wuzak
Captain
We have had a long discussion, not always on point, about the merits of different liquid cooled piston aero engines.
Now we should look at the flipside - what is/was/could have been the best aircooled engine for all around service (ie used in bombers, fighters, attack, whatever). Or perhaps we should look at ones for specific duty.
I personally don't think production numbers give the answer to what was best, and there were several engines that didn't reach production, or only gained small production orders.
For example. The Armstrong Siddeley Deerhound. This was a 21 cylinder 3 row radial, with ohc and 2 valves per cylinder.
The Mk I had difficulty meeting the targeted 1500hp, and the chief engineer resigned as a result. Stewart Tresilian, formerly of Rolls Royce, was recruited to take over the job, modified the Mk II so that it was able to produce 1340hp, still short of the projected target. The modifications brought capacity up to 41l (2,505cid) from 38.19l (2,259.75cid).
Bore and stroke was 140mm x 127mm. This was carried over to the MkIII, which was a total redesign by Tresilian. He added reverse cooling to the design, and the engine was able to demonstrate 1800hp on the bench.
The engine was compact, with a diameter of 44 inches, giving significantly lower frontal area than the major radials of the period - the R-2800 was between 52 and 55 inches (depending on version), as was the R-4360, the Centaurus was 55.3 inches, the Hercules 55 inches. The smaller Taurus was slightly bigger at 46 inches in diameter. The R-1820 was over 54 inches in diameter, the R-2600 was 55 inches, and the R-3350 nearly 56 inches in diameter.
The R-2600 is probably closest in power output to the MkIII in its initial development status, and very similar in capacity. Had the Deerhound project been continued it may have been on par for power with the R-2800 by war's end. It was, however, cancelled mid 1941, and the company instructed to concentrate on gas turbines.
A further development, the 28 cylinder Wolfhound, never left the drawing board.
Now we should look at the flipside - what is/was/could have been the best aircooled engine for all around service (ie used in bombers, fighters, attack, whatever). Or perhaps we should look at ones for specific duty.
I personally don't think production numbers give the answer to what was best, and there were several engines that didn't reach production, or only gained small production orders.
For example. The Armstrong Siddeley Deerhound. This was a 21 cylinder 3 row radial, with ohc and 2 valves per cylinder.
The Mk I had difficulty meeting the targeted 1500hp, and the chief engineer resigned as a result. Stewart Tresilian, formerly of Rolls Royce, was recruited to take over the job, modified the Mk II so that it was able to produce 1340hp, still short of the projected target. The modifications brought capacity up to 41l (2,505cid) from 38.19l (2,259.75cid).
Bore and stroke was 140mm x 127mm. This was carried over to the MkIII, which was a total redesign by Tresilian. He added reverse cooling to the design, and the engine was able to demonstrate 1800hp on the bench.
The engine was compact, with a diameter of 44 inches, giving significantly lower frontal area than the major radials of the period - the R-2800 was between 52 and 55 inches (depending on version), as was the R-4360, the Centaurus was 55.3 inches, the Hercules 55 inches. The smaller Taurus was slightly bigger at 46 inches in diameter. The R-1820 was over 54 inches in diameter, the R-2600 was 55 inches, and the R-3350 nearly 56 inches in diameter.
The R-2600 is probably closest in power output to the MkIII in its initial development status, and very similar in capacity. Had the Deerhound project been continued it may have been on par for power with the R-2800 by war's end. It was, however, cancelled mid 1941, and the company instructed to concentrate on gas turbines.
A further development, the 28 cylinder Wolfhound, never left the drawing board.