Author Topic: Each nation's most powerful service engine? (Read 2972 times)

Karnak · « **on:** October 31, 2005, 04:18:47 AM »

Engine power is, to a large degree, the determining factor in how powerful a fighter can be. I am wondering what the most powerful domestic engine each or the six warring nations got into significant service was? What I mean is engines that were used in the hundreds or thousands, not a few tens of custom built engines.

Germany: BMW 801Dg at 2,100hp?
Italy: Piaggio P.XIX at 1,175hp?
Japan: Ha-45-21 at 1,990hp?
UK: Napier-Sabre at 2,180hp?
USA: R2800-77 at 2,800hp?
USSR: ASh-82FN at 1,850hp?

What are the correct answers. Those are my guesses, but I am not sure.

Angus · « **Reply #1 on:** October 31, 2005, 04:23:01 AM »

UK: Griffon 61 at +18 boost makes how many hp's?

Karnak · « **Reply #2 on:** October 31, 2005, 04:24:13 AM »

2,050hp on the Griffon 65 at +18lbs boost Angus. If +21lbs boost I think it is in the 2,300s.

Angus · « **Reply #3 on:** October 31, 2005, 04:28:16 AM »

Wholly cow!
Was that in service in WW2? Spit 21 maybe?

Karnak · « **Reply #4 on:** October 31, 2005, 04:31:44 AM »

Spitfire Mk XIV uses the Griffon 65.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #5 on:** October 31, 2005, 05:41:45 AM »

Napier Sabre IIC - 2400hp (Typhoon) 1945
Napier Sabre IIB - 2420hp (Tempest V) 1944
Napier Saber IIA - 2220hp (Typhoon) 1943

Kurfürst · « **Reply #6 on:** October 31, 2005, 10:24:23 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
2,050hp on the Griffon 65 at +18lbs boost Angus. If +21lbs boost I think it is in the 2,300s.

Yeah but some point should be made that the Brits are always giving peak outputs - ie. the Griffon did ~1840 HP at SL, and 2035HP peak at altitutude -, others rarely do, they give max output at usually Sea level, i.e. Americans, Germans and Russians.

Ie. see it's power graph :
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/griffonhp_b.jpg
It only reached 2300 HP in one single point, at all other altitudes it's lower.

Another point is high-alt vs. low alt engines. Griffon vs. Sabre is a good example, the high alt engine is seemingly in disadvantage in output vs the low-alt rated one, because it drives a bigger supercharger, and the peak output (which is always developed at low altitude with mechanical superchargers) is lower. But at high altitude, the Griffon would put out a lot more power..

There's more things to look at. The output on the whole altitude range needs to be considered. Turbocharged or hydraulically clutched engines have pretty linear output over the whole altitude range, there's no bigdrop until the FTH. Most aero engines had fixed supercharger gear ratios, and this resulted the power go up and down, see the Griffon power curve again. IMHO it should be broken down to low alt and high alt engines.

Then there's engine effiency. No matter if an engine develops 10 000 HP, if it weights 3 tons, has a 100 sq.feet frontal area, needs 5 tons of fuel carried for it to get any decent range, and a 20 ton airframe to carry all that... so you have to look at how much useful power is developed, and how much is spent to just cancel out the engine/installation/fuel weight that the particular needs to operate. Powerplant installation is also a big factor.

As for the list, I think the most powerful inline engine (for peak output, note the above about altitude performance) the Germans fielded was the Junkers Jumo 213A-1, with 2240 PS peak output, seeing service with the 190D-9. The DB 605 peaked out at ~2030HP with 1.98ata, 2.3ata was considered/tested and would yield around 2300. I am not sure about the DB 603 service, there were some true beast around on the testpad, but the engine wasn't showing the true potential until '44-45. The BMW 801s may have gone up to 2400 HP in service with the later models, but that's crumpp's table.

Karnak · « **Reply #7 on:** October 31, 2005, 10:45:37 AM »

Good points Kurfurst and I was thinking of some of that last night when I posted, but opted for the simpler post.

The altitude effects on the Griffon and Napier-Sabre are definately significant and other nations definatelty saw that effect too when looking at different engine lines. As to size and frontal area, well, I was asking about engines that saw service in the hundreds and we can safely assume nobody put a destroyer's engine into service in an aircraft. In terms of frontal area I was thinking last night about that in comparing the fact that the bigger Griffon engine has a smaller frontal area than the Merlin it was replacing in the Spitfires.

I discounted the DB605 at 1.98ata for the same reason I discounted the Griffon 65 at +21lbs boost, there seems to be little agreement on not only how much service these settings saw, but if they saw service at all. German fans say yes to the 1.98ata and no to the +21lbs and British fans say yes to the +21lbs and no to the 1.98ata. Personally I think they both saw service, but I don't know to what extent and they might not count as common service engines. In light of the ongoing "debate" (more like two sides screeming past eachother) I opted to count the DB605 as 1.8ata at peak and the Griffon 65 as +18lbs boost at peak, large scale service numbers that are incontrvertable.

I wanted to stay away from engines in development because that opens a huge can of worms. The A7M2 was to be powered by a 2,200hp Mitsubishi Ha-43 of some kind. "In development" engines often failed to produce the desired power or even to be adequately reliable for service, such as the Rolls-Royce Vulture engines which failed on both those points.

Widewing · « **Reply #8 on:** October 31, 2005, 11:40:49 AM »

Add to the list:

Wright R-3350-23 (from 2,200 hp, up to 2,700 hp in later versions).
Pratt & Whitney R-4360-4 (3,000 hp, up to 3,600 hp at war's end).
Packard V-1650-9 (1,930 hp)

My regards,

Widewing

MiloMorai · « **Reply #9 on:** October 31, 2005, 12:07:09 PM »

It should be pointed out that the Brits did not always give power output at the engines best altitude. The 2420hp Sabre IIB is Sea Level power.

Quote

Yeah but some point should be made that the Brits are always giving peak outputs at altitutude

It should also be pointed out that German engines gave their best output at SL and then the power dropped off with altitude.

for the DB605, http://mitglied.lycos.de/luftwaffe1/aircraft/lw/DB605_varianten.pdf

Karnak · « **Reply #10 on:** October 31, 2005, 12:25:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Widewing
Pratt & Whitney R-4360-4 (3,000 hp, up to 3,600 hp at war's end).

May I ask what fighters (I assume we're talking fighters here) were using the 3,600hp engine and in what numbers? That is really a lot of power compared to everybody else's engines.

john9001 · « **Reply #11 on:** October 31, 2005, 01:02:07 PM »

>>F2G
Goodyear did undertake part of the production of the F4U, under the designation FG. Hence it developed, late in the war, a version of the Corsair powered by the Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major. It was based on the F4U-1D, and intended as a low-altitude interceptor. Such aircraft were required to defend the fleet against Kamikaze attacks.
The early R-4360-4 engine was rated at 3000hp. Because of the greater length of the four-row R-4360 radial, the engine cowling of the F2G was elongated. Together with the air intakes behind the engine cowling, on top of the fuselage, this was an easy recognition feature. The tail surfaces were enlarged, and more fuel capacity wa installed. Goodyear also fitted an all-round vision bubble cockpit on the F2G. This had first been tried on a FG-1A. It was a significant improvement, that for some reason was not adapted by later models of the Corsair.

The first models were land-based F2G-1s, but they were later followed by F2G-2 carrier fighters with hydraulic wing folding.

Production of the F2G ended after eight prototypes, five F2G-1s and five F2G-2s were completed. The original order for 418 F2G-1s was cancelled, because the end of the war removed any need for the F2G. Climb was excellent, 9150m could be reached in 4 minutes. Maximum speed on the other hand was rather disappointing, 32km/h (20mph) down from the expected 724km/h (450mph). The F4U-5, with its uprated R-2800 engine, was faster than the F2G. The F2G also suffered from lateral control problems.
<<<

Karnak · « **Reply #12 on:** October 31, 2005, 01:04:32 PM »

Anything else? If not it wasn't really a service engine, more of a specialty item. When I listed the 2,800hp R2800 I thought of the F2G's engine as well, but didn't go with it due to rarity.

Still, very impressive power on it.

2bighorn · « **Reply #13 on:** October 31, 2005, 01:10:24 PM »

Major Wasp was not really something what would you wanna put in a typical WWII fighter. At dry weight of over 3600 lbs and at that time prop limitations, it was just too much of an engine.

Widewing · « **Reply #14 on:** October 31, 2005, 01:42:20 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Karnak
Anything else? If not it wasn't really a service engine, more of a specialty item. When I listed the 2,800hp R2800 I thought of the F2G's engine as well, but didn't go with it due to rarity.

Still, very impressive power on it.

P&W's R-4360 was used on several prototypes that were discontinued to concentrate on jets and was used for heavy bombers and attack aircraft.

Republic XP-72 (499 mph)
Boeing XF8B-1 (432 mph)
Martin AM-1 Mauler (Developed during war, 151 in USN service between 1946 and 1949)
Convair XB-36 (first flown in 1946)
B-29D (later redesignated the B-50)

My regards,

Widewing