I’m not seeing any hard sources, just “because I said so” and “because bypass ratio”, the latter of which is a non-argument, as it does not rebute anything that has been shown to you by Flame. You also change your mind on what the EFT can and cannot do almost on a whim (this isn’t even the first time that you claimed EFT cannot supercruise at all, you had done so before, in another thread - and there, just like here, you also “changed your mind” once showed evidence that it in fact can), as Markus has already mentioned; cannot supercruise - > needs AB to reach mach 1 - > can supercruise but can’t do so efficienctly. One doesn’t need to be addressed at all, the other two are nothing more but assumption borne out of a conviction that bypass ratio is an end-in-itself.
All in all, you don’t have any actual evidence EFT cannot supercruise “efficiently” from what I can see, you only have assumptions, and those are fine and all, but at the end of the day they’re just presumptions. So I’d suggest to find some hard evidence it cannot do so efficiently, or wait for people to release more data on the jet.
Yes, the discussion progressed from an incorrect thread to the correct one. My position was X because Y and I asked for info, info proved my position wrong so I adjusted and yet my hypothesis has not been answered. Bypass ratio is important as it is the core of the issue but it is affected by other factors. Most of these do not aid supercruise efficiency in the EJ200’s case.
It’s not just because I said so, there is information and studies already linked that support the conclusion I arrived at. What I’ve asked for is serious discussion with substance that aids either position and none has been posited by any of the hecklers.
I’ve provided substance from which that conclusion can be met, if you choose to ignore it that is entirely your own prerogative.
That has nothing to do with optimal altitude, the bypass ratio alone is irrelevant for such factors without considering the other mechanisms. I’ve considered all of the factors that aid efficient supercruise from the design standpoint. Exhaust velocity, how that affects fuel consumption, how the bypass ratio affects cooling capability, the temperature limits, the mass flow through the core, the size of the intake and it’s ability to slow air down. These are all factors that have been considered.
A larger bypass is not indicative of low altitude performance. The MiG-31 has a 1.0 or even up to 2.0+ bypass ratio and higher overall pressure ratio compared to the Viggen. It performs terribly at low altitude and exceptionally well in high altitude, high speed scenarios.
That isn’t true, it’s been postulated that it is actually more efficient for the eurocanards to use the burner to get up to speed and altitude faster to save fuel during acceleration before cutting back the burner. I just believe the efficient cruising speed for the Eurofighter is likely closer to the Su-35’s at mach 1.1-1.2 but if it wants to supercruise at 1.5 mach it would need to reach the limits of the engine in pressure/temperature and mass flow… and push itself outside the optimal efficiency range doing so.
@Mytho-GR1
Insulting Mig-23M because his perspective is hard to understand is not conducive to this conversation.
I haven’t seen a post of him pushing people to question their own “self” [sanity], he has not lied as he believes what he says. He has stated what he believes in a direct manner, and I for one have more questions despite probable disagreement.
@MiG_23M
It is in-general most efficient to run low burner for climbs and mild acceleration including into mach than full burn or full dry, unless you’re already within your preferred cruise speed range. This is for all aircraft of course; those that can supercruise and those that cruise below the sound barrier.
So why do you think that EJ200 is inefficient at mach 1.5?
Have you seen fuel flow at that speed and altitude vs a slower speed and same altitude, then compared endurance time to distance traveled?
That’d be the best way to determine fuel efficiency, but that’s not necessarily supercruise efficiency.
Well, they are wrong of course, they obviously dont know how their own jet performs.
The random guy on internet exposed all their lies of one of the features they sell it with.
Its all scam. In fact, eurofighter turns worse than F-4C.
Jesus wept, that thing is even worse, it’s like God (or Northrop Grumman) strapped two portable suns to the back of the Tomcat. According to Gaijin (mind you, Northrop apparently had cold fusion technology for the F-5)
I have an overall positive opinion on your positions since they are critical in nature and physics based.
I merely stated that you changed your mind quite quickly given the right sources but you seem to be reluctant to accept that the Eurofighter might actually be able to supercruise efficiently.
It’s hard to find a source that specifically tells you what you want to hear. I would need a much deeper understanding of the matter to find what you or I are looking for, which I do not have. So I am just interested in the studies you reference with the engines temperature limits. From what I can tell the EJ200 can withstand very high temperatures and hitting 2300ish °K doesn’t seem outlandish to me.
It all depends in what you call efficient. Will it hurt the engine? Yeah probably, just like all war time settings will reduce the lifetime a high supercruise speed will almost certainly always lower life expectancy of the engine. This however comes at the benefit of greatly increased range at higher speeds.
So you get into action quicker and can stay there longer at a faster pace. This overall seems very efficient to me. You might define efficiency in a different way so there is no way for us to agree on it if our subjective definitions are already incompatible.
Again, this doesn’t mean I want to twist your words to fit my agenda. I appreciate the time and effort you spend on research and trying to improve the realism.
I think you misread my comment as being hostile, when it was meant to be more of a recollection of what was said before. We already made a lot of progress in the discussion and I am interested to learn more about the EJ200 engines and what kind of stress supercruise might put on them compared to other engines.