How much better could modern tech make a world war two engine?

[GtoRA2]

Ahh ok I get it now, the actual length of the prop is pretty sqaure is what you mean!




What was the andvatage to some of the brit designs that had five blades?

[GRUNHERZ]

Just to transfer the power if the new engines. They also had the benefit of making the spit 14 handle like crap.

[GtoRA2]

So the P-38 was stuck with crappy props the whole war... They never changed them on a production model right?


Interesting it still did so well.

[GRUNHERZ]

Experimental P38s with new engines and more modern props had vastly better performance.

Here is a link from widewing's site.

http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/P-38K.html

[GtoRA2]

Yeah, I read all about the K in one of the books I have.


I think it is called P-38 lighting by Warren M Bodie?


He talks about the K and how it did not go into production cause of line delays and they only had one factory for the P-38.


What a killer plane that would have been....

Talk about a perk plane!

That is a fantastic book by the way, great read on the P-38, lots of info none of the other books have, even some speculation about what a P-38 with Merlins would have been like.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
So the P-38 was stuck with crappy props the whole war... They never changed them on a production model right?


Interesting it still did so well.

Yes, the War Production Board and the USAAF denied Lockheed permission to use the Hamilton Standard props, because the P-38 was evidently so important to the war effort that any production stoppage of more than a few hours could not be tolerated.

The P-38 was to be second sourced from Consolidated Vultee here in Tennessee. Sadly, they were never able to make more than 113 of them. Oddly enough, Lockheed was required ot produce the B-17 under license from Boeing. This cut capacity for the P-38 in half. Why the War Production Board and the USAAF were so stupid as to not have Consolidated Vultee make the B-17, which they were better equipped to do, and let Lockheed make twice as many P-38s we'll never know.

Not only did the P-38 use the crappy Curtiss Electric props, but also the P-39, the P-40, and some P-47s. Several pilots quickly learned to grab a P-47 with a more reliable and more efficicient Hamilton Standard prop, because the Curtiss prop would get you killed.

Again, the War Production Board COULD have required Curtiss to manufacture the Hamilton Standard props under license, but they chose not to. Why they did not is another burning question. The USAAF was allowed to require certain parts be used regardless of whether they were suitable or not. They could also prevent manufacturers from installing upgrades as well.

That link to Widewing's website will only get you the story of the P-38K. Elsewhere on the site you'll be able to see dozens of stupid things the War Production Board and the USAAF did to the P-38, not to mention the total hack job they did on the P-39. By the way, they also prevented Allison from fitting better crank driven superchargers on the P-39 and P-40, and prohibited the use of turbochargers on those planes. They also prevented the use of the upgraded Allisons in the P-38 later in the war. The Allisons used in the P-82 twin Mustang were available but not used in the P-38. Remember that the P-82 had no turbochargers, but it had Allisons nearly as powerful as the turbocharged (compound supercharged) Allisons in the P-38.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Experimental P38s with new engines and more modern props had vastly better performance.

Here is a link from widewing's site.

http://home.att.net/~C.C.Jordan/P-38K.html

Yeah, note that the P-38K would have been available BEFORE the J model, meaning it would have been in Europe in the early fall of 1943. Nevermind the fact that the following J and L models would have been even better.

[GtoRA2]

Captain Virgil Hilts
 I have heard all that and it seems astounding.

 I had not heard that the p-82 engines where available before the war end.

Imagine if you could go back and replace the guys on that board?

I read somewhere that GM told the airforce basicaly use the alison in the p=38 or we will stop making them or something to that effect? Do you think there was some high level back room deels going on?

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
Yeah, I read all about the K in one of the books I have.


I think it is called P-38 lighting by Warren M Bodie?


He talks about the K and how it did not go into production cause of line delays and they only had one factory for the P-38.


What a killer plane that would have been....

Talk about a perk plane!

That is a fantastic book by the way, great read on the P-38, lots of info none of the other books have, even some speculation about what a P-38 with Merlins would have been like.

The Merlin would have REDUCED performance in the P-38, it was heavier and less reliable. High altitude performance and climb rate would have suffered greatly. The P-51 with the Allison was not a poor performer because of the Allison, but rather because of WHICH Allison it had.

Imagine the P-38 with the later four blade version of the Hamilton Standard props. And the engines held back and later used in the P-82, with turbochargers.

Imagine BOTH the P-39 AND the P-40 with the turbocharger AND the Hamilton Standard props.

Remember that after the war, the P-39, fitted with P-38 engines complete WITH the turbochargers, were some of the best race planes around.

And remember all of this and the Sherman tank the next time some one tells you "They'd have only supplied our fighting men with the very best weapons possible, so if it was replaced or phased out, it was inferior". Just so much Bravo Sierra.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
Captain Virgil Hilts
 I have heard all that and it seems astounding.

 I had not heard that the p-82 engines where available before the war end.

Imagine if you could go back and replace the guys on that board?

I read somewhere that GM told the airforce basicaly use the alison in the p=38 or we will stop making them or something to that effect? Do you think there was some high level back room deels going on?

To find the truth about the Allisons, read "Vees for Victory, the story of the Allison V-1710 Aircraft Engine" and "Allied Aircraft Piston Engines of World War II".

Was there a huge bunch of politics going on behind the scenes in the War Production Board? You bet your bottom dollar on it.

[GtoRA2]

With the engines from the P-82, would the P-38 have needed to the turboes? DIdnt the engine from the P-82 have 2 speed 2 stage superchargers like the Merlin XX?



Was the Navy not under the same board as athe army Aircorp?

Seems like Navy Aircraft did not have as many problems as the Army ones. Like no one had issues with the -4 having a 4 blade prop? They never used the curtis prop. (Well maybe the wildcat,)

[FUNKED1]

Yep 2-speed 2-stage, although IIRC the 2nd stage was kind of a bulky add-on job, not as neat and integrated as on the 60 series Merlins.

I think it was basically the same motor as the one in the P-63.

[GtoRA2]

CVH!

AWSOME!! I am ordering the Vees for Victory book right now!

I have the allied piston engines book by Gramah, hell I bought his HARDCORE book on just the r2800, good stuff.

[Captain Virgil Hilts]

Originally posted by GtoRA2
With the engines from the P-82, would the P-38 have needed to the turboes? DIdnt the engine from the P-82 have 2 speed 2 stage superchargers like the Merlin XX?



Was the Navy not under the same board as athe army Aircorp?

Seems like Navy Aircraft did not have as many problems as the Army ones. Like no one had issues with the -4 having a 4 blade prop? They never used the curtis prop. (Well maybe the wildcat,)

The turbochargers were necessary for the optimum high altitude performance. A crank driven supercharger, even a two speed two stage supercharger, can only be tuned for certain altitude ranges. It will be a killer at those altitudes, but weaker at others. Look at the Spitfire. There were Spitfire models made for specific altitudes. They not only had certain airframe atributes, but also specific Merlin engines tuned for a specific altitude range.

Yes, the Navy and Marines also operated under the War Production Board.

However, realize that the Navy and Marines were a whole different system. First, they had no liquid cooled V type engines, the Navy refused any liquid cooled engines, only accepting radial air cooled engines. Therefore they didn't have to deal with two types of props for the same type of aircraft (ie fighters), because they all had the same basic engine type. Remember that the Navy operated off of carriers at sea, and the Marines were attached to the Navy. Well, you can only store so many spare parts on a carrier, so you don't have the option to carry two or three types of props.

[GtoRA2]

Imagine how badly the P-38 would have dominated the Japanses planes.


How many other planes like the P-38 K  or the FW-187 are out there that would have been world beaters but never made it into production?