zlacker

The next steps for Airbus' big bet on open rotor engines

submitted by CGMthr+(OP) on 2026-02-03 15:31:40 | 99 points 86 comments
[view article] [source] [go to bottom]

NOTE: showing posts with links only show all posts
◧◩
21. nickff+dQ[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 18:54:26
>>zabzon+JH
This website has some nice explanations and GIFs: https://s2.smu.edu/propulsion/Pages/variations.htm
◧◩◪
28. txru+SX[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 19:25:54
>>dcrazy+DN
Southwest 1380[0] is a case where the cowling didn't quite contain the thrown rotor blade.

They were very lucky that only one person died.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southwest_Airlines_Flight_1380

◧◩◪
40. pedroc+ma1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 20:21:33
>>Gibbon+F31
Another advantage is you can place the fans all along the wing getting you better stall resistance as the flow doesn't detach as easily. There's already a prototype of a hybrid plane that does this:

https://www.electra.aero/

◧◩
46. danpar+DH1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 23:15:16
>>inhuma+7l
Reminded me of this: https://youtu.be/j973645y5AA?si=QJrNJe0gT-zwpElD

Seems like quite an engineering challenge with this new design...

47. Galxea+7I1[view] [source] 2026-02-03 23:18:48
>>CGMthr+(OP)
Not clear to me from the article - what's the different between an 'open rotor' engine and a turboprop (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turboprop)? At face value, both seem to be jet engines with propellers used on single-aisle planes?
◧◩
51. JumpCr+jL1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 23:36:40
>>ggm+BI1
> I am unsure all visible fans on modern jets on the spool couple directly to the turbine

They exist now [1][2]. The general term is geared turbofans.

If you want to mentally unfuck it a bit, the major variables are: combustion type (internal or turbine), gearing or not, ducting or not and bypass ratio. (Compression ratio and number of blades can come too.)

When one of these changes substantially, you get a change in engine type. When it changes a little bit, you get a blur.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pratt_%26_Whitney_PW1000G

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Trent#UltraFan

◧◩◪
57. ggm+aP1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-03 23:56:43
>>CGMthr+hO1
This one is the one I have a hard copy of from 1954:

"jet" -the story of a pioneer by Sir Frank Whittle

https://www.amazon.com.au/Jet-Story-Pioneer-Pioneers-Aviatio...

◧◩◪◨
59. idontw+sQ1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 00:03:53
>>JumpCr+aN1
https://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/22316/why-do-tu...
60. havalo+MR1[view] [source] 2026-02-04 00:10:49
>>CGMthr+(OP)
I knew I had seen this before growing up as a child, Popular Science, 1985:

https://books.google.com/books?id=rgAAAAAAMBAJ&lpg=PA69&dq=t...

◧◩◪◨
61. jagged+NT1[view] [source] [discussion] 2026-02-04 00:24:01
>>pedroc+ma1
You can go one further and just mount a squirrel cage fan in place of or on the front or top of the wing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FanWing

Or go further and use rotating drums: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flettner_airplane

Or you can use a horizontal-axis style helicopter rotor with variable pitch, and it gets you omnidirectional thrust (VTOL) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclogyro

There are a lot of interesting possible alternate histories (only requiring a few tweaks to physics) where fixed wings never really work and horizontal rotorcraft dominate, especially in a world where lighter-than-air craft are common - something like a hybrid between a zeppelin and a paddleboat.

[go to top]