The XB-42 "solved" this problem by putting two 12-bangers side-by-side. One engine could fail and the aircraft still fly--- and fast it did!
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The XB-42 "solved" this problem by putting two 12-bangers side-by-side. One engine could fail and the aircraft still fly--- and fast it did!There was no such nonsense before 1939, at least not from the British perspective.
RR can ditch the Exe and make a liquid-cooled engine instead of it. Say, a 40 liter H layout engine that uses Kestrel/Peregrine bore and some internals to speed up the development.
I'm certainly no expert on mechanics, but a single crankshaft isn't all that and a bag of chips. You are attempting to fit twice as many piston connections per unit length as with a V-12. It's certainly possible, but the complexity of such an arrangement is arguably a bigger headache than it is worth
It seems safe to say the H-24 is the most practical way to get more power in a liquid cooled piston engine. While the Saber was not without its share of pains, it was still in production aircraft by 1943, which only German attempts at double engines can boast on the He 177, and the difference in weight and reliability heavily favors the H-block example here.
It also caught on fire. A LOT. And as you said, it was 2 1,300hp engines glued together. That MAYBE saves some space over using a 4 engined bomber with 1,300hp engines, but at the cost of complexity, pricetag, and, you know, turning your crew into the Human Torch every 10 flights. Maybe the Allies didn't have equal hp per engine, but the B-17G had the same total Horsepower and could hold it to higher altitude, the A-20G was only around 66% as powerful but was more reliable… Hell, I'd rather fly a Po-2 on a combat sortie than the Greif.I'm sure having 4 connecting rods on a crankshaft pin is no worse than having 7, 9 or 11 as on radials.
The Sabre was very compact for a 24 cylinder engine, particularly an H-24.
The Daimler-Benz DB606 (and later 610) was two complete engines joined to a common gearbox. It was possible to disconnect one engine from the prop drive and shut it down.
Having two of everything made the 606 very heavy. It was also capable of ~2,600hp early in the war, which wouldn't be matched by any allied engines until late in the war.
It also caught on fire. A LOT. And as you said, it was 2 1,300hp engines glued together. That MAYBE saves some space over using a 4 engined bomber with 1,300hp engines, but at the cost of complexity, pricetag, and, you know, turning your crew into the Human Torch every 10 flights. Maybe the Allies didn't have equal hp per engine, but the B-17G had the same total Horsepower and could hold it to higher altitude, the A-20G was only around 66% as powerful but was more reliable… Hell, I'd rather fly a Po-2 on a combat sortie than the Greif.
It's a wonder that the greatest 24 cylinder engine of them all hasn't been mentioned - the Fairey P.24 with 4 speed, 2 stage supercharging!
I'm sure having 4 connecting rods on a crankshaft pin is no worse than having 7, 9 or 11 as on radials.
The Sabre was very compact for a 24 cylinder engine, particularly an H-24.
The Daimler-Benz DB606 (and later 610) was two complete engines joined to a common gearbox. It was possible to disconnect one engine from the prop drive and shut it down.
Having two of everything made the 606 very heavy. It was also capable of ~2,600hp early in the war, which wouldn't be matched by any allied engines until late in the war.
In the real war, the RAF developed the Griffon and the Sabre. As noted previously, the Griffons fit into Spitfires. They probably would have fit into Mustangs if jets had not come along. Once they got the Sabres working, they had a super powerful engine with tomo pauk's twenty four cylinders.Because RR may only develop 2 engines. Kestrel doesn't need development and training aircraft don't need the Peregrine. Merlin or Vulture address every requirement of the Griffon.
Probably a great performer in everything except long range escort.Griffon powered Mustang. Cool.
Look up Precious Metal , Red Baron, and Miss Ashley II. The world's Mustang speed record still is held by Voodoo, which appears to still have a Merlin engine.Griffon powered Mustang. Cool.
Apart from the name/numberplate it doesn't have much to do with a WWII Merlin. Or a P51 for that matter.Look up Precious Metal , Red Baron, and Miss Ashley II. The world's Mustang speed record still is held by Voodoo, which appears to still have a Merlin engine.
Those racers were all using post-war Griffon 57 series engines surplused from Shackletons.Look up Precious Metal , Red Baron, and Miss Ashley II. The world's Mustang speed record still is held by Voodoo, which appears to still have a Merlin engine.
Who cares?Probably a great performer in everything except long range escort.
Not me, but thats how the P-51 became famous, a WW2 Griffon Mustang would have no influence on history but would have huge discussions about "what ifs" There werent enough enough engines to be of use at all.Who cares?
The engines were developed for the RAF. Those fancy twenty four cylinder engines were military only. For civilian use, you want something simple, reliable and cheap. Postwar British airliners were powered by some Merlins, and a lot of Hercules and Centauruses. I am not aware even of a Griffon powered airliner.Howard Gibson : The RAF didn't develop any engines: Rolls-Royce (RR) developed Merlin and Griffon during war, Napier the Sabre, and Bristol the Hercules and Centaurus.
The OP's requirement was for a 24 cylinder engine of 1,500+ hp in '39 (which just about guarantees 87 octane fuel), that will be up-gradable to remain relevant until VJ-Day. The only engine that historically meets the '39 date in the Vulture. And RR needs to keep the 'A-team' focused on the Vulture to make it a 3k hp engine in Aug/'45.
If nothing else keeping Vulture in production provides 2nd source for all designs wanting Sabre.
SaparotRob : RR Merlin and the last Allisons were keeping up on power with the Griffon through VE-day. I haven't read of any serious plans to replace the Merlin with Griffon at production line level (our Mustang experts might correct me) - the extra 300lbs of Griffon + bigger (heavier) propeller having negative effects on balance. As was pointed out, the speed record for a Mustang based air frame is still held by one powered by Merlin.
They were developed for the British government, under government contracts. Not all "Merlins" went into aircraft, some were de tuned and went into tanks as Meteors. The intellectual property was the UK governments which is why they could contract Packard to produce Merlins under license, RR obviously profited from the deal but that is normal in a war, RR were in no position to refuse.The engines were developed for the RAF. Those fancy twenty four cylinder engines were military only. For civilian use, you want something simple, reliable and cheap. Postwar British airliners were powered by some Merlins, and a lot of Hercules and Centauruses. I am not aware even of a Griffon powered airliner.