Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: agent 009 on May 08, 2005, 03:15:43 AM
-
My P-38 neighbor told me that these were not a success as they could not be adjusted, feathered what ever the correct word is. any thoughts here? Brits had one that went 460 mph, but never went into production.
-
Dunno....Republic's XP-47J Superbolt went 504mph at alt and it used contrarotating props.
-
A number of British production aircraft used contra-rotating props and seem to have been reasonably successful. I can't see why they couldn't be faethered, given enough clearance between the two props.
-
Hope link works. Even Italians experimented with these.
Might Have Beens: Italian Twin-Engined Fighters, 1943
worldatwar.net/chandelle/v3/v3n1/italtwin.html - 9k - Cached - More from this site
-
Good point Pei. In fact here's a good photo of just that at this site.
Contra-rotating propellers - encyclopedia article about Contra-rotating propellers.
... Contra-rotating propellers, also referred to as coaxial contrarotating propellers, are a complex way of applying the ... Contra-rotating propellors. Contra-zoom ...encyclopedia.thefreedictio nary.com/Contra-rotating+propellers - 36k - Cached - More from this site
Some were a bit loud & could create tone deafness, but even these probs were worked out.
-
Spit 21
A single Mk. 21 fitted with a Griffon 85 was tested with a 6 blade contra-rotating propeller, however, it was not used on production aircraft because the system was unreliable and heavy. A revised system was used on the Seafire 47 with great success.
-
Seafire 47 picture at bottom of the page
http://www.supermarine-spitfire.co.uk/supermarine_seafire.html
-
Seafire 47 had it as standard.
I think also the Avro Shackleton.
Maybe also the Skyraider?
Anyway, once the technical bugs were flushed away, it was a success.
I have Jeff Quill's description of a mechanical failiure somewhere, will see if I find it and type ;)
Good day all.
-
Fastest prop plane ever:
(http://air.xuexue.net/bomber/gfx/tu95/tu95_2.jpg)
575 mph.
-
Tupovlev?
The Bear?
-
Aye.
-
Figgers the guy from Iceland would know right away :). They
did drive past your house all the time after all.
-
Check out the MB 5
Martin-Baker MB5 Replica Nears Completion
aviation history: Martin-Baker Aircraft Company MB5 Replica built by John and Carol Marlin. A story by: Mark S. Daniels- ... Martin-Baker MB5 Replica. Nearing Completion At Reno Stead Airport ... The Marlin MB5 replica is modeled after the Martin-Baker Aircraft Company prototype fighter once referred to as ...http://www.aafo.com/racing/news/00/MB5_1.htm - 17k - Cached - More from this site
-
That's a nice looking airplane!
-
I thought that was called counter-rotating?
-
Originally posted by agent 009
My P-38 neighbor told me that these were not a success as they could not be adjusted, feathered what ever the correct word is. any thoughts here? Brits had one that went 460 mph, but never went into production.
The contra-rotating props on the P-38 worked out quite well and you could feather the props on the Lightning. The WW2 training film in Zeno's website for the P-38 explains what to do when you have an engine failure on one engine during take off. It mentions feathering the dead prop as part of the emergency landing procedure.
ack-ack
-
The MB 3 & 5 are yet another what if of WW2. I don't know why is was not produced, they already had the Spit & resources limited likely suspects.
-
The "Bear" used to drive by all the time.
They always got an escort from the Phantoms of Keflavik airbase.
It counted hundreds of occasions.
I cannot remember when they gave it up, sending those up here, whether they were ever followed by the F15 which replaced the Phantom.
-
Originally posted by hawker238
I thought that was called counter-rotating?
P38 has COUNTER-rotating. MB-5 had CONTRA-rotaing. Big difference.
Main reason they didn't use them was because it was a LOT of weight, and a complex system. Hard to maintain, keep going, and it's much easier to simply put a single prop in (with the engines they had towards the end of the war they decided "who needs contra rotating? We get just as good a fighter with a single prop")
-
(http://www.amtechmodels.com/images/XP-72_2_500.jpg)
This fighter was in development designed for a Contra prop. Prototypes flew with a standard prop early in the program and still managed 490 mph. While the P-72A would have been the highest performing prop fighter in existance, it was dropped to pursue the XP-84 (F-84 Thunderjet).
(http://www.wpafb.af.mil/museum/research/p60-5.jpg)
One of the many iterations on the XP-60. propeller vibration issues were never resolved before the project was cancelled.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Vibration issues aside. One can't help but consider torque probs being eliminated with this arrangement. Also stall & spin probs are interesting to contemplate with these.
-
I think that the main driver for contra-props in WW2 was to allow aircraft to take much more powerful engines than they were designed for. The later Spits had over twice the power of the Mk 1, and a single prop to soak up that power would be so big that it would hit the ground on taxying. So you could say that a contra-prop was a simpler alternative to fitting new, longer undercarriage!
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
-
I can see the argument for the extra weight/complexity of contra rotating props on a single engine plane due to issues of torque and disc diameter.
Why would one use the arrangement on a multi engined plane; instead of handing the engines??
-
Same argument; prop diameter.
-
Prop diameter is limited because of RPM, - you do not want the tips breaking the sound barrier.
So, once all other tricks are used up, more blades, paddle blades and so, then you can add a prop!
Get rid of the torque at the same time.
Imagine the Avro Shackleton, basically a Lancaster with 4 Griffon engines, all of those countra rots!
Now, early problems with this device were some, this one the most important:
Translational bearing mechanism. The main thing basically. If it fails, it's quite bad, for then the pitch of the rear prop is not under control any more.
This happened to J.Quill. He needed every HP out of a whole Griffon engine to fly a Spitfire at 110 mph! Or as he put it:
"It must have been a strange experience to anyone watching to see a Spitfire approaching to land at normal speed but emitting the roar of an engine at full throttle. In fact the translational bearing had failed, causing the overall propeller efficiency to drop to almost nothing, and it had therefore taken almost the maximum power of the engine to keep me in flight at all"
(Spitfire, A test pilot's story, p.242)
-
Can you imagine the howling if we had this bird in AH? :)
Spit 21 from 41 Squadron with contra-rotating prop. 4 cannon and superior to the Spit XIV
And yes Spit 21s were operational before the war ended with 91 Squadron.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115669917_41spit21.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Can you imagine the howling if we had this bird in AH? :)
Spit 21 from 41 Squadron with contra-rotating prop. 4 cannon and superior to the Spit XIV
And yes Spit 21s were operational before the war ended with 91 Squadron.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115669917_41spit21.jpg)
no more LA7 dweebs .....ahhh paradise 8) 38
-
you allied freaks get that, we then must get this:
(http://avions.legendaires.free.fr/Images/Gdo335-2.jpg)
-
How many staffeln ?
Notice I didn't wrote Gruppen :D
Originally posted by JB73
you allied freaks get that, we then must get this:
(http://avions.legendaires.free.fr/Images/Gdo335-2.jpg)
-
Dohhh.
Firstly, that Dornier never existed in squadron strength.
Secondly, it does not have a contra-prop.
Well, if it did, so did the Walrus :D
-
Precious Metal at the Reno Air Races
(http://www.aafo.com/gallery/week/11-25-02.jpg)
g00b
-
That thing's big...and ugly.
-
Originally posted by Angus
Secondly, it does not have a contra-prop.
well maybe not right next to eachother ; )
i was meerly speaking of performance and rareity anyway ; ) LOL
-
Originally posted by JB73
well maybe not right next to eachother ; )
i was meerly speaking of performance and rareity anyway ; ) LOL
I agree, don't let the fact that the Props are separated by an entire airplane get in the way. Picky Picky. :)
-
When the RAF retired the Shacklton , 8SQN had a zap sticker proclaiming 8 screws are better than 4 blowjobs ...:lol
-
Rofl!
-
:rofl
-
Took me a while to remember the name of this thing. It's the Convair xfy 1.
(http://prototypes.free.fr/vtol/sitter/xfy1_04.jpg)
(http://www.easyracers.com/temp/convair_xfy_1_vtol_prototyp.jpg)
g00b
-
the pogo ..lockheed did a similar thing ...
-
ps regarding the shacklton....splendid views from the nose n tail positions ...but the worst view was for the radar ops...situated above the bomb bay , ...there was holes in the floor ...letting the poor rad ops blokes see the world below em ......sod that !!!!!!!!!, this was when the bomb bay was opened ....i only went aboard when it was on the ground , they didnt pay me enough to go airbourne in it :aok
-
A flawed design if ever there was one lol.
Re: Spit21...
They only ordered 50 spit22s on March 45. I doubt they'd get into production too fast, nor that they'd see any action by the end of the war. Also note this contract was cancelled August 1945. Not sure how many made it before the cancellation.
They ordered 150 more in Nov '45. Far too late.
EDIT: Ahh wait, found more info. There were earlier orders for Mk 21s
700 Mk21s were ordered Jan 1944. Were cancelled August '44. Reinstated for 40 Spit9s (am guessing they used the partial airframes?)
800 ordered for Feb 1944. Contract cancelled August 1944. Partially re-instated for 558 Spitfire Mk IX. Seems the airframes ended up being Spit9s and Spi16s. Guess nobody wanted Spit21s.
So those spit21s were ordered but few made it.
-
Originally posted by Krusty
A flawed design if ever there was one lol.
Re: Spit21...
They only ordered 50 spit22s on March 45. I doubt they'd get into production too fast, nor that they'd see any action by the end of the war. Also note this contract was cancelled August 1945. Not sure how many made it before the cancellation.
They ordered 150 more in Nov '45. Far too late.
EDIT: Ahh wait, found more info. There were earlier orders for Mk 21s
700 Mk21s were ordered Jan 1944. Were cancelled August '44. Reinstated for 40 Spit9s (am guessing they used the partial airframes?)
800 ordered for Feb 1944. Contract cancelled August 1944. Partially re-instated for 558 Spitfire Mk IX. Seems the airframes ended up being Spit9s and Spi16s. Guess nobody wanted Spit21s.
So those spit21s were ordered but few made it.
Trust me Krusty, I wouldn't have said they made it into combat if they hadn't :)
Part of my focus when I was researching the Spit XII was 91 Squadron. Some of the guys who flew XIIs were still with the squadron when they transitioned to the 21 BEFORE the war ended. They were flying patrols over Holland etc. Lost two to flak and claimed the sinking of a midget sub in their time.
I made no claim it was in great numbers, but then again neither was the TA152. And I wasn't really suggesting we get one for AH :)
We'd be far better off with an accurately modeled Spit LFIXe
Image is of a 91 Squadron Spitfire 21 from a photo given to me by one of those 91 pilots who flew it on ops :)
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115751753_spit21.jpg)
-
Oh, nice photo Dan! :) My copy of Rawlings, Fighter Squadrons of the R.A.F. has the following caption next to a photo of a Spit 21 (I gather post war): Although no photographs of No. 91's Spitfire F.21's survive, this one depicts LA226, an F.21 used by No. 91, faithfully restored to its 1945 condition. As to operational Spit 21's, see No. 91 ORB at bottom of this page (http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit21.html)
-
The one I have hasn't been published. The original was one of those tiny photos that thankfully blew up fairly well.
There have been other photos of 91 Squadron Spit 21s published. A recent book on 91 Squadron by Peter Hall has 4 others, and Alfred Price has published a couple in books he's done so if you include the one I have there are 7 or so floating around that have turned up so far.
I have a squadron group photo taken at Ludham of the crew in front of a Spit 21 as well so I guess that makes 8 :)
Dan/CorkyJr
edited to add image of Johnny Faulkner, who was one of the two Spit 21 pilots downed by flak. He was rescued. Got this image from the same guy who gave me the Spit 21 photo.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115754630_faulkner91.jpg)
-
Cool :) I remembered that caption, but no photos came immediately to mind, although now that you mention it I vaguely remember something from Price. Well, if Rawlings ever updates... ;) On further reflection, I have a copy of 91's War Diary and I think there might be some news paper clippings in there with some grainy Spit 21 photos, hmm....
-
91 Squadron is an interesting one. Started on Spit IIs, then Va, Vb and Vcs, also a few VIs on to the Spit XII, then the Spit XIV. Gave up XIVs for IXs, then went to the 21.
Not sure what other squadron flew that many different marks of Spit and clearly no one flew more Griffon Spit types operationally then 91
41, my other favorite since they flew the XII had Is, IIs, Vs, XIIs and XIVs flown operationally. So they're close with 5 types, but not sure anyone else flew 7 different Spit variants during the war.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Dan,
what is your take on the Osprey 91 Sqd book?
(http://www.ospreypublishing.com/osp_img/titlecovers/S1605AL.JPG)
Cover is one of a Mk XII of 91 Sqd which scrambled to intercept some Fw190A-5s on May 25 1943.
edit: changed date
-
Originally posted by MiloMorai
Dan,
what is your take on the Osprey 91 Sqd book?
(http://www.ospreypublishing.com/osp_img/titlecovers/S1605AL.JPG)
Cover is one of a Mk XII of 91 Sqd which scrambled to intercept some Fw190A-5s on May 29 1943.
That's the book I was referring to. I think it's a good reference. He and I crossed a few of the same paths in terms of pilots talked to etc. He had a few Spit XII bits I hadn't found. Ray Nash's photos show up a lot, and when I was digging in 1980, he wasn't ready to let them out. Those I got were from H.D. Johnson, who also contributes to the book. I got to a few guys who have since passed on, prior to his getting there too.
The cover Spit XII is EN625 DL-K which was Ray Nash's bird. Not sure why the artist gave it a 5 blade prop :)
My only nitpicky things are around a profile of a Spit XIV and a photo of a pranged Spit XII DL-V. That one has been misidentified in two books now. Alfred Price's Spitfire at War, and in this one. The Spit is MB839 not MB832 and it was Jacko Andrieux's mount DL-V. The image was taken after it was out of service and 91 had gone on to XIVs.
I was lucky enough to be loaned the original photos so I could get copy negatives made.
I wish I had known the book had been in the works as I'd have happily passed on the photos and info I had that he didn't have.
Still the 91 book is a good one to have on the shelf. Another guy is working on a 41 squadron history, and he and I have been in contact so my photos etc will hopefully help him with that work. 10 + years of hunting, so it's a fairly decent pile of photos and info :)
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Well, I checked No. 91's Diary and there are photos of IXs and XIIs, but alas, no XXIs.
Here's some No. 91 Spit XII photos from the Diary:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91spit12-a.jpg
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91spit12-b.jpg
Here's some clippings about the 190 raid that was intercepted. Milo, please forgive the nitpick, but that interception occurred on the 25th, not 29th. There was apparently no operational activity on the 29th.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91news.jpg
-
Originally posted by mw
Milo, please forgive the nitpick, but that interception occurred on the 25th, not 29th. There was apparently no operational activity on the 29th.
NP, typo error. :)
-
Getting more to the point of the thread here's an Aircraft Data Sheet for a Spit XIV with contra prop:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14contra-ads.jpg
465 mph isn't too shabby ;)
p.s. Dan, I found a No. 91 Spit 21 pic in Spitfire the History, page 476 my version - definately wartime photo.
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Spit 21 from 41 Squadron with contra-rotating prop. 4 cannon and superior to the Spit XIV
Hmm, the 21 was a very trouble infested aircraft with serious stability issues. They developed it from 43 onwards, but could not cope with the problems. It was very slightly faster than the MkXIV, a few mphs only, as the guys at supermarine managed to find out by the wars end that wheel well covers actually reduce drag. Other than that, at 9200 lbs it was 700lbs heavier than the XIV, had the same engine, with about 200 fps less climb rate and more malicious handling with the new wings... the only pros over the 'old' XIV was the 4 cannons (another thing that took supermarine half a decade to solve..), and perhaps a little better roll rate due to the stiffer wings, but as from I read from the later Marks, this was still quite poor at high speeds due to the enourmous stickforces. Same fuel load, same poor range.
I would rate the XIV over the 'better' 21 at any time. More manouverable, lighter, better climber, less bugs.
-
Originally posted by mw
Well, I checked No. 91's Diary and there are photos of IXs and XIIs, but alas, no XXIs.
Here's some No. 91 Spit XII photos from the Diary:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91spit12-a.jpg
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91spit12-b.jpg
Here's some clippings about the 190 raid that was intercepted. Milo, please forgive the nitpick, but that interception occurred on the 25th, not 29th. There was apparently no operational activity on the 29th.
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91news.jpg
Thanks for those. I hadn't seen the captions. I have a copy of the first photo. Made me laugh to see the caption as S/L H.D. Johnson(a 91 pilot) and I went back and forth through the mail on the IDs and I was convinced the one guy was absolutely Jimmy Anstie, and he was sure it wasn't. Turns out I was right :)
The other two photos appear in that 91 Squadron book.
Image is my favorte photo of the Spit XII boys. Taken shortly after their best day when they got 9 for no loss on October 20, 1943. Ray Harries is center with 41 on his right and 91 on his left.
Dan/CorkyJr
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115831054_tangmere-wing.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Image is of a 91 Squadron Spitfire 21 from a photo given to me by one of those 91 pilots who flew it on ops :)(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/169_1115751753_spit21.jpg)
Erm... that's not a contra prop. That's a single 5 bladed prop.
-
Yes Dan, that's a nice photo :) Thanks for sharing! Here's some stuff from No. 91 pertaining to 20.10.43 that may be of interest:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91diary-pg115.jpg
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91diary-pg116.jpg
-
Here a Spit XIV with contra prop:
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit14cp.jpg)
Spit 21 with contra prop:
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit21cp.jpg)
:)
-
One would always think Supermarine could not possible make that plane more ugly than the last version... and then they prove you wrong, again and again. :p
-
Originally posted by mw
Yes Dan, that's a nice photo :) Thanks for sharing! Here's some stuff from No. 91 pertaining to 20.10.43 that may be of interest:
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91diary-pg115.jpg
http://www.spitfireperformance.com/no91diary-pg116.jpg
Thanks for those :)
Where'd you come across that stuff? I've never seen it.
It did mention Chris Doll and Ray McPhie, both of whom I was lucky enough to correspond with for a time. I have copies of both their logbooks for their Spit XII driving time.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Erm... that's not a contra prop. That's a single 5 bladed prop.
Yep. Never said they flew contra-rotating Spit 21s on ops :)
Probably should have clarified it though as I can see in retrospect where it might have been seen as implied based on the original discussion.
Dan/CorkyJr
-
Chatted with my P-38 neighbor Mr Coffee today. he said he worked on the XP-56. Said it had no feather control, but did have a switch to set off a charge to blow off the props from the back in case a pilot had to bail out. He also said it flew real good.
Aircraft: Northrop XP-56
... I think XP-56 could be used, having ... for a parasite fighter under a B-36, years ... of XP-85 Goblin (a jet fighter). In the other hand, XP-56 shape ...aeroweb.brooklyn.cuny.edu/specs/northrop/xp-56.htm - 10k - Cached - More from this site
-
Originally posted by Guppy35
Yep. Never said they flew contra-rotating Spit 21s on ops :)
Probably should have clarified it though as I can see in retrospect where it might have been seen as implied based on the original discussion.
Dan/CorkyJr
Ah lol, with all the discussion I thought (assumed) that all Mk21s had the contra props.
-
I belive they were equipped with them post war.
The Seafire 47 had them as standard.
Performance? Well, it's a navalized aircraft, so 452 mph, ROC 4800 ft/min, time to 20K 4.8 mins, fuel 154 gal, max range 1475 miles, and roll rate 68 deg/sec, well, that's not bad ;)
I always thought the Mk 21 was similar in performance. Quill compares it to the XIV and finds it better in all categories except a yawing unsuitability at high altitude. All combat maneuvers are described as good. Climbing can be done hands off, and the yawing can be countered with the rudder. Acceleration is better, speed is 10-12 mph greater, range is greater, armament is better, high speed roll rate is better, so, - overall better.
-
The ultimate Spit was perhaps the 24, a polished 22 perhaps.
Quill describes a mk 22 on the landing like this (it was dark and cloudy), - as he chopped the throttle on the threshold of the RWY, the aircraft virtually landed itself.
A real lady.
Now, did that one have a contra-prop?
-
Speed, XIV/21 : 448 / 454 mph
Climb, SL, XIV/21 : 4700 / 4500 fpm
Range : 450 / 490 miles (most economical)
Weight : XIV, 8500 lbs, Mk21, 9200 lbs.
Powerloading, wingloading etc. similairly worser on the 21. Add the handling troubles. It was simply unsuccessful, with marginal improvements.
-
I'll take Quills word for it any day, sorry.:D
What was the reason for the yaw anyway, all the power?
-
Here’s a Spitfire 21 with contra-prop on active service with No. 1 Sqdn.
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/spit21jx2.jpg)
Spit 21’s with contra props were produced before VE but I doubt they saw action. Rawlings states that No. 1 Sqdn. converted to Spitfire F.21’s in May 45 “but its only operation with these was to cover the Channel Island landings.”
‘Dizzy’ Allen, who flew both contra-prop and 5-bladed Spitfire 21’s with No 1 Sqdn., wrote:
“It was equipped with Spitfires Mark XXI but I never had a chance to fly the squadron on real operations before the war ground to a halt.
Some of these Spitfires had five-blade propellers, others had six-bladed propellers, three of each rotating in the contra-prop disposition. It was the same lovely aircraft as its mother, the Mark I Spitfire. Both the five-bladed and the contra-prop Spitfires Mark XXI were dreamy aircraft. The former could exceed the performance of the latter on the dive, but on the climb it was quite a bit slower and could never get as high as the contra-prop. They both retained beautiful handling characteristics.”
Wing Commander H.R. ‘Dizzy’ Allen DFC, Battle for Britain, (Transworld, London, 1973), p. 126.
Dan, I'm quite aware, and appreciative, of your familiarity with Spit XII operations ;) Contact me at admin@spitfireperformance.com re: my Spit XII stuff.
-
Saw this in another forum. If true, spite was faster than P-51 H.
The DH Hornet managed 472 mph, the Supermarine Spiteful 494 mph.
-
The Spiteful had a laminar flow wing, different from the original Spitfire wing.
So, not a Spitfire, or?
Anyway, it was disappointing how little faster than "just a Spitfire" it was.
They're all beauties anyway ;)
-
Hiyas:
I stumbled on this pic the other day of a Spitfire PR XIX with contra prop:
(http://www.spitfireperformance.com/pr19-s.jpg)
The PR XIX (225 built) was pretty much just an unarmed Spit XIV dedicated for photo recon. The contra prop sure wasn't standard for this varient during the war though.
-
Ah yah I think you're right Angus. Spiteful is Spit with laminar flow wings. Seems quite a bit faster than a Mk 14. Don't know bout Mk 21. Wonder why it was not considered a success?
Saw an article on the Hornet 3, ( circa 1947) at Barnes & noble. It claimed the Hornet 3 was fastest piston fighter ever to go into production. Forget exact speed. Between 472 & 500.
-
Well, the Hornet was a Twin, and refined to the limit.
I belive they were ready for combat on the pacific front when the war ended, and had perhaps done some patrols.
But that picture of the PR blue spitty, wow, drool, wonder how fast that was. I bet ROC is 4.5 mins to 20 K and speed,,,,,460?
-
Yep Hornet was twin.
-
Originally posted by agent 009
Yep Hornet was twin.
And one of the most beautiful planes ever to fly. The photo below comes from: http://1000aircraftphotos.com/APS/2915.htm
Tony Williams: Military gun and ammunition website (http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk) and discussion forum (http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/)
(http://1000aircraftphotos.com/APS/2915.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Angus
The Spiteful had a laminar flow wing, different from the original Spitfire wing.
... also a radiator layout copied - at last they got rid of those drag bags - from an old adversary. ;)
-
And topped it's speed, hehe.
Anyway, does anyone have performance specs for the Spiteful? Wingloading and climb?
Oh, and the Hornet, - what a plane. The ultimate twin!
-
Or a good belly shot of the Spiteful would be good.
-
Giggle this link:
http://1000aircraftphotos.com/APS/2918.htm
And.....if it works....
(http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/pictures/gallery/supermarine%20spiteful.jpg)
Anyway....
(http://www.ww2incolor.com/gallery/albums/British/The_494_mph_Supermarine_Spiteful.jpg)
And then....(http://homepage.ntlworld.com/alemarinel/Spitfire/SpitefulPrototype.jpg)
Well, the link:
http://www.supermarine-spitfire.co.uk/the_spiteful.htm
Goodnight ;)
-
Angus,
Performance figures for RB518 are on page 501 of Shacklady and Morgan's book "Spitfire: The History". I can scan it and post them if you do not have the book!
All the best,
Crumpp
-
Well there's your reason it was a flop: It's butt-ugly!!
-
Well, the old wing is prettier, but this wing gives more speed.
Crumpp: I'd be very grateful if you'd scan and post. Take your time, for I am quite busy this time of year, and have little time of my own, - except when I am pretty well exhausted. Well, you're from the rural background, so you pretty much know it!
BTW, I also have some books that you probably don't have, probably they are more or less from the brits, but I have some German ones as well. If you are looking for anecdotes from, say, some particular part and theater of the war, just define it, and I'´ll see if I have some. I'll be quick about the business.
To keep this thread alive, and feed some to the ever-waking eye of HTC, I'd appreciate if you'd drop me a mail, I'd respond with a post, - here ;)
Well, all the best folk :)
-
Originally posted by Krusty
Well there's your reason it was a flop: It's butt-ugly!!
Reminds me of an offspring from a Spit humped by the Stang, too. The parents are OK on their own, but their kid looks just odd. ;)
-
Well, some thoughts:
-in the Spitfire Story there is the test report on Spit with the contra-prop and the pilot´s findings are exceptionally positive
-in Putnam´s Supermanrine aircraft tome it is mentioned that the 20-series Spit rolled at 120 deg/sec at 300 mph IAS
-had e.g. the F4U been fitted with a contra-prop, vast number on landing accidents would have been avoided
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
-had e.g. the F4U been fitted with a contra-prop, vast number on landing accidents would have been avoided
Where did you get this information from?
I actually never ever heard about contra-propeller fitted into F4U/FG Corsair and there's a early prototype XF4U-4 has 6 Blade Prop, but project abandoned, but for Contra-Prop on F4U/FG, I never heard of it.
-
Originally posted by pasoleati
-in Putnam´s Supermanrine aircraft tome it is mentioned that the 20-series Spit rolled at 120 deg/sec at 300 mph IAS
Probably true, as afaik the 20series had redesigned wings which fixed the old problem with the spitty wings flexing too much in rolls and causing some 65% reduction in roll rate as per NACAs report on lateral control. Too bad that it was practically not fixed until post-war, I wonder what took the Brits 10 years that the wing has serious rigidity problems.
I wonder if the other lateral problem of the Spits were fixed with the 20 series, namely the so excessive aileron forces that prohibited the full deflection of the aileron above as litle as 140 mph IAS, even if both hands were used. As a result max roll rate was somewhere about 70-80 deg/sec, and fell steeply with speed increase. But from memory, 4x series Spitties were still heavy on the ailerons. Yet, 50-60% of improvment is readily believable if they brought up the wings to the typical scale of rigidity of other fighters of the time, ie. ca 30-40% roll loss to flexing - even if the controls were still that heavy.
-
Watch out here a little....
70-80 deg pro sec is actually almost uncomfortably good.
And once the wing was merely clipped, which has rather little to do with rigitity, the humble Spit V rolled close to the 190...
Now, 120 deg/sec is very very fast. I have a lower number for the Seafire47, - 67 degrees or so, but it could be the min number as well.
Makes one wonder what a corsair with a contra prop could have done.....
-
Originally posted by Angus
And once the wing was merely clipped, which has rather little to do with rigitity, the humble Spit V rolled close to the 190...
Unfortunately angie it never did, the improvement was marginal and the pilots were against it. How many clipped spits were around, not many, guess why. It didnt help much. I can send the docs over if u r interested.
-
Originally posted by Rafe35
Where did you get this information from?
I actually never ever heard about contra-propeller fitted into F4U/FG Corsair and there's a early prototype XF4U-4 has 6 Blade Prop, but project abandoned, but for Contra-Prop on F4U/FG, I never heard of it.
Didn´t you note the magic words HAD IT BEEN FITTED? From basically every account it can be deduced that contra-prop would have eliminated the main cause of F4U accidents, torque roll at low speed (such as wave-off).
K, I wonder when the Willy M fixed the control forces on the 109? AFAIK even the K had very excessive stick force per g. And don´t repeat the manure about "flying with the trimmer".
-
Annappas pasoleati mailiosoite niin saat vähän aineistoa.
gripen
-
Gripen, tässäpä se on: paso.leati@pp.inet.fi
-
Oh, dear.
"Unfortunately angie it never did, the improvement was marginal and the pilots were against it. How many clipped spits were around, not many, guess why. It didnt help much. I can send the docs over if u r interested"
I belive the improvement plonked the clipped Spitty roughly in the 3rd seat of WW2's finest rolling fighters, exceeded by the F4U and the scorer, - da 190!
Some late US fighters also rolled well, like the late P38, so I would not swear on that for 1945, but for 1942, well, 190, F4U and Spit V clipped were the best rollers of the game.
AFAIK, but please post if you can.
The pilots did not overly like the clipped ones, - they were faster and rolled well, but stalled worse and had a poorer ROC and climb as well as high alt performance. NATURALLY
I remember you quoting turning performance from Clostermann vs 109F's, - I dug it up, - he was flying a clipped Spitfire.
So, where and when does what suit M8 :D
-
Originally posted by Kurfürst
Unfortunately angie it never did, the improvement was marginal and the pilots were against it. How many clipped spits were around, not many, guess why. It didnt help much. I can send the docs over if u r interested.
Which pilots were against the clipped wing?
I know a bunch of Spit XII drivers that really liked it.
Never heard anyone complain about it. Performance difference in turning was marginal down low and the improved rate of roll was very welcome when dealing with the 190s.
The majority of Spit XVIs came off the production line with clipped wings btw and many Spit IXs also did so. Certainly many XIVs had clipped wings as well.
With the air war down lower, the clipped wing was a better trade off for performance over the full span wing.
Had the war stayed up high, that would not have been the case.
Dan/CorkyJr