0
$\begingroup$

As I understand it, turbojet thrust decreases both with altitude due to rarefied air reducing massflow, and airspeed due to a smaller speed increase between intake and exhaust relative to the airframe. However aircraft designed for sustained supercruise such as Concorde or Blackbird had intakes that used various amounts of ram-effect pressure recovery, so I was wondering how much that would offset the effects of being fast and high i.e. what was Concorde's mach 2 max thrust compared compared to sea level dry thrust, and/or the Blackbird's mach 3.2 turboramjet thrust compared to take-off wet thrust?

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

For Concorde, takeoff thrust:weight was 1:0.373. At cruise, the Concorde had a lift:drag ratio of 7:1. At cruise, thrust = drag. So cruise thrust is 1/7 = 0.1429

So, cruise:ASL is 0.14(rounded down for climb fuel burn):0.373 = around 1:3.8

For the SR-71, takeoff thrust:weight is 0.44:1. Using the Kuchemann supersonic L/D formula, we get

4(Mach(=3)+3)/Mach(=3) =1:8

Now this looks too high. And running this formula for Concorde gave 10:1. So, having no better option (yet), I simply took 1:6 as the value. This would give us a cruise thrust:weight of around 1/6:1 = 0.167:1

0.167/0.44 = around 1:3.8 (again?)

The figures for the SR-71 may well be wrong.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.