Talk:History of the jet engine

Untitled
Looks good so far if a little sparse. But the title implies ALL the history of the jet engine i.e. everything before todayPetebutt (talk) 06:00, 4 July 2010 (UTC)

This article is relatively well written, but still needs some work. It provides an overview about jet engines, from their conceptual origins through development before and after World War Two. The information is easy to read. Some pictures, along with technical information, are provided to explain how different types of jet engines work and how the designs have changed over time. They could be more detailed to help readers that are unfamiliar with jet engines understand the mechanics of how they function. The introduction needs lots of work because it is very short. More than one sentence should be provided to summarize the entire article. The article is divided into three sections: precursors, pre world war two, and post world war two. I think that more sections could be added to better explain the history. Additional sections for each major country that developed jet engines would be useful, considering that many countries each made unique contributions to engine design. This article also puts most of its emphasis on developments made immediately before and after World War Two. A section specifically about more recent developments in jet technology could help to complete the chronology of development. The article is focused mostly on the technical development of jet engines. More emphasis on the impact that jet engines had on changes in military and civilian aircraft could be added. This would help educate readers that are reading more for the history and less for technical information. The sources also need some work. The article has a fair amount of references, but only a few solid sources. In some cases better citations are necessary. HIST406-11KyleMoyer (talk) 00:01, 5 October 2011 (UTC)HIST406-11KyleMoyer


 * I think the development of axial and radial engines should be in separate sections, even though they overlap.
 * In the postwar period the only engines that saw significant use where radial types until the 1950s saw new alloys. This should mark the start of new section that leads into by-pass turbo-fan engines(which became the ubiquitous 'Jet engine'). 94.247.186.148 (talk) 11:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Hot Section of Historical Engines
I know a bit about today's jets, having trained as a jet engine mechanic. The "hot section" is the turbine, or portion that sits in the hot, high pressure exhaust of the combustion section. Some people liken the turbine to a piece of machinery that keeps operating in the flame of a blowtorch.

Today we use exotic materials, including ceramics, in the turbine. I am interested in what materials were used for the hot section in the first generation of jet engines, and how did they deal with extreme heat and pressure?

Also, are there any nuances, such as in the compressor between axial flow and radial flow in early experiments?

172.76.227.26 (talk) 00:12, 1 November 2017 (UTC)


 * Early axial compressors had a very short service life (hours) and low reliability due to the temperature problem. This is why they were generally not adopted until the 1950s.
 * I have a chart that was presented at a conference in the early 1940s which shows actual and projected temperature performance of alloys - it anticipated that high temperature ceramics would be available in a few years. In practise it took a bit longer, but the chart could explain why people were building engines which they knew would not be suitable for contemporary alloys. I'm planning to scan this chart and include it in the article.
 * In the actual early axial engines the compressors were cooled by forcing air into hollow blades which would go out through bleeder holes in the tips. Obviously this meant having an auxiliary compressor to get the cooling air to an even higher pressure (this was a radial compressor). This was a significant detraction from the efficiency gains of the axial design. 94.247.186.148 (talk) 12:10, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

Italian jet missing
Before and during the WWII italian were pioneering jet technology. They should deserve a mention. See the following: 1)Stipa Caproni 2)Campini Caproni CC2 3)Reggiane RE.2007 Magnagr (talk) 14:01, 27 November 2011 (UTC)


 * The CC2 is already mentioned, although our article links its other name, the Caproni Campini N.1.


 * Ducted fans, such as the Stipa Caproni and the Coandă-1910, do warrant some coverage here. They're important steps, especially for Caproni, in the development of jet aircraft. I presume they're not mentioned here through taking a narrow view of "jet engine", rather than "jet propulsion" or "jet aircraft".


 * I don't see the Reggiane Re.2007 as important to the History of the jet engine any more than the Mikoyan-Gurevich I-250. These were dead-end emergency measures. They made some sense at the beginning of their project, but were outdated by the progress of the gas turbine jet engine before they could make any difference. They certainly didn't change the history of how the engines developed. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:46, 27 November 2011 (UTC)

STEAM JET MISSING FROM ARTICLE

Another jet engine missing from the article is the underwater steam jet designed by allan burns from australia which was developed by pursuit dynamics plc in england. From what i can figure the patent rights for this jet are now owned by online gambling operators in europe and in the ten odd years that this was being researched and developed with considerable funding no jet was ever sold for the purpose of propulsion of marine craft which was the primary objective of the engine, i believe pursuit dynamics may now be non existent. However in saying that the projects research showed a very powerful jet could be built relatively cheaply with very low maintenance and some quite staggering performance figures — Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.56.190.71 (talk) 09:42, 8 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link on History of the jet engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080525093007/http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca:80/aerodynamics1/Performance/Page8.html to http://selair.selkirk.bc.ca/aerodynamics1/Performance/Page8.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Cheers.—cyberbot II  Talk to my owner :Online 13:18, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Meteor
No Mention of British Meteor Jet Fighter

This article makes no mention of the Gloster Meteor jet fighter which saw service during WWII. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.168.109.151 (talk • contribs) 08:46. 2 January 2020 (UTC)

The Meteor went on to be used in the Korean war and was the only jet plane in service after WWII. It went out of production in 1954 However this article is about engines, not planes. The article is essentially misleading; it seems to overlook the fact that axial flow engines, allthough being proposed in the 20's, only ever saw very limited (and ineffective use) until the 1950's when improved alloys were available. Centrifugal compressors were used on the Meteor and several other planes, including the Mig-15 and on the first two jet airliners.

In fact the article also seems to gloss over the not insignificant metallurgy issues. These were the reasons that the axial engines of the WWII era were a flop, but also the reason that the Meteor was the only jet plane to succeed; the centrifugal compressor was less demanding and it was made with Nimonic alloys which, being produced in Birmingham, were not available to the axis countries during the war period.

I have an excellent standard textbook on Jet Engine design published in the 1940's which goes into a lot of detail on these issues, when I have time I would like to try and publish some details here, but Wikipedia editors have become incredibly nit picky, even when you are trying to improve completely unreliable passages.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:52, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Albert Fono's ramjet-cannonball in 1915-hu.svg