Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Aircraft and Vehicles => Topic started by: SunTracker on March 13, 2005, 04:09:38 PM
-
People keep saying that there was not a cockpit floor in the F4U. So the pilots seat just hung in an empty space?
-
I think they mean there wasn't a supporting floor to stand on, instead they'd just plant their feet at the rudders.
To think of it, why did fighter planes need floors anyway?
-
need floors to keep the sides apart
-
In the early F4u's there was no floor in the cockpit, just foot troughs below and aft of the rudder pedals and a seat which is suspended from the radio shelf aft of the cockpit and in the rear fuselage. (1 major readson why pilots generally do not fair well when an f4u ditches and breaks apart... ie, pilot stays attached to the rear fuselage and gets smushed.)
Anyways, when the F4u-4 arrived, it was standard production with a cockpit floor. Seat remained attached the same though.
Will try to dig up some photos I have somewhere.
-
OK, here's the -4's cockpit floor.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/514_1110759692_cockpit.jpg)
keep in mind that the open spaces on the left and right take the consoles and the spot in the rear is for the seat.
Here are those parts: (note the instrument panel does not go on floor)
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/514_1110759825_cockpitpieces.jpg)
-
here's the difference of the FG-1 floor.
(http://www.onpoi.net/ah/pics/users/514_1110760224_fg1.jpg)
note the foot troughs and open floor.... bad if you drop say a pen light or chart.
-
Many f4u crew cheifs became loose change millionaires
-
When one pukes in it, you'd need to hold the thing upside down to clean it :)
-
I don't remember where I read an account of a hog driver saying he hated to go inverted cus of all the crap that flew around the interior.
-
I have read that in many places Storch, lol.
Roll inverted in a -1,-1A, -1C, or -1D and you never knew what was going to come hit you. Everything from dust and dirt to the wrench the mechanic dropped.
The tamia models for the corsair have the correct cockpit with no floor so you can see the window.
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
Everything from dust and dirt to the wrench the mechanic dropped.
Uh oh, sounds like the Tool Control P.O. is gonna have some explaining to do....
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by GtoRA2
I have read that in many places Storch, lol.
Roll inverted in a -1,-1A, -1C, or -1D and you never knew what was going to come hit you. Everything from dust and dirt to the wrench the mechanic dropped.
The tamia models for the corsair have the correct cockpit with no floor so you can see the window.
I used to drive a D40D Caterpillar articulator at a rock quarry a few years back. The first day I started stockpiling, I thought it would ok to put a can of soda in the cup holder. The first stretch of ridges proved me very wrong as the soda hit me in the head so many times that it exploded. I'm not sure if it would be the same in an aircraft, but I sure wouldn't want to find out.
-
That's hilarious.
I'd wet myself if HT modeled a wrench flying around in the cockpit.
-
IIRC, Galland installed an ash tray in his 109E.
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
That's hilarious.
I'd wet myself if HT modeled a wrench flying around in the cockpit.
:rofl
-
Well not that it matters much, but all U.S. engines suffered damage and could/would seize up after 7 to 30 seconds of inverted flight.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Well not that it matters much, but all U.S. engines suffered damage and could/would seize up after 7 to 30 seconds of inverted flight.
never read that anywhere
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Well not that it matters much, but all U.S. engines suffered damage and could/would seize up after 7 to 30 seconds of inverted flight.
Incorrect statement
-
Incorrect statement
Let's not tell him why or anything.
Take away the "All US Fighter" part and it's not that incorrect...in fact it is correct if the engine wasn't designed with or had installed an inverted fuel and oil system.
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Let's not tell him why or anything.
Take away the "All US Fighter" part and it's not that incorrect...in fact it is correct if the engine wasn't designed with or had installed an inverted fuel and oil system.
No way,whatever is American supost. to be good.
Nobody ever mentions that P47 is russian couse it's good:)it's an American:)
if it were crapy they would call it "russian pos"
Same goes to P51 i think it's german creation,not sure.
No offence to anyone
-
Originally posted by ATA
No way,whatever is American supost. to be good.
Nobody ever mentions that P47 is russian couse it's good:)it's an American:)
if it were crapy they would call it "russian pos"
Same goes to P51 i think it's german creation,not sure.
No offence to anyone
I don't get it. Considering how good the Soviet Planes are in this game, where is this coming from?
Is this more about the lgay-7 thing? Sorry ATA, but it wouldn't have that nickname if it wasn't so good at what it does. Sort of like the P-51 "Runstang."
-Sik
-
If a plane wasn't good, it sure wouldn't be added in Aces High.
-
Ok, which American planes had an oil system capable of sustaining oil pressure in inverted flight?
Heres the planes that could not do it:
P-47
F4U
F6F
P-38
P-51
Any by logical deduction, if these planes were not equipped with such an oil system, neither were other American fighters.
-
You don't by any chance have a reference that back this claim up?
Originally posted by SunTracker
Ok, which American planes had an oil system capable of sustaining oil pressure in inverted flight?
Heres the planes that could not do it:
P-47
F4U
F6F
P-38
P-51
Any by logical deduction, if these planes were not equipped with such an oil system, neither were other American fighters.
-
Originally posted by Sikboy
I don't get it. Considering how good the Soviet Planes are in this game, where is this coming from?
Is this more about the lgay-7 thing? Sorry ATA, but it wouldn't have that nickname if it wasn't so good at what it does. Sort of like the P-51 "Runstang."
-Sik
No i wasn't talking about lgay7 thing
My apologies guys.I didn't mean to offend you.
BTW acodrding to that nikname P51 runs and la7 is homo that runs.:)?
People that cant fight will run,doesnt matter wich plane they are in and same skill level pilots will try to cach you till you run out fuel.
But it's just mine humble opinion.
Almost forgot,Kozhedub flew La5,last 17 kils in la7,it doesnt deserve that homo nik:)
Best regards:aok
-
P-51
http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasaspark/safety/process/flight.htm
Flight restrictions are: no "power-on" spins; no snap rolls; inverted flying should not exceed 10 seconds (there will be a loss of oil pressure and failure of the scavenge pumps to function properly in inverted position)
P-38
http://home.tiscali.dk/winthrop/p38op1.html
1. FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS
(1) Deleted.
(2) Continuous.inverted flight.
The F3F had a scavanger pump to allow for sustained inverted flight, but the F6F, F4U, and P47 did not.
-
So its not the engine themselfs, but the pumps that dictate if the engine can or cannot be supplyed the oil to fly inverted, interesting.
Simple, nuff said.
-
Since when does an R-2800 engine require oil to operate properly?
-
This is good stuff!!
Muchos Gracias Senor!
Originally posted by SunTracker
P-51
http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasaspark/safety/process/flight.htm
P-38
http://home.tiscali.dk/winthrop/p38op1.html
The F3F had a scavanger pump to allow for sustained inverted flight, but the F6F, F4U, and P47 did not.
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Let's not tell him why or anything.
Take away the "All US Fighter" part and it's not that incorrect...in fact it is correct if the engine wasn't designed with or had installed an inverted fuel and oil system.
Incorrect statement.
Oh, and you are on ignore, I do not listen to people that support liars... they are just as bad as the liar.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Ok, which American planes had an oil system capable of sustaining oil pressure in inverted flight?
Heres the planes that could not do it:
P-47
F4U
F6F
P-38
P-51
Any by logical deduction, if these planes were not equipped with such an oil system, neither were other American fighters.
You're statement is very open ended and vague.
When you think about it, and I truly mean think, how often does an aircraft ever sustain true inverted fly, ie. no positive G's while upside down. Rarely in a fighter. That said, assigning a value of 7 to 30 seconds is just flat out incorrect. The 2800's alone have massive residual cooling available even in the abscence of oil. You're assuming that since the aircraft is inverted, the oil just disappears? It stays right in there, and although it may not be all in the sump, the oil will still be splashing all over hell, probably more so as it is not pooling in the sump. The one big issue though is that the aircraft will not have the cooling pickup advantage of the oil coolers if ALL the oil stays in the cc. Chances of that happening are between slim and none.
As for the inlines, you are completely forgetting the true cooling system... or liquid other than oil...
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
You're statement is very open ended and vague.
When you think about it, and I truly mean think, how often does an aircraft ever sustain true inverted fly, ie. no positive G's while upside down. Rarely in a fighter. That said, assigning a value of 7 to 30 seconds is just flat out incorrect. The 2800's alone have massive residual cooling available even in the abscence of oil. You're assuming that since the aircraft is inverted, the oil just disappears? It stays right in there, and although it may not be all in the sump, the oil will still be splashing all over hell, probably more so as it is not pooling in the sump. As for the inlines, you are completely forgetting the true cooling system... or liquid other than oil...
As a tech i know and i mean know that oil needs to be pumped into crank,rod exe. bearings from inside not just "splashing all over",few inverted flights and engine might go.
Even modern engines spin bearings for no reason:lol
And i think "true cooling" not much of a help if motor not lubricates corectly
Best regards.
-
I was under the impression that the R2800 had a separate oil tank and not a crankcase with an oil reservoir and that the oil was always under pressure. where am I going wrong here?
-
Anything I say will be smitten by the great Bodhi. My only experience with R-2800's is with an A-26 Invader and those have seperate and distinct oil tanks in the engine nacelle. They hold more oil than my car holds gas too...yikes!
But watch out, I associate with liars and therefore am a liar as well. Careful what you read from me :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Golfer
Anything I say will be smitten by the great Bodhi. My only experience with R-2800's is with an A-26 Invader and those have seperate and distinct oil tanks in the engine nacelle. They hold more oil than my car holds gas too...yikes!
But watch out, I associate with liars and therefore am a liar as well. Careful what you read from me :rolleyes:
Had too look for your response.
Nice job of putting words in my mouth. Never said that you were a liar. However, I do feel that you are as bad as what you support. Take your own interpretations from there.
As for me being great. Cool, glad you feel so, never thought I was anything more special than one of God's children. I do not know everything, never claimed to, and I make mistakes like anyone else.
As for you, I have yet to see you admit that Straiga lied even though you have seen the proof. You know we have the name right now, so... whats up... ego. Is that it, a newly frocked cfi with an ego... there's something new.
LMFAO
-
Does anybody know the link or some info about that aircraft engine?I'm talking about design(blueprints) not caracteristics,this way we will know for sure;)
Thank you.
-
Originally posted by storch
I was under the impression that the R2800 had a separate oil tank and not a crankcase with an oil reservoir and that the oil was always under pressure. where am I going wrong here?
You are correct, it does have a seperate oil tank, one that is 18.5 gallons on hull numbers 80759-81187 with hulls 81188 having a 23.5 gallon tank with allowable expansion of 6 1/4 and 7 1/4 gals expansion respectively.
Both tanks have baffles to prevent oil from rising to the top of the tank and not be sent to the engine in the case of sustained negative g's.
As for the oil pick ups, my personal opinion is that it will take longer than 30 secs for the engine to suffer damage if in sustained negative g flight, especially since there chances remain that oil will flow back to the engine for a period after it goes inverted based on the 20 ish gallons in the tank that will be picked up because of the reverse flow baffles. Then again, no one would ever be in that situation as the aircraft does not want to fly that way anyways.
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
As for the oil pick ups, my personal opinion is that it will take longer than 30 secs for the engine to suffer damage if in sustained negative g flight, especially since there chances remain that oil will flow back to the engine for a period after it goes inverted based on the 20 ish gallons in the tank that will be picked up because of the reverse flow baffles. Then again, no one would ever be in that situation as the aircraft does not want to fly that way anyways.
It may take some time to pump the oil back into system plus theres always a chance of air poket,who knows.....
Well dont know crap about plane engines so if i'm wrong then i'm sorry
Best regards
-
Then again, no one would ever be in that situation as the aircraft does not want to fly that way anyways.
Inverted flat spins. Multiple negative G maneuvers in combat. Snap rolling inverted at low altitudes and having to push negative Gs to regain a safe altitude to roll level.
-
Hm...i gues this game not that realistic after all
-
Originally posted by Bodhi
Had too look for your response.
Nice job of putting words in my mouth. Never said that you were a liar. However, I do feel that you are as bad as what you support. Take your own interpretations from there.
As for me being great. Cool, glad you feel so, never thought I was anything more special than one of God's children. I do not know everything, never claimed to, and I make mistakes like anyone else.
As for you, I have yet to see you admit that Straiga lied even though you have seen the proof. You know we have the name right now, so... whats up... ego. Is that it, a newly frocked cfi with an ego... there's something new.
LMFAO
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.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Inverted flat spins. Multiple negative G maneuvers in combat. Snap rolling inverted at low altitudes and having to push negative Gs to regain a safe altitude to roll level.
Sustained inverted means sustained... Long periods, not several seconds.
I wouldn't worry about hurting an R-2800 too much. You can run these engines for at least 10 minutes with no oil in the tank (oil line failed). I know because I had to do it once. No oil pressure, cylinder head temps were pegged. But, it ran until we got it on the runway. Ten minutes after shutdown, three guys couldn't budge the prop... Seized tight. I wouldn't want to try that with a Merlin or Allison.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Inverted flat spins. Multiple negative G maneuvers in combat. Snap rolling inverted at low altitudes and having to push negative Gs to regain a safe altitude to roll level.
Sun Tracker, true inverted, or negative G flight in a warbird just does not happen for extended periods of time. Thats just the way it is, the aircraft was not intended to fly like that.
Instances of negatives G's such as you described are instances of time measured in seconds. Not the time frame that is required to fry an R2800.
-
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.
-
F3F designed to fly sustained inverted flight for 30 minutes.
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
F3F designed to fly sustained inverted flight for 30 minutes.
Show proof please.
-
Look what I found about the P-47 while searching for one of Bodhis endless questions:
Lubricating oil was carried in amagnesium tank of 28.6 U.S. gallons capacity, strapped to supports on the engine mount. A pendulum was in-corporated in the tank to insure ade-quate lubrication for inverted flightsof limited duration
-
Show proof please.
powered by a Wright Cyclone R-1820-GI 1,000 hp engine and a three-blade Hamilton Standard propeller the aircraft was equipped for inverted flying for periods of up to half an hour.
A second scavenger pump and five drain lines enabled the plane to sustain inverted flight for up to 30 minutes.
http://www.mucheswarbirds.com/F3Fart.html
-
sorry, but the F3F flight manual I have mentions nothing of being equipped for inverted flight for up to 30 mins.
Which to believe, someone's website, or the real thing...
-
Originally posted by SunTracker
Look what I found about the P-47 while searching for one of Bodhis endless questions:
endless questions my arse...
fruck I am through with this.
:rolleyes:
-
Never Know by Jack Johnson
I hear this old story before
If people keep appealing for the metaphors
Don't leave much up to the imagination,
So I, wanna give this imagery back
No it just aint so easy like that
So, I turn the page and read the story again
And again and again
It just seems the same, with a diff. name
We're breaking every building
And we're growing
Always guessing
Never knowing
Shocking but we're nothing
We're just moments
We're Clever but we're clueless
We're just human
Amusing but confusing
Were trying but where is this all leading
Never Know
It all happened so much faster
Than you could say disaster
Wanna take a time lapse
And look at it backwards
From the last one
And maybe thats just the answer
That we're after
But after all
We're just a bubble in a boiling pot
Just one breath in a chain of thought
The moments just combusting
Feel certain but we'll never never know
Just seems the same
Give it a diff. name
We're beggin and we're needing
And we're trying and we're breathing
Never knowing
Shocking but we're nothing
We're just moments
We're Clever but we're clueless
We're just human
Amusing but confusing
Helping, we're builign
And we're growing
Never Know
Knock knock on the door to door
Tell ya that the metaphor is better than yours
And you can either sink or swim
Things are looking pretty grim
If you dont believe in what this one feeding
Its got no feeling
So I read it again
And again and again
Just seems the same
Too many different names
Our hearts are strong our hands are weak
We'll always be competing never knowing
Never knowing
Shocking but we're nothing
We're just moments
We're Clever but we're clueless
We're just human
Amusing but confusing
But the truth is
All we got is questions
We'll Never Know
Never Know
Never Know ;)
-
Other than the carburetor issue I suspect the question is how a dry sump works when the engine is inverted. If the scavenging pump is drawing from the bottom of the block and all the oil is instead at the base of the piston... That's what the links here seem to suggest.
The place to find all this stuff is Graham White's books on Allied Engines of WWII.
-Blogs
Originally posted by SunTracker
P-51
http://nasaui.ited.uidaho.edu/nasaspark/safety/process/flight.htm
P-38
http://home.tiscali.dk/winthrop/p38op1.html
The F3F had a scavanger pump to allow for sustained inverted flight, but the F6F, F4U, and P47 did not.