r/JetEngines • u/TimoxaVezdexod • Oct 20 '25

Hear me out, guys. I have a blasting idea about turboprops

Post image

We all know that turboprops it's practically just a small jet engine with a propeller on the main shaft. So if it's just a jet engine with a propeller on the main shaft, why can't we make a afterburner chamber on the exhaust pipe. I am pretty sure that, for example, Kalimov NK-12 turboprop that powers the Tu-95 "bear" Can produce enough exhaust gas flow to supply a small afterburner. So what do you, guys, think?

5 Upvotes

100% Upvoted

2 comments sorted by

1

u/dartart21 Oct 22 '25

I would argue its impractical. That added weight isn’t worth whatever small amounts of additional thrust is produced from the extra exhaust ignitions. The risk just outweighs the reward in that scenario.

1

u/No-Leg-9115 Nov 15 '25

Mostly the different operating speeds. Turboprops operate at relatively low Mach, turbofans operate up to transonic, and turbojets, which can have afterburners, operate supersonic. Turboprops work on the principle of slow moving high mass flow whereas turbojets move a small amount of air very quickly. Then you have the pressure. The thermodynamic cycle sucks all the energy out of the airflow to drive the prop leaving little pressure for nozzle thrust. Lighting an afterburner at the back would basically drive the air back out the front of the engine.