A jet engine between a "Wheesley" and a "Whiplash"

[Columbia]

I feel that there's a big gap between the current Turbofan and Turbojet engines, one intended for small, Mk1 planes, and the other for supersonic, high-speed jets - What about an engine that's about between that? It could have a static thrust of, say, 180 kn and maximum 250 or so, which would be useful for atmospheric Mk3 planes and research jets, especially with the Ramjet's new shock effects. For me, I also feel that the Wheesley is a bit too weak for large planes and has to rely on a lot of them or mere clipping - Think of it as a counterpart to the GE CF6 engine.

What do you guys think?

[clivman]

Good idea.

[CaptainTurbomuffin]

We definitely need more large parts: Big structural wings; big canards; big 30°-triangle-wings; and 2.5m RAPIER; Basic jet; Ramjet; intake (and maybe my pure ramjet if that'll be implemented ^.^)

[KrazyKrl]

The whiplash is currently a turbojet/ramjet hybrid engine. And is already in the mid-range for engines; the "ramjet" effect really starts to happen when the engine gets into the "runaway thrust" area of speed.

But I do agree that we need a 2.5m class of LiquidFuel parts. (2.5m NERVA, 2.5m LF tanks, 2.5m Intakes, and 2.5m atmospheric engines.) (A 2.5m NERVA would be pretty insane though, it'll be the size of an X32 tank (the 1/2 2.5m orange tank, and about as massive with an 80% load of fuel.))

2.5m for me is a comfortable size for some of the largest crafts; anything bigger, and Unity has a problem with large and massive parts (playing around the Orion mod showed me that.) We are missing a lot of the other side of the part catalog, LF-Only 2.5m parts and engines.

Edited July 10, 2015 by KrazyKrl

[Rath]

Keep the Wesley the same, nerf the whiplash, add propeller.

[Mutex]

I feel that there's a big gap between the current Turbofan and Turbojet engines, one intended for small, Mk1 planes, and the other for supersonic, high-speed jets - What about an engine that's about between that? It could have a static thrust of, say, 180 kn and maximum 250 or so, which would be useful for atmospheric Mk3 planes and research jets, especially with the Ramjet's new shock effects. For me, I also feel that the Wheesley is a bit too weak for large planes and has to rely on a lot of them or mere clipping - Think of it as a counterpart to the GE CF6 engine.

What do you guys think?

Wait, are you just asking for a larger version of the basic jet engine? There should definitely be 2.5m versions of the basic jet, turbo/ramjet and RAPIER, and air intakes. Using quad adapters for this is getting old.

[Goddess Bhavani]

Wait, are you just asking for a larger version of the basic jet engine? There should definitely be 2.5m versions of the basic jet, turbo/ramjet and RAPIER, and air intakes. Using quad adapters for this is getting old.

A 2.5m high efficiency turbofan is not as absurd as it sounds. How big is the diameter of the monster turbofans on 777s and A380s anyway? Those look like they can swallow a 737 fuselage whole!

[RocketPilot573]

Yes Please. A 2.5 meter jet engine, similar to airliner engines, would be very useful. It could be very good for flying large planes up to maybe 15,000 meters, but be no good for flying to space.

EDIT: Just had another thought, how about instead of a new jet engine, we get a 2.5 meter propeller which has a similar function?

Edited July 11, 2015 by RocketPilot573

[Jouni]

A 2.5m high efficiency turbofan is not as absurd as it sounds. How big is the diameter of the monster turbofans on 777s and A380s anyway? Those look like they can swallow a 737 fuselage whole!

The engines on B777 are 3.43 m wide and 7.23 m long, and they're nominally rated for 514 kN of thrust at sea level. The engines on A380 are smaller. The fuselage of B737 is 3.76 m wide.

[Coyote27]

add propeller.

Turboprop engines excite me, so I'd like to be able to make them with a propeller+wheesley combination. I'm not sure about a prop engine that uses fuel and intake air so much, perhaps an electric one that can run on fuel cells (or be powered by jets on said turboprop design) would be best - simpler too perhaps since only a propeller, spinner, and shaft connected to an electric motor would be necessary. And the big advantage of an electrically driven prop is that it'd work in oxygen-free atmospheres, so we could go flying on Eve and Duna...

[KrazyKrl]

Turboprop engines excite me, so I'd like to be able to make them with a propeller+wheesley combination. I'm not sure about a prop engine that uses fuel and intake air so much, perhaps an electric one that can run on fuel cells (or be powered by jets on said turboprop design) would be best - simpler too perhaps since only a propeller, spinner, and shaft connected to an electric motor would be necessary. And the big advantage of an electrically driven prop is that it'd work in oxygen-free atmospheres, so we could go flying on Eve and Duna...

I would suggest something like a high-electricity draw system that would add something like real-world hydraulics; but be simplified to work with the electrical system already in place. Something like an "APU" tweakable in-VAB/SPH for the jet engines; which would disable their thrust, but turn it into massive power generation (and the thrust limiter could still be used to reduce the power generation and fuel drain.) The turbopumps in the SSME produced something like 71,140hp (53,049 KW) for fuel compression, and APUs are used on major jet aircraft.

[hazard-ish]

The idea of a new jet engine has my support, 2.5m or not. There are loads of rocket engines to choose from, all having specialised uses helpful for varying circumstances so it makes sense to give jets, reconnaissance crafts (especially with the addition of new contracts) and SSTOs more air-breathing engines to choose from.

[Columbia]

Well.. honestly.. I was just suggesting a mid-power engine.

Although yes, I agree that jet engines should go beyond 1.25 m.

I'm honestly rather tired of clipping Wheesleys together to make an actually flyable airliner..

Edited July 16, 2015 by Columbia

[Coyote27]

On that thought, an 0.625m jet engine might be nice too. A pulse-jet maybe?

[Azimech]

Agreed, 1.25m in between basic and turbo ... I just hope it would be a short model. The turbojet is too long.

And a 0.625m.