Re: 1940 Caproni-Campini Jet Bomber Project


"Eunometic" <eunometic@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2a6f9200-b561-48d3-83ad-a0de4ba7eb14@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Aug 29, 8:29 am, "Keith Willshaw" <keithnos...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"Rob Arndt" <teuton...@xxxxxxx> wrote in message

news:18316553-0af1-44e8-83c5-73d1d6ccb357@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Aug 28, 5:06?am, guy <guyswetten...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


Any idea what engines were proposed? They look more like centrifugal
rather than axial types.

Guy
Two 1,350 hp thermal jets.
Wingspan: 18.8 m
Wing surface: 48 square m
Weight: 8,400 kg
Take-off run: 500 m
Range: 3,000 km
Cruise speed: 750 km/h
Max. speed: 1,050 km/h (estimated)
In a postwar interview, Campini stated that he started to develop a
3,000hp gas turbine for this aircraft which would push maximum speed
to 1,250 km/h.
Rob

There's not a hope in hell of pushing that airframe at 1250 km/hr
no matter how big the engines.

A 1350hp thermal motor jet would produce 2500lbs thrust if the
experimental Campini N1's performance is scaled up.

Campiin N1 never exceeded 250 mph

(Campini N1 had 750kg/1650lbs thrust from a 750hp or 900hp motor)
I imagine they would be slightly improved given that the Campini
hadn't solved the burner problem yet.


Imagination is no substitue for aerodynamics

The 3000hp version might thus produce 5500lbs thrust which isn't too
far of the 7000lbs you mention for the Canberra below though the
engines might be rather heavier at about 3500-4000 lbs a pieced

If you can build a gas turbine why not just build a turbojet ?

To be
fair though the 'thrust' may be mostly from the ducted fan portion
than jet thrust though it must be said the Campini engines also
recover ram pressure to help generate thrust.


very inefficiently


This aircraft would have had a similar planform to
the Canberra which with two 7,000 lb turbojets could hit
around 900km/hr

Well, motorjets don't have the same limitations as gas turbines which
are limited by RPM, turbine inlet temperatures and surge limits.

Wrong - piston engines are very much limited by RPM and inlet
temperature. If you dont believe me put your car in neutral, start
the engine and push the gas pedal to the floor.

A piston engine, by virtue of being supercharged, can be set up to
maintain power to higher altitude without the proportional fall of in
performance that decreases linearly in proportion to air density that
is associated with gas turbines.

Wrong - you must have missed the bit in thermodynamics classes
where they explain that the front end of a gas turbine is a
compressor that provides a far higher compression ration than
can be achieved by piston engines.

Feel free to explain how a supercharger is different to a compressor.

So long as the fan/compressor
portion can absorb the power in the reduced density the thrust won't
decline as rapidly.

<Irony Mode On>
Which presumably is why high altitude aircraft use motorjets
<Irony Mode Off>

Perhaps this is why Whittle felt he could talk
about flight at 100,000ft using a motorjet concept.


Whittle (and von Hain) decided against motorjets when he realised that gas
turbines
were MORE efficient at high altude than piston engines due to the
low air temperatures at altitude.

The Horn Balances on the vertical tails suggest that aerodynamically
the Italians either didn't know what they were expecting that this
aircraft could do 1250km/h let alone 1000km/h or that more likely this
was a publicity design intended to 'inspire' funding. Germany,
Austria, Switzerland and Italy had all invested in supersonic wind
tunnels so they should have known better. The NACA's Jakes Jeep was
expected to be capable of at least Mach 0.75 (perhaps more, the
Americans didn't want to spoil their credibility so they were very
conservative). This to me suggests that Mach 0,9 was possible.

Eunometic

You seem to be very suggestible, personally I'd be amazed if it
hit mach 0.6.

Keith


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: 1940 Caproni-Campini Jet Bomber Project
    ... no matter how big the engines. ... A 1350hp thermal motor jet would produce 2500lbs thrust if the ... The 3000hp version might thus produce 5500lbs thrust which isn't too ... is associated with gas turbines. ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • MEMs rockets and jets - a fabulous opportunity
    ... This could be very important for rocket engines. ... That's because rocket thrust is a function of nozzle area while rocket ... directly adapted to a propulsive skin that cna produce any thrust ... need not be life threatening or even bring the vehicle to harm. ...
    (sci.space.policy)
  • Re: P-38K???
    ... If you are referring to the He-280 jet, that had quite short range, and ... its engines never did come fully up to snuff till the very end of the war. ... The FW-190 was the correct choice for the early war period. ... but did not encounter any German jets. ...
    (rec.aviation.military)
  • Re: New Powerplant
    ... for those who are skeptical of the jet Silent's ... launch from my home airport at 6200' MSL. ... These are NOT 'throwaway' engines. ... My overhauls cost ...
    (rec.aviation.soaring)
  • Re: the "Spencer Launcher"
    ... > build the *bottom* of the LOX tank. ... > ring's mass. ... The engines are about 48t, and throw in another 10t for a thrust ...
    (sci.space.policy)