Re: [NTLK] up in the sky

From: Karel Jansens (
Date: Mon Jun 24 2002 - 15:28:19 EDT

On Monday 24 June 2002 15:17, Mark Bock wrote:
> >Um, IANAE but... I don't think the SR-71's jets ever operate as
> > ramjets.
> Not true ramjets, no -- that's why I said "quasi-ramjets".
> >The huge cones (which are adjustable) serve to keep the air intake
> > speed below mach 1. It is true that the compressors don't do much
> > compressiong anymore at cruise speed, but they keep churning...
> From, also mentioned
> in Ben Rich's book about the Skunk Works (he designed the engine
> inlet system):
> The SR-71 is a delta-wing aircraft designed and built by Lockheed.
> They are powered by two Pratt and Whitney J-58 axial-flow turbojets
> with afterburners, each producing 32,500 pounds of thrust. Studies
> have shown that less than 20 percent of the total thrust used to fly
> at Mach 3 is produced by the basic engine itself. The balance of the
> total thrust is produced by the unique design of the engine inlet and
> "moveable spike" system at the front of the engine nacelles, and by
> the ejector nozzles at the exhaust which burn air compressed in the
> engine bypass system.
> The air compression and ignition in the engine bypass system is what
> I was talking about. This is the same concept as a ramjet.
Wow! I actually remembered some of this stuff more or less correctly! I'm
amazed about me!

So, would it be correct to type the SR-71 engines as a hybrid turbo-ramjet?

> >Isn't a supersonic ramjet called a 'scramjet'?
> Yes -- a supersonic combustion ramjet is called a scramjet (see
> But in theory a ramjet operates into the low hypersonic range (mach 6
> or so), at which point a scramjet becomes necessary to get you up to
> mach 8 or 9.

Karel Jansens.

"Ceteris censeo Fenestras delendas." (Cato - de Terrore Portarum)

-- Read the List FAQ/Etiquette: Read the Newton FAQ: This is the NewtonTalk mailing list -

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Wed Jul 03 2002 - 14:02:57 EDT