Physics

Why a Jet Engine Is Useless Standing Still (and Loves a Big Fan)

By Lucian — builder & engineer, LK Forge

A jet engine's overall efficiency is the product of two very different numbers: thermal efficiency, set by how hard the core compresses air before burning fuel, and propulsive efficiency, set by how closely the exhaust speed matches the aircraft's own flight speed. We swept the Jet Engine Lab's model across bypass ratio, flight speed, and pressure ratio for a 60 kg/s core airflow engine to measure exactly how bypass trades specific thrust for efficiency, why standing still wastes every bit of exhaust energy, and why raising pressure ratio lifts efficiency independently of either.

 ·  6 min read  ·  measured from the bypass/speed/OPR benchmark

45.16%
overall efficiency at a 12:1 bypass ratio, versus 22.32% for a pure turbojet
0.768 kN/(kg/s)
specific thrust at bypass 0, falling to 0.12 at bypass 12
0%
propulsive efficiency at zero airspeed, even while producing 155.94 kN of static thrust
80.7%
propulsive efficiency at 340 m/s, up from 0% standing still

A bigger fan trades specific thrust for overall efficiency

Overall efficiency is thermal efficiency times component efficiency times propulsive efficiency. Bypass ratio doesn't touch the first two — it only changes how the same core power is spread across the exhaust: a low-bypass engine concentrates it into a small, fast jet, while a high-bypass engine spreads it across a much larger, slower one. A slower jet closer to flight speed wastes less kinetic energy behind the aircraft, which is why propulsive — and therefore overall — efficiency rises with bypass, even though the same engine now produces less thrust per kilogram of airflow moved.

overall efficiency = thermal efficiency × component efficiency × propulsive efficiency

At this lab's 250 m/s cruise speed and 30:1 pressure ratio, moving from a 0:1 to a 12:1 bypass ratio takes overall efficiency from 22.32% to 45.16%, while specific thrust falls from 0.768 to 0.12 kN per kg/s of airflow.

Overall efficiency versus specific thrust, across bypass ratio

Overall efficiency (blue, left axis) rises steadily while specific thrust (orange, right axis) falls, for the 60 kg/s core airflow engine at 250 m/s cruise, swept from a 0:1 to a 12:1 bypass ratio.

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 00.20.40.60.8 024681012 bypass ratio eff. kN/(kg/s)

● overall efficiency (left axis)    ● specific thrust (right axis)

Standing still, none of that thrust does useful work

Propulsive efficiency measures how much of the exhaust jet's kinetic energy ends up moving the aircraft, versus how much is left behind in the wake at a speed the aircraft never reaches. At zero flight speed there is no "behind" to compare against — the aircraft never advances into the energy the engine spent, so propulsive efficiency is exactly zero even while the engine produces enormous static thrust. As flight speed rises toward the exhaust's own speed, the gap the engine has to make up shrinks, and propulsive — and therefore overall — efficiency both climb.

Thrust (blue, left axis) and propulsive efficiency (orange, right axis) versus flight speed, for the same engine held at a fixed 6:1 bypass ratio.

0 40 80 120 160 0%25%50%75%100% 080150220280340 flight speed (m/s) kN prop. eff.

● thrust (left axis)    ● propulsive efficiency (right axis)

The exact numbers

Every row below is a direct sample from the lab's model: a 60 kg/s core airflow engine at a 30:1 pressure ratio, for the bypass-ratio sweep at 250 m/s cruise.

Bypass ratio Overall efficiency Specific thrust TSFC
0:1 22.32% 0.768 kN/(kg/s) 26.04 g/(kN·s)
1:1 28.42% 0.489 kN/(kg/s) 20.45 g/(kN·s)
2:1 32.25% 0.37 kN/(kg/s) 18.03 g/(kN·s)
4:1 37.09% 0.255 kN/(kg/s) 15.68 g/(kN·s)
6:1 40.15% 0.197 kN/(kg/s) 14.48 g/(kN·s)
8:1 42.3% 0.162 kN/(kg/s) 13.75 g/(kN·s)
10:1 43.91% 0.137 kN/(kg/s) 13.24 g/(kN·s)
12:1 45.16% 0.12 kN/(kg/s) 12.87 g/(kN·s)

And the flight-speed sweep, at a fixed 6:1 bypass ratio:

Flight speed Thrust Propulsive eff. Overall eff.
0 m/s 155.94 kN 0% 0%
80 m/s 125.84 kN 34.88% 19.51%
150 m/s 105.07 kN 54.6% 30.54%
220 m/s 88.73 kN 67.62% 37.83%
280 m/s 77.58 kN 75.25% 42.1%
340 m/s 68.51 kN 80.7% 45.14%

And the pressure-ratio sweep, isolating thermal efficiency alone:

Pressure ratio Thermal efficiency
15:1 53.87%
25:1 60.13%
35:1 63.79%
45:1 66.3%

Engine: 60 kg/s core airflow, 30:1 default pressure ratio, 250 m/s cruise speed. Generated 2026-09-11.

Try it yourself

Open the lab, set your own core airflow, bypass ratio, pressure ratio, fuel flow, and cruise speed, and watch thrust, thermal, propulsive, and overall efficiency move in real time.

Open the Jet Engine Lab →
Share this X Facebook Reddit

Related reading

Common questions

What is the difference between thermal efficiency and propulsive efficiency?

Thermal efficiency is how much of the fuel's chemical energy the engine core turns into kinetic energy in the exhaust jet — set by the overall pressure ratio, it runs from 53.87% at a 15:1 pressure ratio up to 66.3% at a 45:1 pressure ratio in this lab's model. Propulsive efficiency is a separate question entirely: how much of that jet's kinetic energy actually pushes the aircraft forward, versus how much is left behind as wasted motion in the exhaust wake. Overall efficiency is the product of the two (times a component efficiency term), so a jet engine can have excellent thermal efficiency and still deliver poor overall efficiency if its propulsive efficiency is low.

Why does a jet engine have zero propulsive efficiency when the aircraft is standing still?

Propulsive efficiency compares the aircraft's flight speed to the engine's exhaust speed, and it is zero whenever flight speed is zero, no matter how much thrust the engine makes. At 0 m/s this lab's default engine still produces 155.94 kN of static thrust, but 0% of the jet's kinetic energy does useful work on the airframe — all of it stays behind in the high-speed exhaust wake, because the airframe itself isn't moving to absorb any of that energy. As flight speed climbs toward the exhaust speed, propulsive efficiency rises with it, reaching 80.7% at 340 m/s and 67.62% at 220 m/s in this sweep.

Why does a high-bypass turbofan need less fuel per unit of thrust than a turbojet?

A turbojet (bypass 0) pushes all of its airflow through the hot core at high speed, which gives it high specific thrust — 0.768 kN per kg/s of airflow in this sweep — but a large mismatch between that exhaust speed and typical flight speed, which caps propulsive efficiency and drives fuel flow per unit of thrust (26.04 g/(kN·s)) up. A high-bypass turbofan (bypass 12) instead pushes far more air through its fan at a much lower speed increase, dropping specific thrust to 0.12 kN per kg/s but closing the gap to flight speed — which is exactly why fuel flow per unit of thrust falls to 12.87 g/(kN·s) and overall efficiency climbs from 22.32% to 45.16%. The larger fan and duct that a high-bypass engine needs to move all that extra air is the physical size it takes to get there.

What is overall pressure ratio (OPR) and why does raising it improve thermal efficiency?

Overall pressure ratio is how much the compressor raises intake air pressure before fuel is added and burned, and it governs the ideal (Brayton-cycle) thermal efficiency of the whole engine core — independent of bypass ratio, flight speed, or fuel flow. Raising OPR from 15:1 to 45:1 lifts thermal efficiency from 53.87% to 66.3% in this lab's model, because a higher pressure ratio lets the same fuel energy expand through a bigger pressure drop, extracting more usable work from every unit of heat released.