Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The Merlin was key to the P51 success and the Pratt&Qhitney R 2800 and their other radials were key to the p47,b24, and B25 and several others. Granted there were Axis motors that could have been very good but when you bomb the heck out of factories and have an idiot dictator. Good stuff doesn't matter. We had almost limitless funds and high production factories so we more or less ran over them.Thinking about a number of posts in recent threads, it seems as if a critical advantage the Allies has during the crucial 1943-1944 time frame was aircraft power plants that were significantly better than those of the Axis. The inability of the Axis to develop comparable power plants was a major failing and a major factor in the outcome of the air war. Or, oversimplified:
Did the Allies just have better engines?
Your thoughts?
Resp:You do have to be careful when reading some of the old accounts/memo's.
If you see the phrase "from the Americas" for example it can very well mean from the British owned/controlled refinery/s in Trinidad that were processing oil from the region.
It may have nothing to do with oil or oil products from the United States of America.
the 100/130 fuel specification came into being after the BoB. BoB fuel was around 100/115-120 depending on batch. The performance number scale itself was developed after the BoB.
Resp:
I read that the British added 10% alcohol to their aviation fuel, and that it caused problems when used in the
P-38 Lightning in the ETO. If this was done, what if any affect did it have in various engines/carburetors? Thanks.
Resp:
I read that the British added 10% alcohol to their aviation fuel, and that it caused problems when used in the
P-38 Lightning in the ETO. If this was done, what if any affect did it have in various engines/carburetors? Thanks.
The Merlin was key to the P51 success and the Pratt&Qhitney R 2800 and their other radials were key to the p47,b24, and B25 and several others. Granted there were Axis motors that could have been very good but when you bomb the heck out of factories and have an idiot dictator. Good stuff doesn't matter. We had almost limitless funds and high production factories so we more or less ran over them.
I just read a sample of the book written on the development of the R 4360 P&w motor . They spent over 5 million 1940's dollars on just one motor development. I also think tactics were much better planned and executed. Just look at the kill scores. after the us gave more or less free hand find it see it shoot it to returning escort planes the axis ground movements were nearly paralyzed.
The British version of 100/150 did not use xylidine, using methyl aniline. The American version did use Xylidine but did not go overseas. In fact the USN was dead set against xylidine.The 110/150 fuel I contained xylidine and perhaps some aniline. Xylidine is the main component needed to make 110RON/150PN fuel, it is not an alcohol
150 Grade Fuel
It is sometimes mistaken for xylene which is an alcohol but not the same. Xylene is also an octane enhancer as well and used by hot roders. It is often added in those after market fuel tank injector cleaners etc along with acetone and toluene. Adding 30% xylene to a tank full of 87 MON will make it 92 MON.
The Germans added methanol (wood alcohol) to their A4 77 RON grade fuel which was used in training aircraft. Methanol is an excellent fuel and good octane enhancer. Methanol was easy to synthesise from coal derived syngas.
The issues with alcohols are usually
1 Cold starting (hence works well with fuel injection in harsh conditions)
2 material compatibility issues (corrosion, lubrication and dissolution issues)
3 tendency to absorb water
4 lower energy density.
It does however burn very cleanly and has a very high RON. All of the above can be solved by adjustments to materials.
Aircraft fuels also must not boil of at high altitude.
Of course both ethanol and methanol could have been added to WW2 aviation fuel as an octane enhancer but generally wasnt for some of the above reasons.
Ethanol and Methanol was used as an anti freeze for water injection systems. For instance in the Luftwaffe MW50 was 50% methanol, 0.5% grease and balance water. There was also MW30 which used less methanol for less cold weather and also EW30 which used ethanol etc. In warm weather the Germans sometimes did not use any alcohol at all especially if the were not flying to high altitude.
The First P-47C to receive water injection received them as field retrofit kits. They were instructed to mix in alcohol as an anti-freeze. For some reason they chose propanol ie iso-propyl alcohol. This then blew up engines when the water injection was engaged and made P-47 combat pilots reluctant to do so. Supplies of ethanol were then used.
Interestingly the Germans used xylidine in their Tonka rocket fuel so they must have planned mass production.
The bad British fuel myth. As I have pointed out in previous posts, Lockheed was blowing up V -1710s at a prodigious rate during the winter of 1943-44 in sunny California trying to solve the problems being expirenced world wide. Perhaps Ronnie Coleman and Basil Rathbone were sneaking over to Burbank and sabotaging the fuel.Resp:
I read that the British added 10% alcohol to their aviation fuel, and that it caused problems when used in the
P-38 Lightning in the ETO. If this was done, what if any affect did it have in various engines/carburetors? Thanks.
The problem with the DB 603 is simplest to describe and mostly comes down to lack of funding and the RLM's belief that the Jumo 213 was going to be a better choice. Thus even when the DB 603 was put into production in 1943, it was not available in large numbers and was not used by the Fw 190.
Finally, the Jumo 222 was hoped to become the main bomber engine until late 1941. I don't know why it didn't work but changes in the specification and thus in the cylinder bore obviously slowed development and possibly shortages of tin for the bearings also caused delays. The basic configuration was much later shown to work Dobrynin VD-4K - Wikipedia.
Thanks, I was probably hastily looked up xylanol, which has the OH, but is categorised as a phenol or xylatol which is a sugar substitute and an alcohol.Xylene is not an alcohol; see p-Xylene | C8H10 | ChemSpider. Its formula is C8H10. Its alternate name is 1,4-dimethylbenzene. Alcohols need OH substituents.
Thanks, I was probably hastily looked up xylanol, which has the OH, but is categorised as a phenol or xylatol which is a sugar substitute and an alcohol.
I hope that you could cope with the rearrangement. I am told that people who study organic chemistry have alkynes of trouble.Alas, a few years ago had to take organic chemistry. I was permanently changed.
Daimler-Benz proposed the DB603 to the RLM in the autumn of 1936 and received permission to develop the engine. On March 11, 1937, the RLM had development stopped, paying D-B's accrued development costs. The reason was that "in the BMW801, we already have an engine in development that will meet all our requirements in this power class". D-B people were sure that with properly funded and supported development, the 603 would have been ready for series production before the start of the war. Low-key development obviously continued in the form of the marine and tank derivatives (DB 503/507); the Daimler-Benz land speed record car of 1939 was intended to be powered by an early DB603 prototype (likely one of the ten engines that the RLM had financed) that had produced a test-bench output of 2800 HP with 3500 HP likely to be achieved. The RLM was still not interested, indeed it was considered to offer the engine for export (imagine Japan buying the engine program!). All that changed with the war; D-B received the first order for 120 engines on February 3, 1940. Series production started in 1941, but output was initially low (and was needed for any number of prototypes). Focke-Wulf made a preliminary design for a DB603 installation in the 190 in February, 1940, estimating that speed would rise by 50 km/h and the engine installation would even weigh less than the BMW801. The RLM was still not interested - the BMW is all we need for the Fw190. When the engine was available in production numbers, it was obviously needed for more important applications like the ME 410 - see above reasoning. From April, 1942, Focke-Wulf built three prototypes with the DB603 - V13, V15, V16. The V15 reached 696 km/h at 6950 m with combat (max continuous) power. Daimler-Benz brought the V16 to 724 km/h at 7000 m with Notleistung (take-off power), and with an improved supercharger to 722 km/h at 9000 m. Not needed, says the RLM, since the 190 will be used in the east, where high-altitude performance is irrelevant - the Me109 G is all that is needed in the West. Stymied by bureaucracy - a common theme in the Third Reich where know-it-alls with good contacts made the decisions.
The Jumo 222 did work eventually. The most persistent problem stemmed from the bearings - plain bearings made of an RLM-mandated bronze alloy containing antimony instead of tin. Only when tin was used could that problem be solved. Incidentally it was found that lubricants containing sulfur worked better with highly-loaded bearings. The Jumo 222 suffered from its connection with bomber programs - bombers not needed, then again needed, meaning production was ordered, then cancelled, then ordered again. The engine was ready for production in December of 1942, but production and development capacities were repurposed for the DB603 and Jumo 213. The engine would have been just right for the He219 night fighter, which was seriously underpowered with the DB603 - see "Winkle" Browns opinion.
You all forget fuel Octane!! Also about the shape of the development curve and influence of available technical resources and strategic bombing disruption not to mention political in-fighting.Thinking about a number of posts in recent threads, it seems as if a critical advantage the Allies has during the crucial 1943-1944 time frame was aircraft power plants that were significantly better than those of the Axis. The inability of the Axis to develop comparable power plants was a major failing and a major factor in the outcome of the air war. Or, oversimplified:
Did the Allies just have better engines?
Your thoughts?
I agree with your assessment with some caveats. The BMW 801 (2550cubic inches) had the same swept volume as the Curtiss Wright R-2600 but the 801 was a better engine because it had a much lower frontal area and in addition the gear driven fan allowed a tightly fitted cowling. The Pratt & Whitney R-2800 however also had a much lower frontal area than the R-2600 plus 8% more swept volume and better cooling and aspiration. If things had of stayed with single stage two speed superchargers for both the BMW 801 and PW R-2800 (as used on the B-26) I dont think you could argue that the R-2800 was a much better engine, Maybe slightly better (probably a little lighter, a little more drag and ,little more power) but the difference is small. However the US fighters that entered combat service in 1943 (P-47, Corsair and Hellcat) all had either turbo-superchargers or two stage, intercooled superchargers with independent drives and this is where the USAAF gained a huge jump on the Luftwaffe in performance above 20,000ft.
So how long did it take for the Luftwaffe to catch up? Almost 2 years. History shows that their first two stage intercooled engines entered service only in 1945 (Jumo 213E on the Ta 152H and Jumo 213F on Fw 190D12 and DB601LA on Ta 152C). The Turbocharged BMW 801TJ entered service also in the dying days of 1944 with some Ju 88S and in 1945 with Ju 388L.
It is not quite as clear cut as that. The DB605 and DB603 were not as reliant on supercharging for basic power because of their high compression ratios and high swept volume design. In 1944 the Germans made significant hydrodynamic improvements to their single stage two speed supercharger designs that partially closed the gap in altitude performance with allied engines eg DB605ASM(enlarged and improved impellor) and BMW 801TS (improved impellor, improved head design). The final version of the BMW801F was likely to have been producing 2600hp. The improved fuels, increased boost and rich mixture injection meathe nt a 1943 BMW 801 had 1900hp not 1700hp.
The BMW801R with two stage supercharging, intercooling, 4 speeds (as two separate drives) was intended for the Ta 152C but bombing destroyed the tooling. There is not doubt had the German industry not been under such extreme pressure they might have rolled out these engines much earlier. The allied oil bombing campaign so reduced the production of C3 fuel that engines had to be delayed to accomodate the new fuel. The Ta 152C with DB603EM would have been in service in 1944 for instance.
The bigger problem on the Me 109G was the poor airframe tolerances and tooling problems. Had the Me 109G6 that met the P-51B/C in combat in 1944 had a retractable tail wheel, no gun bulges over the cowling and fully enclosed main wheel covers it would have been 5% faster (419mph instead of 399 mph). These were all features the Me 109G0 had (and lost due to weight growth) but and all features the P-51B/C had. When the new DB605ASM engine came into serivice in May 1944 the P-51B/C and Me 109G6 should both have been roughtly 440 mph aircraft. It was October 1944 before the Me 109K4 fixed these minor airframe issues.
????????powerful centralized armament of 3 cannon
He must be referring to the replacement of the cowl MGs with cannons.????????
what three cannon?
????????
what three cannon?