50s aircraft that originated during World War II

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

special ed said:
I thought I read it in Test Pilot but maybe not. However the YP-59A didn't have the performance to dive on F4Us and climb away.
Click to expand...
If the Corsairs were cruising in formation, which is most likely the case with them being trainees, then they would have been traveling about 200mph or so.
The P-59A would have easily been able to perform shenanigans around them and speed away.
 
The YP-59As were operating from one area of what would later be Edwards AFB and a squadron or two of P-38s were operating out of another area. They kept reporting a strange airplane with no propeller leaving a smoke trail. The jet commander told them they had to do better than be reported by the P-38s.

Jack Woollams requisitioned a Jeep and went to Hollywood and bought a gorilla mask and hands, a derby hat, and a couple of cigars. Next day, he opened the cockpit, pulled up next to a flight of P-38s, waved, and dived away. They reported a strange airplane with no prop, being flown by a gorilla wearing a derby hat and smoking a cigar, leaving a smoke trail.

The fight surgeon told then they could go ahead and submit the report and be grounded for being crazy or let it go. So, they kept seeing the YP-59A, but stopped reporting it.

Problem solved.
 
Now, this is a subject I love…

The B-36, it was to the B-29 what the B-29 was to the B-17, HUGE! when engineers can walk IN the wings to address the many engine problems, you know you're flying some big D energy..6 Turning 4 burning… We have one halfway between Phoenix and Tucson, B-36J my 5 ft tall daughter is tiny next to it's gear… imagine those remote 20mm firing…I've read they would blow the tubes out of the electronics of the plane.

Skyraider, the only things I can say they should have built more. Absolute brutes.

This one probably doesn't count but I'm throwing it out there, AU-1 Corsair. Not fast but armored up with 4x20mm and a good payload. Marine ground attack aircraft in Korea.
 
Graeme said:
What were Lockheed's proposed engines?
Click to expand...
The Wikipedia article states rather tersely that "Lockheed proposed a jet powered initially by a Lockheed L-1000 axial flow turbojet, and then the General Electric J35."

But according to this other article, the engine that Lockheed proposed would have offered a serious jump in performance, but it only existed on paper, and the Army Air Force request for proposal had stipulated an "off the shelf" (already-existing) engine.

One might possibly argue that Lockheed was overly optimistic about their own engine, but the indisputable fact is that the engines that were actually used were woefully inadequate, and had that not been the case, the F-90 might have been a real winner. After all, this was a product of the Skunk Works under Kelly Johnson (think P-38, F-104, U-2, and SR-71).
 
As good as the F-90 looked, even with the J-79s, it would have to lose the tip tanks to dogfight.

But, that's just my thought on it. Perhaps it magically had less roll inertia than it appears from the pics. Another thought would be to use fuel from the wing tanks and automatically pump fuel from the tip tanks to the wing tanks as it is used. That way, the tip tanks would get lighter quickly and maybe not be a factor at all.

Also, Lockheed developed the first American axial-flow turbojet, the company designation was the L-1000 and the military designation was the J-37. The Planes of Fame Museum has one on display. The design called for a weight of 1,700 pounds and a thrust of 5,100 pounds. Final weight was 1,610 pounds. The Army was seemingly uninterested and Lockheed ceased further development. Pic below of the engine at Planes of Fame.

 
Last edited:
Could what you have there be used as a hands -on engineering study? Kind of like a grad student or hobbyist doing what Curtiss did with Langley's Aerodrome to get it to fly. With whatever Cad-Cam is now called.
I have read references to this engine, all vague. How far along was Lockheed on this path? Was it way off base or "so very, very close "? I am not asking for a phone book of numbers.
 
Hi
Bill Gunston in 'The development of Jet and Turbine Aero Engines', PSL 1997, has a little bit on the L-1000:

The book 'Gas Turbines and Jet Propulsion' (Fourth Edition May 1946, First Edition was December, 1942) by G. Geoffrey Smith, published by 'FLIGHT' has the following summary on American Gas Turbines:





Mike
 
About the engine ... not too sure if it could be used as an engineering study. You can certainly see it and photograph it, but I doubt if the museum would allow it to be disassembled. You never know. Throw some money at it and ... maybe. Money talks.

About the tip tank auto empty, all we really need to know is if the airplane rolled well when the tanks were empty as opposed to full. The T-33 was not cleared for aerobatics if there was fuel in the tip tanks, but was when they were empty.
 
Thanks for the post, Mike. The L-100 became the XJ-37 and was startlingly advanced but how did it differ from Whittle's and Heinkel's design? Are there diagrams of the L-1000's innards?
 
You may find more in Leslie Nevilles book on turbojet engines dated 1948. I thought I had a pdf of this but cannot find it. Will keep looking.



I have a copy of his ADDB so will look at that tonight if I get time. The turbine engine section is very small - 20-30 pages from memory
 
The earliest jet engines were centrifugal compression. Axial compression came along later, as an improvement. That's what Lockheed was offering. Axial compression engines are generally more efficient and more powerful; centrifugal compression engines are easier and less costly to make.
You can find out a lot just by Googling "Axial vs centrifugal jet engines" but here is an article that does a good job of giving a quick comparison:

The Differences Between Axial Compressor & Centrifugal Compressor
 
Hi
Axial and Centrifugal were close contemporaries in technology, information from the previously mentioned 1946 book includes the German jet engines that were mainly axial:

The early British jet engines were of both types:

The first British axial engine cleared for flight was apparently the Metropolitan-Vickers below:



Mike
 
I do not have a deep knowledge of jet history, but it does seem that the first jets were centrifugal, and the axial jets came along later. The British Whittle was centrifugal, while the Me262 used axial jets. The American P-59 used centrifugal compressors, and the proposed Lockheed engine would have been the first American axial-flow jet and a large improvement (if it had been built). I find the whole topic interesting, but I still have a lot to learn.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Historic World War II aircraft hidden in plain sight
Replies
0
Views
673
GTX
M
USAAF aircraft lost through transport sinkings during Battle of the Atlantic?
Replies
2
Views
392
fubar57
What (or what would) make a good tactical recon aircraft in World War II
Replies
10
Views
1K
ColFord
War Weary
Replies
14
Views
751
Snautzer01
T
Identify a aircraft from WV II
Replies
19
Views
783
Engineman
E
Menu
Log in
Register