Wright R-1820-G5 Engine

[Megalodon]

DC-3
The first DC-3 flew on 17 December 1935, the 32nd anniversary of the Wright Brothers' first powered flight
Initial production versions of the DC-3 used Wright R-1820-G5 9-cyl Cyclone engines with 850hp (685 kW) each.

B-18 1935
The first DB-1 flew in April 1935, with 9 Cylinder 850hp Wright R-1820-G5 engines.

CW-21
The first example flew in September 1938 with an 850hp R-1820-G5 engine, and was demonstrated in China.

P-35
This then developed into the SEV-1XP, a single seat fighter powered by a Wright R-1829 radial engine. This aircraft was entered in the USAAF's 1935 Fighter competition. None of the entrants in this contest were awarded a contract. Seversky then re-engined the SEV-1XP with the 9-Cyl Pratt & Whitney R-1830 G-5 Twin Wasp engine, theoretically giving 850hp. Seversky then ripped this motor out of his P-35 prototype in 1939 because it blew up and was unreliable. The engine wasn't suited to the high-g stress of fighter combat, probably because of the way lubricating oil reached the cylinders in the early models. Oil leaks and oil starvation are a constant of the Brewster Buffalo story, even in the B-239 that did so well in Finnish service.

That is all,
 

[Wmaker]

In the Boomerang thread I told you my source. R-1820-G5 was 1000hp engine.

You, however, didn't manage to include a single source here.

The fact that you are this upset at me that I don't happen agree with the addition of the Boomerang, certainly makes me smile.

Gotten under your skin it seems.

I might aswell stop your trolling right here:

...from the source I mentioned previously.

[Megalodon]

In the Boomerang thread I told you my source. R-1820-G5 was 1000hp engine.

You, however, didn't manage to include a single source here.

The fact that you are this upset at me that I don't happen agree with the addition of the Boomerang, certainly makes me smile.

Gotten under your skin it seems.

I might aswell stop your trolling right here:
(Image removed from quote.)
...from the source I mentioned previously.

I'm not upset with you Just moving your spaming of the brewster over here.

No trolling just facts a 1933 motor that keeps up with the best planes in the game  

Theoretically and Estimated sound the same to me.

I you say so,

[Wmaker]

I'm not upset with you Just moving your spaming of the brewster over here.

My spamming?? I was already wondering in that thread why Boomerang advocates talk so much of the Brewster in a thread about the Boomerang.

I suggest you read that thread again from start to finish and think who actually started talking about the Brewster and who kept the topic on it especially in the end of that thread.

No trolling just facts a 1933 motor that keeps up with the best planes in the game  

The fact that the R-1820 was intially introduced in 1933 doesn't mean it was the same engine that powered the Brewster or the FM-2 later for that matter. The powersettings quoted in your posts are nominal settings, not the max. output.

It simply doesn't keep up with the "best planes" in the game. When looking at the whole altitude band, it is the slowest fighter in the game with the I-16.

[Megalodon]

My spamming?? I was already wondering in that thread why Boomerang advocates talk so much of the Brewster in a thread about the Boomerang.

I suggest you read that thread again from start to finish and think who actually started talking about the Brewster and who kept the topic on it especially in the end of that thread.


Well, the thing is that it doesn't. When looking at the whole altitude band, it is the slowest fighter in the game with the I-16.

 Well I moved it ...and  its still a POS engine not meant to fly combat, made for civil flight, but it seemingly is the best thing since sliced bread and can hold its E in a uturn and catch a p-47 at going bye it at 400mph

 

[Karnak]

Well I moved it ...and  its still a POS engine not meant to fly combat, made for civil flight, but it seemingly is the best thing since sliced bread and can hold its E in a uturn and catch a p-47 at going bye it at 400mph

 

I think you need to fly it a bit before you make such absurd claims. 

[AWwrgwy]

I think you need to fly it a bit before you make such absurd claims. 

I think he got shot down by a Brewster in a Jug flying the Brewster's fight.

 



cheese




wrongway

[Butcher]

Well I moved it ...and  its still a POS engine not meant to fly combat, made for civil flight, but it seemingly is the best thing since sliced bread and can hold its E in a uturn and catch a p-47 at going bye it at 400mph

 

Uhhh not sure where you are getting your information, but I fly the F4F, Brewster reguarly, you are not catching someone doing 400 tahts flying by you unless you get an idiot who doesn't climb up fast enough.

Generally speaking Both aircraft have very little acceleration and speed, given a brewster/f4f/boomerang with any energy it can pose a problem - simply use vertical fighting and both are worthless and want to do circles because it ran out of energy.

Only people you are going to kill in a Boomerang/F4F is unless you have 5k alt advantage, or someone is trying to turn fight (newbie).

Now there are some of us like me who regularly enjoy flying 25+ eny planes are for the disadvantages of flying it. I don't come screaming down from 15k, instead I generally fly between 6-10k depending alt of nearest base etc. Sometimes I do get someone that ups an A6m and wants to duel or I prefer a spitfire, majority of the time its someone warping past me doing 550 in a P51 trying for an easy pick.

However unless you have some serious Alt advantage, you won't be getting many to try to turn fight you, that and a lack of slow speed means you need to disengage and climb out.

[2ADoc]

Megalodon you are incorrect about the DC-3 using the Wright Cyclone 1820.  Although there were 2 models the DC-3B and the DC-3S also known as the R4-D, most DC-3 variants used the Pratt and Whitney 1830.  The Pratts were more reliable and had a longer TBO.  I am at work so I can't get into all of my DC-3 material, but I assure you that the vast majority of the DC-3s that came off the lines had Pratts, and most of the DC-3s that are flying today are still behind Pratts, the sole R4-D that is flying is behind Wrights.  Now that there is the conversion many of the Turbine DC-3s are still behind Pratts, just the PT-6 variants and not the 1830s.  Although there are some conversion kits for the Allison turbine.

[Wmaker]

Megalodon you are incorrect about the DC-3 using the Wright Cyclone 1820.

He said that the initial versions of the DC-3 used R-1830-G5. And that is correct. Brewster Model 239's used refurbished engines which came from airline use, from DC-3s.

[2ADoc]

I did not see that he said initial, but their numbers were minuscule compared to the numbers using the Pratts.  I don't remember the numbers exactly, but I think it was 16,000+ DC-3 variants built, most of them flew behind Pratts.  Again I am not where I can get to my books, and don't quote me on numbers but I think only aront 500-600 were drug around behind Wrights.  Again I missed that he said Initial.  They went to the Pratt because of fuel usage, reliability, and TBO.  So the reference to DC-3 using wrights is not a good point to use since Wrights were removed from them at an early stage in the development of the DC-3 family.

[Wmaker]

Yes, most of the DC-3/C-47 were powered by Twin Wasps, that is true. But (splitting hairs here) is the number of Cyclones miniscule when we talk about true, original DC-3s instead of C-47 converts. As the number of original DC-3s compared to the C-47 passenger converts is also miniscule. And he said "DC-3" and didn't mention C47 at all.

[2ADoc]

Ok I will give you that one, since there were not many DC-3s built before the war, once the war started, the ones in production were converted to C-47, and variants.  After the war, most of the DC-3s were C-47 that were converted back to DC-3s.  I was revering to the DC-3 family as a general, including all the different variants.

[Widewing]

[quote author=Wmaker link=topic=327730.msg4290834#msg4290834 date=1327613381


The fact that the R-1820 was intially introduced in 1933 doesn't mean it was the same engine that powered the Brewster or the FM-2 later for that matter.
[/quote]

So very true... The R-1820s fitted to our S-2s were rated at 1525 hp. Hang one of those on a Brewster and they'd have something to whine about!

[dirtdart]

What I read is that the 1000HP rating is only good for 5 minutes or so.  If the AH Brewster has a 1000HP engine, then maybe the need to have a "WEP".  Also, is that 200HP drop at 3,000 feet included.  All things I do not know, Wmaker, whats the story? 

Reasons why a Brester kicked your butt:

#1:  You fought the Brewster on it's terms. 
#2:  You don't realize the Brester has a Drag C/D lower than many other Ac.
#3:  You need to work on SA and ACM.

If you hold the cards and are patient, the Brewster is easy to hit, aim for the wings, they come right off.  If you don't, then run for your life.