messiach
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2016
- Messages
- 1,373
- Reaction score
- 20
- Country
- Location
Yes.
No but DEEC does reduce responce time to 5s. I think i have suggested somewhere development of annular ignition chamber utilizing extremely high operative temperatures reducing smoke. DEEC like controls are essential requirement for Hi-T ignition chambers.
DEEC like variants exists. Essential req. for smokeless tubofan amongst other things. Its a 70s phenomenon jointly collaborated by PW, lawrence-livermore & Nasa.
We'll see when we reach the bridge.
is that english?
No but DEEC does reduce responce time to 5s. I think i have suggested somewhere development of annular ignition chamber utilizing extremely high operative temperatures reducing smoke. DEEC like controls are essential requirement for Hi-T ignition chambers.
Also, is it correct to say that DEEC is better because it gives the flexibility for manual override, if and when needed?
DEEC like variants exists. Essential req. for smokeless tubofan amongst other things. Its a 70s phenomenon jointly collaborated by PW, lawrence-livermore & Nasa.
Lastly, is DEEC included on RD-93 by default or is it a Pakistani addition? I am asking because from Google it seems DEEC is a pretty much American innovation, so how come we have it on a Russian engine?
We'll see when we reach the bridge.
Many thanks, madam. Is it correct to deduce that Pakistan's NG fighter may be twin engine?