When did "Reheat" become "Afterburner" ?

[Fonsini]

I know that in the earlier days of jet aviation the UK adopted the term reheat for the process of injecting fuel into the jet efflux, while the US went with afterburner, or more commonly just "burner" or even other acronyms such as Zone 5 etc.

I have heard RAF pilots talking about using "afterburner" which made me wonder if this is now the official term and if so when the change was made ?

[hoss183]

The term was changed after confusion caused by crew meals being prepared in the Vulcan's microwave oven. Ok i'll get my hat & coat....;)

[newt]

Reheat for the RAF and afterburner for the USAF.....Simples!

[622]

Probably since Hollywood (other US film making companies are available!) starting making movies about jets.

[Rhino power]

I would've thought it was more down to personal preference than anything else, afterburner, 'burner, re-heat, zone 5, augmented thrust, carrot power, etc etc... ;)

-RP

[NutLoose]

I'm all for Thrust Augmentation :O

[Basil]

I'm all for Thrust Augmentation :O
Ah, reached a certain age, have we? ;)

[Lima Juliet]

My favourite is 'hey mum, look at my carrots'...

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/4f/14/48/4f14482e2e65f432413f4b3193d27886.jpg

[NutLoose]

Ah, reached a certain age, have we?

:*

I believe the VC10 had thrust augmentation BTW with that little outlet just aft of the Baggage door ( I mean the freight one, not the crew one)

[Hempy]

It's ok Nutloose, these days the doctor can give you a little blue pill to solve all that ails you in that regard. Guaranteed to augment your thrust :}

[Motleycallsign]

Probably about the same time as the Railway Station became Train Station. American influences........................
I know hat and coat time!

[Wander00]

Talking of which, the photo I mean, we seem to have become the centre of the French low flying programme this afternoon - great, except for the dog chasing "noisy sticks" down the garden whilst barking furiously.

[dixi188]

Undercarriage and Landing Gear?

[VX275]

Undercarriage and Landing Gear?
Don't you mean chassis?

[SASless]

Well you are part of NATO right?

As the US Forces are the largest component and provide the majority of the Funding....is it not natural for the Majority to rule?

Had you hung on to a good thing all those years back....the shoe might still be on the other Foot.




(I was just leaving....getting my Cap and Jacket on the way out!)

[57mm]

IIRC, a certain Lightning formation leader called "Reheat, Reheat, Go.....Now", which caused a stir among his formation members......

[Ken Scott]

SASless: need I remind you whose language we all speak? (It's called English for a good reason....!)

[mopardave]

Had you hung on to a good thing all those years back....the shoe might still be on the other Foot.



We couldn't.....you lot were too busy bleeding us white! Ah, the special relationship!
MD

[Warmtoast]

According to the OED
1947 Sci. News Let. 2 Aug. 70/1 Emergency spurts of speed of jet-propelled combat planes will result from a development of the Ryan Aeronautical Company which the makers call an ‘after burner’The same source refers to 'reheat' as
[1947 Pop. Sci. Monthly Oct. 87/1 As a next step, they've devised the after~burner. It's principle, essentially the same as the steam-turbine reheat system, is fairly simple.]
1948 Brit. Patent 606,176 4/1 The act of turning on the re-heat will open the propelling nozzle.
1949 Flight 8 Sept. 285/1 Exhaust reheat, or ‘afterburning’, is the name given to the process of burning fuel in the exhaust pipe of a jet-propulsion unit.
1972 D. Hart-Davis Spider in Morning ii. 21 The reheats were in and burning fuel at a terrifying rate.
2005 R. R. Lawrence Mammoth Bk. Space Explor. & Disasters i. 4 The XF.91 was powered by a General Electric J.47 turbo-jet engine equipped with reheat
So it looks like 'afterburner' was first with 'reheat' coming later

[megan]

At one time (WWII) the manuals had a page of "interpretations" at the back. Battery = accumulator for example. I know not now what an accumulator was called in the hydraulic system.

[John Eacott]

Reheat was originally (& still is) a steam turbine term, and predates gas turbines. It would follow that it is therefore the original and was changed with the dominance of US terminology in many facets of aviation.

Now, when did "airscrew" become "propellor"?

[Wander00]

It's an "aeroplane", Mr Bader

[Ken Scott]

And when did the English 'alti-meter' become the American 'al-tim-eter'?

[RetiredBA/BY]

:*

I believe the VC10 had thrust augmentation BTW with that little outlet just aft of the Baggage door ( I mean the freight one, not the crew one)
Anyone have any idea how much the thrust augmenters on the VC10 (air conditioning exhausts) added, if any, to the push of 4 Conways ?

[newt]

What about "Finals Three Greens" to "Finals Gear Down and Locked"?

[ORAC]

From the sources I found the original afterburner term referred to was the electromechanical component used to inject the fuel. The resultant fuel/air mix producing reheat.

Referred to as afterburner up to 1945 by AERL researchers who successfully ran the first prototype.

AERL afterburner research (https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=a2e1zZRieQsC&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=aerl+afterburner&source=bl&ots=T0hfOD7Y3T&sig=cYFNmqyYbFxZzRvKYyntY45JAnU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjys6TB3LbPAhWqIMAKHTdGBF0Q6AEIHTAA#v=onepage&q=aerl%20afterburner&f=false)

[NutLoose]

Anyone have any idea how much the thrust augmenters on the VC10 (air conditioning exhausts) added, if any, to the push of 4 Conways ? When I did my VC10 ground school they tried to find out to no avail.

I remember Dick Langworthy saying on an exchange he eventually had all the Americans calling the Windshield the correct term Windscreen and correcting fellow Colonials when they said it.

[Tankertrashnav]

Any Brits visiting the US should be careful not to walk on the pavement, lest their visit be a short one!

[ORAC]

Why do Americans drive on parkways and park on driveways? :confused::confused:

[Hempy]

Now, when did "airscrew" become "propellor"?

I may be wrong, but didn't that have something to do with RAF ME in WW2 sending an urgent request for 100 airscrews for Wellingtons being misinterpreted as requiring 100 aircrews? The crews were urgently deployed, the propellers not so..

[Basil]

Superheat and reheat in steam turbines is for a slightly different reason from afterburning.
It's mainly to prevent the steam reducing to saturation state, losing energy and eroding LP turbine blades with condensed water droplets.

[Drainpipe]

What about "Finals Three Greens" to "Finals Gear Down and Locked"?
As the F4 did not have the light system to show undercarriage status but used dolls-eye indicators instead, the call was always "final, gear down"

[NutLoose]

The P-51 Mustang also had thrust augmentation, the clever design of the cooler bulge underneath, meant the heated air from the cooler not only counteracted the drag of hanging the cooler out under the fuselage, but actually produced a small increase in thrust.

[Wander00]

And when did "finals" become "final"?

[NutLoose]

Why do the Americans call the ground floor the 1st floor.

[megan]

but actually produced a small increase in thrust.Afraid not. What it did was reduce cooling drag. Radiator drag (gross) was about 400 pounds on the P-51, but the momentum recovery was some 350 pounds of compensating thrust, leaving an effective drag component of 50 pounds. British invention by the way, called the Meredith effect, first used on the Spitfire.

[VX275]

Talk of the Meredith effect and the P51 in a thread about thrust augmenters/reheat/afterburners, reminded me of an old Farnborough report that would combine the threads together.
This is the summary from the report that was published in November 1943.


"Estimates of the effect of burning fuel in the radiator duct of Mustang behindthe matrix, show that a top speed increase of 45 mph, at all heights ispossible with a combustion temperature of l000°C. Larger increases are possiblewith increased combustion temperatures. Loss of speed with the burners not in actionshould be negligible, and operation for 5 minutes at 1000°C uses sufficientfuel to reduce the subsequent endurance by about 18 minutes."

[golfbananajam]

@Wander 00

It has always been "final" as it is short for "on final approach", anything else is pure hollywood

[NutLoose]

that is what I was taught that on my RAF engineering courses, it does produce thrust, the only one that does as far as I am aware and to quote the designer

He recounted his tales of the design concept of the P51 and on his ideas for aerodynamics at that time that led him to believe he could build a front line fighter with a higher top speed than the Spitfire MkIX. The key to the performance of the aircraft and its high top speed, he explained, was the air scoop that swung down below the fuselage to gulp great lungfulls of air. Nicknamed the doghouse, it makes the P51 instantly recognisable from any distance and has become a design icon of the second world war.
Yet what I was unaware of until hearing Lee Attwood’s presentation was that despite hanging down into the airflow like a basking shark, the whole assembly doesn’t add any significant drag to the airframe. In fact, at various speeds, it actually provides thrust. This thing wasn’t just designed to look stunning. It had a clarity of purpose that came from many hours wind tunnel testing theories which at that time represented the cutting edge of aerodynamics.
So how didLee Attwood and the team at North Americanachieve this amazing feat? Any racing car designer will tell you that cooling an engine creates drag. The smaller the radiators, the less drag, more speed. Too small a radiator of course means that cooling becomes marginal. Many warbird fighters have very marginal cooling systems, unable to spend much time on the ground on hot days before overheating, just like a Formula One car on the grid.
The clever part of the Mustang cooling is not just in the intricately formed leading edge with its hand formed compound curves, but in the secondary section that comes after the air has entered the scoop. Nicknamed the ‘doghouse’ section, named after its shape resembling an upturned kennel, intricately shaped ramps and angles channel the air into a smaller and smaller space. As it’s forced into the smaller area, it’s forced rearwards, passing through what is effectively a choke, before being allowed to expand and pass through the radiator and oil cooler. The hot air then exits through a small flap, the size of which is continuously adjustable and creates the back pressure needed to achieve thrust. The difference in speed between the Spitfire XIX and the Mustang P51D is generally recorded as 405 vs 437 mph. Despite much discussion regarding laminar flow wings and fuselage fairings, Lee Atwood’s presentation, from the very man who designed the fighter, made it quite clear that it was the attention to detail and optimising the Meredith Effect that gave the P51 it’s high speedP51 Mustang Meredith Effect explained by Lee Atwood, designer (http://www.historicracer.com/aviation/p51-mustang-meredith-effect-lee-atwood/)

CONCLUSIONS
The additional thrust of the cooling system further increases the interest for piston engines propulsion
in aeronautical field. In fact, due to the Meredith effect, it has been possible to eliminate the radiator drag and to increase the total thrust of the power-pack. Therefore, Meredith ramjet improves the total available thrust and reduces fuel consumption. Both under-fuselage/under nacelle and in-wing configurations were analyzed

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=13&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiJ3c2iqrfPAhWLDsAKHZrSD1IQFghgMAw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.arpnjournals.com%2Fjeas%2Fresearch_pape rs%2Frp_2015%2Fjeas_0715_2249.pdf&usg=AFQjCNEZiTFZExEph7hHCz3jh-iVIaobOg&bvm=bv.134495766,d.ZGg

[Fonsini]

Would it confuse things if I confessed that I never fully understood why plenum chamber burning didn't fry the compressor ?

[NutLoose]

Surely it has to be running at a lower pressure than the compressor or you would get flow reversal as in a surge, therefore would it effect the compressor? Wasn't the problem they had to do with the change of direction in the nozzle, though they had cured that before it got canned.
I take it we are talking Pegasus, that was the core engine based on the Orpheus out of the Gnat with a bypass fan nailed on the front, the fan feeding the forward nozzles and the hot end the aft ones.

[PersonFromPorlock]

Why do Americans drive on parkways and park on driveways? http://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gifhttp://cdn.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif'Parkways' because of the extensive landscaping on the right-of-way. Long, skinny 'parks' with a road up the middle.

'Driveways' I'm not sure about, but affluent homes on extensive grounds had 'drives' leading up to them which, probably by the magic of advertising, became 'driveways' when attached to more modest houses.

[megan]

G'day NutLoose. The figures I quoted, ironically, come from a speech made by Lee Atwood. Lee had made claim to something that he was not. He did not design the P-51, that came down to Edgar Schmued, Lee has a reputation for promoting himself as doing things he did not with respect to the P-51. It’s interesting that he claims he was the Chief Engineer, when he is listed by Edgar, and others, as Vice President and Assistant General Manager. The following is what Ed Schmued had to say re the radiator design,
“Then there were some other features of the airplane that are essential. For instance, the radiator of the airplane; if it is a ducted radiator (surrounded by cowling), it has a tendency to spill air. The air that is coming into the opening cannot all go through the core of the radiator itself and spills around the edges. Here it is very important to locate the radiator in a position where it cannot interfere with either wing or main-fuselage drag, because any spillage is turbulent air, producing drag. To keep that to a minimum, I moved the radiator as far aft as I could, and as far below the wing as I could. With the radiator located in this position, we really got an optimum.

”Since the radiator was far enough aft, it interfered as little as possible with fuselage drag and with wing characteristics. We had a world beater! We also found out, later on, that the heat from the engine actually produced thrust in the radiator by increasing the velocity of the air flowing through.

“That horsepower gained by the radiator was only discovered by wind-tunnel investigation. We were contractually required to wind-tunnel test the P-51, and long after the first airplane flew, we got around to test a model which had an electric motor to drive a three-bladed propeller. We found from wind-tunnel data that the P-51 should not be as fast as it was actually clocked. Our chief thermodynamicist, Joe Beerer, studied the problem and noticed the favorable effect of the radiator." This added thrust is called the Meredith effect, after the British engineer F. W. Meredith, who described it in a paper published in 1935.

The distribution of power is approximately as follows: 100 percent energy in fuel is put into the engine, but about 30 percent of this has to be radiated into the air to cool the engine. Another 30 percent of the energy is lost in the exhaust heat of the engine. Then 25 percent is usually used on the propeller. This amount of power drives the airplane, overcoming the drag, so 15 percent of the fuel energy is lost in mechanical friction. This indicates that an airplane, or any other heat machine, is not a particularly economical device.

“The British Air Ministry was extremely helpful. Among others, they sent us Dr. B. S. Shenstone [who arrived February 25, 1941], to assist us in some of the airflow problems into the radiator. The radiator, as we had it, consisted primarily of a fairing, which started at the bottom of the fuselage and enclosed the radiator. Dr. Shenstone advised us to provide an upper lip on the radiator housing, which was about 1.5 inches below the fuselage contour. By doing this, we got a much better pressure distribution in the air scoop.

“Previously, air would go in at the bottom of the scoop and spill out on top. By providing this lip and the gap between the fuselage and the radiator lip, we actually equalized the pressure distribution in the duct and got a much better cooling system. We reduced some of the loss due to spilling, which is always detrimental and will produce a certain amount of drag. lt is always a problem with any kind of a ducted radiator installation, so this all helped to reduce the spillage."

Aerodynamicist Ed Horkey fills in the details. “The back was the greatest place in the world to put [the radiator]. However, we started out with an opening to the radiator duct, the top line of which was the bottom line of the fuselage. The problem was that being so far back in the fuselage caused the boundary-layer build up and the airflow wasn’t doing the job of furnishing enough [air] to the radiator to give efficiency or enough cooling.
“Meredith had brought forth the theory or proposal to take in air at a high velocity and slow it down, which, of course, builds up pressure. As it goes through the radiator core, the pressure helps some, but primarily you have more dwell time. Then with the increased pressure and temperature, you squeeze the air down again as it goes out the back and you actually get some thrust from this, or what can be called negative radiator drag. It was great, but with the problems we had at the inlet, we weren't achieving cooling or a drag reduction.

“Ed certainly looks at it from a different viewpoint than we in aerodynamics did at that time. Actually, with the one-quarter scale model at Cal Tech, Irving Ashkenas, who had been working with me, was doing the night shift and I was doing the day shift. He was over one night and came up with the idea 0f why not put a boundary bleed in. ln other words, take that top line of the radiator duct and bring it down from the bottom line of the fuselage and let the turbulent boundary layer that built up under the fuselage go by the entrance and therefore you would get more efficient air into the duct. He went ahead one night and did this on the model and the results were great. Other people may have come up with that later on. I want to give full credit to Irving Ashkenas as really being the developer of the boundary-layer bleed. This is in full use yet today. For instance, one can look at the F-16 and see the tremendous boundary-layer gutter that they use.

Perfection of the cooling system was an ongoing process, requiring the input of Horkey’s department, wind-tunnel model work, and, above all, continuous flight testing. And most of it would have to be redone in 1943 and 1944 when the Mustang shifted to the more powerful Merlin engine.

Writes Horkey: “The boundary-layer bleed wasn't all that simple. If you drop the radiator inlet down far enough to get rid of all of the turbulent boundary layer, the drag would be too high; so it ended where it was a compromise of the bleed depth to get an acceptable cooling performance with minimum drag.

“It so happened that later on when we started the P-51B project, we got the boundary-layer bleed a little too small. What would happen was that it caused a duct rumble. Chilton described it to us as somebody pounding on a locker. The boundary layer would build up, and airflow would go around the duct inlet, and then it would all of a sudden go inside again, and this would create a large impact load. We did two things. We got the model out again and started checking the bleed. We also took an actual P-51B up to Ames Aeronautical Lab and cut the wing span down a little and mounted in the 16-foot high-speed wind tunnel.
“I took the first ride, and when we got up to 500 mph in the tunnel, we got the rumble. lt was quite a thrill. Smith J. DeFrance of NACA at Ames, Manley Hood, and Bill Harper all worked with us. We lowered the top inlet of the radiator duct a small amount and also went to the cutback, or slanted, inlet shape and solved the problem on the P-51B. Later on, on other airplanes like the P-51H, we had to make an eighth of an inch change, and again make sure we had this problem in hand.

“l am absolutely certain, having been there, that the boundary-layer-bleed solution credit should be given to Irving Ashkenas. He later went on to Northrop and participated in the development of the P-61 and their flying wings. He still has a company that does aerodynamic consulting on drag, stability, and control, etc."
What gets lost in the discussion is that, yes the radiator produces thrust, but not sufficient to overcome cooling drag. You can see evidence of this in one of the P-51 Reno racers that has dispensed with the radiator completely, and has a complete loss system, whereby the coolant boils off and is vented overboard. You can see the steam venting from the outlet in the fuselage immediately above and behind the wing trailing edge, they claimed removing the scoop and radiator substantially reduced drag.

http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Galloping_Ghost_25.jpg

[AtomKraft]

I guess the pilot of an aircraft with a 'total loss' cooling system needs to be 100% sure to be on the ground before he loses the last of his water.

Still, if u make the duration of the water greater than the duration of the fuel, I suppose it takes care of itself.....

[Warmtoast]

Re the photo above, is that the same "The Galloping Ghost" that crashed at Reno in 2011, killing the pilot and 10 spectators?

[AtomKraft]

Warmtoast.

Yup.

Here you see it, in one big bit.

It now exists in many more, smaller, pieces...:sad:

[Wander00]

Never realised core of the Harrier engine was the Orpheus - now if we had had that much thrust in Aunty Betty's little fun jet..................

[NutLoose]

Yup, with the LP bits off the Olympus thrown in for good measure, see

Rolls-Royce Engines: Pegasus (http://www.gracesguide.co.uk/Rolls-Royce_Engines:_Pegasus)

[Old Fella]

Don't know that we ever officially went from "Airscrew" to "Propeller". What I do know is that my RAAF Fitter IIE Flight Mechanics Notes (Issue 5 -1943) issued to me in 1958 refers exclusively to Airscrews. No mention anywhere of propellers.

[riff_raff]

I think afterburner is a better term, since there is combustion taking place.

Doesn't reheating take place in turbofan engines as the bypass airflow mixes with, and is reheated, by the exhaust gas flow?

[safetypee]

Barry Jones recalls in his book 'The Meteor', that an 'exhaust reburning system' had been discussed by RAE before 1945. An experimental system was tested in Meteor EE215 in April 1945.
In a similar time scale Rolls Royce had been investigating an 'after burning' system, but fully operational systems for Derwent engines were not available until 1949; these had variable nozzles.

Of interest John Grieson's book 'Jet Flight', Jan 1945, did not mention reburning systems, even though advanced concepts of turboprops and bypass were foreseen. In a chapter by George Carter (designer of the E28 and Meteor) on future engine systems, he noted a divergence between civil and military designs, but this section was subject to security restrictions at the time.

From the above it might be concluded that 'reheat' preceded 'after burning'; perhaps the latter coming from a 'different' system designed the USA, or a corrupted amalgamation of the preceding terms.

[Fonsini]

Variable nozzles on Derwents in 1949 - we had some amazing engineers back then. I always thought that variable nozzles came much later.

[tdracer]

I always thought that variable nozzles came much later.


Variable area nozzles are almost mandatory with afterburner/reheat - if you burn enough fuel to make it worth while, the nozzle must get bigger or your engine match goes all to hell.

[megan]

The British projected 1946 supersonic Miles M.52 incorporated a type of after burning, but the term used at the time was "thrust augmentation". Only the burning took place, not in the core flow, but in the bypass.

[Thud105]

A buddy recommended I take a look at AirForces Monthly, but in the first feature I read the author uses the term 'reheat'. I guess he meant afterburner - does anyone say reheat anymore?

[H Peacock]

I guess he meant afterburner - does anyone say reheat anymore?

Yep, reheat is what one uses to make the airplane aeroplane fly faster!

Whatever next, you'll be calling the fin a vertical stabiliser!!

[Thud105]

Ha ha ha! So do current serving RAF aircrew select reheat in their Typhoon? That's what I'd like to know - what is the correct terminology?

[57mm]

Even now, some dudes refer to it as reheat, others as burner. Much excitement once in a formation fly past of Lightnings, as the leader called "Reheat, reheat go....now"

[LOMCEVAK]

We are, indeed, two nations divided by a
common language ....

[Vendee]

I'm immediately reminded of the feared but respected propulsion instructor Mr Garrett (ex Chf Tech) on my fitters course at Halton in 1976 when one of my fellow students used the "A" word. "Its called reheat" said Mr Garrett. We won't tolerate any Americanisms here. I tend to agree with Mr Garrett, after all, we did invent it ;)

[Wensleydale]

This is indeed an unusual Americanism because it does not consist of three words, which appears to be a formal requirement in American "Aircraft Technical Manuals". So for example, the AWACS radar does not have Tilt, but an "Elevation Command Angle". The console (Mission-crew Work Station) does not have a keyboard, but an "Alphanumeric Entry Device" and so forth. Indeed, the occasional aberration of this rule has been corrected in the mid-life update, where the older "Situation Display" has been replaced by the "Primary AWACS Display". Needless to say, this approach to military systems certainly meets the requirement for a surfeit of acronyms.

[MPN11]

.... Much excitement once in a formation fly past of Lightnings, as the leader called "Reheat, reheat go....now"Reminded me of the Javelin 4-ship in immaculate echelon joining the circuit, although that ws "Break - Break - Go - Now." Much wobbling of Javelins ensued! ;)

[Pontius Navigator]

Having touched on 3 character designators, the V-Force was there over 60 years ago with NBS, BNS, NBC, H2S and then numbers that any nav rad has engraved in memory 595, 585, 301, 343, 626.

[ORAC]

This is indeed an unusual Americanism because it does not consist of three words

TLA.......

[Mr. Vice]

The Typhoon uses 'Reheat' often shortened to 'RHT' in its documents.

Mr Vice.

[tescoapp]

reheat is a thermodynamics term. Its not limited to aircraft engines. Afterburner is a form of reheat which is used in aircraft engines.

If your talking about aircraft engines both are correct. And septic engineers know very well what they are and how one is shall we say the family name for a solution and the other is a individual solution for the effect.

[NutLoose]

I won't mention turbo superchargers then, it'll just confuse you ;) ohh I just did.

BTW they used a primitive reheat on large piston engines

[tdracer]

I won't mention turbo superchargers then, it'll just confuse you ;) ohh I just did.

There are various types of 'superchargers' - it's legitimate to call one type 'turbo' to differentiate it from the others.

Reheat and afterburner both clearly indicate what's being communicated, and you don't need to be overly familiar with the nuances of the language to clearly understand. That's often not the case when comparing the American and British versions of the English language. For example, when referring to the luggage carrying compartment of an auto, I've always thought 'trunk' made more sense than 'boot'.

[ve3id]

We are, indeed, two nations divided by a
common language ....

Funny how the word 'common' comes up when talking about the yanks! Don't forget they are a classless society, i.e. they have no class(es)

Reheat is standard English, and after-burner is simplified English, or American!

tally-ho chaps!

[Lima Juliet]

Obviously others at the eastern side of the pond may say “Gate” or even “Carrots” when they want to use the “loud levers”. ;)

”Cookers” and “Heaters” also, but the latter may also refer to IR missiles.

[ve3id]

Obviously others at the eastern side of the pond may say “Gate” or even “Carrots” when they want to use the “loud levers”. ;)

”Cookers” and “Heaters” also, but the latter may also refer to IR missiles.
Just make sure you put it out over the Tannoy for the passengers!

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

When you consider that it’s a process involving the ignition of large quantities of fuel and resulting in a 1000 mph efflux with purple/orange flames, shock diamonds and deafening roaring, crackling noises - ‘reheat’ is really just another example of charming British understatement, isn’t it? :ok:

Whereas ‘afterburner’ is somewhat more picturesque and descriptive, and also just fine as far as I’m concerned.

[Wensleydale]

I've always thought 'trunk' made more sense than 'boot'.

Not when, in reality, you put your trunk into the boot!

[rogerg]

When I was doing some training in the states the instructor said the thrust levers were connected to the " big round things" That's the only tech you need to know.!

[jimjim1]

From:- Bringing the Future Within Reach: Celebrating 75 Years of NASA John H. Glenn
Research Center by Robert S Arrighi, National Aeronautics and Space

(sorry about image but I can't work out how to copy/paste text from google books)

Aircraft Engine Research Laboratory (AERL)
Altitude Wind Tunnel (AWT)
NASA John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field (Lewis)
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/715x484/afterburner_d4a12ddee7c37e566070b45bb42b1e951351170d.png

This is further up the page - Man vs Fire!!
https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/742x489/man_vs_fire_291c157992afc04fcc1b61a3edffd550811afe10.png

Man vs Fire

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=a2e1zZRieQsC&pg=PA68

[Downwind.Maddl-Land]

Just reading the preamble on this thread and noticed:Undercarriage and Landing Gear?
Any Brit Air Trafficker, of a certain age, will quote to you:
"Your landing gear appears down and locked'
Or
"Your port undercarriage does not appear to be down"
(Or words to that effect)

[turbroprop]

Confusing one for me Is LIGHT OFF call during engine start. Especially when during the start you are also monitoring warning lights that you also expect to go OFF.

[ivor toolbox]

as correctly described earlier in the thread, afterburner is the name given to the mechanism and extended tailpipe paraphernalia that adds the fuel and stabilises the result, which is reheat, ergo
you engage afterburner to produce reheat.

Ttfn

[Lancman]

Confusing one for me Is LIGHT OFF call during engine start. Especially when during the start you are also monitoring warning lights that you also expect to go OFF.
The call used to be LIGHT UP. Terminology drift?

[Saintsman]

Man vs Fire.

That man is wearing no safety equipment!

What was he thinking...

[Null Orifice]

Re #73
Anybody know if the man with the extinguisher still has a 'ringing' sound in his ears? 'Elf'n'safety, etc.

By the way, undercarriage down and locked is impossible to determine from the cockpit/flight deck! Even though there may be three greens indicated.

[H Peacock]

Confusing one for me Is LIGHT OFF call during engine start. Especially when during the start you are also monitoring warning lights that you also expect to go OFF.

Glad you brought that one up. I spent 10 years reading Bombardier documentation that refers to 'Light Off' during the start sequence. Now I'll reluctantly go along with 'Touch & Go' when doing Rollers, but I ain't ever going to teach an RAF student to use the term 'Light Off' when he starts a jet engine! (or is that now called a gas turbine!?)

[SASless]

We are, indeed, two nations divided by a
common language ....

That and a whole lot of salt water thank goodness!

[Blacksheep]

The term was changed after confusion caused by crew meals being prepared in the Vulcan's microwave oven. Ok i'll get my hat & coat....;)Ah! You must mean the "Ration Heaters"? I remember finding a turd in one of them during an After-Flight inspection. That's about all they were fit for I reckon.

[SASless]

Could one utilize the Microwave Oven when operating "EMCON"....would hate for the Nav to give away the aircraft's position by heating up some Pies?

[dook]

…..a certain Lightning formation leader called "Reheat, Reheat, Go.....Now", which caused a stir among his formation members...…

That would be 'Spike' Newman then.

[LTCTerry]

Why do the Americans call the ground floor the 1st floor.

Uh, because it is? :)

The Germans say "ground floor" and "first upper floor."

[ShyTorque]

Uh, because it is? :)

The Germans say "ground floor" and "first upper floor."

They also say "halb sieben" (half seven) - but actually mean 06:30. Don't be late for briefing! :oh:

[weemonkey]

Man vs Fire.

That man is wearing no safety equipment!

What was he thinking...

I think he's also looking in the wrong direction.

But hey Ho..

[PDR1]

The following is what Ed Schmued had to say re the radiator design

Thanks for that, Megan - an interesting piece. I would only take issue with one part (which I'm sure was an unintended "mispeaking" at the time because Ed Schmued definitely know what he was talking about!), where he says:

The distribution of power is approximately as follows: 100 percent energy in fuel is put into the engine, but about 30 percent of this has to be radiated into the air to cool the engine. Another 30 percent of the energy is lost in the exhaust heat of the engine. Then 25 percent is usually used on the propeller. This amount of power drives the airplane, overcoming the drag, so 15 percent of the fuel energy is lost in mechanical friction.

The energy dissipated in friction will of course be converted into heat which is included in the "30% radiated into the air" that he mentions - it can't be a separate element in this sum. I don't doubt his figure for the overall thermal efficiency (25%), but I would add the frictional losses and cylinder cooling losses together to get a ballpark number for the radiator sizing. So if it's a 1,000bhp engine I would expect the radiator and oil cooler to have to dissipate a large chunk of the 1,800bhp (~1.3MW) of heat dumped to the engine casing. Somewhere I have a piece in one of Ricardo's books which suggests that for watercooled engines like the Merlin and Sabre over half the thermal energy dissipated through the engine casing comes out as radiated heat (he was suggesting this is the only reason that aircooled engines didn't melt!), so I'd suggest that for a 1,000BHP engine the radiator and oil cooler would need to be able to dissipate at least 800BHP (~600kW) at full power - 80% of the nominal power dyno'd at the propshaft.

PDR

[tdracer]

Not when, in reality, you put your trunk into the boot!

Interesting - I usually put my foot in a boot, and my bag in the trunk, but to each his own :E

[Wensleydale]

Interesting - I usually put my foot in a boot, and my bag in the trunk, but to each his own

The Trunk is a large wooden chest, used to carry possessions on expeditions and long journeys. It was usually stored in the boot room of large houses which was near the servant's entrance and also where the dirty boots and shoes were kept before they could be cleaned. Therefore, possessions in trunks were often placed into the "boot" before being carried out to the coach: instructions to the house staff being what to put into the boot! I would assume that American coaches did not have a separate boot, but the trunk was strapped onto the top or back of the coach, leading to where possessions were placed. (American houses probably didn't have a boot room either).

[Bing]

American houses probably didn't have a boot room either

I know standards in the colonies were lower, but really.

[SASless]

Ah, but we do leave our boots in the Mud Room.

[Wensleydale]

Ah, but we do leave our boots in the Mud Room.

Then why do you have fenders instead of mudguards?

[PDR1]

Then why do you have fenders instead of mudguards?

So do we, but only on boats - and therein lies the clue. The typical american car has always had the agility, fuel-consumption and handling of a fully-laden supertanker so they feel it appropriate to apply maritime terminology to their cars...

:)

PDR

[ORAC]

Could one utilize the Microwave Oven when operating "EMCON"....would hate for the Nav to give away the aircraft's position by heating up some Pies? Just follow the smoke trail, just like on USAF F4s......

[SASless]

I suppose if we had wings instead of fenders....we would have no need for mud rooms.

But how do you retain your bonnets while using wings?