PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Tech Log (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log-15/)
-   -   Rolls Royce Viper Engine (https://www.pprune.org/tech-log/389992-rolls-royce-viper-engine.html)

punkalouver 24th September 2009 12:15

Rolls Royce Viper Engine
 
Anybody flown an aircraft with them.

An article I read said that not all the bearings recovered oil and therefore oil had to be added on every turnaround.

Any other turbine engines like that?

FE Hoppy 24th September 2009 12:25

Partial loss systems were quite common on early jets. Don't remember if the spey was designed that way but in practice it worked that way.

Doctor Teeth 24th September 2009 12:37

I haven't had anything much to do with the Viper, but the Rolls Royce RB162 had a total loss oil system where all the oil was scavenged out to the exhaust.
The engine was the Boost Engine fitted to the Trident 3 and so wasn't in use all the time. I do remember checking the oil quantity on a gauge in the rear equipment bay and topping up from a remote re-oiling point close by.

BizJetJock 24th September 2009 15:36

On the early HS125's with vipers used to have to get up on the pylon after each sector and add 1 litre per hour of flight from tins. Great fun in the snow!
Later viper ones had a remote replenishment system in the equipment bay, then they went to fans that don't use any oil to speak of.

Dan Winterland 24th September 2009 17:39

It went out of the centre main and rear turbine bearing seals - the hot bits. It had micro pumps to limit the loss. The Viper was a very early engine (1953)and they hadn't worked out how to seal them at that time. And with the Viper's fuel consumption, you were never going to run out of oil before you ran out of fuel!

http://www.powerjets.co.uk/Viper%20Oil%20System.jpg

Proof Reader 24th September 2009 18:07

The Pegasus has a partial total loss system and oil useage can be the limiting issue on very long mutiple AAR sorties unless precautions are takem. If you see a Harrier in the hover you can sometimes see smoke venting from near the front right hand cold nozzle.

Agaricus bisporus 24th September 2009 18:30

Wasn't the Viper known as one of the most efficient means known to mankind of converting petrochemicals into noise and smoke? It certainly seemed to have bugger-all to do with thrust.

boofhead 24th September 2009 20:02

I was told the Viper was originally built for the Jindivik unmanned target airplane and was only supposed to be run a few times before being blown up. Hence simple design.

Flight Detent 25th September 2009 00:18

Didn't all the MB326H Macchi trainer aircraft have them?

At least the ones that used to be in service as advanced trainers in the RAAF did!

And you're quite right, they were a 'bit' underpowered!

Cheers...FD...:)

Old Fella 26th September 2009 07:02

A bit underpowered!!!
 
The "Fanta can's" were, a little unkindly, said to have "variable noise, constant thrust".

galaxy flyer 27th September 2009 02:05

Throttle setting was just like using a telegraph system to the engine room! :}

GF

singpilot 27th September 2009 22:43

Have a lot of Viper time in an HS125-600. Oiling the engines was done only when needed. Checking them was at every possible opportunity.

Rarely did those two numbers diverge.

A lot of Spey time in G1159's. If they weren't dirty on the bottom of the cowl, it was because you held 300 knots until final, or they were out of oil. Many a time in Newfoundland on a tech stop, it was 5 minutes to refill the sumps (2x2.5 minutes). Max human exposure time on a ladder in 40 knots at -30F was 20 seconds.

Tays..... Brand new airplane. New owner standing at cargo door waiting for a particular bag to emerge from hatch. Sees a drop of oil draining from cowling and asks why does a brand new plane leak oil?

Had to smile. That's not a leak, I said. That's a sign of progress.

mcdhu 28th September 2009 08:23

Jet Provost (3 and 4) trained in the 60s. The viper was very reliable - I don't remember any engine problems at my flying training school apart from icing - no de or anti-icing kit fitted. I seem to remember that the thrust was a ton plus 8 lbs ie 2248lbs. The mark 3 was undepowered but the Mark 4 went quite well and was therefore popular for aeros and the high level trips. No pressurization though - the 'bends' were common amongst the QFIs during the high level phase!

Boofhead is right - the Viper was designed for the Jindivic drone and was therefore simple.

Happy days!
mcdhu

Old Fella 29th September 2009 06:24

Forerunner to Jindivik
 
The forerunner to the Viper powered Jindivik was the GAF Pika, a manned version of the Jindivik. Only two were built and one still survives in the RAAF Museum at Point Cook, Victoria, Australia. Google up GAF Pika for more info.

Tmbstory 29th September 2009 17:17

Rolls Royce Viper engines
 
I flew a lot of time in an HS 125 403B and it had these engines. The F/O's seemed to lose the toss, more than the Captain, so they ended up more on the pylons, checking the oil and topping it up if necessary.

The Viper at that time had the reputation of , if you could light it off it would then never let you down.

Tmb

zetec2 29th September 2009 18:38

Constant Loss systems
 
The Sapphire in Victor 1 & 1A was a constant loss engine from the turbine bearing scroll area, Paul H.


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:33.


Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.