new DARPA Vulcan engine

[avatar]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/05/darpa-to-build.html

 

[Sundog]

This weeks Aviation Week has an article on a similar (The same?) engine. It basically looks like an update of the SR-71's engine, in concept, only I think the core would be completely bypassed and it uses what they're calling a "Hyper-burner" in lieu of an "Afterburner." I'll have to go re-read the article, but I believe the hyperburner is basically a "PDE burner."

 

[ouroboros]

I wonder why they are going for a supposed cocooned core turbine that's minimally modified, aside from the cost consideration? I wonder what the reasons are for ignoring the older and ground tested Marquardt SERJ engine though...

 

[antigravite]

I wonder why they are going for a supposed cocooned core turbine that's minimally modified, aside from the cost consideration? I wonder what the reasons are for ignoring the older and ground tested Marquardt SERJ engine though...

This VULCAN program seems to be designed to expand the US Air Force portfolio of advanced airbreathing propulsion technologies, matured to the adequate TRL, to make the best possible choice when time is ripe to build a new generation of advanced recce/strike hypersonic vehicles.

To my understanding, exploratory research on advanced combined cycle engines -- I mean, a specific combination of turbojets and PDE, insofar as they (were thought they) could be used in the M= 0 / M= 6 segment, started in the late 1990s, receiving some visibility in year 2000 (kick-off papers by AFRL in this period). A decade or so passed. And insights inti the art of PDE progressed a lot.

VULCAN seems to be some sort of alternative to Nasa funded RTA (Revolutionary Turbine Accelerator) program. The fact is you would use conventional, off the shelf, turbojets in lieu of an ultra-advanced M4+ capable HiSTED type turbine engine. In other words, you'd want to LOWER the costs, maintenance type operations, development schedule and technical risks while besting performances.

 

[dannydale]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/05/darpa-to-build.html

Cute article, but why is there a pic of an explosively-formed penetrator instead of a jet engine?

 

[sferrin]

http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/05/darpa-to-build.html

Cute article, but why is there a pic of an explosively-formed penetrator instead of a jet engine?

You really have to ask?

 

[avatar]

here's a pdf
http://www.darpa.mil/TTO/solicit/BAA08-53/VULCAN_Industry_Day_Presentations.pdf