Could a single engined, single seat fighter be made for the Lycomings xr-7755?

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

Admiral Beez

Captain
8,938
10,187
Oct 21, 2019
Toronto, Canada
 
One of the few built is at NASM, last seen at the Garber facility. It dwarfs a R-4360.
Intended for a global bomber, if you consider the mass of the engine, the "fighter" would be larger than a B-17.
Then, consider how large the prop would have to be ... the landing gear would make those on the F8F look short and stubby.
 
From Wiki:


Diameter: 61 in (1,500 mm)
Dry weight: 6,050 lb (2,740 kg)
Fuel consumption: ≈ 580 gal/h (480 imp gal/h; 2,200 L/h)

It will need a lot of fuel!

The XR-7755 weighs roughly the same as a Spitfire Mk.V.

It would have to be a hell of an aircraft.

Might have to do something like the McDonnell Model 1 proposal with a central engine and a system of driveshafts to a pair of propellers on the wings.

 
The XR-7755 weighs roughly the same as a Spitfire Mk.V. It would have to be a hell of an aircraft.
I was picturing something like a 3x scale Granville Gee Bee Super Sportster. But as a fighter, of sorts :)

gee-bee-model-r-2%25255B6%25255D.jpg
 
By the way, I got to thinking:
The Douglas A-1 had the R-3350 installed and if you look at photos of the Spad, the cowling looks small compared to the rest of the airframe.

The Cyclone was 55 inches in diameter and 6 feet long, making it 6 inches narrower and about 4 feet shorter than the R-7755.
 
The Cyclone was 55 inches in diameter and 6 feet long, making it 6 inches narrower and about 4 feet shorter than the R-7755.

It fits !!!
Now if we just shove hundreds of pounds of ballast in the tail to make up the extra extra 2400-2600lbs of engine weight.

I KNOW, turn it into a twin a shove an R-2800 in the tail !!!
CG problem solved.
 
It fits !!!
Now if we just shove hundreds of pounds of ballast in the tail to make up the extra extra 2400-2600lbs of engine weight.

I KNOW, turn it into a twin a shove an R-2800 in the tail !!!
CG problem solved.
My point was that the A-1's proportions were such, that the R-3350 appeared comically small in comparison, unlike many single types where the engine dwarfed the airframe.

Douglas did modify the A-1 to accept a turboprop assembly (designated A-2D) and even that arrangement looked disproportionate.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back