Talk:Turbojet

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

AVIATION This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.

Clarification request:

For a time, some turbojet engine designs included the ability to inject water onto the engine to cool the exhaust in these cases. This was particularly notable because of the huge amounts of smoke that would pour out of the engine when it was turned on.

Is this "smoke" in fact steam formed due to the evaporation of injected of water onto the turbine blades, or was it smoke due to some other factor? --Abqwildcat 23:14, 26 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The Rolls-Royce Pegasus certainly still employs water cooling for use in the hover mode, this indeed limits the harrier's hovering endurance for as long as the supply of coolant water holds out. Emoscopes 08:31, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Edit as to what actually causes thrust. Generally speaking, for aspirated engines at lower altitudes the previous statement holds true, but the mass of the fuel must also be considered. Regardless of whether we're talking rockets or jet engines, it's simply the change in momentum that either produces thrust, or creates a net drag. When considered as a system, including all the air drug forward by the aircraft, at a constant velocity, the net momentum of the total mass of air through with the jet, airplane, or helicopter flies through will have a net change in momentum along the direction of flight of zero, but will have a negative change in momentum along the verticle plane. It's than downward increase in momentum which holds the airplane up.


ERROR IN ARTICLE: The article states that the ME-262 was Germany's first jet fighter. It actually was the HE-280.


Please clarify the definitions of each term under "Net thrust". Fuzzform 02:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


"The accidental deployment of a thrust reverser during flight is a dangerous event that can lead to loss of control and destruction of the aircraft." <--- It's nice to see that the Lauda B767 is remembered, but does in-flight reverser deployment happen often enough that a broad statement such as this is warranted, or might it be better if the Lauda incident was more directly acknowledged? 59.167.244.69 12:14, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't think accidental thrust reverser deployments are common enough to be notable. Feel free to delete that line if you wish. Shreditor 00:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Assessment

This is a nice article, pity it doesn't have inline citations and more references. --Colputt 17:31, 12 September 2007 (UTC)