Venomstick121
Airman 1st Class
- 247
- Dec 21, 2023
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
who needs a firewall when your tank is covered in stalinummodel kit, but shows the T-60 interior pretty well.
View attachment 758661
Firewall, Bah.
That's for weak, running dog capitalists, not stronk followers of STALIN
I'd want the least number of cylinders for the max amount of output.
How many tons of armor just in the engine compartment?Or... take the Lycoming xr-7755 and design a tank around it.
Where we're going, we don't need "How many tons of armor just in the engine compartment?
The thing for the British is that they ordered 100 Covenantors off the drawing board in April 1939. Which means somebody/s were already designing the engine and somebody/s had OK'd it. The British had much of 1938 and early 1939 to figure out the successor to the Liberty and this was what they went with.
On a more serious note, there are of course tradeoffs. In particular, smaller cylinders enable higher rpm for a given mps. And for petrol engines, issues with flame propagation etc. And then you have balance. Some cylinder configurations provide better balance than others. In particular, I6, V12 and 90 degree V8 are all nice. Maybe less of a problem on a tank engine where you can to an extent paper over such sins with mass.I'd want the least number of cylinders for the max amount of output.
Still in production, and reliable in 1937.Bleh. Just make a V-12 and call it a day instead of inventing exotic layouts?
Not a problem: see every Soviet V-2 Diesel ever madeAnd then you probably need master-slave conrods, with associated issues with difference in stroke length etc.?
Not sure what the Liberty and the big Packard had in common?I wonder how Packard's 3M-2500 (marine version of the above-mentioned Liberty) would have worked in an AFV?
That is part of the "crime". They "saved" 14 inches (350mm?) and about 1/2 (more more?) was by chopping the commanders copula off.Agreed, although I can see a reason for at least trying to develop the Meadows DAV flat 12-cylinder. IIRC the intent was to design an engine that would allow the hull height to be kept to a minimum.
Still in production, and reliable in 1937.
Shorter engine can mean shorter hull, and that's armorweight saved that can be redistributed on the frontal aspect.
Could the RR Kestrel or Peregrine have made a good tank engine, akin to its larger cousin the Merlin-derived Meteor?
has to be better than this chain driveThat's true, but OTOH the width and height of a W-12 does have an impact as well, in how you can place stuff like auxiliaries, fuel tanks, radiators, etc.