Aurora: is it real?

[colsie123]

My ground is the sound barrier shold have made that clear. Sorry.

[colsie123]

Oh yeah just noticed what vapour posted its not right as british army tradition is never too hide but to face and protect. Too me thats hiding away from other aircraft. Spell chekced checked even

[Tweek]

My ground is the sound barrier shold have made that clear. Sorry.

Well there's plenty of other supersonic aircraft being operated all over the world. We don't hear them breaking the sound barrier too often, do we?

[colsie123]

Touche my kind friend I was going by its size. You put forward good points have a cookie on me.

[elite marksman]

Facts about the blackbird 20% of the thrust comes form the planes engines 80% comes form nowhere at all?
Answer: Weel, in essence Those big pointy things that stick out of the intakes steer most of the air into escape channels that never go anywhere near the blades. The air is simply compressed and then, as it gets to the exhaust ignited, And simple physics the more air you push in the faster you go. Basically the jet gets you to the mach and from then on theres no moveing parts at all. You simply burn the air and wathc the speedo climb. Quite literally, the fatser you go the fatser it goes.

What? I think you're trying to say that 80% of the air bypasses the core but is still ignited? Yes, this is correct when the afterburner is operating. However, once you hit Mach 1, the engine does not become a Scramjet. Those big pointy things control airflow to keep the air entering the engines at less than Mach 1, as supersonic air hitting the compressor blades results in a compressor stall. Compressor stalls can sometimes cause the compressor assembly to fail catastrophically resulting in a rotor burst the loss of the aircraft.

Please learn to spell correctly and use proper grammar. It will make reading your posts much easier. A little proofreading goes a long way.

[colsie123]

I think your mistaken are you not my science teacher spent time explaining that too me. I just transferred it into laemans terms(sorry not sure how to spell that word). What im trying to explain at speeds above mach 3 you don't have a normal supersonic engine bacause for it too work, to bring that air in would destroy the blades thats why the engine funnels it through intakes out the back 80% of the air, whilst the engine through its on power it creates (tyhe air it brings out the back made by itself. Sorry not good explination hopefully you know what I mean) only produces 20% of that speed above mach 3 below mach 3 it operates like concordes engines I believe. Hope that gives a better explaination of what I was trying to explain.

But thanks for point out what you did in your last post. Did I explain the rest of it better. Or could it have been improved to a better understanding for people. Is it too simple for people in an airplane forum. Our teacher mainly explained it like that, because well Im the only one who like planes in a

[elite marksman]

Ok, I think I understand what you are trying to say now. What you are describing is a high-bypass turbofan. In an engine like this, there is a set of very large fan blades at the inlet of the engine. Behind this set of blades lie the core and the bypass ducts. Turbofans produce a significant amount of their thrust from the bypass, which also serves to cool the engine and helps to quiet it.

In the core lies all of the moving parts of the engine. Directly behind the intake fan is the compressor, which consists of a series of alternating rotors and stators. The compressed air enters the combustion chamber where it is mixed with fuel and ignited. The expanding gases drive a turbine located at the end of the core which is linked, via a shaft, to the compressor blades and the intake fan.

This is the type of engine used on almost all commercial aircraft; however, it does not operate well at supersonic speeds.

The engine most commonly used for supersonic flight is an afterburning turbojet.

In a turbojet, the air enters the compressor immediately. After being compressed, all of the air is mixed with fuel and ignited. In the case of an afterburning turbojet, there is another fuel injection system behind the turbine, which injects fuel into the exhaust gases to ignite with the remaining oxygen.

The speed of the aircraft in either case has little effect on the amount of thrust generated. Also, no engine design that I have ever heard of would behave in two different ways depending on the airspeed. A hybrid centrifugal-flow turbojet and Scramjet might be possible, but would be very difficult to engineer as the turbine and rotor would need to withstand the shockwaves created. The shockwaves are the primary reason that Scramjets are just becoming possible as well. For the same reason that sound can put out a candle, a sonic boom can cause a flameout in a jet engine, particularly the afterburner, as that is extremely sensitive.

I'm curious, so I'll ask you a few questions if you don't mind.
How old are you?
Is English your first language?
What science does your teacher teach?

EDIT - Centrifugal flow, not axial flow. Need to stop writing posts that require thought at 4:00 AM.

[colsie123]

Im 14.

[Vapour01]

May I ask what gives you the impression that the Queens language is not my first language.

aircrfta, breahc its terrible the plane correct me if im wrong is so fats its dangerous because teh engines once at a certain speed  cna experience something when the air starts comeing through the bakc of it and not the front thats what screws the blackbird nad generally all american large supersonic planes I think they go fatser and fatser but dont consider the engines. All they ask can you make it go faster wiht more range.

All the spelling mistakes and bad grammar in that, for a start, I'd guess.

[colsie123]

Read the posts after that please it revelas something.

[Tweek]

Read the posts after that please it revelas something.

Point proven.

[colsie123]

No probs I do it my self a lot. Thanks. Is there anything else you dont undertsand that I have typed and maybe I could if I can be bothered type it up again.

Yes because I misspelt reveals doesn't mean im a bad speller it just means im lazy. And if I possibly stopped typeing like a crazed maniac we would all be better off.

Your point may be proven there or maybe it was me jokeing.

[Xyn_Air]

Oh, for fonging sake!  Are we now trying to prove or disprove the existence of secret military aircraft by analyzing the grammar of non-native English speakers?  Well, fong me sideways on a pogo-stick!

As a current English teacher, yes, I do encourage proper grammar and spelling.  But, even I give kudos for good intentions.  Communication is not always about following all the rules (except when talking to ATC, of course).  If you can convey the correct idea, that is 90% of the battle.

So, if you are going to "correct" someone's English, be constructive without being anal.

AS FOR THE AURORA, long ago I learned that I will never ever know everything various governments blow R&D money on, so I just relax and wait for Jane's to publish something about the things I never knew a decade or two back.  Wakarimashita ka?

Er.  Um.  Rant over?  :-[

EDIT:
Please, please, please, don't beat me with fuel hoses.  I have had a few after work this evening, and am prone to rambling.  No disrespect to anyone was intended.

[Hagar]

Yes because I misspelt reveals doesn't mean im a bad speller it just means im lazy. And if I possibly stopped typeing like a crazed maniac we would all be better off.

That's true. If you take a little more time & trouble over what you post we might be able to understand what you're gabbling on about.

It won't improve your grammar but a spell checker on your browser might come in very handy. They're available for most browsers including IE & Firefox.

PS. It's possible to edit your posts to correct any glaring errors.

[expat]

I believe this tells tells you of the aircraft experienceing the engines not functioning failing the way I said here.

"This aircraft disintegrated on 25 January 1966 during a high-speed, high-altitude test flight when it developed a severe case of engine unstart. Lockheed test pilot Bill Weaver survived although his ejection seat never left the plane! Reconnaissance System Officer (RSO) Jim Zwayer died in a high-G bailout. The incident occurred near Tucumcari, New Mexico."

Facts about the blackbird 20% of the thrust comes form the planes engines 80% comes form nowhere at all?
Answer: Weel, in essence Those big pointy things that stick out of the intakes steer most of the air into escape channels that never go anywhere near the blades. The air is simply compressed and then, as it gets to the exhaust ignited, And simple physics the more air you push in the faster you go. Basically the jet gets you to the mach and from then on theres no moveing parts at all. You simply burn the air and wathc the speedo climb. Quite literally, the fatser you go the fatser it goes.

OK heres the info on an unstart for those who dont know what it is.

One engine works backwards basically ejecting air form the front the other ejects form the back basically it burps. This is bad full thrust one side full drag the other. This results in an unrecoverable spin most of the time you hardly have time to eject infact many dont. The result is quiet and undisnified end for both pilots because how cna a plane crash if it doesnt excist hmm... And its undignified because you dotn so much bury the remains as hose them down a drain sadly. Before an unstart there is tiny hardly audible noises which makes it an uncomforting aircrftaa s your ocnstantly diligant to any noise that the aircrfta might decide to break wind. And many blackbird crashes are still classed as unoffical or as F-105 crashes.

Out of the 40 blackbirs 20 survived and 20 crahsed offically the figure is actually reconed to be more. Luckily thoguh not onje USAF pilot has died in it yet or offically.

A crash not listed on that site was a blackbird that was being used ot launch a pilotless drone that then feel bakc on the blackbird in other words a giant hole at what is 90000ft. What caused this is basically the sound barrier of air was a wall and it hit that and fell bakc onto the blackbird. Noone took into account why launch a drone for spying form the perfect spyign tool developed alreayd and how was this mini blackbird suposed ot penetrate the shockwave comeing fomr it mothers nose.

Another factoid the plane grows by 1ft inflight and the engines are wider and broader than the fuesladge (sorry useless with that word). And another after two hours of flight the gorund crew had to iron out the nose creases usieng blow torches .

And sadly now its a plane wiht no purpose where does it go.

Thanks for listening.

Not sure what website you are getting your info from, 50 aircraft built and 20 crashed is the official line. Also Several pilots where killed during some of these crashes. As for "unstarts" or what is more commonly known as a "surge", yes for the SR71 it was a bigger deal that other normal aircraft, but it did not mean the automatic loss of the aircraft. There is a laser-projected artificial horizon across the front instrument panel. This is  because during an unstart the pilot needs to pay attention to the attitude indicator in order to maintain/regain control of the aircraft.

And this will be the drone story not on the link that Hagar posted.....

"M-21 (60-6941 / 135)
This was the second A-12 to be built as an M-21 for launching the D-21 reconnaissance drone. During a flight test on 30 July 1966 for launching the drone, the drone pitched down and struck the M-21, breaking it in half. Pilot Bill Park and Launch Control Officer (LCO) Ray Torick stayed with the plane a short time before ejecting over the Pacific Ocean. Both made safe ejections, but Ray Torick opened his helmet visor by mistake and his suit filled up with water which caused him to drown. This terrible personal and professional loss drove Lockheed's Clarence "Kelly" Johnson to
cancel the M-21/D-21 program."

Another factoid the plane grows by 1ft in flight and the engines are wider and broader than the fuesladge (sorry useless with that word). And another after two hours of flight the ground crew had to iron out the nose creases usieng blow torches .

I would doubt that on the grounds that applying heat in such a way would change the characteristics of the metal and significantly weaken it.

Matt

PS As for the sideline subject of spelling install an addon spell checker for your browser.