Do you get Open Rotor?
ENTREPPRUNEUR
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Do you get Open Rotor?
I do sympathise with Keesje. Airlines wet themselves over saving 5-10% fuel so why don't they buy Keeje's Turboliner and save 20% for only slightly longer flight durations?
Nevertheless I'm still intrigued to see where Rolls' vision of the future fits in. What essentially is the difference between a turboprop and an open rotor?
It would appear open rotors can go a bit faster but turboprops can already do M0.72 at 37,000 feet. That's not much slower than a 737.
Turboprops have gears but then again it looks to me as though Rolls' motor has a gear to get one of the rotors to counter-rotate.
Rolls has failed to win anything recently with their RB285. Is open rotor just to divert attention from their weakness in the narrow body market?
Nevertheless I'm still intrigued to see where Rolls' vision of the future fits in. What essentially is the difference between a turboprop and an open rotor?
It would appear open rotors can go a bit faster but turboprops can already do M0.72 at 37,000 feet. That's not much slower than a 737.
Turboprops have gears but then again it looks to me as though Rolls' motor has a gear to get one of the rotors to counter-rotate.
Rolls has failed to win anything recently with their RB285. Is open rotor just to divert attention from their weakness in the narrow body market?
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bristol
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
don't they buy Keeje's Turboliner and save 20% for only slightly longer flight durations
I remember seeing something like this on a proof of concept demonstrator at Paris or Farnborough back around '87 or '88. At that time GE called the concept UDF for unducted fan. One UDF engine was mounted on an MD-80 series airplane while the other side carried the standard JT8D-200 series fanjet. It was billed as being able to provide massive fuel savings to cost conscious airlines. But what was remembered by crowds witnessing the flight demo was the cacophony of ear-splitting noise emanating from the beast. Between that, concerns expressed over the structural integrity and damage tolerance of the blades and the development of higher bypass and more efficient fanjets, the project never really went anywhere. The idea still has it's supporters to this day though, so it resurfaces from time to time.
Edit: I found an interesting historical perspective on the project here. Enjoy!
Edit: I found an interesting historical perspective on the project here. Enjoy!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Richmond Texas
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember following the UDF at the time it was first tried. They lined the fuselage with Helmholtz resonators and still couldn't control the noise.
After an excellent landing etc...
After an excellent landing etc...
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Seattle
Posts: 3,196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The "open rotor" engines, despite their relatively green characteristics, will still be unpopular with many anti-aviation campaigners as they are significantly noisier than ordinary turbofans.
With all the noise complaints already, it is unlikely we'll see any of these on airliners.