Falkland Islands Tension increase

[JFKvsNixon]

Yes, with refuelling and transitting at normal cruising speeds they can get there in a day, but forget the 'maximim speed' thing - that's only available for short bursts.

 

An aircraft that can cruise 4 or 5 hours on normal throttle settings at about mach 0.85 will be able to do a few minutes on full reheat. Even forgetting the horrendous fuel consumption at supersonic speeds and/or on reheat, for long hauls they'd be carrying big drop tanks so they can't go supersonic anyway.

 

Can't the Typhoon perform supercruise up to mach 1.5?

[Conrod]

Not sure, but I know Chile let us use their air strips. Suppose things have changed since, but we still have allies and I am sure we could obtain a friendly base or two.

 

Also, what seems to have been neglected in this debate is the UN. I am sure an invasion would not be welcomed by all at the UN. Could Argentina cope with sanctions being imposed on it? Would it's people allow it?

Most of the South American countries side with Argentina and play awkward. They shelter pirate fishing vessels which trawl Falkland waters and make flight diversions difficult - if a British transport aircraft bound for the Falklands diverts to South America due to winds being too high to land at Mount Pleasant, they are only allowed to divert to South America if they return to Ascension afterwards.

[Conrod]

Can't the Typhoon perform supercruise up to mach 1.5?

It was built for supercruise but that still uses a hell of a lot of fuel compared to sub-sonic, and all it really means is that is can sustain supersonic speed without reheat - still using a lot of fuel.

 

If you were driving from London to Edinburgh, would you cruise at 70mph or keep your foot to the floor and nail it all the way at, say, 150? It's just the same for the aircraft. It will do Mach 1.9 or whatever, and will hold supersonic speed on military thrust, but it's not going to do that for half a day.

The way these jets work you can probably compare them with an athlete - they can sprint 25mph for a few seconds, but if you want them to run a marathon . . . .

[JFKvsNixon]

It was built for supercruise but that still uses a hell of a lot of fuel compared to sub-sonic, and all it really means is that is can sustain supersonic speed without reheat - still using a lot of fuel.

 

If you were driving from London to Edinburgh, would you cruise at 70mph or keep your foot to the floor and nail it all the way at, say, 150? It's just the same for the aircraft. It will do Mach 1.9 or whatever, and will hold supersonic speed on military thrust, but it's not going to do that for half a day.

The way these jets work you can probably compare them with an athlete - they can sprint 25mph for a few seconds, but if you want them to run a marathon . . . .

 

I never realised that supercruise used so much fuel.

[Conrod]

I never realised that supercruise used so much fuel.

Wind resistance is proportional to the square of speed. Go twice as fast, use 4 times the fuel, halve your range - in an ideal world.

In the real world, engines are optimised for best fuel efficiency lower down their operating range, so if you push them hard the fuel comsumption goes up even higher than the model above.

 

Do so by using reheat (which literally chucks extra fuel into the jet pipe after the turbine) instead of normal thrust, and you can use 10 or 20 times the fuel.

 

Then add the need to accelerate from normal subsonic cruising speeds through transonic to a supersonic speed - that could use 20% of the aircraft's tank capacity alone. Accelerating a jet uses vast amounts of fuel - Tornados used their entire tail tank just to take off, and they had very fuel efficient high bypass engines - at loiter and steady cruise their RB199s were more fuel efficient engines than even the RB211s used in Jumbos at the time. The EJ200 in Typhoon is a lower bypass engine which will develop better power at altitude but isn't optimised for fuel economy the way the RB199 was from its initial concept.

[Tony]

What was that old gag?

 

EE Lightning role: Defend RAF Binbrook.

[Conrod]

What was that old gag?

 

EE Lightning role: Defend RAF Binbrook.

Full reheat to intercept altitude, tap fuel guage, turn round and land before the engines go 'phut'.

 

It's alleged that nobody ever found out how fast the Lightning really was, because they could still be accelerating past the point the tanks were empty.

[JFKvsNixon]

Wind resistance is proportional to the square of speed. Go twice as fast, use 4 times the fuel, halve your range - in an ideal world.

In the real world, engines are optimised for best fuel efficiency lower down their operating range, so if you push them hard the fuel comsumption goes up even higher than the model above.

 

Do so by using reheat (which literally chucks extra fuel into the jet pipe after the turbine) instead of normal thrust, and you can use 10 or 20 times the fuel.

 

Then add the need to accelerate from normal subsonic cruising speeds through transonic to a supersonic speed - that could use 20% of the aircraft's tank capacity alone. Accelerating a jet uses vast amounts of fuel - Tornados used their entire tail tank just to take off, and they had very fuel efficient high bypass engines - at loiter and steady cruise their RB199s were more fuel efficient engines than even the RB211s used in Jumbos at the time. The EJ200 in Typhoon is a lower bypass engine which will develop better power at altitude but isn't optimised for fuel economy the way the RB199 was from its initial concept.

 

Supercruise doesn't involve reheat or afterburners though does it?

 

I understand that part of the Tornado's job in the interceptor role was to loiter for a long time hence the really efficient engine, as opposed to the Lightning's role which was to get high fast and shoot down the bombers before they can release their missiles.

 

I'd thought that the Typhoons ability to fly supersonic without resorting to afterburner would make it a lot more fuel efficient, but I guess as you explained above the faster you go the more fuel you use irrespective of afterburner or no afterburner.

[Conrod]

Supercruise doesn't involve reheat or afterburners though does it?

 

I understand that part of the Tornado's job in the interceptor role was to loiter for a long time hence the really efficient engine, as opposed to the Lightning's role which was to get high fast and shoot down the bombers before they can release their missiles.

 

I'd thought that the Typhoons ability to fly supersonic without resorting to afterburner would make it a lot more fuel efficient, but I guess as you explained above the faster you go the more fuel you use irrespective of afterburner or no afterburner.

 

Indeed, a lot more, though not nearly as much as on reheat:

It was built for supercruise but that still uses a hell of a lot of fuel compared to sub-sonic, and all it really means is that is can sustain supersonic speed without reheat - still using a lot of fuel. . . . .. . . .

[simonj]

I would imagine we have typhoons stationed at RAF Gibraltar and the Ascension Islands, both of which I would imagine have the capability of providing air to air refuelling for the typhoons, RAF Mount Pleasant, Falklands does have air to air refuelling aircraft. Flight time from Ascension Island to Falklands 2.5 hours, from Gibraltar, 5-6 hours and from UK 7-8 hours.

 

Obviousely if you are in the RAF you may know something I don't, why can't they get there in a day?

 

I didn't take into account in-flight refueling and subsequent posts have shown that it is indeed possible but very hard work to get there in one day from the UK. Took me around 2-3 weeks to get there almost 30 years ago but that was on a warship. My links with the RAF are now more on a supplier/customer basis which has shown me more of the RAF than my 27 years RN service ever did!