AETP Three-stream VCE - GE XA100 and P&W XA101 engines

They don't outweigh the benefit of keeping engine development going by replacing the F135 on the F-35A/C.
 
I wonder how much it'd cost to integrate? For export versions? Or would the XA100 be considered too sensitive to share with European or Canadian operators? I'm sure some services would value the extra range/efficiency.
 
Avimimus said:
I wonder how much it'd cost to integrate? For export versions? Or would the XA100 be considered too sensitive to share with European or Canadian operators? I'm sure some services would value the extra range/efficiency.
Click to expand...
At what cost - both in $ and loss of commonality?
 
It's an astonishing decision, indeed. AETP was discussed as being upgradable onto the F-35 since its inception.
Although we can understand that the acceleration of NGAD had an impact on its availability for other platforms, a cancelation leaves the F-35 with a single engine supplier for the duration of the program... Probably 50 years. That amount of exclusivity will have an impact on the industry. We have to wonder how decision makers are planning to balance that.

The winners are probably RR and, perhaps, Safran. They now have de-facto an avenue to augment their manufacturing numbers and decrease the astronomical price of their very segmented original host platforms.
 
TomcatViP said:
It's an astonishing decision, indeed. AETP was discussed as being upgradable onto the F-35 since its inception.
Although we can understand that the acceleration of NGAD had an impact on its availability for other platforms, a cancelation leaves the F-35 with a single engine supplier for the duration of the program... Probably 50 years. That amount of exclusivity will have an impact on the industry. We have to wonder how decision makers are planning to balance that.

The winners are probably RR and, perhaps, Safran. They now have de-facto an avenue to augment their manufacturing numbers and decrease the astronomical price of their very segmented original host platforms.
Click to expand...
The winner is P&W, who can now say "Sure our reliability is well below targets, but our current motor won't hit the performance or cooling requirements for future blocks so now you have no choice but to sole source our upgrade path."
 
sferrin said:
Very disappointing. We will regret this.
Click to expand...
I feel like for US military if anything seem even a little bit innovative, they are often cancelled in favor of the old/traditional things.
the same thing happened before with
YF-23, NGM (JDRADM) , LRASM-B , Ramjet Harm, ramjet AIM-120 and now XA100
 
Last edited:
Ronny said:
sferrin said:
Very disappointing. We will regret this.
Click to expand...
I feel like for US military if anything seem even a little bit innovative, they are often cancelled in favor of the old/traditional things.
the same thing happened before with
YF-23, NGM (JDRADM) , LRASM-B , Ramjet Harm, ramjet AIM-120 and now XA100
Click to expand...
To be fair, new tech has risks, and the military is not eager to shell out cash to fix up their newfangled gadgets in case they have issues.
 
acegeek9992 said:
Ronny said:
sferrin said:
Very disappointing. We will regret this.
Click to expand...
I feel like for US military if anything seem even a little bit innovative, they are often cancelled in favor of the old/traditional things.
the same thing happened before with
YF-23, NGM (JDRADM) , LRASM-B , Ramjet Harm, ramjet AIM-120 and now XA100
Click to expand...
To be fair, new tech has risks, and the military is not eager to shell out cash to fix up their newfangled gadgets in case they have issues.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but I feel like more often than not, they will spend load of money on new tech, get it nearly work or even a working prototype, then cancel it, then came back do the samething again with that same tech, over and over. Then the adversary get the lead on the tech which they developed first. Take for example, ramjet cruise missile and hypersonic weapons.
 
Ronny said:
acegeek9992 said:
Ronny said:
sferrin said:
Very disappointing. We will regret this.
Click to expand...
I feel like for US military if anything seem even a little bit innovative, they are often cancelled in favor of the old/traditional things.
the same thing happened before with
YF-23, NGM (JDRADM) , LRASM-B , Ramjet Harm, ramjet AIM-120 and now XA100
Click to expand...
To be fair, new tech has risks, and the military is not eager to shell out cash to fix up their newfangled gadgets in case they have issues.
Click to expand...
I get your point, but I feel like more often than not, they will spend load of money on new tech, get it nearly work or even a working prototype, then cancel it, then came back do the samething again with that same tech, over and over. Then the adversary get the lead on the tech which they developed first. Take for example, ramjet cruise missile and hypersonic weapons.
Click to expand...
True, so very much true.
 
Ronny said:
sferrin said:
Very disappointing. We will regret this.
Click to expand...
I feel like for US military if anything seem even a little bit innovative, they are often cancelled in favor of the old/traditional things.
the same thing happened before with
YF-23, NGM (JDRADM) , LRASM-B , Ramjet Harm, ramjet AIM-120 and now XA100
Click to expand...
The YF-23 was not cancelled. It was built and was not competitively down-selected. JDRADM gave way to AIM-260 with the AF secretly moving towards that direction around the same time the T3 program matured or completed. Ramjet AIM-120 was not a requirement. Ramjet HARM likewise gave way to HARM upgrade and now ultimately to the SiAW program. Adaptive engine development investments will only increase over time funded via the NGAD and NGAP efforts. They just awarded rather large propulsion integration contracts just months ago.
 
Pure speculation on my part but could the existing engines have the potential to be upgraded to within 90+% of the new engines making replacement more costly than the additional capabilities warrant?
 
bobbymike said:
Pure speculation on my part but could the existing engines have the potential to be upgraded to within 90+% of the new engines making replacement more costly than the additional capabilities warrant?
Click to expand...
Not that Pratt, USAF, or LM has indicated. The EEP upgrades would increase thrust, range, and thermal management at most about half as much as an ATEP turbine, compared to the existing baseline. That's going off Pratt and Air Force statements, GE has been claiming there's an even larger gap.
 
Moose said:
TomcatViP said:
It's an astonishing decision, indeed. AETP was discussed as being upgradable onto the F-35 since its inception.
Although we can understand that the acceleration of NGAD had an impact on its availability for other platforms, a cancelation leaves the F-35 with a single engine supplier for the duration of the program... Probably 50 years. That amount of exclusivity will have an impact on the industry. We have to wonder how decision makers are planning to balance that.

The winners are probably RR and, perhaps, Safran. They now have de-facto an avenue to augment their manufacturing numbers and decrease the astronomical price of their very segmented original host platforms.
Click to expand...
The winner is P&W, who can now say "Sure our reliability is well below targets, but our current motor won't hit the performance or cooling requirements for future blocks so now you have no choice but to sole source our upgrade path."
Click to expand...
F135 is the most reliable engine ever in a single engine fighter.

Durability of the high pressure turbine, running with the highest turbine inlet temperatures ever in a production engine, has been less than desired when exposed to the Middle East high calcium / low melting point sand environment. But improved turbine blades are already in production and being installed during shop visits to address that problem. Even when running the engine well beyond its bleed air specification in the current aircraft blocks.

The enhanced core incorporates technology from the Navy funded fuel burn reduction program to significantly improve the high compressor efficiency, lowering TIT and improving SFC while providing improved cooling capacity and performance margin. All while being easily incorporated into the depot overhaul process with little change to the overall support system or aircraft integration.

The three stream technologies demonstrated in the XA100 and XA101 will continue to be developed and will be introduced in future aircraft, you can be certain.
 
F119Doctor said:
Moose said:
TomcatViP said:
It's an astonishing decision, indeed. AETP was discussed as being upgradable onto the F-35 since its inception.
Although we can understand that the acceleration of NGAD had an impact on its availability for other platforms, a cancelation leaves the F-35 with a single engine supplier for the duration of the program... Probably 50 years. That amount of exclusivity will have an impact on the industry. We have to wonder how decision makers are planning to balance that.

The winners are probably RR and, perhaps, Safran. They now have de-facto an avenue to augment their manufacturing numbers and decrease the astronomical price of their very segmented original host platforms.
Click to expand...
The winner is P&W, who can now say "Sure our reliability is well below targets, but our current motor won't hit the performance or cooling requirements for future blocks so now you have no choice but to sole source our upgrade path."
Click to expand...
F135 is the most reliable engine ever in a single engine fighter.

Durability of the high pressure turbine, running with the highest turbine inlet temperatures ever in a production engine, has been less than desired when exposed to the Middle East high calcium / low melting point sand environment. But improved turbine blades are already in production and being installed during shop visits to address that problem. Even when running the engine well beyond its bleed air specification in the current aircraft blocks.

The enhanced core incorporates technology from the Navy funded fuel burn reduction program to significantly improve the high compressor efficiency, lowering TIT and improving SFC while providing improved cooling capacity and performance margin. All while being easily incorporated into the depot overhaul process with little change to the overall support system or aircraft integration.

The three stream technologies demonstrated in the XA100 and XA101 will continue to be developed and will be introduced in future aircraft, you can be certain.
Click to expand...
I realize at some point I'm arguing the best thing since sliced bread isn't best enough, an I'm not trying to argue 135 is crap. However, the DoD and industry have a real opportunity to both give the F-35 family a serious step up in capability and retire risks for NGAP. However well EEP goes, we may regret passing those up a lot more than we regret spending the money.
 
Moose said:
However, the DoD and industry have a real opportunity to both give the F-35 family a serious step up in capability and retire risks for NGAP. However well EEP goes, we may regret passing those up a lot more than we regret spending the money.
Click to expand...

The current FoM program is expected to cost about $15 Bn. Given that level of commitment and the sheer depth of capability that is being upgraded, I doubt anyone can say that they aren't treating F-35 modernization seriously. NGAP continues from AETP and has already started (contracts for it were exercised a couple of years ago) so in a way it already had a head start compared to a hypothetical F-35 adaptive engine EMD program based on the two adaptive engine tech demonstrators.
 
acegeek9992 said:
La-Fuente Technologies said:
https://www.defensenews.com/air/202...y-wants-another-shot-at-adaptive-f-35-engine/
Click to expand...
Let's just hope that it succeeds!
Click to expand...
This is the "if you give us the money, we'll do it" pitch the Navy has tried a few times lately. When it comes to ordering an additional ship, Congress has shown some willingness. But I don't think Congress will do it unless they can get the Navy to admit they're interested, or OSD weighs in favorably.
 
Moose said:
acegeek9992 said:
La-Fuente Technologies said:
https://www.defensenews.com/air/202...y-wants-another-shot-at-adaptive-f-35-engine/
Click to expand...
Let's just hope that it succeeds!
Click to expand...
This is the "if you give us the money, we'll do it" pitch the Navy has tried a few times lately. When it comes to ordering an additional ship, Congress has shown some willingness. But I don't think Congress will do it unless they can get the Navy to admit they're interested, or OSD weighs in favorably.
Click to expand...
Looks like the USAF might be getting that money after all

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03...look-shows-big-jumps-for-new-marquee-weapons/
 
La-Fuente Technologies said:
Moose said:
acegeek9992 said:
La-Fuente Technologies said:
https://www.defensenews.com/air/202...y-wants-another-shot-at-adaptive-f-35-engine/
Click to expand...
Let's just hope that it succeeds!
Click to expand...
This is the "if you give us the money, we'll do it" pitch the Navy has tried a few times lately. When it comes to ordering an additional ship, Congress has shown some willingness. But I don't think Congress will do it unless they can get the Navy to admit they're interested, or OSD weighs in favorably.
Click to expand...
Looks like the USAF might be getting that money after all

https://breakingdefense.com/2023/03...look-shows-big-jumps-for-new-marquee-weapons/
Click to expand...
As I understand it, the increased funding is mainly for ICBM and the next generation fighter, nothing for XA100 though
 
Ronny said:
As I understand it, the increased funding is mainly for ICBM and the next generation fighter, nothing for XA100 though
Click to expand...
NGAP has a mention though:

To power NGAD, the service will also continue developing the fighter’s Next Generation Adaptive Propulsion (NGAP) engine, seeking $595 million in the coming fiscal year. RDT&E spending will finish off in FY27 at a level of $291 million, according the the j-books, which state that “competitive prototyping” work would proceed between FY25 and FY28. Both Pratt & Whitney and General Electric are participating in NGAP, which a top official suggested last year could move to down-select as soon as this year.
Click to expand...

Though with the recent news that the USAF will prioritize the improvements of the F135 engines over any Adaptive or Variable Engine developments, this may be put on hold.
 
PW saying the AETP would cost $40 billion more than their F135 engine looks to me like trying to poison the well and kill the program because they think GE will win. And on fit and schedule, GE should win. Which would give GE the inside track on the engine for NGAD as well, and leave PW with nothing.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom