I would guess, that N1, N2, EGT and Oil Temp (or 3 of them) would all exceed their continious operation limits for some period of time to check it doesn't explode.
too small clearance between the engine airfoil and ground at that 747 test. is this engine was intended to swap its former two cf6/jt9 with this one (as some sources wrote)?
note that if additional 2X GE90-115B were mounted on the test 747 they could produce more thrust than the 6X D18 Lotarev turbofans on the largest aircraft in the world- the An225.
This engine represents how strong the competition between Aribus and Boeing is. If i remember correctly, this engine was only made for the 777 so boeing could make the 777 two engined, beating the A340. It is still a true testament to the GE engineers though, but thank god for healthy competition :D.
My property touches this test facility. I think GE has around 9000 acres. Let me tell you, when they engage full power, all of Adams county rumbles. I think they are testing the GEnx 2b right now, it roars!!
how the hell do they keep it running while ingesting 4.5 tons of water/min? You would think that amount of water would make it impossible to keep flame going (so to speak).
The primary compressor blade hub is designed to shed water away from the turbine inlet (and hence, away from the combustion process inside the turbine) and out through the high bypass fan ducts surrounding the turbine instead.
Salemcripple: about 80% of the flow bypasses the core, where the combustion is occurring. The water is ejected through centrifugal force because the air has a slight swirl to it after the fan. (This swirl is corrected by exit guide vanes) Thus, most of the water isn't going through, and whatever does go through, is evaporated. Compressor exit temperatures are about 700 deg F, and combustion temperatures are above 2000 deg F!
The black ball is used as part of the acoustic testing of the engine, to make sure that it passes dB output. I can't remember if the black ball is for ensuring that air intake is even, or if the ball actually contains the recording device. Can't quite remember.
the black ball is to lower the noise and to also protect the surrounding area cause they did a triple red line test so it ran at full power for about an 1hr or o so the engine can over heat and do some serious damage so they use that doe to catch any flying debris
the power....not quite understanding "thrust" as it relates to power measuring as i am familiar (hp/tq), and the high pitch whine...well....it has to do with power...with the whine of a jet engine like that of a turbo, it makes power....boils down to the phsycology of 'man' as we know wanting to be the strongest and fastest to be 'fertile' to women and thats what attracts them right?
N1 and N2 represent the speed of the two stages of the engine. N1 is the low pressure compressor/turbine and fan, and N2 is the high pressure compressor and turbine. N1 and N2 run independently on most engines.
when GE flight tested the engine on the flying test bed, they put the other three engines at flight idle and then GE90 kept the plane flying at the same airspeed. very crazy
What a wonder of engineering. It is amazing what this engine underwent to to see if it would perform. And perform it did. No wonder GE is a leader in this technology.
Well, we can't tell just yet, since the GEnx has not seen flight on the 787 just yet, nut supposedly, the GEnx is supposed to be a more improved version of the GE90 and it uses some of it's technology.
They're both amazing engines. Personally I think the GE90-115B is better if you really want range, power and speed. The GEnx has a lower thrust value and you'll need more throttle to keep the speed and that may reduce range, but since the fuel efficiency is higher than the "115B" it might not make that big of difference. They both have their ups and downs, but personally I think the 115B is better
Maudale: A block is a grouping. Its an organizational, documentation thing. Its nomenclature/jargon. In this case it could refer to block/group/set of tests and or it refers to the type of test (stand). Much like engine braking refers to a type of test; a block test can refer to a type of test and stand and system that is often used to test the thrust of aviation engines.
Amazing. Truly amazing. This engine has been a key factor in the overwhelming success of the 777-300ER. Boeing and General Electric put together great teams that put together a work of art. Love it.
mmtlibra67 : Im not sure but I dont think so. I dont think it would be certified or practical. I think this was considered a test/experimental configuration with special temporary licensing. I dont think it could be licensed for commercial or military use without a lot of time and money involved and even then I dont think it would be certifiable because I think the engine clearance is too close to the ground; thusly there is little safety margin.
Hey, 1 question.. at 3:57 there is a destructive Test, now do they do that in a prop propelled aircraft? or are we just S.O.L? lmao.. i was talking 2 a guy who just did his "DoT accident investigation course" said that his instructor DOES NOT sit beside the engines because of possible damage from prop/fan blades.
There is a FAA/JAR certification test, called Fan Blade Out,in which is simulated the rupture of fan blade in a cell (not with the engine mounted in the airplane)to verify the that engine is capable to support this event
Correct, no commercial 747 ever had this engine mounted. The 747 shown is GE aviation's flying test bed. It is used to test engines in flight instead of on the ground and the mounting hardware is all specially designed.
Fun thing: The first gas-turbine prototype was finished in 1903! And that was by `Jens William Eagidius Elling in Norway. I`ve seen the engine for real.. But it was very difficult to make it work properly, and overheating was the biggest problem, until the WW2. Titanium-parts were used, ironichal to be found near the inventor, witch didn`t find what material to use..
1872 - Dr. F. Stolze designed the first true gas turbine engine. His engine used a multistage turbine section and a flow compressor. This engine never ran under its own power.
I didn't think Titanium started to be used significantly in aircraft until the cold war about 1950s.
I think most of the cold war that the use of Titanium in aircraft was pretty much hushed up. The soviets were the main supplier and it was feared that if it became common knowledge that Titanium was benefiting US military aircraft, that the soviets might try to block the sale of it.
I see. It is a bit like television. Several inventions to make it work. The very first attempt Egidius Elling did of his idea, was 40 years before the Wright-brithers took off with their "Flyer" in 1903..
These engines are to big for a 747.didn't you see that one engine on the 747 was nearly touching the ground? unless if they add height to the landing gear, now that would perfect for a 747.
shadowmorman: This engine was built for the 777. However it was decided since the engine was a new type and unproven it would be safer to test and do preliminary certification of the engine on a 747 with 3 known and certified engines that could easily fly it in safely if the engine failed.
Oh, yeah that makes sense. So a co worker of mine told me that the 777 has the record longest flight on one fueling... is that true? We work on an air ramp so this is bound to come back up.
The GE90 has a 9:1 bypass ratio, meaning 90% of the water doesn't even make it to the core where the combustor is located. As for the water that does enter the core, I'll let you figure out what happens to water when it comes into contact with a combustion chamber at over 2000 degrees F. :)
Well, the engine still compress the air better than most turbofan engines with 13 stages of compressors. Also there are fans with a blade, and no pistons in the engine so technically its a turbofan/jet engine.
jeez i allways imagined a 747 with 777 engineS 2 bad this one only has one tho it would be way awesome if it had 777 on all 4s and i think it would feel wierd 2 fly with one engine thats way more powerful than others
You forgot to mention about them using a micro to check for imperfections or miniscule cracks in the material and in the fuselodge. I don't think they use microsoft in their computers. At least I hope not. And you would think that 777 would have independent systems or at least a back up in case of failure like that. Seen it on how it's made. And seconds to disaster.
love this engine with the rolls royce rb11 in a close second. The 777 that "lost engine power" sounds rather fishy to me. the ge90 115b is among the most reliable and powerful jet engines on the planet, i am waiting on the final report, how much do you want to bet it was pilot error?
1291918: In a way I wish it was pilot error. However judging what I have heard on the grapevine, it sounds more likely there was some sort of electrical, software, hardware, sensor or problem. The British Airways Flight 38 777that augured in at Heathrow had a Rolls Royce in it. I think the pilots might be heroes for minimizing the crash.
ATFSCRASH: you have no idea how i feel now about what you said to me, I am a pilot, i place almost complete faith in the designers and engineers of these crazy machines we fly, i thought the 777 was an untouchable aircraft, in every aspect, safety, reliability, economy etc. I fly rotor, but if you asked me to trust my life to the 777, before i would have said yes in a heart beat now i'm not so sure! Please god let this be a human error!
1291918: In a way it might be nice if it was pilot error, because then it would probably just be an isolated incident. However there are some things that suggest this may be an issue with the aircraft, thusly it might very well affect many aircraft in service and in production. However though this is a tragedy, there is a silver lining to it. There were no deaths, and injuries were relatively minor and few.
1291918: There should be an abundance of great evidence that will hopefully make it fairly easy to find a root cause. If there are aircraft in service and development that have flaws, hopefully this investigation can lead to improvements that eliminate flaws before more crashes occur.
You are very right indeed! thankfully there was no loss of life, and as you said, the abundance of crash data will be overwhelming. We can only hope that this will be the wakeup call for boeing. There safety record is less than reputable. Just take a look at the original 737s 100-300 most of them crashed, I still get jitters when flying on the 737 800 ver. now the 777 is falling out of the sky, can't they do anything right?
1291918 "There safety record is less than reputable"
I would have to disagree with you on that. The only real major competitor to Boeing right now is Airbus. Airbus is a relatively new kid on the block, most of its aircraft are younger. Boeing is an old hand, that has a lot more aircraft in service and many of them have a lot more hours and years on them.
I can't doubt you on that, beoing has been around since the 1920s and airbus, the 1970s. Basically boeing was stuck with the learning curve of aviation the "trial and error phase". Its only logical that they would have a greater number of accidents. But since the 5th of july 1972 the 737 has killed 2667+ people. i shit you not. This is a very conservative figure. I weeded out those that were not entirely the aircraft's fault. I simply cannot say that they have a good track record.
1291918: Once again you are making an unfair dissimilar comparison. Boeing has a lot more aircraft in service and have been in service a lot longer than Airbus. Since Boeing has produced a lot more aircraft and has been in service a lot longer a lot more of its aircraft are in the hands of budget airlines and second and third world nations with lower safety and maintenance standards; so it's obvious and logical that Boeing would have more crashes than Airbus.
Again i agree with you, third world nations, operating high maintenance aircraft, IS a recipe for disaster or for the very least some sort of mishap will occure during the aircraft's operation. This now brings us to a new argument. Should we chastise the makers of the aircraft or the operators or both?
1291918: If it was poor maintenance because of cost cutting measures to farm out the work, then I think the responsibility should be shared depending on the circumstances. I think if a parent company (British Airways) decides to save money by farming out work to shady contractors that they both should share part of the blame.
This conversation is getting very interesting, i'm a bit busy at the moment, I have so many different possibilites to discuss, I will respond to you tomorrow, I'm Glad i found an intellingent person on youtube (for a change) :)
There is a fine line between, engineering malpractice and manufacturer defect. Who is to blame when an aircraft crashes? The pilots, engineers, or manufacturer? Maybe all? How can we tell for sure. If the manufacturer does not address weaknesses in there aircraft, that are prone to failure they are in fact contributing towards critical failure in flight.
1291918: What matters is the evidence. In order to determine liability first you have to find what failed and why. Then you have to determine who was responsible for what failed and why. It's not as simple as you might think. It might require some analysis of procedures,policies and of contracts. And of course things will probably be muddied up by the lawyers.
one of the best engines man has ever produced... long live and more power to GENERAL ELECTRIC AIRCRAFT ENGINES
jeckdlc 1 year ago 6
What does triple-redline mean? Also, what is that weird ball thing that is covering the engine intake during that test.
Xboxlivemgear 1 year ago
I would guess, that N1, N2, EGT and Oil Temp (or 3 of them) would all exceed their continious operation limits for some period of time to check it doesn't explode.
DarrylLMiles 1 year ago
nice
n310ea 1 year ago
Huge engine.
rb21122b 1 year ago
damn that engine is tough!!
lapulapu12345 1 year ago
too small clearance between the engine airfoil and ground at that 747 test. is this engine was intended to swap its former two cf6/jt9 with this one (as some sources wrote)?
and 2000+ C - is unbelievable EGT
serresjio 1 year ago
Damn that engine is one hell of an engineering feat. GE and Boeing FTW.
mikeycomputer 1 year ago
The GE on the 747 looks so big compared to the other engines
GE90 = Best engine
oliverman22 1 year ago
wow a 747 with a 777 engine
kingofmexico5268 2 years ago
is GE made by Boeing?
circa2football 2 years ago
are the military interested in these. YOu would of thought so considering the power they can produce
Lunarlaserranging 2 years ago
WOW what a great sound at 1:33
maxou5757 2 years ago
GE freakin rules!
maxou5757 2 years ago
note that if additional 2X GE90-115B were mounted on the test 747 they could produce more thrust than the 6X D18 Lotarev turbofans on the largest aircraft in the world- the An225.
urigotliv 2 years ago
When taking off in the 777, the first thing you notice is effortless, linear and strong but quiet acceleration. You're in the air in no time.
1PacificRedwood 2 years ago
Awesome!
I like that its made in America as well :)
gixx3r 2 years ago
This engine represents how strong the competition between Aribus and Boeing is. If i remember correctly, this engine was only made for the 777 so boeing could make the 777 two engined, beating the A340. It is still a true testament to the GE engineers though, but thank god for healthy competition :D.
av8james 2 years ago 12
777 has driven the A-340 out of business..
FORBAN2 2 years ago
That engine can swallow a 737. POWER!!!!!!!
wampaku2 2 years ago 5
easily man!... its almost twice as big!!
sohil486 2 years ago
My property touches this test facility. I think GE has around 9000 acres. Let me tell you, when they engage full power, all of Adams county rumbles. I think they are testing the GEnx 2b right now, it roars!!
pelagic6 2 years ago
thats not a jet engine. thats a monster
1967tuncay 2 years ago 4
does anyone else LOVE engines like this?
NewGameReleases 2 years ago 84
Yeah, my heart leaps whenever the throttles are opened. Thing is, I can't understand why.
Kronik2g2 1 year ago
That engine test airplane is pretty cool! 3 identical engines, and a fourth experimental...
Nick410s 2 years ago
that whole flight wasnt ran on 4 engines its boeing's 747 test plane, the only engine that was running this whole flight was the ge90 115b
tweak2487 1 year ago
how the hell do they keep it running while ingesting 4.5 tons of water/min? You would think that amount of water would make it impossible to keep flame going (so to speak).
salemcripple 2 years ago
The primary compressor blade hub is designed to shed water away from the turbine inlet (and hence, away from the combustion process inside the turbine) and out through the high bypass fan ducts surrounding the turbine instead.
Clever piece of work!
BowToYourHighness 2 years ago
Salemcripple: about 80% of the flow bypasses the core, where the combustion is occurring. The water is ejected through centrifugal force because the air has a slight swirl to it after the fan. (This swirl is corrected by exit guide vanes) Thus, most of the water isn't going through, and whatever does go through, is evaporated. Compressor exit temperatures are about 700 deg F, and combustion temperatures are above 2000 deg F!
pollolocol 2 years ago
In horse power it is equiv to 106,531 HorsePower (at takeoff power )
david2371 2 years ago
Does anyone know how long they test the engines at a continuous rate?
I know with cars its aprox. 30 hours non-stop.
Revituser 2 years ago
wayyyy more then that my friend a car only carries 4-5 people the 777 carries 250+
tturbocar 2 years ago
Revituser, I saw a special on the development of the 777 and the GE90. They ran it at 120 percent for 3 days straight with no failures.
FunktasticLucky 2 years ago
wow... the coolest engine ( gotta love the signature sounds) fitted on the most advanced ETOPS-rated aircraft..... the 777.
Aipl15 2 years ago
WTF is corrected solid state thrust? And whats that black ball for?
MrWarrenbuffett 2 years ago
The black ball is used as part of the acoustic testing of the engine, to make sure that it passes dB output. I can't remember if the black ball is for ensuring that air intake is even, or if the ball actually contains the recording device. Can't quite remember.
ShokaLion 2 years ago
the black ball is to lower the noise and to also protect the surrounding area cause they did a triple red line test so it ran at full power for about an 1hr or o so the engine can over heat and do some serious damage so they use that doe to catch any flying debris
bigkevinpetrona 2 years ago
It's corrected STEADY state thrust. It just means the thrust as measured experimentally and at "steady state", or not changing with time.
captain150 2 years ago
That's pretty amazing isn't it.
A&P
damondanner 2 years ago
Wow. That engine have a low ground clearance on that 747.
jasleil 2 years ago
Dear All,
I have some questions about psychology:
*Why do we love jet engine?
*Why do we like the high-pitch-sound of jet engine?
THANK YOU IN ADVANCE for your creative ideas and brainstorm!!! :)
applesweeter 2 years ago
because its cool
TheWrongRoadHome 2 years ago
I'd say the search for greater power by mankind.
Then again, i'm no psychologist.
wwtsniper 2 years ago
Because its amazing that spinning a few fan blades fast enough in the air can lift up tons of metal 10.5Kms into the sky.
Sub40H 2 years ago
I think the added energy from the fuel has something to do with it.
nitr0burn 2 years ago
the power....not quite understanding "thrust" as it relates to power measuring as i am familiar (hp/tq), and the high pitch whine...well....it has to do with power...with the whine of a jet engine like that of a turbo, it makes power....boils down to the phsycology of 'man' as we know wanting to be the strongest and fastest to be 'fertile' to women and thats what attracts them right?
kingbrewski2000 2 years ago
Is there a facility somewhere that tests these conditions simulating the atmospheric pressure of 35,000ft or does that not apply?
DrumGod22 2 years ago
Peebles Ohio.
That's what that big black dome thing does.
blampa 2 years ago
1:47, if this really happens, the pilot behind this plane is gonna suffer.He cant see a thing
2:48 , the GE90-115B almost touched the ground
sealalula 2 years ago 8
sealalula: If it's raining that hard than visibility would be zero anyway.
ATFSCrash 2 years ago 7
Oh thats right .
Sorry i didnt think about that , my mistake ):
sealalula 2 years ago
01:30 shower anyone?
DRUMMAGEEE 2 years ago
its annoying how the narrator says "dash"
carpetrug01 2 years ago 33
YES...
hrmarinkovic 2 years ago 2
Just think of the power if 4 GE90 were mounted on the 747. Talk about overkill.
KDALove 2 years ago 6
back up
danman281 2 years ago
Yea, they would need 1.6 90-115Bs to power the 747-100.
qwerty112311 2 years ago
Can someone tell me what triple redline is please?
EMaster9 2 years ago
I think it means when the N1 N2 and EPR are all at max.
flyer176 2 years ago
Its the test for how much trust an engine produce
sealalula 2 years ago
N1 and N2 represent the speed of the two stages of the engine. N1 is the low pressure compressor/turbine and fan, and N2 is the high pressure compressor and turbine. N1 and N2 run independently on most engines.
ModularFox 2 years ago
what is N1 and N2?
rpm of the fan and rpm of the turbine?
tolleke89 2 years ago
good lord america, convert to a sensible system of units please
lets get some newtons up in here
daviclond 2 years ago
540607N of thrust per engine
fshighflyers 2 years ago
the engine produces thrust almost equal to the weight of an m1 abrams tank, thats about 60 tons of continuous force
CrzVids 2 years ago
It can get up to 127,000+
qwerty112311 2 years ago
all those 'dashes' are a bit annoying
tahadar 2 years ago 4
omg those sound so madness when they are on full
smartbotX 2 years ago 2
i like the pic at 1:48
mrbrookz08 2 years ago
when GE flight tested the engine on the flying test bed, they put the other three engines at flight idle and then GE90 kept the plane flying at the same airspeed. very crazy
queefkake1 2 years ago
howcan a engine sustain a flame to keep the engine running with that kind of water intake very impressive excellent engineering
TripingAIR 2 years ago
No doubt.....
30% larger than Rolls Royce Trent 800...
raykrislianggi 2 years ago
I'd like to see a stretched updated C-5 with four of these!
fanofrhymeswithstar 2 years ago
Imagination at work.
rb21122b 2 years ago
What a wonder of engineering. It is amazing what this engine underwent to to see if it would perform. And perform it did. No wonder GE is a leader in this technology.
kc0ofz 2 years ago
GE90-115B has almost 3 metres in Diametre...!!! Largest Engine in the world!!
raykrislianggi 2 years ago
which turbine engine is better the GE90 or the GEnx ,both are awesome i saw the tusts,and the thrust power is fucking INSANE,but wich one is better ?
MustangGTR2 2 years ago
depends on what are they best.
The GE90 is more powerfull that GEnx but the GEnx is a more quiet engine.
The GEnx have some tech from the GE90 indeed
Regards
AF401 2 years ago
GENX is based on the GE90
vblogrsRLzrs 2 years ago
Well, we can't tell just yet, since the GEnx has not seen flight on the 787 just yet, nut supposedly, the GEnx is supposed to be a more improved version of the GE90 and it uses some of it's technology.
au1357924680 2 years ago
They're both amazing engines. Personally I think the GE90-115B is better if you really want range, power and speed. The GEnx has a lower thrust value and you'll need more throttle to keep the speed and that may reduce range, but since the fuel efficiency is higher than the "115B" it might not make that big of difference. They both have their ups and downs, but personally I think the 115B is better
046547717 2 years ago
Oh dear. What IS better? More thrust? More efficient? If more efficient under which circumstances and conditions?
You can not say which one is better. I am sure both of the engines does its job on the aircraft it is designed for.
phasilian 2 years ago
Performance wise:
The GEnx is expected to produce thrust from 53,000 to 75,000 lbf
The GE90-115B(-200LR,-300ER) Produces 115,000 lbf
GE90-115B Pwns ANY other Engine!!!
TNCMAviator1013 2 years ago 4
it doesn't make sense to put one ge90 on a 747 because the ge90 is bigger than all of the others
gigagdragoon2345 2 years ago
Yeah, it was just about a feet or two above the ground when it went on the 747.
starsoffyre 2 years ago
they detrate it to match the others.....
beergut111 2 years ago
I thought the phratt and whitney jet engine on the A380 were the most powerful.
crazywarriorman 2 years ago
Airbus A380 has Rolls Royce Trent 900 Engines, not Pratt & Whittney!
raykrislianggi 2 years ago
that baby can out some thrust out.
blt40 2 years ago
4 1/2 tonnes of water a minute..
That is impressive!
McDiezel 2 years ago 2
HUGE!
MustangGTR2 2 years ago
The only thing I like about GE is their aircraft division.
qwerty112311 2 years ago
Triple 7 engines. FACINATING!!
FLIGHTCOMPANY 2 years ago
damn right lmao guy with the ford racing hat on
tturbocar 2 years ago
AWESOME VID! Can anyone post some old test vids of old jet engines from a 707 or 727? The history of all these jets is fascinating!
sophiegromit 3 years ago
what in the world is the block test for?????someone explain!!!!!!!!
maudale 3 years ago
Maudale: A block is a grouping. Its an organizational, documentation thing. Its nomenclature/jargon. In this case it could refer to block/group/set of tests and or it refers to the type of test (stand). Much like engine braking refers to a type of test; a block test can refer to a type of test and stand and system that is often used to test the thrust of aviation engines.
ATFSCrash 2 years ago
Maudale:
Google
United States Patent 6810752
Please note that that particular patent does not necessarily apply to aviation, however the definition and the rough design is similar.
ATFSCrash 2 years ago
I built GE90s for almost 15 years. Then, my hands gave out. Still trying to solve that. Four surgeries later, and I'm still messed up.
But, it is an awesome machine, no doubt about it
patsaretherealchumps 3 years ago
Can anyone tell me which air flow generates more thrust; the fan bypass flow or the air that flows through the core and comes off the rear nozzle?
elguerrouj326 3 years ago
At sea level the fan bypass air is about 70% of the engine thrust.
That decreases with altitude due to thinner air.
fandingas 2 years ago
imagine if they put 4 ge 90's on the 747
sikhbeatz518 3 years ago
would be more a rocket than a plane
...the next supersonic cruiser
twoaxis 3 years ago
lol they would normaly only have to fly on 1 engine or use 20% of all 4 engines
ryashoki 3 years ago
Amazing. Truly amazing. This engine has been a key factor in the overwhelming success of the 777-300ER. Boeing and General Electric put together great teams that put together a work of art. Love it.
Archie23rulz 3 years ago
When I die I want to be sucked into a GE90-115B
Kscorps2 3 years ago 10
i send my video , Turbina LAbala Argentina, with nanomaterials. Thanks
oscarlivy 3 years ago
Oscarlivy : Video approved. Close enough to the topic; and a pretty novel/neat gas turbine you have there for the likes of a C-182 .
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
Just take the RRs and PWs off the 747s, and replace 'em with four of these bad boys. THAT'LL getcha where you wanna go! :P
operazanotaijin 3 years ago
this type of engine can be use for 747-400?
mmtlibra67 3 years ago
mmtlibra67 : Im not sure but I dont think so. I dont think it would be certified or practical. I think this was considered a test/experimental configuration with special temporary licensing. I dont think it could be licensed for commercial or military use without a lot of time and money involved and even then I dont think it would be certifiable because I think the engine clearance is too close to the ground; thusly there is little safety margin.
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
The GE90 is not designed for use on the 747. It's only application is the 777. GE does have one on their 747 flying test bed, but that is all.
patsaretherealchumps 3 years ago
One of these engines has just over two 747 engines worth of power, so in theory, a 747 could fly with only two of these.
kinsley2108 3 years ago
yo that 747 looked sick with 3 small and 1 big engine
shaquo890 3 years ago
2,000+ degree exhaust. 'Smores anyone?
operazanotaijin 3 years ago
I fell in love with the beautiful fan blades.
venichen1 3 years ago
how can fuel ignite with water in the combustion chamber?
nguyentuan1990 3 years ago
this may be the highest thrust jet ever, but rockets are on a whole different level.
Pimpmastahanhduece 3 years ago
Yes it is the highest thrust jet engine ever made, however it is unfair to compare it to a rocket because after all rockets are completely different.
macdonaldjohnstonfan 3 years ago
i am wondering how they keep the combustion chamber dry while water test.
is there someone who can explain that to me?
ordinary1985 3 years ago
they dont, the combustion chamber is just an area where the fuel is ignited with the air. So as long as there is air in there, there is no problem.
ExperimentalArmy 3 years ago
whats triple redline?
jethobo 3 years ago
jet hobo: The maximum of three different limits; such as RPM, temperature, pressure.
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
Amazing.
kwrzxm 3 years ago
Very interesting, great vid thanks for posting.
spidey692003 3 years ago
I love the look of the engine, the diameter of it look so so cool. I love the sounds made by the engine too when it spools
FunkyZangel 3 years ago
American ingenuity at it's finest!
DG121480 3 years ago 2
we sure do need it now, havent had much in a long time.
Pimpmastahanhduece 3 years ago
the 777 engine looks funny on the 747
filipinoboy147 3 years ago 5
Hey, 1 question.. at 3:57 there is a destructive Test, now do they do that in a prop propelled aircraft? or are we just S.O.L? lmao.. i was talking 2 a guy who just did his "DoT accident investigation course" said that his instructor DOES NOT sit beside the engines because of possible damage from prop/fan blades.
multisyncxp 3 years ago
There is a FAA/JAR certification test, called Fan Blade Out,in which is simulated the rupture of fan blade in a cell (not with the engine mounted in the airplane)to verify the that engine is capable to support this event
pezzu70 3 years ago
1:44 GOOD GOD
xenugears 3 years ago 2
In a gas turbine engine at full power, if a fan blade comes off, it has enough momentum in it to lift a family car about 50 feet
operationcwaI789789 3 years ago
747 mod @ 2:46
so no 747 had this engine at all, or where ther modifications?
nakazatoGTR 3 years ago
They probably would of had them on at idle in case something went wrong.
macdonaldjohnstonfan 3 years ago
Correct, no commercial 747 ever had this engine mounted. The 747 shown is GE aviation's flying test bed. It is used to test engines in flight instead of on the ground and the mounting hardware is all specially designed.
pollolocol 3 years ago
LOL its a sight to behold! 1:30
when he the engine has set to take off power, it really expanded! omg thats just awesome!
qwwqqe 3 years ago
Quality.....through and through. Nice work General!
ferretflasher 3 years ago
Fun thing: The first gas-turbine prototype was finished in 1903! And that was by `Jens William Eagidius Elling in Norway. I`ve seen the engine for real.. But it was very difficult to make it work properly, and overheating was the biggest problem, until the WW2. Titanium-parts were used, ironichal to be found near the inventor, witch didn`t find what material to use..
ingareinar007 3 years ago
1872 - Dr. F. Stolze designed the first true gas turbine engine. His engine used a multistage turbine section and a flow compressor. This engine never ran under its own power.
I didn't think Titanium started to be used significantly in aircraft until the cold war about 1950s.
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
I think most of the cold war that the use of Titanium in aircraft was pretty much hushed up. The soviets were the main supplier and it was feared that if it became common knowledge that Titanium was benefiting US military aircraft, that the soviets might try to block the sale of it.
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
I see. It is a bit like television. Several inventions to make it work. The very first attempt Egidius Elling did of his idea, was 40 years before the Wright-brithers took off with their "Flyer" in 1903..
ingareinar007 3 years ago
They Replaced Engines 2 and 3 with the GE90 on that 747, just for testing. and Left the Engines 1 and 4 as the original. Damn those GE90's are big.
tiggfigg 3 years ago
No, it seems that they replaced only ENG N°2 if you look well...
Moumou727 3 years ago
why was there a 747 with on of the engines instead of a 777 like they has originally said
shadowmorman 3 years ago
These engines are to big for a 747.didn't you see that one engine on the 747 was nearly touching the ground? unless if they add height to the landing gear, now that would perfect for a 747.
Destronus 3 years ago
shadowmorman: This engine was built for the 777. However it was decided since the engine was a new type and unproven it would be safer to test and do preliminary certification of the engine on a 747 with 3 known and certified engines that could easily fly it in safely if the engine failed.
ATFSCrash 3 years ago
Oh, yeah that makes sense. So a co worker of mine told me that the 777 has the record longest flight on one fueling... is that true? We work on an air ramp so this is bound to come back up.
shadowmorman 3 years ago
GE owns the 747 as a testbed - no other reason.
mdmf007 3 years ago
Apparently, the water doesn't mix with the combustion chamber. The chamber is probably inside and the water was outside.
farouqnimer 3 years ago
How can the combustion chamber stay lit with that much water pouring in? Someone please reply
ZacharyB 3 years ago
The GE90 has a 9:1 bypass ratio, meaning 90% of the water doesn't even make it to the core where the combustor is located. As for the water that does enter the core, I'll let you figure out what happens to water when it comes into contact with a combustion chamber at over 2000 degrees F. :)
etherealbw 3 years ago
hi ethereal,
at a ratio of 9:1,isn't it closer to a turbo propeller rather than jet engine?
jeetendrag10 3 years ago
Well, the engine still compress the air better than most turbofan engines with 13 stages of compressors. Also there are fans with a blade, and no pistons in the engine so technically its a turbofan/jet engine.
flyer176 2 years ago
how tall is this engin? (in feet)
cyprussunizhot 3 years ago
The fan is over 10.5 feet in diameter.
etherealbw 3 years ago
jeez i allways imagined a 747 with 777 engineS 2 bad this one only has one tho it would be way awesome if it had 777 on all 4s and i think it would feel wierd 2 fly with one engine thats way more powerful than others
jesusrulesflight 3 years ago
yes it would be awsome but the engine is really heavy and big
aznturtle1 3 years ago
Wow ! A 747 with a GE-90 !
matLFRC 3 years ago
imagane it with 4 i no the wings wont stand it but it would be so cool
aznturtle1 3 years ago
HAHAHA, Bird ingestion :)...
That is a great video! Amazing engine!
VSkwidd 3 years ago
at 1.41 ...standing there with shampoo and soap will be nice high pressure jet shower!:)
at 1.47... thats the easiest way to extinguish a fire...seems easy!:)
Farhanians 3 years ago 3
"standing there with shampoo and soap will be nice high pressure jet shower!:)"
Yes, if you want your flesh flayed from your bones... At least they will be clean.
CroakerMD 3 years ago 4
If Chuck Norris can do it...do can I.
SSJLIGHT 3 years ago
You forgot to mention about them using a micro to check for imperfections or miniscule cracks in the material and in the fuselodge. I don't think they use microsoft in their computers. At least I hope not. And you would think that 777 would have independent systems or at least a back up in case of failure like that. Seen it on how it's made. And seconds to disaster.
011180russell 4 years ago
love this engine with the rolls royce rb11 in a close second. The 777 that "lost engine power" sounds rather fishy to me. the ge90 115b is among the most reliable and powerful jet engines on the planet, i am waiting on the final report, how much do you want to bet it was pilot error?
1291918 4 years ago
1291918: In a way I wish it was pilot error. However judging what I have heard on the grapevine, it sounds more likely there was some sort of electrical, software, hardware, sensor or problem. The British Airways Flight 38 777that augured in at Heathrow had a Rolls Royce in it. I think the pilots might be heroes for minimizing the crash.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
ATFSCRASH: you have no idea how i feel now about what you said to me, I am a pilot, i place almost complete faith in the designers and engineers of these crazy machines we fly, i thought the 777 was an untouchable aircraft, in every aspect, safety, reliability, economy etc. I fly rotor, but if you asked me to trust my life to the 777, before i would have said yes in a heart beat now i'm not so sure! Please god let this be a human error!
1291918 4 years ago
1291918: In a way it might be nice if it was pilot error, because then it would probably just be an isolated incident. However there are some things that suggest this may be an issue with the aircraft, thusly it might very well affect many aircraft in service and in production. However though this is a tragedy, there is a silver lining to it. There were no deaths, and injuries were relatively minor and few.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
1291918: There should be an abundance of great evidence that will hopefully make it fairly easy to find a root cause. If there are aircraft in service and development that have flaws, hopefully this investigation can lead to improvements that eliminate flaws before more crashes occur.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
You are very right indeed! thankfully there was no loss of life, and as you said, the abundance of crash data will be overwhelming. We can only hope that this will be the wakeup call for boeing. There safety record is less than reputable. Just take a look at the original 737s 100-300 most of them crashed, I still get jitters when flying on the 737 800 ver. now the 777 is falling out of the sky, can't they do anything right?
1291918 4 years ago
1291918 "There safety record is less than reputable"
I would have to disagree with you on that. The only real major competitor to Boeing right now is Airbus. Airbus is a relatively new kid on the block, most of its aircraft are younger. Boeing is an old hand, that has a lot more aircraft in service and many of them have a lot more hours and years on them.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
I can't doubt you on that, beoing has been around since the 1920s and airbus, the 1970s. Basically boeing was stuck with the learning curve of aviation the "trial and error phase". Its only logical that they would have a greater number of accidents. But since the 5th of july 1972 the 737 has killed 2667+ people. i shit you not. This is a very conservative figure. I weeded out those that were not entirely the aircraft's fault. I simply cannot say that they have a good track record.
1291918 4 years ago
1291918: Once again you are making an unfair dissimilar comparison. Boeing has a lot more aircraft in service and have been in service a lot longer than Airbus. Since Boeing has produced a lot more aircraft and has been in service a lot longer a lot more of its aircraft are in the hands of budget airlines and second and third world nations with lower safety and maintenance standards; so it's obvious and logical that Boeing would have more crashes than Airbus.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
Again i agree with you, third world nations, operating high maintenance aircraft, IS a recipe for disaster or for the very least some sort of mishap will occure during the aircraft's operation. This now brings us to a new argument. Should we chastise the makers of the aircraft or the operators or both?
1291918 4 years ago
1291918: If it was poor maintenance because of cost cutting measures to farm out the work, then I think the responsibility should be shared depending on the circumstances. I think if a parent company (British Airways) decides to save money by farming out work to shady contractors that they both should share part of the blame.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago
This conversation is getting very interesting, i'm a bit busy at the moment, I have so many different possibilites to discuss, I will respond to you tomorrow, I'm Glad i found an intellingent person on youtube (for a change) :)
1291918 4 years ago
There is a fine line between, engineering malpractice and manufacturer defect. Who is to blame when an aircraft crashes? The pilots, engineers, or manufacturer? Maybe all? How can we tell for sure. If the manufacturer does not address weaknesses in there aircraft, that are prone to failure they are in fact contributing towards critical failure in flight.
1291918 4 years ago
1291918: What matters is the evidence. In order to determine liability first you have to find what failed and why. Then you have to determine who was responsible for what failed and why. It's not as simple as you might think. It might require some analysis of procedures,policies and of contracts. And of course things will probably be muddied up by the lawyers.
ATFSCrash 4 years ago