4 ms·
You are confusing combustion efficiency with thermal efficiency. Having a combustion efficiency of 100% does not mean that 100% of the energy stored in the prop
by montenegrohugo 8y ago
You are confusing combustion efficiency with thermal efficiency. Having a combustion efficiency of 100% does not mean that 100% of the energy stored in the propellant is transformed into kinetic energy (the thing the plane is interested in).
The ICE engine with highest thermal efficiency reaches just 50%: The Wärtsilä-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged 2-stroke Diesel [1]
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_efficiency https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_efficiency
- tim333 8y agoThat's quite an engine - I just looked up a picture of it https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQv24mYUMAAmvQs.jpg https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DQv24mYUMAAmvQs.jpg
- aunty_helen 8y agoThe latest F1 tech has started to exceed this using their jet ignition system. https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/131772/mercedes-engine-hits-remarkable-dyno-target https://www.autosport.com/f1/news/131772/mercedes-engine-hit... https://www.enginelabs.com/news/f1-tech-what-is-turbulent-jet-ignition/ https://www.enginelabs.com/news/f1-tech-what-is-turbulent-je...
- aerodude 8y agoCombined cycle gas turbines are actually higher efficiency than this. The current state-of-the-art is somewhere around 63% thermal efficiency.
- montenegrohugo 8y agoTrue, but those are usually not on a moving vehicle and have the luxury of being as heavy and big as desired. Engines on ships instead are limited by weight and size, engines on cars/trucks a little bit more, engines on planes much more and at the edge of technology we have the engines on rockets which have to be as light as humanly possible whilst still providing high thrust-specific fuel consumption