will and do invest in new technology and projects within their sphere of expertise.
So there is light within the forest of Capitalist darkness!
It was John Redwood who told investors to get out of the Uk.
https://www.businessinsider.com/brexiteer-john-redwood-tells-investors-to-pull-money-out-of-the-uk-2017-11?r=US&IR=T
Rees-Mogg merely has shares in a firm that has opened an Irish office and why not, lots of money is being moved to Dublin in the wake of the 2016 vote.
The main problem for British tech has been a lack of government investment as quite often we like to leave things to the market. Thankfully, for once, UK.gov has seen some sense and backed this one.
https://www.reactionengines.co.uk/news/reaction-engines-secures-26-5m-investment-from-new-industrial-and-financial-investors
Ironically most go to the US which and have private investors so perhaps its more to do with the way we penalise or even demonise investors.
@ Blackivar Well you have (as many do) misquoted what Redwood was arguing against as was briefly referred to at the end of the article you quote. And in context the UK edition of ‘Business Insider’ (like the CBI and other large business conglomerates) is a virulent anti Brexit organisation as it and its friends like the EU so anything any Brexiteer says is dissected to the last detail to find a way to misrepresent it. Redwood was in a very long and deep debate about how the Bank of England has mishandled its side of the fiscal and economic policy of this country. For example while the Fed put up rates twice the BofE reduced them – nett effect funds left Sterling for the Dollar. Just when the £ needed supporting. And there are many examples of Carney talking down the economy at key moments just as this document accuses Redwood but it never maligns Carney a pro EU Governor. Unlike his immediate predecessor King!
Now as to Somerset Capital Management to be accurate they have moved funds to Ireland not created an office there. They move funds about all over the world as its what they do. They (as do others like Barclays and RBS etc) also have to support earlier Euro trading deals in Euros within the EU as demanded by EU Law. As it happens JRM first had dealings in Dublin in 1993. Barclays recently moved some £98 Mn to Dublin and this was reported as ‘Barclays leaves London’ when in fact no jobs moved and more were created (in London) on their investment banking side.
Two sides to every story but then these days according to where you read it everything is done either ‘despite’ or ‘because of’ Brexit….
I am very excited about this and have been since I first heard about the project (before REL was an entity).
Let’s hope this time the UK keeps the technology and it isn’t handed over easily as has happened far, far too often in the past.
This technology must remain British – we are sick to death of grubby politicians and their “investment” mates selling British innovation and technology to foreign competitors.
It is nothing to do with grubby politicians. It is entirely to do with the British attitude to risk. In the US investors are willing to take risks on things like Space X etc but in Britain they crawl away until they think it is a perfectly safe investment. For instance the shoes and trainers you see that light up as you walk were a British invention, the inventors went to every British shoe company to sell them the idea but there were no takers. So they went to America and sold it to a US company and now all the British companies have light up shoes but now have to pay licence fees to the US patent holder! You can only blame so much on politicians.
Noted Lee – but I still wonder why the Government allows “jewels in the crown” to be taken over by foreign companies? I really can’t see the Germans or French allowing it?
I agree with you. However as UK investors are risk averse who would invest in our companies if foreign investment was curtailed?
That is why one said UK and not the ‘government’.
I was replying to David A-H…
Yes, the British attitude to risk, risk sharing and short versus long term thinking is the significant difference I think. Ultimately it is a political and social choice. For example, by virtue of thinking long term and being prepared to underwrite significant investments at government or state level France built Rafale and got it to market earlier than Typhoon. It virtually created Airbus as a European competitor to Boeing. It also managed to protect its sovereign auto and steel industries for a long time. But now their model is struggling.
Patriotism and sovereignty or capitalism? Where is the best deal for number 1; with your goverment or your employer? Ireland does not have a national health service so work for Google and you never have to leave the campus, lr is that leave the base? 🙂
https://www.google.com/about//careers//locations/dublin/
Reading the comments below, maybe it’s the British natural negative attitude towards anything positive and wonderful that is the problem, a good news article, and most of the comments are nothing but moaning. Get a grip. We talk ourselves out of anything positive. Any recent article about the new carriers or F35 for example comes with a string of negative comments, we have waited decades to have this level of equipment, 2 of the most advanced carriers in the world, and a fleet of world beating 5th gen aircraft to fly off them, and what do most do? Moan about it. It hasn’t got SAM’s, it cant pull 9g. OMG we are all guna die. Jesus, give me a break.
Save the Royal Navy thinks the carriers should have point defence missiles, think they said the decision to not have missiles was taken when we were meant to be having 12 type 45’s, they go on and question if a type 45 could defend the carrier against a saturation missile attack.
Nobody moaned about the F-35B, they said specifically they can’t think of a better aircraft for the carriers, what they did do was suggest a split buy and purchase the F-35A for the RAF, pointing out the specifications which the A is better than the B and seen as the RAF and MP’s when asked will not rule out the F-35A purchase, it’s clear the RAF want it as well.
There is a massive difference between moaning just for the sake of it and being passionate about wanting what’s best for your countries armed forces, maybe you should think it’s the latter with some people on here.
If all your escorts have been blown out of the water, a handful of SAMs on the carrier are not going to save you.
“If all your escorts have been blown out of the water, a handful of SAMs on the carrier are not going to save you.”
That’s terrible logic, why don’t you suggest that to the Navy to include in their training..
“Right boys and girls if our escorts are disabled, sunk, or there was a mechanical or human error and we have missiles incoming, don’t use the Phalanx, don’t bother firing a missile, don’t try save the ship, don’t even bother abandoning ship because you will be dead, nothings going to save you.
Wow.
I served in the RN for 14 years, have you? I served on Invincible class carriers for all of that 14 years, so I guess I have a pretty good idea of Navy training and doctrine, the RN is very good at fleet defence, we went 20 years on the Invincibles without the sea dart system, because it was deemed better to extend the flight deck to carry more aircraft, and trust the escorts to do there job, we have made a huge investment in Aster/Sampson radar, that’s what it’s job is for. And if there ever was a serious threat to our fleet, from some fantasy Russian missiles that might be able to hit Greenland, or a Chinese fleet that cant deploy anything past Taiwan, you can guarantee our carriers will be along way way from the threat. I slept very well at night when I was on board in the gulf during OP Telic, Afghanistan 2001, and I would still have slept well if somebody fired some missiles at the fleet.
No I have not, but plenty of people who did thinks we should of had a PDMS on the QEC.
Let’s not forget the only reason we don’t is because of costcutting, first in 2002 they scrapped the PDMS then in 2003 they scrapped phalanx which was later reversed.
The Invincibles were built to possibly expect Soviet missiles attacking it. By the time of the mid 90’s that threat was all but gone and it was beneficial to add more space for aircraft to an already small carrier.
Now we have more chance of peer or near peer threats, more advanced anti ship missiles.
I’m going to ask you a question..do you think if the QE was under a missile salvo attack, would the QE have a better chance of not getting hit if it had it’s own PDMS?
I’ll answer it for you, of course it will! Any man and his dog can see that, the only reason we don’t have it is because of money simple as that, so because the government wouldnt spend the money on it, it isn’t needed or won’t work, that’s complete nonsense and you know it.
And for the record, the QEC is here now and it’s amazing, gives us capability that only a few others have, I have never moaned about it once, but what I won’t do is have such biased, tinted spectacles on and shoot anyone down for suggestions of improvement, or asking for things to be fitted during its mid life refit etc.
Just to double check and be clear here are you actually saying the men and women on board would be safer, without an extra layer of defence?
The men and women are safe when the fleet defence works, the carrier has phalanx, chaff/flares and a whole host of electronic warfare equipment. Seriously, if the shit has hit the fan that bad that every single escort, RN or coalition has been sunk, every single Aster missile/sea captor/ phalanx and whatever the American destroyers carry has been spent, a handful of missiles are not going to save the day. I mean, let’s be honest, this is 3rd world war stuff, massive scale conflict, and In times of real conflict, all sorts of toys come out of the locker that aren’t standard fit. Nobody has fired a missile at anyone ships, let alone an aircraft carrier since the Falklands, and we have come a very long way since then. I’d rather have more F35’s with ASRAAM & metors. You are never going to agree with me, so lets leave it at that.
The French carrier keeps breaking down. Its planes are old fashioned. Russian carrier is a load of junk. The Chinese are just being poor copies of everything and half of it is propaganda. We are doing pretty well and even if we should do better it’s still better than most.
Too many on here are a bunch of know all’s moaning at a load of regulation puff pieces produced by various industry PR info sheets.
Our armed forces are easily up to everyone else’s except America’s. And grow up you people… we are a tiny island, not the billion plus population of China.
As for these engines… I thought jet engines were simple and safe, these look horribly complicated. And what is their point. They have been talking about them for years and all we still get is 3 techs squatting on the floor with a laptop.
Tiny island? We are the 9th largest out of over 300, the Canaries are tiny islands, Mauritius is a tiny island.
The Rafale M and E2-C Hawkeye are old fashioned? ? the Rafale is a very capable fighter not a million miles away from typhoon and the Hawkeye is what the yanks use.
@SoleSurvivor – While I in no way decry the Rafale (well OK just a bit) I have to point out the Rafale M is like a Tranche 1 Typhoon which is a very different aircraft to later Tranche builds. Its why T1 builds cannot be upgraded in Project Centurion like T2 and T3 will be and 24 of the original 51 T1s are being activated from store just for QRA and other fighter roles.
Rafale M aircraft are now nearly 20 years old and although they have had little use compared to all Typhoons they will be up for replacement in the next 10 years. Cue demands from Germany for an EU carrier and of course the EU Dream Machine Fighter over which Airbus and Dassault are happily arguing for dominance. (Typhoon revisited).
Mate, you’re missing the point. The Sabre engine concept is a game changer for the aerospace industry as its seamlessly combines a gas turbine, ramjet and rocket engine in one. Therefore, it can be used to propel an aircraft from ground level to space. However, to make it work it requires the pre-cooler. To significantly reduce the air temperature before it enters the engine. This is because due to friction and the process of slowing the air down for the engine as the aircraft goes faster, the air temperature ramps up and at Mach 5 the air temperature is near 1000C.
The best known combination engine was the SR-71 Blackbird’s Pratt & Whitney J58 engine. These were turbojets, but as the aircraft’s speed went over Mach 2.8 the majority of the air bypassed the combustion chambers and was directed to the afterburner, turning the engine into a ramjet. The SR71’s speed was limited due to the inlet air temperature going through the compressor which couldn’t handle temperatures above 430C.
Reaction Engines cracked the process of using a liquid cooled “intercooler” without the air freezing and thus blocking the airflow through the very small diameter pipes.
In the past to get a ramjet to the required operating speed, you required additional rocket engines or a turbojet. This added significant weight, complexity and used up space that could be used for fuel or payload. The pre-cooler allows the Sabre to be a multi-function engine which will allow horizontal take-off aero-spaceplanes to be developed. It also significantly increases the efficiency and power of a traditional turbojet or turbofan engine. Which in turn has led to the development of their hypersonic Scimitar engine.
There are large changes afoot in the aerospace industry and I’m proud that a UK company is part of the process.
Thanks for that very informative reply. Thanks Daveyb
Anyone interested in the history of this should check out the Three Rocketeers documentary that was run in 2012 by the BBC I believe.
I am a bit confused so I hope that someone could help me out. This engine and pre-cooler is an interesting break through and hopefully stays within the UK, I can only say well done to the team. It also appears to be a requirement for Mach 5+ flight, hyper-sonic flight. At a 1,000C it will not take long before metal and electronics will fry and or warp. This I understand. This is the bit that I am confused with, the Russians and Chinese boast about their hyper-sonic missiles etc. Yet if I understand correctly this pre-cooler is designed so that the basically the parts don’t melt and they don’t have that technology.
It appears that I’m missing something, apart from a few screws. Can someone explain it to me in simple terms that an engineer would understand. Or is it the case that the Russians and Chinese are just spouting off.
Sorry if it seems a stupid question.
Hi Ron, I can’t give you a educated reply unfortunately on this matter, but I think the story’s around the Russian and Chinese hypersonic missiles are alot of bull, and many years away from being credible weapon systems.
Remember Ron, the Sabre engine is not a standard jet engine, it is a Synergetic air breathing rocket engine. This works as a jet engine up to Mach 5 in the earths atmosphere, but can transition to rocket mode as it enters space and power up to Mach 20plus. No one else has been able to combine these two separate elements and the intercooler has always been the stumbling block. British engineers have solved the issue and means space craft will not need separate rocket boosters to get out of the earths atmosphere. The intercooler itself can also be meshed to a standard jet engine to increase its efficiency, hence the potential sales in future could be massive and go onto all jet powered aircraft, as well as opening up a new era of accessible outer atmosphere travel allowing super fast travel around the world.
The ramjet engine that is used in Brahmos is basically a straight pipe, with a convergent zone that is used to compress the air so that fuel can be added to it (no moving parts). The ramjet will not work unless it is already travelling through the air at over Mach 1. Therefore, it uses a rocket engine booster to get it to this speed, which then drops off when its fuel is used up. The engine can be made of much simpler materials, with the heat resistant material start from the convergent zone to the exhaust. The missile’s avionics, radar and explosive charge are housed in the forward part of the missile’s centre body, the airflow goes around this. Think of the air-inlet arrangement for the old Lightning and Mig 21, where the inlet cone held the radar.
The difference between the Barhmos and the Sabre engine is that the missile is a one shot only, whilst the Sabre is like a regular jet engine (sort of) so must be made to be reusable, hence the complexity and difference in material requirements.
The UK needs to keep this amazing technology within the UK. Patent and copyright law the technology and concept so only this company can sell it. Then happily sell these engines to the world whilst retain sole manufacturing in the UK.
Chances of us doing that with HMGs support? Absolutely zero. We will sell it off cheap and get nothing back for yet another British innovation.
“Tests were carried out at a facility at the Colorado Air and Space Port in the US.” So the Yanks have already stolen our invention? First the M52, The Atomic Bomb, the World Wide Web, the first smartphone and countless more. When will we ever learn to stop being a country of sell-outs? You don’t see the Germans or French do this, we just willingly give everything to the Yanks and they just cut us out after.
@AgentB I would maybe read the article again and better yet read up about the project and the company. The Colorado site is only a test facility and that is all. The company is based at Culham and is building a new test facility at Westcott in Bucks. Two of its industry partners are British based.
However I do have concerns about Boeing’s involvement. Since when did they build jet or indeed any engines? My fear is they will buy a share, import it to the USA and command sole rights in the world’s biggest aerospace market and given the cosy tie up they have with GE I suspect this engine will be marketed as a GE propulsion system. You heard it here first. US Incorporated will rewrite specifications multiple times (delaying it) and then make it cost 10 times what it should. And of course only have it built in the USA. They don’t do sharing.
On your other points:
* The Atomic Bomb perfectly demonstrates why we should never let any American interest into anything we do. They have a history of dominating any project and exaggerating what they contribute to the detriment of the originating partner(s).
* WWW was invented by Tim Berners-Lee who himself donated it to the world for global benefit.
Some say the Tizard Missions of ’40 and ’41 were the biggest acts of industrial betrayal of the 20th Century but other say given where we were in WWII we needed to add US industrial muscle so we needed to give away our future to save the present.