avatar_Leigh

Aircraft engines. Swapping and upgrading.

Started by Leigh, March 05, 2005, 02:14:40 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

GTX

QuoteIt's on the large size, but Lycoming was in development of the R7755 which was a 5000 hp., four-row, liquid-cooled, radial. Wikipedia has the full details on the engine, but a fighter or bomber powered by the R7755-5 (fuel injection, contra-props) would be an awesome beast.

Yes - look here.

Regards,

Greg
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

canuck

according to wikipedia a large PT6A of 1940 shp.I don' t think so. the most powerful
PT6A is is only able of delivering 1450 shp

Hobbes

Found another 42-cylinder radial. This is a Russian design, made for use in ships. Of course, some lunatic had to install it in a tractor puller:



more info here

Mossie

QuoteThis must be COOL from a WHIFFER's point of view B)  :wub:
We need more info :)
There were several aircraft designed around this engine Carlos, they didn't materialise when development of the engine fell through.  The Lockheed XP-58 Chain Lightning, Republic XP-69, & Hughes D-2/XP-73/XF-11 all were designed to take the Wright Tornado at some stage.  Not suprisingly, Anigrand do resin kits of all of these, although you might have to make changes to some to depict a particular aircraft with Tornado engines.

http://www.anigrand.com/AA2038_XP-58.htm
http://www.anigrand.com/AA2069_XP-69.htm
http://www.anigrand.com/AA2041_XF-11.htm
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

ysi_maniac

#49
IIRC Chain Lightning had Allison engines. No?
Will die without understanding this world.

Mossie

This was what it the XP-58 was finally fitted with, but only after it was obvious that the development of the Tornado was not progressing well.  No aircraft flew with the Tornado because it failed to materialise, but several were designed with it in mind because of it's promised power.
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

simmie

A couple of books that might be of interest to you chaps are as follows:-

Major Piston engines of World War II

By Victor Bingham

Pub - Airlife

and

British Piston Aero Engines and Their Aircraft

By Alec Lumsden

Pub - Airlife

Both are very good.  The first has individual chapters on Sabre, Merlin, Griffon, Vulture, DB600 series, Jumo 211/13, R2800, V1710 etc.  The later book only covers engines that flew, and list all types in to which it was installed.
Reality is for people who can't handle Whif!!

Now with more WHATTHEF***!! than ever before!

Mossie

Archies Whirlwind thread got me thinking, what if the Pergrine & Vulture had been developed sucessfully?  The Merlin was more or less an interim while problems with the Peregrine were sorted out.  The Vulture was two Peregrines coupled together & suffered similar problems.  If these two engines had been developed properly, the Merlin & therefore the Griffon may not have emerged, or at least the Merlin would have been superseeded.

So what aircraft would have got these engines?  The Peregrine had a slimmer profile than the Merlin & would have given a different look, not to mentioning tweeking a bit more speed due to improved stramlining.  The Vulture would have been available earlier than the Griffon & Sabre, maybe resulting in earlier development of high powered in-lines?

Simon.  :thumbsup:  
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

Archibald

QuoteThe Vulture was two Peregrines coupled together
:blink:  

Never realised that before. You learn something everyday here...
What an irony! I've imagined in my thread that the Whirlwind actually killed the Typhoon...

King Arthur: Can we come up and have a look?
French Soldier: Of course not. You're English types.
King Arthur: What are you then?
French Soldier: I'm French. Why do you think I have this outrageous accent, you silly king?

Well regardless I would rather take my chance out there on the ocean, that to stay here and die on this poo-hole island spending the rest of my life talking to a gosh darn VOLLEYBALL.

ysi_maniac

A steamlined, sleek, styled, ... Tempest, maybe?
Will die without understanding this world.

jcf

As I posted in the Whirlwind thread, dimensionally the Peregrine and Merlin are actually very close, displacement and weight are the big difference:

Peregrine:
Length 73.6"; width 27.1"; height 41.0"; weight 1,140 lbs.
Displacement 1,296 cu in.

Merlin (single-speed supercharger):
Length 69"; width 29.8"; height 41.2"; weight 1,375 lbs.
Displacement 1,637 cu in.

Merlin (two-speed supercharger):
Length 71"; width 29.8"; height 43.0"; weight 1,450 lbs.
Displacement 1,637 cu in.


Cheers, Jon

kitnut617

I don't know about the Peregrine, I don't think it had the development potential, RR would build a few engines and then see which one was easier to develop.  The Merlin in it's first redentation, put out 980+ hp, and by the end of WW.II had been developed to put out 2040 hp, that's in 6 or 7 years.  Really remarkable considering that the bore and stroke stayed the same all through it's development.
If I'm not building models, I'm out riding my dirtbike

jcf

QuoteI don't know about the Peregrine, I don't think it had the development potential, RR would build a few engines and then see which one was easier to develop.  The Merlin in it's first redentation, put out 980+ hp, and by the end of WW.II had been developed to put out 2040 hp, that's in 6 or 7 years.  Really remarkable considering that the bore and stroke stayed the same all through it's development.
Agreed.

Mossie

Maybe not, but we'll never know, Rolls might have been able to work the same wonders.  Wartime urgency helped with the Merlin development (it probably wouldn't have acheieved so well otherwise), had the bugs been ironed out of the Peregrine it may have developed further too.  It wouldn't have to be developed as far as the Merlin to still get some good use out of it.

It was never intended to develop the Merlin as far as it did & my assumption is that if the Peregrine had not been so reliable, that would have been the engine that would have been developed.  It was the favoured design in the beggining because of those stats that Jon supplied, it was lighter & had a smaller displacement for similar power.  It was intended to have a family of engines like Bristols radials, rather than just the Merlin & Griffon as happened.

QuoteNever realised that before. You learn something everyday here...

Archie, the Vulture had an 'X' cylinder arrangement, one Peregrine V engine placed inverted over the other.

QuoteA steamlined, sleek, styled, ... Tempest, maybe?
The Vulture might be a good kitbash for the Tempest, yet another engine to go on it!
I don't think it's nice, you laughin'. You see, my mule don't like people laughin'. He gets the crazy idea you're laughin' at him. Now if you apologize, like I know you're going to, I might convince him that you really didn't mean it.

jcf

QuoteIt was the favoured design in the beggining because of those stats that Jon supplied, it was lighter & had a smaller displacement for similar power. 

Similar power? 880hp versus 1,030hp for the Merlin I is a big difference.
Also according to Lumsden the Peregrine was constructed using info from the early Merlin developments, so without the Merlin program there may not have been a Peregrine. The Peregrine was basically a developed Kestrel incorporating Merlin features.

Jon