Author Topic: Design your own airplane  (Read 18446 times)

Offline moot

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 16330
      • http://www.dasmuppets.com
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #75 on: December 04, 2008, 10:08:52 AM »
By 80 psi you mean the supercharger?  Or mercury manifold pressure?
Hello ant
running very fast
I squish you

Offline Baumer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1739
      • 332nd Flying Mongrels
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #76 on: December 04, 2008, 11:22:10 AM »
I'd like an F2G-1 please!

Think F4U-4 but with a big motor and a P-47 canopy (really!, they got the first few from Republic).

An acquaintance is restoring a R-4360 and he had to replace all 56 sparkplugs, at $110 a piece, OUCH!

HTC Please show the blue planes some love!
F4F-4, FM2, SBD-5, TBM-3

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #77 on: December 04, 2008, 11:38:40 AM »
Which F2G do you want? The one that Goodyear built, or the plane it WOULD have been had the Navy been able to fine-tune the design as was done after the war with the private-owned racers?
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline RAM

  • Parolee
  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #78 on: December 04, 2008, 12:42:19 PM »
Quote from: Widewing

Certainly, this is within the scope of the game.


Agreeing 100% with your opinion that planes flying with 150octane gas should be in AH (but perked) I want to know something about the 150 octane usage in WWII. And something which is based on real data, not on factual information that holds no real ground when subjected to analysis.

There have been a lot of discussions, in about every forum about WWII I can thing of, about 150 octane gas on allied fighters during the last months of the war. I've always been on the bench looking at those discussions without saying anything as I don't really have any serious information on the matter. But it seems that

1-) there were relatively few planes flying on 150 octane fue.
2-) the ones that were fitted with it were mostly dedicated to tactical air support, not Air superiority.
3-) using that kind of fuel caused some serious manteinance issues and drastically reduced the time between revisions for the aircraft using it.

I've seen arguments about and against those three points for years now, to the point that I don't really know if they are based on real facts or they are not. But I've never seen some definite proof that proves them, or that disregard them as false.

As I said in a previous post, I value a lot your knowledge and trust your sources as very reliable, and that's why I'd like to know your point of view: if those facts were true or not, and to which extent.

All of that, I insist, agreeing that US/British planes with 150 octane fuel DO have a place in Aces High (hopefully that will be when the perk loadouts are implemented).

Thanks in advance (again :))
« Last Edit: December 04, 2008, 12:46:29 PM by RAM »

Offline Bronk

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9044
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #79 on: December 04, 2008, 03:45:35 PM »


Widewing- What planes would you make available with the 150 octane upgrades?  Did any other countries have higher grade AV Gas? 
Heh Spits Mk VIII, XIV and XVI with 150 octane????  Yes please. :devil
See Rule #4

Offline Mike Williams

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 40
      • http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #80 on: December 04, 2008, 03:55:17 PM »
Widewing: Please allow me to chip in on the subject of 150 octane and the aircraft that used it.

Copied from  P-51 Mustang Performance

The P-51 operated on 100/130 grade fuel with War Emergency Power limited to 67" up to June 1944. On 29 March 1944 the Commanding General, Army Air Forces authorized the procurement of the necessary parts to modify all P-38, P-47 and P-51 airplanes in the United Kingdom for the use of Grade 150 fuel, subject to the relevant engines being cleared to use the fuel. (1) (2) During March & April 1944 flight tests were conducted at Wright Field on the P-51B-15 airplane, AAF No. 43-24777, using 44-1 fuel, at the request of the Power Plant Laboratory, Engineering Division. (3)  These tests were made to determine the performance of the airplane at the higher powers allowable with 44-1 fuel as compared with the performance at powers allowable for standard aviation fuel.   Parallel tests were conducted by Proving Ground Command at Eglin Field, Florida on P-51B airplanes, AAF Nos. 43-24755, 43-24757, and 43-24775.   The Power Plant Laboratory concluded in a 19 April 1944 memorandum report that the "Packard built Rolls-Royce V-1650-7 engine will satisfactorily comply with a 75 In. Hg manifold pressure war emergency rating with Grade 44-1 fuel".  (4)  As a result of the engine clearance and airplane trials the P-51-B airplane was cleared for operation at 75" Hg by late April.(5) The modifications required to the P-51 to use the 150 grade fuel were: modify manifold pressure regulator, modify supercharger volute drain valve, install new type induction center manifold extension gland seals, use of Lodge RS5/5 or KLG RC5/3 spark plugs, installation of bulged exhaust stacks, and reset supercharger aneroid switch.(6)  By June 1944, final release on Project P.P.F. had been made approving 75" manifold pressure for the P-51 (both the 1650-3 and 1650-7 engines), as well as increased powers for the P-38 and P-47. (7)

Deliveries of Grade 100/150 aviation fuel to Eighth Air Force fighter airfields commenced in June 1944. (8) (9) (10) This coincidentally occured about the same time as the introduction of the P-51D into service.   Even though the USAAF had cleared the P-51 for 75" Hg., the Eighth Air Force chose 72" Hg as the P-51's War Emergency Rating. (11)(12) Apparently there is more to the story, however, as Encounter Reports demonstrate that 75" Hg was used operationally. (13)(14)

By January 1945, fourteen of the Eighth Air Force's fifteen Fighter Groups were operating Mustangs, the sole holdout being the 56th FG in P-47's.
 Maintenance difficulties with spark plug fouling led to the decision to convert all fighter groups to 100/150 grade fuel reformulated with increased levels of ethylene dibromide (1.5T).  Deliveries of PEP, as the new 100/150 blend was called, began to be issued to all fighter groups in February 1945. The use of PEP, however, cooroded the valve seats of the V-1650 at an unacceptable level.   Consequently,  the standard 100/150 (1T) grade fuel was reverted to by the end of March 1945.(15) (16) The Eighth Air Force also had hoped to supply the 352nd and 361st Fighter Groups based on the continent with 100/150 grade fuel.  This was deemed impractical from a logistical viewpoint, although admittedly such difficulties did not prevent the RAF's 2nd TAF from being supplied with 100/150 grade fuel. (17)
« Last Edit: December 04, 2008, 04:17:05 PM by Mike Williams »

Offline Mike Williams

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 40
      • http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #81 on: December 04, 2008, 03:56:21 PM »
Technical Operations, Eighth Air Force issued a 4 April 1945 Memorandum in which  100/150 grade fuel experience in the Eighth Air Force was summarized. It is reproduced in full below:

Quote
1. The following is a summary of 100/150 grade fuel experience in Eighth Air Force.

2.  a.   This fuel was first service tested by Technical Operations Section, this headquarters, in October 1943, said service test lasting through until March 1944, at which time it was recommended that if extra performance from P-38, P-47 and P-51 aircraft was desired it could be secured by the use of this fuel.
  It was pointed out at that time that the only apparent deleterious effect of this fuel on any one of the three types was the extra lead fouling of spark plugs.

b.   A decision was made in May 1944 to have all fighter units supplied with this fuel no later than 1 June.  As of that date operations with this fuel continued until approximately 1 February 1945 when all fighter units switched to “Pep” (100/150 plus 1.5 T’s ethylene dibromide).
  As of 1 April 1945 all units switched back to 100/150 fuel containing 1.0 T ethylene dibromide.

3.   At the time the 150 grade fuel was first used all three fighter types listed above were in operational use by this Air Force.
  Shortly after June 1 P-38 units were re-equipped with P-51 type aircraft so that experience with 150 grade fuel in P-38 aircraft is limited.
  Gradually, conversion of P-47 outfits to P-51’s took place during the Summer and Fall of 1944, and as of approximately 1 November only one P-47 group remained in this Air Force.

4.  Maintenance difficulties can be summarized as follows:

a.  P-38 (V-1710 Engine).

Spark plug leading was increased.  The extent of this leading was such that plug change was required after approximately 15 hours flying.  This conditions was aggravated considerably by low cruising powers used to and from target areas, while trying to get the maximum range possible.  It was found, however, that regular periods of high power running for a minute of two in most cases smoothed out any rough running engines unless the cause was other than leading.

b.  P-47 (R-2800 Engine).

Spark plug fouling was the only maintenance difficulty encountered during the period in which 150 grade fuel was used.  Spark plug life was reduced by about 50%, the same low power cruising as described above being the principle cause for the extra fouling.
  No deleterious effects on diaphragms, fuel hose or any other rubber of synthetic rubber materials were noted.

c.  P-51 (V-1650 Engines).

  The same type of lead fouling as described in a and b above happened in the case of the P-51 except that is was probably more serious than in either of the other two types.
  Using 130 grade fuel with 4½ cc. of lead, the average operational P-51 could last 5 missions (roughly 25 hours) before the fouling required plug change.  With 150 grade fuel containing 6 cc. of lead, 10 to 12 hours, or normally 2 missions, was the average length of time between spark plug changes or cleaning.
  At various times in the six months of operation of P-51 aircraft on 150 grade fuel many other maintenance difficulties were attributed to the fuel, but final analysis proved that the only real effect of the fuel was the lead fouling.
  Some units maintained that they had some deteriorations of seals, but this was not borne our throughout the command, nor was there any concrete evidence that it existed in the units.

 The excessive fouling of spark plugs usually exhibited itself in roughing up of engines after a couple of hours of low power cruising.  Periodic bursts of high power in most cases smoothed the engine out.  However, if the engine was allowed to go too long a period without being cleaned out, the accumulation of lead bromide globules successfully withstood any attempts to blow them out.
  In some instances, long periods of idling while waiting for take-off and a failure to use high power on take off resulted in loss of power during take-off run and in some cases caused complete cutting out with subsequent belly landing.  The cases of cutting-out on take-off definitely attributed to excessive fouling were comparatively few, although numerous enough to list it as an effect of the extra lead.


As a result of several months operational use with the fuel, an SOP – designed to reduce power failures on take-off, leading troubles in flight, and other things which were causing early returns and abortive aircraft – was published.  This is inclosure no. 1.  Almost immediately after this section published this SOP practically all of the troubles then existing ceased, although it was necessary to change plugs after each two missions or thereabouts.

 In an effort to reduce the lead fouling, tests were conducted by this section with 150 grade fuel containing 1.5 T’s of ethylene dibromide.
  A total of about 120 hours was run by this section and the three squadrons given the “Pep” fuel for accelerated service tests.  The results of these service tests showed a considerable reduction in lead fouling with no apparent effects otherwise.
  As a results, all fighter units of the Air Force were put on Pep fuel late in January 1945.  About thirty days thereafter a sharp increase in valve trouble was experienced with the V-1650 engine.
  Inspection of engines at overhaul revealed that the hydrobromic acid was eroding the silchrome valve seat inserts to such an extent that after approximately 100 hours of operation all the valve clearance was gone.
  This 100-hours is the minimum life some engines going 170 to 180 hours before this condition prevailed.  There are no other deleterious effects of this fuel noted.  As of 1 April 1945 fighter units of the Air Force returned to the use of 100/150 grade fuel containing 1.0 T of ethylene dibromide. (18)

Offline Mike Williams

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 40
      • http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #82 on: December 04, 2008, 04:04:59 PM »

352nd FG Mustang being fueled with 150 Octane Gasoline

Those RAF Mustang units tasked with defending against the V-1 were modified to operated at +25 lbs./sq.in. - the equivalent of 80" Hg.(21)(22)  On 24 August 1944, by which time the V-1 threat had subsided, the Ministry of Aircraft Production directed Rolls Royce: "all Packard Merlin V.1650-7 engines to be modified to operate at 25 lbs. boost".(23) Raising the WER rating from 67" Hg to 80" Hg increased Sea Level speed by 30 mph.(24) On 18 September 1944 ADGB noted, that with respect to the Mustang III/Packard Merlin 1650-7, "A total of over 7,000 hours have been flown at a maximum boost pressure of + 25 lbs./sq. in.". (25) The RAF's Mustang Pilot's Notes gives the Combat Engine Limitation as "81 ins. boost for 5 minutes when using 150 grade fuel".  (26)  Combat Reports show +25 lbs was used operationally over the continent by UK based Mustangs of ADBG. 27

See also Mustang Performance
100/150 Grade Fuel


1. CTI-1659: Modification of Fighter Aircraft for use of Grade 150 Fuel  Material Command, Technical Instructions, 29 March 1944. 
2. Project P.P.F.  4 April 1944
3. Flight Tests on the North American P-51B-15 Airplane, AAF No. 43-24777 Using 44-1 Fuel
4.  75" Hg. clearance for V-1650-7   Material Command, Engineering Division, 19 April 1944.
5.  Project PPF: P-51B airplanes are cleared for operation at 75", 29 April 1944
6.  Instructions for Modification of P-51 Airplanes for Project PPF
7.  Project P.P.F. - Installation and Operating Instructions, 20 June 1944
8.  Grade 150 Aviation Fuel   Chief, Petroleum Section, 13 June 1943.
9.  361st FG - 150 Octane Fuel delivered week ending 18 June 1944 .
10. 359th FG - Engineering Report for June 1944  noting "change to one hundred fifty octane gasoline".
11. Grade 150 Aviation Fuel   Supply Division, 11 July 1944.
12. 78th FG Engineering Report for December 1944  noting "boosts set to draw 72 inches" when Group converted to P-51s.
13. Capt. Charles E. Yeager, Encounter Report 6 November 1944, 357th FG
14. Lt. Col. Kyle L. Riddle, Encounter Report 24 December 1944, 479th FG
15. 339th FG Aviation Fuel Report for February 1945
16. Grade 100/150 (1 ½ T) Fuel   Headquarters Air Technical Service Command in Europe, 28 March 1945.
17. Request for Grade 100/150 1.5 T Aviation Fuel for Eighth Air Force Units on the Continent   J.H Houghton, Dir. of Supply, 5 February 1945.
18. Use of 100/150 Grade Fuel by Eighth Air Force  Headquarters Eighth Air Force, Technical Operations, 4 April 1945.
19. TI-2010, Addendum 1: Power Plant Fuel (PPF) 100/150 Grade Fuel   Air Technical Service Command, Tech. Instr., 13 December 1944.
20. 78th FG Supply Report for December 1944  noting "During the latter part of December they were shipped 820 barrels of 150 octane by rail".
21. No. 316 Polish Squadron Operations Record Book, 1 July 1944
22. Technical Note No.Aero.1501(Flight)   Improvement of Performance of Fighter Aircraft Operating Against the German Flying Bomb
23. Requisition MER/388/43
24. Crossbow fighters, low level speed table
25. Summary of Use of 150 Grade Fuel
26. Mustang Pilot's Notes, Engine Data
27. Combat Report F/Lt. G. M. Davis, 23 March 1945, 129 Squadron


Encounter Reports recording high boost obtained with 150 grade fuel:

1st Lt. Raymond R. Flowers, 1 November 1944, 20th FG  "I closed steadily pulling over 70 inches."
1st Lt. James F. Hinchey, 14 November 1944, 353rd FG  "For fifteen minutes at 74” hg and indicating 600 mph…"
2nd Lt. Thomas R. Drybrough, 27 November 1944, 353rd FG  "I had been pulling over 70" H.G. and was indicating about 425 MPH at approximately 14,000 feet."
1st Lt. Charles E. Yeager, 13 September 1944, 357th FG  "I rolled over and was pulling around 70" Hg."
Capt. Charles E. Yeager, 6 November 1944, 357th FG   "I got behind him and was pulling 75” Hg."
Lt. Col. Roy A. Webb, 25 June 1944, 361st FG  "I closed very slowly and pulled as much as 70 inches of mercury."
1st Lt. Thomas H. Hall, 15 August 1944, 364th FG  "I put on 70 inches and gradually pulled up on them."
Lt. Col. Kyle L. Riddle, 24 December 1944, 479th FG  "I pulled about 70" to 75" mercury..."
F/Lt Pearson, 5 April 45, 65 Squadron "Opening up to 70 inches I overtook him..."
F/Lt. G. M. Davis, 23 March 1945, 129 Squadron "Opened up to +25 lbs of boost 3,000 revs and dived down to engage."


67" Hg. WEP limitation for the P-51 was superseded by 72-75" Hg as the standard P-51 WEP 5 minute engine limitation in the 8th AF from June 1944 to War's end.  P-51D use of 67" as the WEP limitation in the ETO would have been quite limited considering the P-51D  arrived onto the scene at the same time as the conversion to 150 grade fuel by the 8th AF (the two 9th AF groups tactical Mustang groups excepted).

Offline Rebel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 734
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #83 on: December 04, 2008, 04:25:33 PM »
 ^^^ :O :O :O :O :O   :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:   :rock :rock

Jesus Christ!  Look at all that info!  A-friggin-mazing.  I know what I'm gonna be reading tonight.

Mr. Williams- Thank YOU!   :salute
« Last Edit: December 04, 2008, 04:27:34 PM by Rebel »
"You rebel scum"

Offline WWhiskey

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3122
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #84 on: December 04, 2008, 04:53:21 PM »
way to go on info !!!
 i like it when someone backs up there stuff like that!!!
 shows that they at least have an understanding of whats going on :aok :aok :aok
Flying since tour 71.

Offline RAM

  • Parolee
  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 38
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #85 on: December 04, 2008, 04:59:35 PM »
thank you both mike and Rebel.

So out of the three points I brought up seems that 1) and 2) were false, and that 3) was true. It's interesting that the alllied accepted the much more intensive manteinance work needed to get the fighters flying with 150 octane fuel rather than staying conservative and using the much less troublesome 100/130...

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #86 on: December 04, 2008, 05:33:21 PM »
Hm. 150 Octane was loaded on the P-47s? What about those R2800-equipped Blue Planes?

*drools at the thought of loading some 150 in his Hog*
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline Rebel

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 734
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #87 on: December 04, 2008, 08:16:42 PM »
thank you both mike and Rebel.

So out of the three points I brought up seems that 1) and 2) were false, and that 3) was true. It's interesting that the alllied accepted the much more intensive manteinance work needed to get the fighters flying with 150 octane fuel rather than staying conservative and using the much less troublesome 100/130...

Agreed- it seems that they wanted to give the pilot's the best possible weapon available, and damn the maint. costs.  I kinda like that.

What really struck me is that the R-2800 engine took it just fine, it was only the spark plugs that complained.  That engine is a feat of engineering, guys.  Turbo-supercharge it to hell and gone, throw high octane fuel in it, and crank 'er up as high as you dare, then throw some 20mm's at it, pop off a few cylinders, she'll still bring ya home.  Gotta love that :)

Quote
Hm. 150 Octane was loaded on the P-47s? What about those R2800-equipped Blue Planes?


dude.  -4 hawg.  150 octane fuel.  Jet hunt, anyone?  :devil
"You rebel scum"

Offline Saxman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9155
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #88 on: December 04, 2008, 08:42:53 PM »
then throw some 20mm's at it, pop off a few cylinders, she'll still bring ya home.
 

If only OUR R2800 could take that much damage. Inhale a single .303 in here and you're a glider.  :furious

Quote
dude.  -4 hawg.  150 octane fuel.  Jet hunt, anyone?

 :rock :rock :rock
Ron White says you can't fix stupid. I beg to differ. Stupid will usually sort itself out, it's just a matter of making sure you're not close enough to become collateral damage.

Offline macerxgp

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 333
Re: Design your own airplane
« Reply #89 on: December 04, 2008, 09:01:41 PM »
If only OUR R2800 could take that much damage. Inhale a single .303 in here and you're a glider.  :furious

 :rock :rock :rock

Then again, if the tail end inhales a 30mm and blows the aft end off, the damn thing is a flying wing.


STILL brings you home (with careful throttle and aileron adjustment).
Quote from: Saurdaukar
Operational kettles in August 2009 exceed operational pots by approximately 142%.

Your comparison is invalid.

DeMaskus
357th-Death Dragons