Author Topic: Ta-152 is a little slow.  (Read 1684 times)

Offline Flyboy

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1582
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #15 on: January 17, 2005, 03:51:06 PM »
thnks hohun that really clear things up! :)


now... to raid the local dentist and install N2O to the buggy :D

Offline Crumpp

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3671
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #16 on: January 17, 2005, 06:34:33 PM »
Quote
Oh, by the way, someone mentioned that N2O was to be used for short bursts only. According to what I have read, it could be used as long as it was available and in fact short bursts were to be avoided as filling and emptying the N2O lines took some time and created some engine management difficulties.


That is correct.  It took up to 3 minutes for the lines to clear and the LNOX to reach the engine.  LNOX would evaporate in the lines if it was not turned on and running.

Once it got going it was left on until the tank went dry or it was no longer needed.

Crumpp
« Last Edit: January 17, 2005, 06:54:00 PM by Crumpp »

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #17 on: January 17, 2005, 06:44:51 PM »
I read that GM-1 equipped Bf109E7 gained some 80km/h at high alt over standard power..

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16333
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #18 on: January 17, 2005, 11:43:09 PM »
Crumpp is HoHun?
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #19 on: January 18, 2005, 01:04:26 PM »
Hi Oldman,

>That's certainly the best explanation of the process that I've seen, HoHun, thanks.

Glad you found it interesting :-)

To add to its usefulness, I should state the main sources: "Die deutsche Luftfahrt - Flugmotoren und Strahltriebwerke" by Kyrill von Gersdorff, Kurt Grasmann, Helmut Schuber and (might seem a bit off topic at first) "Motorcycle Turbocharging, Supercharging and Nitrous Oxide" by Joe Haile.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #20 on: January 18, 2005, 01:13:27 PM »
Hi Flyboy,

>now... to raid the local dentist and install N2O to the buggy :D

LOL!

Be careful with the opposite direction though: Industrial N2O is contaminated with other gases and not suitable for human consumption! =8-O

(It's the same with oxygen, but unlike oxygen, industrial laughing gas is abused occasionally by clueless kids for its reportedly intoxicating effect.)

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #21 on: January 18, 2005, 01:58:08 PM »
Hi Grünherz,

>I read that GM-1 equipped Bf109E7 gained some 80km/h at high alt over standard power..

Radinger/Schick provide a figure of a 100 km/h gain at 8 km, from 250 - 280 PS at 0.1 kg/s. The lower figure than the 300 - 400 PS quoted above probably is the result of using pressurized instead of cooled N2O. (von Gersdorff et al. confirm the figures.)

For the E-7/NZ, 60 g/s, 100 g/s and 150 g/s were available, with the 60 g/s being available from 6.5 km up.

Unfortunatelly, the Emil delivery table in Radinger/Schick is confused just where the E-7/NZ comes into play. It seems 311 Emils were delivered by the factories producing E-7/NZ during the time the E-7/NZ was produced, but some (most?) of them were standard E-7/N models. And I just don't understand the table :-(

Additonally, the GM-1 gear could be retro-fitted, but only at one shop in Dortmund. The factory-fitted E-7/NZ apparently entered production in March 1941.

Of the Emil with DB601N, 496 were produced until 31.10.1940. The number is from a schedule, but updated on 1.11.1940 so it's semi-retrospective. Except for Fieseler, who were behind the production curve, the factories apparently met the orders fairly well. Fieseler was slow to ramp up production, so the 135 E-7/N they supposedly contributed to the 496 total might be a bit suspect.

The first DB601N-equipped Emils were actually conversions of existing E-4 airframes, arriving at the channel on 21.7.1940 with II./JG26. Apparently, they were the only group to use the DB601N in the Battle of Britain, though the above production totals look a bit contradictory there. Since the Technisches Amt had originally planned the DB601N for the Zerstörers primarily until hurriedly changing priorities when the Bf 110 proved to be a lousy escort fighter, I'd even say the entire production totals are suspect. On the other hand, more than 1000 DB601N engines were produced in 1940, and they must have gone mainly into the Emil. Oh well :-(

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

VWE

  • Guest
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #22 on: January 19, 2005, 01:45:45 PM »
Well too bad it aint working in our 152, cause it  needs something.

Offline GRUNHERZ

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13413
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #23 on: January 19, 2005, 01:50:31 PM »
100Km/h at 8KM, which is like 60mph at 25K feet.  Not bad, heck it's amazing..

Would this have made the E7 a 400mph plane in 1940?

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #24 on: January 19, 2005, 02:50:24 PM »
Hi Grünherz,

>100Km/h at 8KM, which is like 60mph at 25K feet.  Not bad, heck it's amazing..

That's why GM-1 was so attractive :-)

But the effect on climb rate was actually more important than on speed. For the Emil, I'd expect a gain of perhaps 8 m/s from full GM-1 usage (estimated by throwing darts at a phone book ;-), which could be activated at the flip of a switch when you had reached service ceiling (0.5 m/s).

The Ju 86R got up to 15 km pressure altitude in an experimental flight using GM-1. Flying a propeller aircraft, that's about as close to astronaut wings as you're going to get ;-)

>Would this have made the E7 a 400mph plane in 1940?

Hm, I'd say it that seems possible (early 1941, actually). Not in the same way like the 400 mph aircraft of later days, though, more like an aircraft with a high-altitude capable turbo-supercharger - "normal" performance at medium altitudes, but it just won't slow down while flying higher and higher.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline dedalos

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8052
Re: Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #25 on: January 19, 2005, 03:03:49 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by VWE
I upped a 152 in the CT last night and seeing that I owned the skies I did a little testing. At 41,010 feet the 152 should do 472 mph with wep,  


I see you guys are back to flying low in the CT.


:rofl
Quote from: 2bighorn on December 15, 2010 at 03:46:18 PM
Dedalos pretty much ruined DA.

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #26 on: January 19, 2005, 03:46:33 PM »
HoHun,

The other amazing thing about the Ju-86P and R was they were powered by diesel engines!

63tb


The Ju 86P was produced in two versions, the Ju 86P-1 high-altitude bomber carrying 4 550-lb bombs or 16 110-lb bombs and the Ju 86P-2 high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft equipped with three cameras. No defensive armament was provided, since it was assumed by the Luftwaffe that the aircraft would be completely immune to interception by enemy fighters. During 1940 and 1941, numerous bombing and reconnaissance missions were flown over Britain, the Ju 86P aircraft indeed proving to be immune from interception by RAF fighters. The Ju 86P aircraft also flew some clandestine reconnaissance missions over the Soviet Union in preparation for the June 22, 1941 assault. Some Ju 86Ps were operated in the Mediterranean theater, and flew unmolested numerous times over Egypt. However, the Ju 86P eventually met its match in the form of a specially-stripped version of the Spitfire V evolved by the British to meet the high-altitude threat. The first successful interception of a Ju 86P was on August 24, 1942, when a Spitfire V caught one of these aircraft over Egypt at an altitude of 42,000 feet and forced it to crash into the Mediterranean. In response to this new threat, Luftwaffe personnel hastily fitted a remotely-controlled MG 17 machine gun fixed to fire aft from the rear fuselage. However, a couple more Ju 86P-2s were soon lost to these modified Spitfires. Since the operation of the Ju 86P over enemy territory was becoming increasingly hazardous to the health of its aircrews, the type was shortly thereafter withdrawn from operational service.

In an attempt to improve the chances of the reconnaissance Ju 86 surviving over enemy territory, the Ju 86R series was evolved. An even higher-aspect ratio wing was fitted, having a span of 104 ft 11 3/4 in. A pair of Jumo 207B-3 engines were fitted, each offering 1000 hp for takeoff. The engines were provided with GM-1 boost (nitrous oxide injected into the supercharger) for use above the rated altitude of the engine. Two versions were proposed, the Ju 86R-1 high-altitude reconnaissance aircraft and the Ju 86R-2 high- altitude bomber. A few existing Ju 86Ps were converted to Ju 86R configuration, and tests showed that an altitude of 47,250 feet could be reached and maintained. A few operational missions were flown by the Ju 86R, but the type was eventually taken out of service by July 1944.

Source:
The Warplanes of the Third Reich, William Green

Offline HoHun

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2182
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #27 on: January 19, 2005, 04:15:09 PM »
Hi 63tb,

>The other amazing thing about the Ju-86P and R was they were powered by diesel engines!

Roger that! :-)

I've seen quite a few Jumo 205 survivors, every technical museum in Germany seems to have one though they weren't produced in great numbers. I guess they were kept for their jaw-dropping qualities ;-)

Have you ever seen one of them? One crankshaft at the bottom, another one on top, pistons going into the cylinder from both ends, aspiration through the cylinder walls and direct fuel injection. The Jumo 207 even had a turbo-supercharger.

Junkers had actually build large, slow running stationary engines for quite a while (steam-engine sized :-) before miniaturizing them for aviation applications in 1928.

The Jumo 205 had a ca. 30% advantage in specific fuel consumption compared to the contemporary Jumo gasoline engines, and this kind of efficiency made them great for economic long-range flights.

Regards,

Henning (HoHun)

Offline MiloMorai

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6865
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #28 on: January 19, 2005, 04:37:52 PM »
Jumo 205






Jumo 205 with mechanical driven supercharger

    * Type: To-stroke supercharged compression ignition
    * Cylinders: 6 with 12 opposed piston
    * Valve arrangement:
    * Bore and Stroke: 105 x twice 160
    * Swept volume: 16.6 litre
    * Compression ratio:
    * Max revolution: 2800
    * Power range: 647 kW
    * Brake specific fuel consumption (lb/hp/h):
    * BMEP: 8.4 Bar
    * Weight, kg 600

Jumo 207 experimental from 1944 with mechanical driven supercharger, turbocharger, charge cooling

    * Type: To-stroke supercharged compression ignition
    * Cylinders: 6 with 12 opposed piston
    * Valve arrangement:
    * Bore and Stroke: 105 x twice 160
    * Swept volume: 16.6 litre
    * Compression ratio:
    * Max revolution: 3200
    * Power range: 1324 kW
    * Brake specific fuel consumption (lb/hp/h): 0.32
    * BMEP: 15 Bar
    * Weight, kg 880
« Last Edit: January 19, 2005, 04:43:39 PM by MiloMorai »

Offline 63tb

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 152
Ta-152 is a little slow.
« Reply #29 on: January 19, 2005, 04:47:32 PM »
Hohun, Milo,

How tall was that engine? Wonder why they didn't mount the prop shaft in the middle. That would have made it a bit easier to blend into the wing. Did it run on regular diesel fuel? I thought that diesel fuel was tough to use in very cold conditions, and it's plenty cold at 40,000 feet!

63tb