Talk:Rolls-Royce Welland

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.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Infobox image[edit]

The turbojet on the picture is not the Welland, it has no "reverse flow" combustion chambers. Kaboldy (talk) 04:53, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, it is captioned as 'a Rover W2B/26 preserved at the Midland Air Museum' just below, one of the development engines mentioned in the text. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph title[edit]

'Merger of Rover with Rolls-Royce'

A curious form of words to describe a straight swap. 86.181.115.142 (talk) 10:22, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A.I.D.[edit]

< the Air Inspection Department (A.I.D.) >

in full, the Aeronautical Inspection Directorate or, more formally, the Directorate of Aeronautical Inspection

86.185.70.165 (talk) 22:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Problems[edit]

< Taxi tests were started by test pilot Jerry Sayer on 10 July, 1940 >

This seems rather early; in fact, impossibly early. Should it be 1941, perhaps?

86.3.108.41 (talk) 02:36, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SFC wrong?[edit]

The fuel consumption figure, (0.1141 kg/kN/hr), must surely be wrong? With a max thrust of 7kN, 0.1141 kg/kN/hr would give less than 1kg/hr at full thrust. With even a small 100kg fuel tank, we'd have more than 4 days of endurance. Surely impossible? Avl (talk) 18:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Rolls-Royce Welland. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100131015440/http://www.enginehistory.org/r-r_w2b.htm to http://www.enginehistory.org/r-r_w2b.htm

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: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:37, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Note 2 in lede[edit]

Removed unsourced note as incorrect/misleading eg:

"Rover straight-through made possible by Nimonic", this configuration was chosen long before Nimonic available, ie 9 months before first run in March 1942. Nimonic not usable til late 1942 (Brooks "Vikings at Waterloo").

"Whittle originally devised reverse flow due to poor turbine material properties", the rotor assembly originated with the first experimental unit (straight through combustion chamber) and was carried over with the first single counterflow combustion chamber (no money to do anything else) and "preserved with the 10 combustion chambers to avoid serious modifications to the rotor assembly" (James Clayton Lecture).

"reverse flow chosen to counter very limited properties of turbine materials when engine designed" Each engine variant was designed using assumptions/calculations for attainable compressor and turbine efficiencies and combustion performance and material properties. "The turbine blade Stayblade material was good enough on this basis but not as it turned out because the efficiences had been optimistic and combustion development troubled eg bad outlet temperature distribution" ("Jet" book by Whittle).Pieter1963 (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

NGTE did not exist at that point[edit]

"Reheat development had started at the National Gas Turbine Establishment (NGTE) in 1943."

This is not possible, as the NGTE did not exist, officially at least, until 1946. It's predecessor, Power Jets (Research and Development) Ltd, was formed in 1944. So reheat was developed either by the original Power Jets Ltd., or the RAE Turbine Division. Anyone have a ref that clarifies? Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:42, 7 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]