Snecma's M88-3: Is the program alive or dead?

Read the forum code of contact

Profile picture for user TinWing

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 932

After the Rafale's defeat by the F-15 in Singapore, I thought it was time to ask about the status of the M88-3 program. Snecma's website used to offer details on the M88-3, but fell strangely silent a year or two ago. Similarly, I haven't seen any media references to the M88-3 for quite a while?

Is the M88-3 dead, along with any chance of an upgrade Rafale "Mk2?"

What precisely were the specs on the M88-3?

As I recollect, the fan diameter, and overall length were slightly great than for the M88-2. Oddly enough, the M88-3 was very nearly the same size and output as the EJ200. Scale models of the upgraded Rafale showed a RB199 style nozzle - very strange.

Original post

Member for

15 years 9 months

Posts: 479

After the Rafale's defeat by the F-15 in Singapore, I thought it was time to ask about the status of the M88-3 program. Snecma's website used to offer details on the M88-3, but fell strangely silent a year or two ago. Similarly, I haven't seen any media references to the M88-3 for quite a while?

Is the M88-3 dead, along with any chance of an upgrade Rafale "Mk2?"

What precisely were the specs on the M88-3?

As I recollect, the fan diameter, and overall length were slightly great than for the M88-2. Oddly enough, the M88-3 was very nearly the same size and output as the EJ200. Scale models of the upgraded Rafale showed a RB199 style nozzle - very strange.

At the moment both M88-3 and Rafale "Mk2" are deferred indefinitely.

Cheers,
Sunho

Profile picture for user Petros

Member for

15 years 4 months

Posts: 395

I think M88-3 is still offered as an option to potential Rafale buyers

Profile picture for user gui

Member for

17 years 2 months

Posts: 116

SNECMA works on a version with a lower consumption and which could give more thrust if needed. They call it the M88 ECO. But it seems there are few informations about it in this moment.

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 1,842

To add a little bit from the post of GUI

They were two versions
M88-3 with the same performance of the -2 but with a lower cunsumption, better reliability, less maintenance
M883- with the same MTBF than the -2 but with more thrust.

Since nobody show interest into the more powerful -3, the M88 ECO is develloped for the french army and could be buy for the Rafale F4

Find on http://www.deagel.com/Powerplant.htm
M88-2
Diameter/Caliber 700mm 27.56-in
Length 3.5 m 12-ft
Max Weight 897 kg 1,978-lb
Thrust 75.5 kN 17,000-lb
Airflow 65Kg/s

M88-3
Diameter/Caliber 790mm 31.1-in
Length 3.6 m 12-ft
Max Weight 985 kg 2,172-lb
Thrust 89.9 kN 20,250-lb
Airflow 72Kg/s

It is said that the -3 need different air intakes on the rafale which are already fully develloped and "decrease the RCS".

Profile picture for user TinWing

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 932

To add a little bit from the post of GUI

They were two versions
M88-3 with the same performance of the -2 but with a lower cunsumption, better reliability, less maintenance
M883- with the same MTBF than the -2 but with more thrust.

Since nobody show interest into the more powerful -3, the M88 ECO is develloped for the french army and could be buy for the Rafale F4

Find on http://www.deagel.com/Powerplant.htm
M88-2
Diameter/Caliber 700mm 27.56-in
Length 3.5 m 12-ft
Max Weight 897 kg 1,978-lb
Thrust 75.5 kN 17,000-lb
Airflow 65Kg/s

M88-3
Diameter/Caliber 790mm 31.1-in
Length 3.6 m 12-ft
Max Weight 985 kg 2,172-lb
Thrust 89.9 kN 20,250-lb
Airflow 72Kg/s

It is said that the -3 need different air intakes on the rafale which are already fully develloped and "increase the RCS".

I think that some of the figures you found at Deagle.com are at odds with the previously published Snecma specs (that have now disappeared from Snecma's own site).

I remember the M88-3 being closer to 4.0 m in length - just about the same as the EJ-200?

As far as the M88-3 designation being used for two variants, that's very possible. Perhaps, it's even more likely that the "M88-3" nameplate is simply being reused. Snecma made claims about benchtesting a +/- 20,000lb. st. "M88-3" prototype back in the 1990s.

I have always assumed that the M88-3 designation was originally meant for a higher powered M88 development, not a longer life/lower maintainence version of the M88-2?

Why not put the EJ200 in there? I know, not going to happen with both sides having good reasons not to do it, but the EJ200 is a mighty fine engine.

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 1,842

[QUOTE=TinWing]I think that some of the figures you found at Deagle.com are at odds with the previously published Snecma specs (that have now disappeared from Snecma's own site).

That is what was edited in the snecma website
http://antislashe.free.fr/


I remember the M88-3 being closer to 4.0 m in length - just about the same as the EJ-200?

The bigger diameter is already quite different, the -3 cannot be too different than the -2.

I have always assumed that the M88-3 designation was originally meant for a higher powered M88 development, not a longer life/lower maintainence version of the M88-2?

I read the names M88-3A and M88-3B in the magazin Air & Cosmos and I don't think that SNECMA ever promote such engines.
But the problem is solved with the ECO :)

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 1,842

Why not put the EJ200 in there? I know, not going to happen with both sides having good reasons not to do it, but the EJ200 is a mighty fine engine.

The M88 has been made for a "fighter-bomber", the EJ200 for a pure fighter.
I'm not sure how well the EJ-200 could sustain when flying at low altitude.

Profile picture for user Stealth Spy

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 815

Some internet sources say that the focus is now on a new engine called M88-Eco (with an increased life, higher fuel efficiency and increased IR reductions) than the M88-3 that was to have more thrust.

Member for

15 years 6 months

Posts: 893

Why not put the EJ200 in there? I know, not going to happen with both sides having good reasons not to do it, but the EJ200 is a mighty fine engine.

EJ200 is a mighty fine engine for a 11T+ fighter. M88 is a mighty fine engine for a 10T- fighter.

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

My 2cents:
M88-3 was to be a 20% stronger version of the M88-2, with some new fans etc. to achieve this. But fuel consumption should be equal.
The first M88-3 was ground tested on 17th february this year.
Developement will probably be finished and the engine offered for exdport customers.
Rafale Mk.2 is dead. Dassault now offers F2/F3 aircraft with options, depending on the customers requirements.

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 1,842

The M88 will still evolve for decades, so it's not the problem.
As long as the RAfale weight do not increase, the RAfale customer (read France) wouldn't pay for a more powerful M88 but in a specific program funded by the DGA.

But for me, the ECO use most of the technologies supposed to be in the M88-3.

The MK2 is just a mix of rafale F2/F3/F4 and was proposed to South Korea only but which were pretty close to the RAfale proposed to Singapore.
So the Mk2 is dead, but not the Rafale with the same capabilties.

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461


So the Mk2 is dead, but not the Rafale with the same capabilties.

As I said. F2/F3 with options which the customer can choose. For example M88-3, CFT or AESA RBE-2.

Member for

17 years 6 months

Posts: 1,842

Exactly.

The "mk2" really looks like a marketing trick.

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

Exactly.

The "mk2" really looks like a marketing trick.

Yes similar to russian fighters like the Su-35 (Su-27M) etc.

Member for

15 years 2 months

Posts: 58

Ej200 isn't as mighty as M-88!

Ej200 is a derivative of the poor RB199, and it's fuel comsomption and life time are ridiculous compared to M88 familly requierements!

and nw that eurostuff is 12t whale, all estimations about "exceptional abilities" gones far!

it's easy to makes powerfull engines, you groth the compressor output, but snecma instead of others want same range, life time and comsomption than the earlier one, with tiny weight grow!

they acheived that, as benchmark proved!

Profile picture for user TinWing

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 932

/
The first M88-3 was ground tested on 17th february this year.
Developement will probably be finished and the engine offered for export customers.

So in other words, you are saying that M88-3 development is still ongoing?

If that is the case, why has Snecma gone silent on the M88-3?

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

Ej200 isn't as mighty as M-88!

Ej200 is a derivative of the poor RB199, and it's fuel comsomption and life time are ridiculous compared to M88 familly requierements!

and nw that eurostuff is 12t whale, all estimations about "exceptional abilities" gones far!

it's easy to makes powerfull engines, you groth the compressor output, but snecma instead of others want same range, life time and comsomption than the earlier one, with tiny weight grow!

they acheived that, as benchmark proved!

You must know it :rolleyes: .
1.) In fact EJ200 has nothing to do with RB-199. The only similarity is the size and that was required due to the fact that the first two prototypes were initially powered by RB-199-34R MK104D turbofans.

2.) Typhoon is not a 12t whale, but a 11t class fighter.

3.) According to your (and some others logic) M88 is "better" or more advanced only because it's smaller and lighter. If I follow that logic M88 is also much more advanced than the F119 of the F/A-22A. :rolleyes:

4.) Typhoon has also demonstrated many of it's proposed capbilities (except AG stuff release).

5.) Did you realize we are talking here about the M88-3?

Member for

15 years 7 months

Posts: 4,461

So in other words, you are saying that M88-3 development is still ongoing?

If that is the case, why has Snecma gone silent on the M88-3?

Yes the M88-3 is still under developement/testing. But it's unknown if the engine will be integrated into operational Rafales. Seems not to be the case for french air force/navy Rafales in the short time. But if there will be an export customer which requires the M88-3 it will be ready in the not to distant future. But I don't know if the M88-3 really achieves the targeted performance.

greets Scorpion

Profile picture for user TinWing

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 932

Yes the M88-3 is still under developement/testing. But it's unknown if the engine will be integrated into operational Rafales. Seems not to be the case for french air force/navy Rafales in the short time. But if there will be an export customer which requires the M88-3 it will be ready in the not to distant future. But I don't know if the M88-3 really achieves the targeted performance.

greets Scorpion

It seems to me that mass flow increase from the M88-2 to the M88-3 is only half as great as the mass flow increase of the GE F414 over the original F404.

Wouldn't a redesign and enlargement of the Rafale's intakes be neccessary to integrate the M88-3?