Supercruise
Thread Starter
Supercruise
So I just finished reading an article on the Russian T-50s "new" engines which will enable it to reach the giddy speed of M1.6 without afterburner. These aviation writers seem to think that Supercruise is still a creation of Fifth gen fighters, but to my mind aircraft like the Lightning were doing this back in the 1960s as a matter of routine.
All of which got me to wondering - what is the highest Mach that any of you saw in a Lightning in full dry power, say in the fastest model, an F.3 with no weapons ?
All of which got me to wondering - what is the highest Mach that any of you saw in a Lightning in full dry power, say in the fastest model, an F.3 with no weapons ?
Just because I can......
GR1 - could only manage 590kts in dry power with 2 big tanks & 2 x CBLS. Never quite got the fully clean TTTE version to supercruise.
Lightning sim - Mach 2 (in a vertical dive from FL900 with both engines flamed out).
GR1 - could only manage 590kts in dry power with 2 big tanks & 2 x CBLS. Never quite got the fully clean TTTE version to supercruise.
Lightning sim - Mach 2 (in a vertical dive from FL900 with both engines flamed out).
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
-RP
The lighter weight F1 Lightnings used on the target facilities flights could accelerate and cruise at >M 1.1 without reheat.
Depending on weight and the atmosphere most of the interceptor versions could have kept pace with a M 1.1 target with cold power after having accelerated to that speed or higher with reheat to make the intercept.
The higher weight of the T5 offset any aerodynamic advantage; it was not very sporty in comparison to the single seat versions. The T5 struggled to exceed M 1.6 on '10 ton' rides (before it ran out of fuel).
Depending on weight and the atmosphere most of the interceptor versions could have kept pace with a M 1.1 target with cold power after having accelerated to that speed or higher with reheat to make the intercept.
The higher weight of the T5 offset any aerodynamic advantage; it was not very sporty in comparison to the single seat versions. The T5 struggled to exceed M 1.6 on '10 ton' rides (before it ran out of fuel).
JAJ - The Lightning exceeded Mach 2, but sometimes relied on a tanker top up. The thread was on super cruise and 3721's assessment is about right, F3 also pretty similar with the better engines, but heavier.
Does supercruise require the aircraft to be able to accelerate through Mach one without afterburner or just be able to stay supersonic after using burner to 'get through' M1 ?
Strictly speaking I don't think Concorde could accelerate through M1 on 'dry thrust'
I thought they engaged reheat around .9 and kept it in until 1.7 in the cruise climb ?
Strictly speaking I don't think Concorde could accelerate through M1 on 'dry thrust'
I thought they engaged reheat around .9 and kept it in until 1.7 in the cruise climb ?
Originally Posted by MACH2NUMBER
JAJ - The Lightning exceeded Mach 2, but sometimes relied on a tanker top up.
Sorry if I was being too facetious.
Fly it like you stole it.