Talk:Junkers Jumo 004

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.
WikiProject Aviation / Aircraft engines (Rated C-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 
 
This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.
WikiProject Germany (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
Checklist icon
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Technology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Technology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 

Assessment[edit]

Nice article, if it had inline citations or any references it might be GA class. As it is, it doesn't meet all of the B-class criteria. Pity. --Colputt 00:48, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:46, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

Unit confusion[edit]

The article on specific fuel consumption (SFC) states that SFC for jet engines can be statet either in kg/(kN*h) (as the article on the BMW 003 does) and kg/(kN*km) (by dividing by airspeed in km/h). Apparently, this article does neither (it uses kg/km/h), so one has to ask: What is the SFC for the Jumo 004, and in what units? Does anyone have sources? Laschatzer (talk) 13:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Add this link?[edit]

I found http://www.enginehistory.org/German/Me-262/Me262_Engine_2.pdf extremely useful, maybe it should be under external links? 85.196.101.178 (talk) 20:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Design and Development[edit]

"but it also had a smaller cross-section, important for a high-speed aircraft design."

Smaller than what? It is not clear (to me anyway) what the comparison is being made with.Dawright12 (talk) 09:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Smaller than an engine with a centrifugal compressor (like the Rolls-Royce Derwent as an example) I think it means. I can't easily clarify it as the whole section is unsourced. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:32, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Design and Development[edit]

"Vibration problems with the compressor blades delayed the program at this point, until a new stator design by Max Bentele solved the problem.[citation needed] The original alloy compressor blades were replaced with steel ones and with the new stators in place...."

I will clarify the above statements after reading Max Bentele's autobiography and the detailed design anlysis of the engine in "Jet Propulsion Progress" by Neville and Silsbee, 1948. The statements use the terms blades and stators interchangeably which is confusing since they are more commonly known as rotating compressor blades and stationary stator vanes. The vibration problem was with the stators. Bentele dooesn't say what the fix was but does say the stators were originally cantilevered from the outside which suggests this was changed. Moving to the other book, production engines examined after the war had stator rings consisting of inner and outer shroud rings so presumably the inner ring was the cantilever fix. As far as material goes not all the stator stages were steel. The first 2 (or 3 in early production engines) were aluminium. The 2/3 Al stages is at variance with the later statement in the article "The four front stators were constructed from steel alloy". This apparent contradiction may be explained by the statement in the book "Considerable variation, both in materials and methods of construction, was found in this (compressor) section." Whether steel was also a vibration fix for some stages is not clear.

" and the problem was solved by raising the blades' natural frequency"

Further on, this statement will also be clarified as it refers to turbine blades.Pieter1963 (talk) 23:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Incidentally I've just noticed the "enginehistory" link has the same words as in the above book "JPP".Pieter1963 (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)