The Pistonator GB

jcf · June 06, 2009, 12:31:06 PM

Don't forget to consider the buried engine with shaft-driven prop(s) alternative for those jet to piston conversions.

Jet fighters and the like have a lot of internal volume.

Jon

Brian da Basher · June 06, 2009, 12:38:29 PM

Your post makes me think, Mr Carffarrelly...how about opening this GB up to re-enging jet planes with piston engines too?

Brian da Basher

Weaver · June 06, 2009, 12:58:12 PM

Quote from: Brian da Basher on June 06, 2009, 12:38:29 PM
Your post makes me think, Mr Carffarrelly...how about opening this GB up to re-enging jet planes with piston engines too?

Brian da Basher

Umm, can't, 'cos it already is:

Quote from: Weaver
Take any turboprop/turbojet/turbofan-powered flying machine and "backdate" it to the heyday of piston engines.

GTX · June 07, 2009, 03:40:09 AM

How about a SR-71 with Pratt & Whitney R-4360s?

Regards,

Greg

Weaver · June 07, 2009, 04:50:38 AM

Quote from: GTX on June 07, 2009, 03:40:09 AM
How about a SR-71 with Pratt & Whitney R-4360s?

Regards,

Greg

Think it would probably need 4 x R-8720s.......

PR19_Kit · June 07, 2009, 05:57:40 AM

Quote from: Weaver on June 07, 2009, 04:50:38 AM
Quote from: GTX on June 07, 2009, 03:40:09 AM
How about a SR-71 with Pratt & Whitney R-4360s?

Regards,

Greg

Think it would probably need 4 x R-8720s.......

Or maybe eight? Quad engine pods with an engine either end?

chrisonord · June 09, 2009, 03:40:39 PM

Well are we doing this are we? can we? please please please.
I have dug out my dead IL-28, a Short Sunderland gun turret, some radial engines from an S-2 tracker, I was going to use a pair of Merlins, but the radials look good (easier to fit

) and I am going to put a pair of sunderland props on it. Also I have some rockets that came from a skyraider, I am going to hang 8 of those on the wings, and maybe the mother of all torpedo's underneath it.
Chris.

Daryl J. · June 09, 2009, 04:06:04 PM

What about a train locomotive that uses traditional internal combustion engines to drive the wheels rather than steam. Fuel could be diesel, gasoline, or ethanol/water in banks of inline 6 cylinder engines mounted transversely. One engine per set of driving wheels.

jcf · June 09, 2009, 04:33:06 PM

Quote from: Daryl J. on June 09, 2009, 04:06:04 PM
What about a train locomotive that uses traditional internal combustion engines to drive the wheels rather than steam. Fuel could be diesel, gasoline, or ethanol/water in banks of inline 6 cylinder engines mounted transversely. One engine per set of driving wheels.

Technically speaking diesel locomotives use internal combustion engines to drive the wheels.

However, I realize you are speaking of direct mechanical drive and it is used on small engines (shunters and the like) and has been experimented with on larger machines. Also diesel-hydraulic drive systems have been used.

The Wiki on the subject of diesel locomotives is a good starting point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_locomotive

Jon

PR19_Kit · June 10, 2009, 01:58:01 AM

Daryl is suggesting the engines are mounted sideways in the locomotive frames, with each engine driving its own set of driving wheels. I'm pretty sure that hasn't been tried in the railway (railroad.....) field so far.

Mind you, it would make for a pretty wide loco body, and a humunguous gear train down to the axles.

chrisonord · June 10, 2009, 07:33:41 AM

Quote from: PR19_Kit on June 10, 2009, 01:58:01 AM
Daryl is suggesting the engines are mounted sideways in the locomotive frames, with each engine driving its own set of driving wheels. I'm pretty sure that hasn't been tried in the railway (railroad.....) field so far.

Mind you, it would make for a pretty wide loco body, and a humunguous gear train down to the axles.

And where would you put the bombs/rockets/missiles/guns/torpedos on it.

Daryl J. · June 10, 2009, 09:35:44 AM

QuoteAnd where would you put the bombs/rockets/missiles/guns/torpedos on it.

Have you seen pictures of some of those old Soviet Ekranoplans?

Regarding the locomotive engines, with a transverse mount, the idea is to avoid changing the rotational directions as much as possible. And make the bore as narrow as possible, stroke as long as possible, and try avoid an engine length issue in order to use current guage rails.

Back to the WIG, 'WW-1 ing' a Lun might be cool.

Daryl J.

Weaver · June 10, 2009, 11:23:28 AM

Quote from: chrisonord on June 10, 2009, 07:33:41 AM
Quote from: PR19_Kit on June 10, 2009, 01:58:01 AM
Daryl is suggesting the engines are mounted sideways in the locomotive frames, with each engine driving its own set of driving wheels. I'm pretty sure that hasn't been tried in the railway (railroad.....) field so far.

Mind you, it would make for a pretty wide loco body, and a humunguous gear train down to the axles.
And where would you put the bombs/rockets/missiles/guns/torpedos on it.

Wherever the gunsight pipper falls, presumably......

Weaver
Not popular in the rail-oriented LHS for describing trains as "linear targets"

GTX · June 10, 2009, 11:39:52 AM

Another option would be some pistonated (that sounds so bad) airliners - 737 with props etc.

Regards,

Greg

PR19_Kit · June 10, 2009, 12:23:51 PM

Quote from: Daryl J. on June 10, 2009, 09:35:44 AM
And make the bore as narrow as possible, stroke as long as possible, and try avoid an engine length issue in order to use current guage rails.

Daryl,

Have you ever seen pics of an East African Railways Garratt?

It has a boiler about the same size a UP Challenger with a 4-8-4 engine at BOTH ends, and it runs on 3 ft gauge track. Width isn't really an issue, you'd need a gear box to get the drive from the engine to the axles anyway and that will raise the engine to footplate level.