![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||
|
The second bullet point refers initially to N1 and Ng, but then goes on to give an example of Np. I would presume that this should have been Ng? Also, from a minor editing perspective should "N1" be N1? Chalky ( talk) 05:15, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
Either the topic is combustive engines or it is jet engines consuming air. If it's the former, then nuclear power engines are offtopic (fair enough), if the latter, then they're on topic (again fair enough).
I don't really see how you can have it both ways, but please feel free to continue insulting and reverting out of hand anyone that makes any good-faith changes to the article. Rememberway ( talk) 04:17, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
The total lack of sources in the article make it very difficult to verify the content being discussed here. Before moving forward, I suggest both of you put aside the current dispute and focus on including reliable sources to support your edits. Wikifan12345 ( talk) 00:38, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
I propose rewriting this section with credible references. Only one statement has a reference and that statement doesn't match the reference (variable geometry v fixed flow-vanes). If it did it would still be incorrect, perhaps because the reference is a translation from French and has some awkward wording.
None of the other statements are referenced and are, I believe after plumbing the depths of the internet as well as traditional texts, etc,incorrect.
What is 'largely a compressor-assisted ramjet'? What are the variable geometry vanes? What reference says 80%? Is Specific Impulse commonly used for comparing aero engines? What technical report/ paper/jet propulsion text uses, and hence defines, the term turbo-ramjet or combined ramjet/turbojet for this engine installation and which makes it applicable to this engine? Pieter1963 ( talk) 21:53, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
This section seems identical to that in the article "Components of jet engines". I don't think having the same stuff in more than one article is a good thing. If one gets improved the other loses out. Any ideas on how to control changes? If not I propose reducing the section to a shadow of its former self with its main strength being,of course, its reference to main article "Components of jet engines". Pieter1963 ( talk) 17:45, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
As with the "Major components" section this one is a copy from article "Jet engine performance". The same issue arises with controlling changes so I propose taking out the detailed explanations and leaving a much shorter general comment. Pieter1963 ( talk) 17:58, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Hello, a table listing current jet engines would be a good thing for comparisons. A good basis would be the jet engines list from Jane's All the World's Aircraft 2005-2006 that I put in a table as I did in Turboprop#Current engines. The List of aircraft engines is too big with many piston engines and defunct engines. Where do you think this list would be more useful? in Turbofan, in Airbreathing jet engine, in a new List of jet engines or List of current jet engines? Or split the List of aircraft engines in propeller/jets, currrent/ancient? thanks for your interest -- Marc Lacoste ( talk) 16:00, 24 April 2015 (UTC)
Why isn't this merged with "jet engine"? I don't see anything on here that's not covered on there, what is here is very basic and disorganized, and I don't remember ever seeing a link to this page on any of the other pages on jet engines, either in general or specifically. They all link to jet engine, if not to a specific page such as turbojet or turbofan. I don't see how "air breathing jet" is sufficiently different to merit its own page...almost all this is covered on jet engine, and what isn't, is covered on turbojet and turbofan. IF it is going to stay, it could use a lot of work. I did some to the opening section before I realized that I was probably wasting my time. .45Colt 06:40, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
I am am aware of this. I just don't see why a separate page is necessary in the light of the fact that the page on jet engines (including rockets and everything) has more info on airbreathing jets than this page does. Since we already have a page for turbojet, turbofan, pulse jet, ramjet, etc, I don't see why this page is necessry. It's sole function appears to be to say that airbreathing jet engines are engines that breath air (and it didn't really say much about that), such as how they differ from rocket engines. Everything else is covered on other pages. Maybe if it gave less specific info about turbojets, etc, and limited itself to explaining the basics concepts of a airbreathing jet engine, it would make more sense. Although that info can be just as easily included as a section in jet engine, since the basics are simple, and also described on the pages for each jet engine. I mean, basically all that can be said on the subject is that rockets provide their own mass flow in their fuel, while airbreathing jets use air as the mass flow. Everything else is specific to each type of airbreathing jet engine. .45Colt 09:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Although now that I think about it, this could provide a handy place to compare turbjets and turbofans, etc, to avoid talking too much about turbofans on turbojet pages, etc. .45Colt 09:20, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Airbreathing jet engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 09:29, 6 October 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Airbreathing jet engine. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 19:28, 28 June 2017 (UTC)