Production stage
where the best engine found at the completion date
of the development programme in 2014, will get funds
of $25 billion; $22 billion for will be given to the
engine considered second most suitable, and $17
billion, if applicable, for the third best power
plant design. These funds are to set up and produce
their engine, or the first best design, as
determined by BAT, and used as reward. The best
entrant may be an engine not obtaining development
stage funding, if applicable.
» Fuel Notices
The long term forecast is for kerosene fuel prices
to rise with the increasing scarcity of this asset.
Neecenow and HYT development may exceed ten years by
which time available oil output in many countries
will be in serious decline. By designing
engines for the Neecenow and HYT which use
sustainable fuels creates and environment where fuel
costs will only decrease is more advantageous for
the long term. Oil prices will only rise as
supplies decrease, meaning engines will need to be
designed for sustainable fuels regardless.
Although Kerosene is easier to store, particularly
in Space, than hydrogen the benefits of hydrogen in
other areas exceeds kerosene, such as Specific
Impulse: Bio-fuels may be considered in place of
fossil fuels. Entries should incorporate the weight
of fuel tanks in their estimates with a developed
rocket engine of recommended product: current
performance outlines are based upon two Space
Shuttle derived main engine derivatives.
» Development capital
Up to six sets of $6 billion payments will be given to
produce four concept versions of the entrants engine for
the AFG, ARFG and J2000 to prove the design claims. If
less than the 6 development allotments are awarded in
the case of insufficient number of viable designs
submitted for example, funds may be used to augment
other entrants or used elsewhere in the Neecenow or HYT
programmes.
These engines will be ground and flight tested for
performance verification. The three best engines will be
given the production capital payments. Depending upon
the quality of the entrants two or three engines will be
built, an aspect favourable to give airlines a choice of
engine and create price competition to reduce the
maintenance and outright engine cost.
Three manufacturers will produce Neecenow engines. If
only 1 or 2 engines meet guidelines, one or two
companies may be given the best design overall to
produce and develop and funds to produce it subject to
security and authorisation by Briggs Aerospace
Technologies. This is favourable should one engine be
better for the AFG and the other, the larger ARFG and
J2000 types.
Development programme recipients
may be asked to judge each others products, with BAT
selecting the best. Finance
will be paid once capital
from shares is derived, either progressively or
outright, dependent upon the speed of portion sales of
the HYT and Neecenow development syndicates: the engine
considered best at the development funding stage will be
provided with funding first, through to the sixth best
concept design.
The development capital will enable true demonstration
and testing of the actual performance and potential of
the engines in comparison to other entries. If the
applicant does not win one of the development funding
grants, entries may still be fielded for the main
payment programme as long as the performance of the
engine can be independently verified.
» Production payment
Production payments will be awarded to the two or three
best engine designs meeting or bettering the performance
specifications as described here in 2014.
Best design payment
(U.S. $)
$25,000,000,000. ($25 Billion)
Second best design payment
$22,000,000,000. ($22 Billion)
Optional third best design payment
$17,000,000,000 ($17 Billion)
This will be paid once capital from sales of the
development cost portions for the Neecenow and HYT
syndicates is derived, either progressively or outright,
dependent upon the speed of sales, from first best to
third if applicable. The main prize will be used to
complete testing, refine the power plant and set up full
production; remaining capital spent at the winners
discretion. The second or third best entrants may be
awarded production capital and given the design of the
first best design to build, should this engine be above
10% more efficient than any other development capital
recipient, or alternative entrant received.
» Guidelines
Main Engine brief
Neecenow hypersonic airliners require engines to
lift the aircraft to altitude, cruise at Mach 7.4
descend, approach, land and taxi with complete safety.
J2000 HYT requires auxiliary internal reusable booster rockets to
achieve high orbits when the altitude is too great for
Scramjets (if used) to operate: projected specifications
have been based upon the use of two Rocketdyne
(hydrogen-powered) rockets used by the Space Shuttle.
Entries will be considered a complete if entrants
integrate a rocket engine with the Hypersonic and
take-off and landing engine(s) to achieve the orbit as
specified or greater, and preferably offer throttle
control with excellent specific impulse. Entries
may be fielded without these engines. Hydrogen,
methane, Bio-fuels and other sustainable fuels are
preferred due to reducing oil output although long-term
storage implications in Space should be addressed and
considered. Some major manufacturers are
researching Pulse Detonation Engines; these are
acceptable if problems such as noise and speed issues
are overcome (PDE's currently limited to about Mach 6
versus the required Mach 7.4 minimum requirement).
The intake is also
considered part of the design which must be attached to
the rear of the main fuselage. To give a low
frontal area engines are expected to be recessed in the
core of the fuselage with openings in the Scramjets (if
applicable) to feed them during taxiing, take-off, climb
approach and landing. Much of the secret of this
engine design will lay in tricks with intake geometry
which can precisely dictate air temperature and pressure
at the turbine face. It is left up to entrants to
decide on whether to develop with an existing power
plant manufacturers engine, significantly modify an
existing engine and combine with the Mach-cruise engine
(eg. Scramjet), or develop the entire engine outright:
the capital will be available to fabricate this engine
should the applicant win a development prize with an
appropriate production plan as outlined. Remember
the aircraft has to "rotate" for take-off and landing,
and allowances must be made for this high nose-pitch
angle.
The General Electric Ge-90 has the minimum take-off
thrust for Neecenow and HYT's weights: several of the
world's fastest aircraft use / used turbofan engines.
However, it is known turbojet engines function better at
higher airspeeds and altitudes and thus possibly better
for transitioning to hypersonic cruise where a Scram or
ramjet (if your design) takes over. Weight ma be
saved by using more engines: GE90 is heavier than two
engines half the size. More engines have higher costs,
so be aware of this balance if using lower than GE-90
benchmark thrust engines. Take-off and transition
engines are considered the most important part to
engineer, to allow the Neecenow prototype to test a
Scramjet (if applicable). The climb phase is a critical
aspect of Neecenow operations, occupying a large percent
of total flight time. Much of the rate of climb
requirement may be achieved by a faster climb speed,
much like the Convair B-58 which climbed at over
400knots. The balance o the average rate of climb
may be achieved at any phase of the flight although no
abnormal climb vectors are acceptable. It may work
in terms of engine noise to reduce power straight after
take-off and for the first 10,000 feet - where speeds
are often limited to 250 knots - leaving the bulk of the
climb to the latter parts of the ascent.
The winning entrant will be the finest balance of these
guidelines:
|
|
All engines
are preferred to be located together in the aft
fuselage. Intake designs coupled close together
around a circular fuselage (preferred),
elliptical or flat fuselage - catering to BATs
design options. Applicants using certain designs
may in fact design the entire aft section of the
airliner/spacecraft. Note the fuselage will be
around 8m for the ARFG and J2000, and 4.5m for
the AFG. Fuel vent, Intake and thrust nozzle(s)
must cater to considerations such as take-off
and landing rotation or flaring and drag
reduction. The aft nozzle must not interfere
with the rotation of the airliner on take-off
and landing. |
|
|
Engineers
may design the entire rear section of the
airplane which would fit to the back of the
Neecenow and HYT fuselage pressure wall. Two
engines are preferred for the 200 seat AFG, and
four engines preferred for the HYT and ARFG.
Allowances will be made to other designs if they
meet or exceed performance and economy and noise
expectation figures. |
|
|
CRITICAL: Noise - meet or exceed future legal
standards on take-off, approach and landing.
Due to the departure times and arrival times of
HYT airliners required to meet time-zone
difference, engine combination/designs meeting
future night laws preferred.
Internalised engines and their location in the
aft fuselage should reduce noise significantly
from in front and below aspects. The fast climb
times will also artificially reduce relative
engine noise.
|
|
|
Cheap to operate:
low maintenance
costs. Easy, quick and
simple to maintain, replace and operate. Note#:
Supersonic types such as Concorde, the SR-71 and the
Convair B-58 had maintenance times approaching 30 hours
per flight hour: Maintenance times are preerred to be
under 7 hours per flight hour to approach, meet
or exceed present equivalent standards per trip. |
|
|
Meet cruise thrust requirements
of hypersonic flight at Mach 7.4 to a ceiling of 150,000
feet Preference given if thrust can be maintained or
increased to higher speed and altitude for the J2000 HYT
climb phase. Engines must produce
climb rates on
each AFG, ARFG and J2000 versions exceeding a sustained
average of 6,000 feet per minute
to operational altitudes of up to 150,000 feet.
|
|
|
MANDATORY: the
acceleration time from brake release to
150,000ft and Mach 7.4 must be 30 minutes or
less. |
|
|
Able to meet the
endurance requirements of AFG and ARFG 2.3 hours
hypersonic, plus ascent and descent times, plus IFR
standards subsonic approach minimum legal standard (up
to 1.5 hours). |
|
|
Main
engine-casing/housing is preferred to be 25
metres or less in length (intake tip to outlet):
exceptions will be made if engine design is
extremely efficient because of a dimension
increase above these recommended outlines. |
|
|
No excessive warm up period after engine start or other (due
to engine oils etc). |
|
|
Engine weight
must not
exceed
23 tonnes per
engine or combined engine unit. |
|
|
Preferred fuels
Hydrogen, methane, bio-fuels or other
sustainable fuels due to Peak Oil
considerations. |
|
|
Combination engines (example:
turbofan or turbojet engine plus a Scramjet engine)
accepted but must
meet weight and
noise requirements. |
|
|
Hypersonic engine to
have an expected minimum engine life (TBO) of 700 hours (preferred
progressive TBO): Climb and approach engine preferred to have
a normal engine life comparable to present
engines. |
|
|
Cheap to produce: fixed
maximum
production purchase price of $60 million per
engine/combination when
taken as 2 engines in AFG, 4 engines ARFG and J2000.
If this price is not
competitive, fewer aircraft will sell, and all
manufacturers then lose sales. |
|
|
Maximum fuel
weight
preferred to be under 250 tonnes
for ARFG, and 80 tonnes for the smaller AFG: consumption
over maximum range preference 2/3s of this or less.
|
|
|
Preference given to
power plants able to provide extended subsonic endurance
in case of mid-ocean depressurisation to meet ETOPS
requirements. |
|
|
Power plants providing to life support, power and
pressurisation systems (both types of engine on
combination engines) favoured although such
systems must not have potential problems
involving toxic leakages or heat breaches. |
|
|
Reliable:
turbofan/jet engines and Scram engine must be able to
start properly after any heat soaking to permit quick
turn-around for return flights. |
|
|
Start redundancy if
using hybrid engines (air and mechanical etc) preferred:
it is presumed the climb or descent engine is shut down
while the airliner is in cruise flight in this situation
and visa versa. |
|
|
Engine designs
preferred with fewest parts: both mechanically and fuel
delivery systems (weight-reliability facet). |
|
|
Safety ability to
cope with any failure without compromising safety |
|
|
Reap considerable
benefits from the Ram principle unless fuel targets are
otherwise met. |
|
|
As un-start proof
as possible. |
|
|
Fuel, fuel use and
fuel tank weight will be considered important,
particularly if hydrogen fuel is used. |
|
|
Paired
engines using the same fuel will be favoured unless
endurance, weight, cost and simplicity is superior. |
|
|
Ecologically sound
in operation: meet environmental regulations and
considerations at both low and high altitudes over the
long term. |
|
|
Low in profile
(low-drag and weight facet): particularly if using
combined engines thrust rather than a single (one power plant
for the entire flight) engine. Preference will be given
to engines that have the ability to be integral to a
fuselage rather than requiring intakes above the
fuselage boundary layer. Recall and address the
incompressible layer at hypersonic velocity. |
|
|
Inter-changeable
aspects and design(s) that reduce servicing costs
preferred but not compulsory - may use different intake
which on Scramjets is part of the power-plant for
example. |
|
|
Thrust to weight
ratio notice:
AFG: MTOW will be around 250 tonnes: ARFG MTOW will be
about 600 tonnes: J2000 MTOW will be 750 tonnes.
Concorde and the SR-71 had thrust to weight ratios of
around 38% of MTOW. Climb requirements can be increased
with a higher climb speed; especially above 10,000ft
(most countries have a 250kt speed limit below 10,000ft:
The Convair B-58 Hustler climbed at 400KIAS). The design
can take this into consideration when planning ascent
profile. |
|
|
Considerations of
production; able to set up engine production for
the prize amount or less. |
|
|
Proven performance
an advantage (wind tunnel/flight testing). |
|
|
Reverse thrust
deliverable during aborted take-off and landing phases. |
|
|
Any additional
benefits external to these criteria favoured. |
|
|
Cylindrical intake
is preferred due to the lighter weight and higher thrust
available. |
|
|
Heat soaking
problems are preferred to be overcome during the
descent and approach phase of flight as the
airliner transitions though the Stratosphere, so
the aircraft is able to be serviced as a normal
airliner after landing. |
» Production Notes
|
|
Applicants must include a
brief production plan with their entries. |
|
|
Production plan must
demonstrate an ability to produce the engine
with the above parameters including dimensions,
weight reliability and cost. |
|
|
Address the issue of spare
parts and overhauls. |
|
|
If unable to provide
production plan, applicants must specify
sub-contract an how they are going to build
their prototype. |
» Design submission entry format
Entries for the development programme money must be
received by the 18th of April 2011.
Provide entries in a clear, jargon free context; note
many engine designs received will be similar in concept
and configuration, so there must be evidence of
performance claims: this is why present manufacturers of
power plants will be favoured.
The contract programme is open to all comers with
genuine performing engine designs and demonstrated
ability via a development plan to build them. This
allows talented individuals, university groups,
companies and others with a design and production plan
to enter, whose entries must be superior in every
respect to present manufacturers to succeed.
Winners of both the development programme money and
production funding will be judged upon best meetings of
the guideline criteria.
Entries to obtain development prize and be eligible for
the 3 production funding allotments are to be in the
following format only:
|
|
Main engine brief
must be contained to 2 sheets of A4 paper with a normal
type-face format, including a development through to
production, and operational use plans for the engine,
with the funds to be granted by BAT if your entry is
successful. |
|
|
Additionally,
applicants must address entry criteria, where their
product/design exceeds, meets or fails to meet
guidelines with brief reasons or evidence (an argument
for the use of hydrogen for example) *maximum 3 A4 sized
pages* |
|
|
All of this must be
completed in the English language. |
Desired points may assist your entries chances but are
not compulsory:
|
|
A scale model of the
engine if desired. An additional sheet may accompany a
model of the engine clearly and basically explaining how
it works |
|
|
A video/film,
maximum of 5 minutes explaining the engine will be
accepted as part of the entry if desired. |
Forward this to BAT headquarters by 18 April, 2011.
» BAT development concepts
BAT had engine concepts under research and is offering
the concept to programme entrants as a potential design
option, encouraging broader thinking and development.
This also opens the development and production programme
electrical engineers and other experts. By providing
this expertise outwards it accelerates the operational
debut of both AFG and ARFG Neecenow and the J2000 HYT
and avoids anti-trust laws.
» Development #1
The BAT concept used electrical currents/arcs moving
length-wise down the engine cone and crosswise
(increasing the time the air has to super-heat inside)
to provide the expansive thrust at hypersonic speed,
coupled with Ram thrust. The design is based upon bolts
of lightning being at least 2x hotter than the Sun: much
hotter intake temperatures than hydrogen or kerosene
fuels.
More efficient if
correctly planned.
Virtually Un-start
proof.
More reliable.
Easier to service.
Cheap to service.
Environmentally
sound.
The electricity would have been
derived from internal capacitors, static sources off the
airframe or other. Electrical engines would be cleaner
than any existing/foreseen hypersonic engine concept
options.
The method could be from
arcing between electrodes or from another means. Such
concepts must include shielding designs from any
electromagnetic radiation and any other potentially
problematic effects. As usual with BAT; existing
technology is preferred.
» Development #2
The thrust could be increased and decreased if the
shockwaves inside the engine core are able to be
amplified via mechanical or other source or manipulation
within the intake. The amplification of shockwaves will
exponentially increase the thrust, similar to the
process that increases the intensity of explosions.
This is magnified by integrating incompressible airflows
experienced at hypersonic velocity: the shock-waves
striking each other will produce higher compression and
heat: if applicable.
If no suitable designs are fielded by the given dates
BAT will produce an engine to be sold-off for production
by present engine manufactures.
