Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Various Questions (London Procedures, Jet Engines)  
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3309 posts, RR: 13
Posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 3110 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Hi, everyone. I just got back from a trip to Europe (CO EWR-ZRH, AF ZRH-LCY, CO LGW-EWR) and developed quite a few questions regarding various aspects of my trip. So here goes.

A.) POWERPLANTS
1) I have read that Clear Air Turbulence (CAT) was relatively unheard of during the age of propeller planes, and that the advent of jet engines caused this phenomenon. Is this simply because jet aircraft fly higher, and CAT only occurs high-up, or does the construction and function of a jet engine cause this on its own? Either way, how come? Why does it only occur high-up, or, how do jet engines cause this and propellers don't?

2) Do aircraft have synchros for the amount of thrust each engine produces? When I got on my LGW-EWR flight (Boeing 757-200) I noticed, as I was boarding, that the two engines seemed to come from two different centuries. The #1 engine looked old and very used, while the #2 looked brand spanking new. When we taxied and thrust was only slightly increased, you could feel the difference, with the plane shaking laterally, the nose yawing slightly at about 2 hertz, and it was very uncomfortable. It was not shaking due to the ground or anything, as this feels quite different. It was not something I'd ever felt before. When take-off power was applied, the shaking went away and the flight was smooth until he brought the thrust down slight for the descent, where the shaking started again.

3) How fast do the various parts of an engine spin? I know they don't have gears, but I am wondering what the RPM is for the main fan and compressor blades. It doesn't look to be more than 1000RPM or so, but I have no idea.


B.) LONDON AREA PROCEDURES (LCY AND LGW)
1) I have charts for LCY at home, and every approach one dictates a flight path from ALKIN to LCY VOR, right above the airport, then a turn either left of right depending on the arrival runway. I was looking forward to this approach so much, but when we arrived in LCY on runway 28, we came in from the southeast at a heading of about 340 and then turned left heading 280 on final, intercepted the localizer, and crashed onto the runway (no flare at all, quite a rough landing, I must say). I was curious where this approach came from since it is not on any chart I have seen. Was this an ATC thing to help traffic move along? Are they not required to follow at least one published chart?

2) When departing LGW, we flew what I believe was the LAN SID. We took off runway 26L, climbed a bit, and then turned right heading 080 or so, flew past the airport, well past London, and then turned left back towards the Northwest. I was wondering why on EARTH this is the standard procedure for flights to the USA, when it seems awfully excessive. Could it be because our flight path took us incredibly far North (over Greenland!)? I know London has 5 airports, but it seems like a straight-out departure would be far more practical, no?


C.) AIRCRAFT-SPECIFIC QUESTIONS
1) Does the Avro RJ-85 have thrust reverse?

2) Is the Avro RJ-85 notoriously hard to land? I know the LCY approach is steep, but I've never had a landing that hard (even when the captain bounced a VS744 in EWR). There was little to no flare, and the lady next to me screamed. There was NO wind that day and it was clear skies.

3) Does the 767-400 have the same powerplant as the 767-300? It seemed like the 764 had a hard time climbing out of EWR, and used up almost the whole runway. Is ZRH a stretch for this aircraft?

4) Why is the first flap setting on the 757-200 only for the leading edge ones? Are all aircraft like this? Does changing the camber this little do much at all?

Thanks for any input! Looking forward to learning something new!

TIS


www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
16 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 1, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 3081 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
I was curious where this approach came from since it is not on any chart I have seen. Was this an ATC thing to help traffic move along? Are they not required to follow at least one published chart?

If the aircraft is being given vectors to intercept an approach path, much of the published procedure is skipped. Quick and efficient!

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
1) Does the Avro RJ-85 have thrust reverse?

Nope. Not even a little bit.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
2) Is the Avro RJ-85 notoriously hard to land?

I've been told that they are actually very easy to land. The trailing link gear provides lots of cushion, but can be a little "wobbly" in crosswinds.

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineF14D4ever From United States of America, joined May 2005, 319 posts, RR: 4
Reply 2, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3067 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
3) How fast do the various parts of an engine spin? I know they don't have gears, but I am wondering what the RPM is for the main fan and compressor blades. It doesn't look to be more than 1000RPM or so, but I have no idea.

The general trend is the bigger the engine, the lower the rotation speed. At sea level static takeoff thrust the GE90-94B fan is turning at about 2500 rpm and the core at about 10,000 rpm, to generate about 95,000 pounds thrust.

At the other end of the spectrum, the Turbojet Tech TJT-3000 (for scale model applications) generates 30 pounds thrust on a spool speed of about 125,000 rpm, according to their website.

Between those two is the CF34-10E aboard the Embraer E-190, whose fan is turning about 5900 rpm at SLS takeoff power (ca. 20,000 pounds thrust).



"He is risen, as He said."
User currently offlineMhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 25
Reply 3, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3063 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
B.) LONDON AREA PROCEDURES (LCY AND LGW)
1) I have charts for LCY at home, and every approach one dictates a flight path from ALKIN to LCY VOR, right above the airport, then a turn either left of right depending on the arrival runway. I was looking forward to this approach so much, but when we arrived in LCY on runway 28, we came in from the southeast at a heading of about 340 and then turned left heading 280 on final, intercepted the localizer, and crashed onto the runway (no flare at all, quite a rough landing, I must say). I was curious where this approach came from since it is not on any chart I have seen. Was this an ATC thing to help traffic move along? Are they not required to follow at least one published chart?

That will be the procedural (non radar) approach. It is more common to use Radar services where available to save time, but it is unlikely that there will be a separate chart to cover it because there is no fixed routine for a Radar arrival.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
2) When departing LGW, we flew what I believe was the LAN SID. We took off runway 26L, climbed a bit, and then turned right heading 080 or so, flew past the airport, well past London, and then turned left back towards the Northwest. I was wondering why on EARTH this is the standard procedure for flights to the USA, when it seems awfully excessive. Could it be because our flight path took us incredibly far North (over Greenland!)? I know London has 5 airports, but it seems like a straight-out departure would be far more practical, no?

Gatwick departures to the north do that to avoid London; so domestic departures to the north do the same. You probably flew towards Wallasey or further north towards Scotland rather than flying straight out.



No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3309 posts, RR: 13
Reply 4, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3056 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting F14D4ever (Reply 2):
The general trend is the bigger the engine, the lower the rotation speed. At sea level static takeoff thrust the GE90-94B fan is turning at about 2500 rpm and the core at about 10,000 rpm, to generate about 95,000 pounds thrust.

Interesting that larger engines need lower speed, though it makes sense since the area of each blade is higher. The difference in speed between the core and the fan is staggering! This implies that there are gears or belts to slow the fan's angular velocity. Does the engine actually use these gears as thrust is being increased, like in a car, to help the power distribution and allow lower revs at cruise speed? If not, is this a viable option for jet engines?

Quoting 2H4 (Reply 1):
The trailing link gear provides lots of cushion, but can be a little "wobbly" in crosswinds.

I've always noticed that the Avro is fidgety in winds. It's one of the types I've flown most on, so I'm familiar with its characteristics, and this is always very evident. Was it designed without T/R because BAe thought it wouldn't need it, or because the engine wasn't offered with this as an option? Do all Avros have the same engines?

Quoting Mhodgson (Reply 3):
Gatwick departures to the north do that to avoid London; so domestic departures to the north do the same. You probably flew towards Wallasey or further north towards Scotland rather than flying straight out.

Makes sense that they want to avoid London, and I remember seeing Wallasey on the in-flight map, but why do that huge S around the city instead of flying along the runway heading until clear of London, since LGW is South of the city?

Thanks to those who have answered so far, looking forward to more feedback.

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineMhodgson From United Kingdom, joined Dec 2002, 5047 posts, RR: 25
Reply 5, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 3051 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 4):
Makes sense that they want to avoid London, and I remember seeing Wallasey on the in-flight map, but why do that huge S around the city instead of flying along the runway heading until clear of London, since LGW is South of the city?

I suspect because you'd then go through the LHR departure and arrival routes



No trees were harmed by this message. However, several million electrons were terribly inconvenienced
User currently offlineBigSaabowski From United States of America, joined Jul 2008, 160 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3023 times:

Clear air turbulence usually occurs at the higher altitudes, but could happen lower. It has nothing to do with the power plant on the aircraft. CAT is caused by windshear either due to jet stream disturbance (i.e. inversion, jet stream passing through a trough) or mountain wave turbulence - the lift generated by air flowing over mountains. You can see the latter type of CAT below 20,000 feet.

User currently offline2H4 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 8956 posts, RR: 60
Reply 7, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 3020 times:
AIRLINERS.NET CREW
DATABASE EDITOR



Quoting BigSaabowski (Reply 6):

Welcome to the forums, sir!

2H4



Intentionally Left Blank
User currently offlineViscount724 From Switzerland, joined Oct 2006, 25999 posts, RR: 22
Reply 8, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 3014 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 4):
Was it designed without T/R because BAe thought it wouldn't need it, or because the engine wasn't offered with this as an option?

It has a lower landing speed than most jets, and if you can avoid the need for reverse thrust it reduces weight and maintenance. The Fokker F-28 also lacks reverse thrust.


User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 3002 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 4):
The difference in speed between the core and the fan is staggering! This implies that there are gears or belts to slow the fan's angular velocity.

No, they're on two separate shafts.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 4):
Do all Avros have the same engines?

Same family of engines, yes.


LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3309 posts, RR: 13
Reply 10, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 2952 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting BigSaabowski (Reply 6):
Clear air turbulence usually occurs at the higher altitudes, but could happen lower. It has nothing to do with the power plant on the aircraft. CAT is caused by windshear either due to jet stream disturbance (i.e. inversion, jet stream passing through a trough) or mountain wave turbulence - the lift generated by air flowing over mountains. You can see the latter type of CAT below 20,000 feet.

Thanks for the information. I must have read too much into the comment "Jet engines brought along the discover of CAT", thinking it was a comment about engines rather than the flight envelop being enlarged.

Quoting Viscount724 (Reply 8):
It has a lower landing speed than most jets

What is the landing speed at full flaps and a "normal" landing weight (i.e. not MLW). Also, how much distance does it need to slow down at autobrakes 1, let's say, on a dry runway. I know this isn't an exact number, as it depends on a HUGE variety of factors, but I am curious what the smallest airport it can land at is. For example, I saw a photo of one landing in LUG, but can a fully-loaded passenger layout one land there (regardless of flying the approach, I just mean in terms of the runway).

Quoting LY744 (Reply 9):
No, they're on two separate shafts.

So both of these shafts are powered individually? Is there any reason for doing this other than the weight saved by not having gears and belts? Along similar lines, would it be POSSIBLE to have a geared jet engine?

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineLY744 From Canada, joined Feb 2001, 5536 posts, RR: 9
Reply 11, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2934 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
So both of these shafts are powered individually?

In a nutshell, in a turbofan you would have two sets of turbine-compressor pairs, one is low pressure (the fan and 'outer' turbine) and one is high pressure (the core, or the inner pair of compressor and turbine stages).

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
Is there any reason for doing this other than the weight saved by not having gears and belts?

Reliability would be the other big reason I can come up with.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
Along similar lines, would it be POSSIBLE to have a geared jet engine?

They do exist (hell, pretty much every turboshaft does it), apparently the Honeywell engine on the Avro RJs has a geared fan. PW, IINM, is the one that's been working off and on on a smallish jet engine with a geared fan as well. I'm not sure if they're working on just a simple gear ratio between the turbine and the fan, or if they are actually trying to accomplish a multiple ratio gearbox on that shaft, to better suit engine performance for different conditions. The latter would be kind of cool, but would you want to fly on one of those?  Wink


LY744.



Pacifism only works if EVERYBODY practices it
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3309 posts, RR: 13
Reply 12, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2931 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting LY744 (Reply 11):
They do exist (hell, pretty much every turboshaft does it), apparently the Honeywell engine on the Avro RJs has a geared fan. PW, IINM, is the one that's been working off and on on a smallish jet engine with a geared fan as well. I'm not sure if they're working on just a simple gear ratio between the turbine and the fan, or if they are actually trying to accomplish a multiple ratio gearbox on that shaft, to better suit engine performance for different conditions. The latter would be kind of cool, but would you want to fly on one of those?

Why not? I'm sure if it gets produced it will be tested just as rigorously. It would be interesting, too, to be in an aircraft and have it sound like a Formula 1 car on even more steroids, with the revs increasing and then the gear changing, haha.

In regards to the geared fan on the RJ, does the blade pitch change when the gear changes? It seems that if just the fan is geared, once it slows as the gear changes the air going into the engine would decrease significantly (I JUST thought of this drawback) unless the pitch is modified. This seems to add quite a bit of complexity to the design.

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
User currently offlineFlipdewaf From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2006, 1578 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2930 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
So both of these shafts are powered individually? Is there any reason for doing this other than the weight saved by not having gears and belts? Along similar lines, would it be POSSIBLE to have a geared jet engine?

they are sort of powered differently but all from the same power source (combustion chamber). Try howstuffworks.com and search for turbofan jet engines and you will understand better I think. Gears are possible and are being used by P&W for their new breed of engines.

Fred


User currently offlineXv408 From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2006, 52 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2925 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
I was wondering why on EARTH this is the standard procedure for flights to the USA, when it seems awfully excessive. Could it be because our flight path took us incredibly far North (over Greenland!)?

Quite probably did fly over Greenland. On a recent flight from Heathrow to Los Angeles, we routed over Scotland, Iceland, Greenland, Hudsons Bay, Calgary, Las Vegas and into LA. Main reason for this is the jet stream, which blows west to east at anything op to 200mph. Vectoring this far north avoids the hefty headwinds. Equally, flying US to Europe, pilots try to get into the jet stream to pick up the tailwind and give them some staggering ground speeds. This can also give you some of the Clear Air Turbulence, as another airliner has noted already. See here for an example of the jet stream at anytime:
http://squall.sfsu.edu/crws/jetstream.html


User currently offlineSlamClick From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 10062 posts, RR: 68
Reply 15, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 2904 times:



Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
Do aircraft have synchros for the amount of thrust each engine produces?

The engine controls, especially with autothrust will set each of them for the desired thrust, either by N1 or Engine Pressure Ratio. This will be sufficient and differences between the actual output will be negligible.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
I noticed, as I was boarding, that the two engines seemed to come from two different centuries.

I assume that you mean before you boarded, since during boarding you should not be able to see #2. Beyond that, you cannot see much of the engine, only the first stage fan and the bullet. What you can see is cowling, and that is just sheet metal. You can wrap old battered sheet metal around a brand-new engine. Besides, the engines stay on the wing "on condition" beyond their basic TBO, so output of each engine is downlinked to the ground and analyzed by maintenance engineering. If the thrust begins to fall off, the engine will be changed.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
When we taxied and thrust was only slightly increased, you could feel the difference, with the plane shaking laterally, the nose yawing slightly at about 2 hertz,

"Never let the driver call the tire." Any vibration or other symptom you noted during taxi was more likely to be tire related than engine related. Alternatively, when high-bypass fanjets are shut down warm, the N1 shaft will sometimes take a slight bend, due to the weight of the fan pullind down at the forward end. The middle of the shaft, where it is not supported by the bearing packages will bow up. After the next start it takes a few minutes some times to true out the shaft.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
How fast do the various parts of an engine spin?

That has been adequately answered above, but also worth stating; the reason bigger fans turn slower probably relates to tip speed. We almost always want to design to keep tip speed subsonic. Helicopter main rotors might turn only 350 RPM or so, while the tail rotor is turning maybe 2000. How many circumferences per minute can you turn while remaining subsonic?

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
Is the Avro RJ-85 notoriously hard to land?

Notoriously easy to land. Notoriously hard to screw up. Hard, not impossible.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
There was little to no flare, and the lady next to me screamed. There was NO wind that day and it was clear skies.

Ah, sounds like a little-used pilot technique called a brainfart. Hard to believe but it is possible to forget to flare until it is too late and all you can do is change the attitude of the airplane for the impending impact, and you can do nothing at all about the sink rate. In fact in flaring at this point, all you do is drive the mains on slightly harder.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
It seemed like the 764 had a hard time climbing out of EWR, and used up almost the whole runway.

Powerplant is only one part of the whole equation.

> Powerplant installed
> Actual thrust setting used (flex or TOGA)
> Gross takeoff weight
> Configuration including flaps/slats and even use of engine anti-ice etc.
> Temperature and other atmospheric conditions
> Noise abatement or other ATC procedures flown.


Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
Why is the first flap setting on the 757-200 only for the leading edge ones? Are all aircraft like this?

Quite common among the more recent jetliner designs.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
Does changing the camber this little do much at all?

Oh yes. It adds a lot of lift and very little drag. Trailing edge flaps add drag to a greater extent. Also if the slats are "slotted" meaning that they actually have a gap between them and the wing, relatively higher pressure air will flow from beneath the leading edge of the wing to the upper surface near the peak camber point, creating a sort of poor man's boundary layer control. It will help keep the airflow attached to the upper surface to a higher angle of attack.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Thread starter):
) Does the Avro RJ-85 have thrust reverse?

Hell, it hardly even has FORWARD thrust. Where would the reverse come from?

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
What is the landing speed at full flaps and a "normal" landing weight

I have the bug speed card at my other location. I'll try to give you some numbers next week.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
Also, how much distance does it need to slow down at autobrakes 1, let's say, on a dry runway. I know this isn't an exact number, as it depends on a HUGE variety of factors, but I am curious what the smallest airport it can land at is.

Well, mostly that depends on whether you want to be able to take off again. Every one of many different jets I've been qualified on could easily land on a runway far too short to take off again. To the point, I've landed the 146 in less than two thousand feet several times, but the shortest actual runway we ever used with it was 4400 feet. That runway was weight restricted based on takeoff performance, not landing limitations.

Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 10):
So both of these shafts are powered individually?

Both of these shafts are powered by the exhaust gases escaping the same combustion chambers. A turbine wheel on the N2 shaft turns that shaft which powers the high compression part of the compressors as well as an accessory drive for generators, pumps etc.. The expanding gases next encounter a turbine wheel on the N1 which spins that shaft. It passes through the hollow N2 shaft and drives the forward or low pressure part of the compressor and the big fan you can see at the front of the engine.

The ALF 502 engine is an interesting one, and serves well to answer question regarding gearing down. The basic engine core has also been used to power a turboprop, the Grumman OV-1 Mohawk and a helicopter the CH-47 Chinook.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Alex Christie
View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Tony Zeljeznjak


Both installations required a planetary reduction gearset in the forward end of the engine casing.
And just to round out the resume of this engine:

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Frank C. Duarte Jr.




Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.
User currently offlineANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3309 posts, RR: 13
Reply 16, posted (6 years 5 months 1 week 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2883 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Firstly, SlamClick thank you for the amazing post. The knowledge on this site never fails to amaze me!

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
If the thrust begins to fall off, the engine will be changed.

Which makes sense, if you think about it, haha. Duh!

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
After the next start it takes a few minutes some times to true out the shaft.

Interesting that this is taken into account and that it reshapes itself naturally.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
Ah, sounds like a little-used pilot technique called a brainfart.

Haha, so it would seem. It seems like the RJs are always pretty smooth landers.

Quoting SlamClick (Reply 15):
Oh yes. It adds a lot of lift and very little drag.

Guess my aerodynamics class this semester will be useful, huh? I have lots to learn yet before I get my degree!

Thanks again!

TIS



www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Various Questions (London Procedures, Jet Engines)
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Effect Of Air Pollution On Jet Engines posted Sun Sep 23 2007 07:52:40 by Thai744
Jet Engines- Monitoring Parameters? posted Fri Aug 17 2007 21:43:47 by Superstring
Various Questions In One Post posted Fri May 4 2007 21:06:57 by CoolGuy
How Do Jet Engines Work?: For School Project posted Fri Mar 9 2007 21:31:10 by YYZflyer
What Is The Effect Of Rain On Jet Engines? posted Sun Feb 25 2007 23:03:32 by JAM747
How Long Before Overhaul For Jet Engines? posted Sun Feb 25 2007 01:30:48 by JAM747
Jet Engines (without The Fan) posted Wed Feb 14 2007 15:26:29 by Sudden
Turbulence - Various Questions posted Tue Sep 5 2006 03:54:46 by TimePilot
RPM Of Jet Engines During Take-off posted Fri Jun 9 2006 18:00:26 by MerlinIIIB
Pre 1970's European Jet Engines posted Mon May 8 2006 18:21:41 by Baw2198

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format