Originally posted by Golfer
I bet you look at this too. I'm glad you can pick up on sarcasm when it's there...even the roll eyes smiley should have given it away.
You've got the name...you just don't have the right record. Toad and I are trying to get it sorted out but I'm in between students now trying to teach them how to have an ego because if they're going to be pilots they're going to need to act like Maverick and Ice Man. Hell with safety and checklists...its all about having your hair on fire and turning fuel into noise.
As for you, herr uberfuhrermechinca try explaining a little something to these guys who are asking you questions instead of responding "Incorrect statement" and explain the whats and whys instead of giving them serial numbers.
There's more to this whole thing than just oil. Without having the fuel under positive pressure or in the case of a standard engine with a carb...your engine will stop making noise if you've got a negative G-load on the airplane. The fuel just isn't going to flow. A good example of how this is modeled without going through any expense is to try the Spitfire MkI or the Hurricane MkI and push the nose over. The engine quits (though does not seize) and as soon as you have a positive G load on the airplane again the fuel starts flowing again and the engine comes back to life.
I think you're trying to use too much logic (I can't believe I ever would accuse someone of this) when you say nobody would ever be inverted for any length of time. When I had the chance to fly a Christen Eagle with an inverted fuel/oil system I flew around upside down for a few minutes just because I could. It's cool. The pilot/shareholder flies intermediate aerobatics in IAC competitions and will fly an inverted pattern which is just cool. No logical reason behind it...it's just cool. Roll inverted for 60 seconds in a Corsair and inspect the engine afterwards if it didn't stop running (I don't think it would) in the middle of doing it...you'd be needing 18 new cylinders.
Anyway...I think the whole point of the thing was he said the engine would stop/seize after a few seconds of inverted flight. It definately would stop making noise once the fuel lines were full of air.
According to Hawaiin I would say we have the right record. Which by the way does NOT change the fact that he still LIED.
Never claimed to be unbermechanica, there are many who are far better than I. Hell, I learn more every single day, the day I stop learning is the day I need to step away from airplanes.
As for the fuel pressure, the Corsair is equipped to run in inverted situations for a period, but again, it is not a "Christian Eagle" an aircraft specifically designed to run inverted and perform all manner of aerobatics. Your mentioning of the carbureutors in the Spit I and hurri are great additions, but they were lethal design flaws in combat that were quickly rectified. I believe that same issue existed in the early P-40 if I am correct, so don't quote that.
As for 60 seconds true inverted in a Corsair... bullcaca, you would more than likely need new main bearings and connecting rod bearing, maybe even suffer some valve issues, but saying all 18 cylinders would be fired is just plain wrong.
Anyways, as for the US fighters of WW2 sustaining true negative G flight as does a modern day Christian Eagle, that is just unrealistic to compare, but in the end, would probably, like you said, starve of fuel first before the engine fried.
So, factually, could you fry an R2800 in sustained inverted flight, yes. In reality, there are many other factors that would weigh in to prevent this ever happening.
