This Engine Will Change Aviation Forever 

I worked in aviation, Navy & commercial for 45 years. The changes in everything - engines & airframes is AWESOME. I'm so proud to have been a part of it. To the younger kids out there, get into this field. It's growing faster than any weed in your front yard !

I was a student at GE Engine school in 1987. This technology was already explored and their engines, the Unducted Fan engines were already in their in house museum in Evendale Ohio. Commercially unviable because of the inherent noise.

You started with one subject and without completing it you took us into another subject.. 😅😂

Incredible! Thank you for the report.

I spent 20yrs. working in aviation and have since retired. I miss being a part of the processes shown in this video. Its a different way of life, you have to perform at a higher level than your everyday Joe. Anyway, I least I can say I've done that. Shout out to my fellow A&P's....IYKYK.

Excellent vids.

I don't think its about dethroning anyone, its about many things, weather robustness, reliability, economy and other factors only Airlines need to think about, never the less good film.

My late Dad was an Engineer on the CF6 in Evandale and it is wonderful to read these accolades. Thank you. Does anyone remember Myron (Mike) Petersen?

They have been working on the unducted fan engine for a long time. However this is one of the reasons why Boeing said that they would not be putting out a completely new design for a few years. Plus the wing designs are all over the place witch means a lot of expensive experiments to find speed and fuel efficiency.

Excellent video commentary!

Regarding past attempts at this that had experienced too much noise/vibrations … were they using winglet type blade tips which both improve efficiency and greatly reduce the noise inducing tip vortex?

GE has been flogging this since the 80’s

You say the second set of blades are fixed yet the footage definitely shows them rotating.

We used to operate Boeing 747's with both the RR RB211 as well as the GE CF6. Hands down, the CF6 was quicker to start and far less complicated than the RR counterpart. We also had CF6 engines on our 767's which were nothing but fantastic- reliable and efficient in every way.

Nice, How about Exptotic Alloys and Metals, and the machines that require them.Their cost and the expertise neccessary in their creation, also history of their discovery. May need multiple vids. Enjoying your vids, try to keep em short. I can never get enough interesting info.

It’s been 6 months and I’m still waiting for this engine to revolutionise aviation. What happened?

I thought the factory was in Derby ?? But what do I know ... I'm Welsh 😂😂

As a life long Machinist this is sexy cool

I thought I knew everything..but I didnt realise RR engines contained a Turban - nice to see diversity in action.

The city in the UK where the RR Trent XWB engines are made, is Derby. It's pronounced *_DAR-bee._*

UHB, Ultra High Bypass was what they called these engines back in the 70's, it's nice to see that they have come full circle to fly soon.

Would be interesting how much share the other manufacturers have. There are definitely more than PW, GE, RR and CFM. Despite in the video they amount 100%.

The Rolls-Royce _UltraFan_ is more a technology demonstrator than anything else. The very fact it can be scaled down to a small, 25,000 thrust (111.2 kN) thrust engine means Rolls-Royce is looking at the possibility of a smaller engine that could be fitted to the Airbus A220 or Embraer E195-E2 airliners, essentially offering a second engine choice for these two airliner models. And Rolls-Royce might be thinking of offer the smaller _UltraFan_ engine for even the 737 MAX.

Awesome.

No mention of the GTF Pratt makes? Over 20% fuel reduction and over 70% noise reduction and already in use now.

What would be the sound noise level?

UNBELIEVABLE!!! WOW

Interesting , Thank you . I hope they work

Cool looking anyway!😎👍

This was tried on the Beech Starship. Among other issues, the excessive noise from the supersonic prop tips ultimately doomed the concept The Starship was actually responsible for noise restrictions at airfields that previously didn’t have any

The fan duct, beside directing the airflow, protects the plane from blade separation and puncture of the cabin. These new engines will have no such protection.

The main problem is as a new generation is developed you learn new information throughout the process,where as a whole concept seems to appear from the development process,that in its self births a new dimension what also needs to be developed..round and round we go

Is every engine tested with the water and the freeze type of test, or is that type of testing done during development only?

what about torroidal propellers? can this design be imporved by using torridal bladed propellers?

Most of this video is on the XWB not the Safran engine. 2min on the RISE engine rest on XWB. misleading title.

Are they quieter are they going to propel the aircraft or pull the aircraft?

I would like to see an A350 neo with the ultrafan.

So pleased that they all need propellors!

Merci, en verifiant CFM je vient seulement d'apprendre ce que veux dire CFM ( moteur CF56 de GE + M56 de snecma = CFM) d'ailleurs aujourd'hui meme si SNECMA est devenu SAFRAN ça reste comme çà car ce sont des contractions de noms de produits. GE and SAFRAN seems to be 50/50 wich is fun to see franco-US motorists in aircraft competition. I am far from being a specialist is the RR ultrafan just larger than LEAPs ? Or is it technologically totaly"new" ?? ( I just understood larger) thx Of course because i am french i réd than CFM rise was design by SAFRAN in 2008 so it's french idea ?? Or not ? Thanks

I believe the noise factor is the biggest drawback to unducted fan engines. Check out the 'Thunderschreech' X-plane with a supersonic propeller. It still holds the record for the loudest aircraft every flown!

Imagine a wait list on order. Specially on RR

i had safran at my school yesterday we had the chance to see this big boi in AR

This has been tried before. It was found that the noise from the counter-rotating fans was prohibitively loud....and at a very annoying frequency.

What surprises me is if they don’t put a cowling around the fan. It should improve the efficiency even if it had a significant gap between blade tip and cowling

Those Fan blades looked as sharp as a Butter knife ,almost.

They have to come up with an efficient way to de-ice the individual blades.

How exactly would the first engine give the airframe ANY protection if or when one or more of the blades fail.

They tried this in the 1980's, times were different then, tech has improved, etc. Perhaps this can happen now.

What amazing pieces of engineering! Incredible!

Thanks.

I imagine this will be EXTREMELY LOUD.

Very interesting video, but this title and the video sample was in reference to exactly 1m31s of this 10m11s video, with almost negligible information about the "engine that will change aviation forever."

It looks like a slice and dice machine!

U know government is too big when you have the people with the expertise having to get approval from bureaucrats with little to no knowledge of innovation

*_futuristic alloy_* what kind of compound is that?

It's no new idea to use prop-fans. If only they find a solution for the noise they are creating

Does it come with bolts?

What is the reduction in speed and altitude compared to a turbo fan. Maybe ok for short range Europe but not for international, Asia and US.

I also have a question about this technology,what amount of energy is involved at the by pass part of the engine, i ask because like most I am aware of how much heat is generated by a normal compressor. If the compressor was increased in size a little and made the purposely increase the air tempreture to a much higher rate then surely the bypass gases would contrubute more thrust without increasing the fuel consumption, after all, its what come out the back end that gives each engine its capability. The other part of the question is we are all aware that splitting water into the two seperate gases and then combining the two as a fuel generated a lot more temprature, is there not a way to improve the method of sepetating the two gases to a point where it is enought to run an engine Then the cost would certainly be a lot less plus tberecwould be no polusion what so ever, and as an added bonus the engine would give a completely clean burn taking a lot more care of the engine itself, plus it would mean there would be no flamable fuel at all possibly making planes a lot safer in the event of a forced landing. I am sure that the technology of hydro fuel cells has come a long way it just a question of developing a really efficient fuel cell that is notbtoo heavy.

This article mentioned shipping by truck/rail or if overseas by ship or by Beluga. What about the 747 with the 5th pylon for delivering an engine into remote locations? It's the only 747 with 5 engines. I believe it is still flying.

This is my highschool science project back in 94...

OK, hold up.... there's a problem with something said in this video that hopefully the 'propeller-beanied' among you can help to figure out: At 7:13 the Narrator says "They secure the engine with 50,000 pounds of thrust on two mounting brackets...." Say Watt??? OK, let's see: That statement can't be a reference to the engine itself (by stating it's propulsive thrust numbers) as the XWB produces >90,000 "pounds of thrust". So, is he referring to the amount of 'torque', measured in lb/ft, that is applied to the fasteners that secure the engine to the two mounting brackets? (If so, the term "thrust" has no business being used in that statement!) But 50,000 lb/ft of torque ??? That wrench and 'dog-bone' they are using is only about 5 ft. long! That would require them to apply 10,000 lbs. of weight to the end of that wrench to generate 50,000 lb/ft of torque! Something is off....🤔

It comes down to to 3 things. 1) Politics, 2)Fuel efficiency, Net Thrust/fuel burn rate. 3)Serviceability (maintenance and reliability and safety). To win an engine manufacture needs to nail all of these so as to show an economic advantage to the Airline for there engine. Not much point producing the best plane or the best engine, in Russia or Brazil or Japan, if no one buys it due to politics.

Counter rotating high speed machete-like blades. I ain't going anywhere near something like that! Nightmares.

So the video is mostly about how an engine is made with a brief mention of the CFM engine at the start...

You spelled Derby wrong.

No they don't do an explosive confinement test during the manuafacture process. They do it during the design process. 🤣"It can't be delivered just yet" If you do those destructive tests it will never get delivered lol.

1:16 - this is just a turboprop, the GE Catalyst (I worked on it recently)

So aviation started in 1903 with a propellor turned by a small gasoline engine and the future of aviation is a propellor turned by a turbine. Got it.

NOW if we could just just figure out a way to keep fuselage plugs on the plane. Wouldn’t it be nice to have ALL the plane stay together on the flight.

Turbin blades instead of turbine blades... brilliant!

Interesting, thank you. I would have thought, though, that in order for the prediction for the engine business worldwide to increase to come true, we'd need to avoid two things. The price of normal flights to be quite a bit lower than it is. Governments around the world being prohibited from banning (or very, very severely curtailing) international travel at the drop of a hat, with no discussion, in an alarmingly synchronized manner, when a virus (which we soon learn to be dramatically less damaging than is speculated) appears. I hope that we achieve those two necessary prerequisites for this business growth.

Why on the RISE is the second stage blade even there is the first place?

That engine looks like somethink from Ace Combat 7..

Slightly misleading. CFM is jointly owned by the US GE and the French Safran Aircraft Engines in a 50-50 ownership so all engines produced by CFM are joint ventures of these two companies.

They keep talking about the engine cost as soon as cost becomes a driver, speed of production comes into play and with speed comes mistakes.

The gear box is the big problem. No-one has managed to make a reliable gear box for counter-rotating duct-less fan engines.

Propfans have been in development for 40+ years now. That there isn't one operational serial built example shows the difficulties and complexities coming with it. If it comes at all I guess it will take another 5-10 more years.

DERBY....NOT DARBY. BUT IT IS PRONOUNCED LIKE DARBY.

it will be good for tu95. surely it cant be louder than existing propellers... right?

What about the noise level. I remember a Russian model produced unbelievable noise.

I remember hearing about this in the early 1990s and thinking, as a 9 year old, that’s lame. It failed. But maybe this one will work!?

What a weird narration. It went from the new amazing CFM to regurgitating the Rolles Royce engine video that has been on You Tube for years.

I loved always thoughts next-generation of

I think the design could be improved if they added a turbo encabulator, preferably on a base-plate of prefabulated aluminite

Se não me engano ja teve um motor desse com pás contra rotativa de um consórcio Brasil Argentina.

I read about it in 1988 they add the very short blades BUT it made way way too much noise was not as fast did get better MPG but this old stuff over 30 years old all air craft co. turned it down over the noise they said it was so loud that theres was not 1 us airport that would let it take off from speed loss was also very close to the fuel gain there was a gain but 8 or 9 % was not the 24% + that was planed it did get this + 24% but when add in the speed loss it was less then 10% gain 2

ITS A TURBO PROP, BEEN AROUND FOR 71 YEARS, THEY PLACE THE REDUCTION GEARBOX MID ENGINE.

I’d like to take a moment to recognize our super computational computers, scientists, and AI overlords for bringing these new technologies to light.

The fixed rotor section was used by Charles Parsons in his steam turbines, it is nothing new....

العمل والنشاطات والخبرات والتدريب والعمل والنشاطات

great vid, but lol @ 'Darby'

Appel pushes down pretty fast

" Sharp as a chefs knife" 😅 Eh no. The assembly engineers would have no fingers.

$32,000,000? That’s $2000 a pound! Do these ever get stolen?

Strut braced wings and unducted fans. Next technological breakthrough, the double stacked wing.

Hello from “Darbyshire”

I would love to see what rolls Royce could accomplish with the budget of general electric or other big American companies

Whew till one of those bad boys throws a blade

It also makes Julienne fries.