Campini jet. Really a jet?

[Sagittario64]

we all know the campini N.1 was a propellerless airplane, but sources clash on the definition of the plane. some say jet powered, some say the engine wasnt really a jet. can someone finally tell me in a professional manner what the N.1 is? if its not a jet, then what do you call it?

 

[buffnut453]

It is incorrect to say that the Campini N.1 was propeller-less. It had a propeller, it was just ducted (ie not external). A jet generates thrust by the rapid expansion of an ignited fuel-air mix that is directed, and hence focused (in effect, amplified in a given direction) by the airflow through the engine. The Campini had a regular reciprocating piston engine driving a propeller - there was no jet thrust.

 

[wuzak]

Yes, it was a jet.

Describing the powerplant as a ducted propellor is disingenuous. The piston motor drove a compressor, which supplied air to the combustion chambers whicj provided thrust.

Campini N.1

 

[Sagittario64]

Then if the prop was internal, could you classify it as a turbofan? turbofans sort of work the same way

 

[Sagittario64]

this is exactly what im talking about
theres nowhere near a majority consensus on whether the N.1 was a jet or not. half of who i talk to say yes, half say no

 

[WJPearce]

I think it was more "jet" than anything else. The piston engine replaced the turbine section of a conventional jet engine. The piston engine drove the compressor stage to bring air into the fuselage and compress it. The compressor stage was much more than a conventional propeller. I believe you had fixed inlet guide vanes followed by a three-stage compressor. In a text that I have, it states the stator blade pitch was variable in flight and the rotor blade pitch was ground adjustable. The air then passed through a radiator, around the piston engine, and toward the back of the aircraft where there was an "afterburner" type devise that injected and ignited fuel.

It was not a turbojet, or a fanjet, or a propjet. It was a motorjet. If you look at the cutaway linked below I think you will see that it is much more like a jet than anything else. Just view the entire fuselage as the "engine" and everything in it the internals. You have a compressor stage, the turbine (engine) which turns the compressor stage, and the afterburner.

http://information2share.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/caproni-campini-cc-2.jpg

But hey, that's just my opinion.

 

[wuzak]

It has been described as a thermojet.

The original prototype had the ducted fan powered by a small radial engine (less than 1000hp). The heat from the engine added to the thrust of the air from the compressor, then they also had the afterburner.

When I looked at the photo linked above I thought the burner would be lit all the time - it would seem this is not the case.

 

[Elmas]

The ancestor.....

 

[Siegfried]

we all know the campini N.1 was a propellerless airplane, but sources clash on the definition of the plane. some say jet powered, some say the engine wasnt really a jet. can someone finally tell me in a professional manner what the N.1 is? if its not a jet, then what do you call it?

It's a jet, however it is not a turbo-jet because it lacks a turbine as the compressor is driven by a piston engine. Had campini installed a better piston engine with a two speed surpercharger instead of no supercharger at all the Campini might have show extraordinary performance.

I regard it as a jet as the reaction liberated the aircraft from mach and compressibillity effects.