Best strategy to avoid nuking Japan

FLYBOYJ · May 22, 2013

zjtins said:
Sorry a bit sensitive on my part.

They were not copies rather a Japanese version they could produce. Lower RPM due to lack of high strength steels the Germans initially used, lower compression on each in the compressor section, no on board starter engine.

"The Ne-20 was made possible by Imperial Japanese Navy engineer Eichi Iwaya obtaining photographs and a single cut-away drawing of the German BMW 003 engine."
Ishikawajima Ne-20 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

zjtins · May 22, 2013

"The Ne-20 was made possible by Imperial Japanese Navy engineer Eichi Iwaya obtaining photographs and a single cut-away drawing of the German BMW 003 engine."
Ishikawajima Ne-20 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Are you implying someone can make a jet engine from 1 drawing?

FLYBOYJ · May 22, 2013

zjtins said:
Are you implying someone can make a jet engine from 1 drawing?

Along with photographs - YES!

GregP · May 22, 2013

That's what we have heard from Japanese visitors to the museum, it was reverse engineered from simple drawings and worked quite well, even if not many were made and used. Given time, they could have flown a lot of jets, but time was not forthcoming.

They were also about 4 years behind the American jet effort, which was essentially started from copying the Whittle engine. The first American jet engine wasn't for several years after that, though we DID improve the Whittle engine several times before that and made very good thrust relative to the original Whittle engine.

Our Bell YP-59A Airacomet project is using GE I-16 engines, which were essentially the first American improvement to the original GE I-A engines that were a copy of the original Whittle engine we were given. The original Whittle engine made 1,200 pounds of thrust for takeoff and the I-16 makes 1,600 - 1,650 pounds for takeoff at only 16,500 rpm.

Later the I-16 was renamed the J-31 and made 2,000 pounds of thrust. It made as much as 2,200 pounds of thrust before being turned into a new model called the J-33.

nuuumannn · May 22, 2013

Are you implying someone can make a jet engine from 1 drawing?

They built a rocket powered interceptor with little more;

"The J8M1 was intended to be a licence-built copy of the Messerschmitt Me 163 Komet. Difficulties in shipping an example to Japan meant that the aircraft eventually had to be reverse-engineered from a flight operations manual and other limited documentation."

Mitsubishi J8M - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

zjtins · May 22, 2013

Along with photographs - YES!

The Japanese had already worked on both jets and rockets of there own. So what they did was take the German information and created there own version. That is not the same as copy it from a photo.

Here is some info.
The Minijets Website: Ishikawajima NE20

GregP · May 22, 2013

Zjtins,

A 440 pound thrust jet engine with 50% efficiency is a far cry from something that can power an aircraft. Their jet engine that actually flew was developed separately and independently from the little 440 pound thrust model jet, and it was developed from the German data.

The engine that flew the Kikka made 990 - 1,000 pounds of thrusts and were unrelated to the TR-10 amd TR-12 except for being turbines.

Everybody had turbines if they had a Navy at the time. The Parsons turbine ensured that after 1894 and the Turbinia.

GrauGeist · May 22, 2013

The Japanese were plagued with "bad luck" courtesy of the Allies...it seems that even though they purchased engines, plans and complete airframes from the Germans, very few ever made it to the Japanese homeland...a vast majority of thier bought goods are laying at the bottom of the ocean.

So they had to improvise the best they could.

zjtins · May 23, 2013

So they had to improvise the best they could.

My point exactly.

FLYBOYJ · May 23, 2013

zjtins said:
So what they did was take the German information and created there own version.

Based on data from the Germans.

zjtins · May 24, 2013

Based on data from the Germans.

Which is not a copy but a guideline for creating their own version.

A4K · May 24, 2013

Best strategy to avoid nuking Japan

Common sense, and forbidding itchy fingered idiots from entering the control room.

Procrastintor · May 24, 2013

VBF,lol, that was pretty... PUNNY!

FLYBOYJ · May 24, 2013

zjtins said:
Which is not a copy but a guideline for creating their own version.

If you say so - when you have data, similar parts and functional components used as a template for maufacturing, sounds like things were copied to me - so tell me, how many jet engines have you taken apart to make a comparison of "like" components?

zjtins · May 24, 2013

If they were copied they would be interchangeable, please provide the proof the Germans and Japanese jet part were interchangeable.

FLYBOYJ · May 24, 2013

zjtins said:
If they were copied they would be interchangeable

Not true, plenty of aircraft parts, components and systems were copied and not interchangeable
Example: Machine gun interupter gear

zjtins said:
please provide the proof the Germans and Japanese jet part were interchangeable.

See statement 1 - I'd still like to know your turbine engine experience to make this determination though....

zjtins · May 24, 2013

I would like to know your s since you are expert and can copy a jet engine from a photo, including the the required metallurgy, surface hardness and finish, and tolerances, blade profile etc.

WWI Example: Machine gun interupter gear

That is not from a photo but from a downed plane in WWI.

FLYBOYJ · May 24, 2013

zjtins said:
I would like to know your s since you are expert and can copy a jet engine from a photo, including the the required metallurgy, surface hardness and finish, and tolerances, blade profile etc.

I never said I could copy a jet engine from a photo - but it was shown to you it was done by others a hell of a lot more talented than me and definitely more versed and knowledgeable than you.

BTW - 35 years in aviation, A&P/ IA Commercial Pilot and Flight instructor. Look up "AMT of the Year 2011."

Anytime you want to compare aviation resumes, I'm all ears. So far you have just proven you're nothing more than an arm chair short on wit and knowlege. I suggest you quit while you're NOT ahead and recognize your limitations!

zjtins · May 24, 2013

Pilots do not design engines, engineers do.

I never said I could copy a jet engine from a photo - but it was shown to you it was done by others a hell of a lot more talented than me and definitely more versed and knowledgeable than you.

You have shown nothing... you claimed it was a copy with no proof. Even a reverse engineered version today is not a copy. They built what the could but it was not a copy, if it was it would have had the same power/performance weight etc, it did not.

FYI if you read your pilots manual or CMM some of what I do is in those.

FLYBOYJ · May 24, 2013

zjtins said:
Pilots do not design engines, engineers do.

And so far you have proven to be neither....

zjtins said:
FYI if you read your pilots manual or CMM some of what I do is in those.

Clean windshields?

Best strategy to avoid nuking Japan

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Major

Major

Banned

Major

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

Brigadier General

Senior Airman

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Banned

"THE GREAT GAZOO"

Users who are viewing this thread

Similar threads