MIflyer
Major
Did the WW1 Liberty engine lead to the US need to build Merlin engines in WW2?
Sounds like an odd question but back around 1990 this was an issue that was rattling around Wash DC.
Following the loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986 the USAF had to switch its payloads back over to expendable launch vehicles, leading to new production of the old Atlas, Delta and Titan boosters in uprated versions.
The USAF GPS satellites were launched on the Delta 2 booster for the initial production run. The next procurement of GPS launches was going to be held competitively. And Martin Marietta came up with a proposal that scared the crap out of the Delta 2 builder, McDonnell Douglas. MMC proposed using existing Titan II ICBM's that had been taken out of service, strap some solid motors on the sides, and use them to launch GPS. MDAC was scared that the TII's would prove to be so cheap as to undercut the Delta 2 and embarked on a campaign to convince Washington DC and the Pentagon that such use of surplus would seriously harm the US aerospace industry.
MDAC argued that after WW1 many surplus Liberty engines were dumped on the market at bargain basement prices and that ultimately that damaged the US aircraft engine industry so badly that the US had to buy Rolls Royce Merlin engines rather that use the inferior Allison V-1710.
This was seriously discussed in DC and in fact the Federal Department of Transportation ultimately developed a policy against the use of surplus missiles. But did the argument make sense?
While many Liberty as well as rotary engines were dumped on the market, aircraft engine development in the US was not negatively impacted as a result. The rotary engines were short-lived, nasty, and cantankerous beasts with high operating costs due to their need for Caster Oil. The Liberty was in reality based on WW1 automobile engine technology, and had less than a long service life as well. It used separate cylinders, while the Curtiss D-12 engine with its cast block design actually showed the way to the future, and the basic design concept was copied by just about everybody.
So, the US actually led the world in aircraft engines, not only with the D-12 but also radials built by Wright as well as Pratt and Whitney. Meanwhile, it was the British that persisted with the Liberty, using it as an armored vehicle engine right up to WW2.
So why was the US buying Packard made Merlins? Well, it was the same reason that the RAF was buying Allison-made V-1710's. There was a war on and the allies needed every engine they could get their hands on. It was normal for armed forces to buy engines and airframes separately, under different contracts, in the belief they could get a better deal from the manufacturers that way.
As to why the Merlin was procured, the USAAF was convinced that turbosuperchargers were the way to go for high altitude power. No military service anywhere in the world was more committed to superior performance at altitude as a way to attain air superiority. But while the turbo worked just great in heavy bombers, that was not the case for single engined fighters. The XP-37 was a P-36 with a V-1710 and a turbo and ended up looking like a Gee Bee racer, the cockpit being so far back; it was indeed faster at altitude but was unworkable. The P-39 was actually slower with the turbo than without it; the installation created too much drag. The P-38 with its turbos was indeed a world beater but while the P-43 could accommodate a turbo it did not have enough power, using only a R-1830. The huge P-47 did fine with a turbo. In any case there was no big push to improve the V-1710's supercharging, since it was thought that the turbo had solved the problem.
The Merlin with two stage supercharging was intended to be a back up to the use of turbocharging with radial engines in a special high altitude version of the Wellington, designed to emulate the Ju-86P. The RAF had found that you needed to be able to swap engine types on airplanes if you factories were in range of enemy bombers. Then they realized that the new FW-190 was a problem that was not going to handled by the Typhoon and stuck the new Merlin in a Spitfire V. One highly experienced Luftwaffe fighter pilot said that after that the Germans never caught up. And then they decided to try it out in the new Mustang I and the rest was history.
So, no, the surplus Liberty engines did not hurt the US aviation engine industry. And MDAC won the second contract for the GPS launches.
Sounds like an odd question but back around 1990 this was an issue that was rattling around Wash DC.
Following the loss of the Space Shuttle Challenger in 1986 the USAF had to switch its payloads back over to expendable launch vehicles, leading to new production of the old Atlas, Delta and Titan boosters in uprated versions.
The USAF GPS satellites were launched on the Delta 2 booster for the initial production run. The next procurement of GPS launches was going to be held competitively. And Martin Marietta came up with a proposal that scared the crap out of the Delta 2 builder, McDonnell Douglas. MMC proposed using existing Titan II ICBM's that had been taken out of service, strap some solid motors on the sides, and use them to launch GPS. MDAC was scared that the TII's would prove to be so cheap as to undercut the Delta 2 and embarked on a campaign to convince Washington DC and the Pentagon that such use of surplus would seriously harm the US aerospace industry.
MDAC argued that after WW1 many surplus Liberty engines were dumped on the market at bargain basement prices and that ultimately that damaged the US aircraft engine industry so badly that the US had to buy Rolls Royce Merlin engines rather that use the inferior Allison V-1710.
This was seriously discussed in DC and in fact the Federal Department of Transportation ultimately developed a policy against the use of surplus missiles. But did the argument make sense?
While many Liberty as well as rotary engines were dumped on the market, aircraft engine development in the US was not negatively impacted as a result. The rotary engines were short-lived, nasty, and cantankerous beasts with high operating costs due to their need for Caster Oil. The Liberty was in reality based on WW1 automobile engine technology, and had less than a long service life as well. It used separate cylinders, while the Curtiss D-12 engine with its cast block design actually showed the way to the future, and the basic design concept was copied by just about everybody.
So, the US actually led the world in aircraft engines, not only with the D-12 but also radials built by Wright as well as Pratt and Whitney. Meanwhile, it was the British that persisted with the Liberty, using it as an armored vehicle engine right up to WW2.
So why was the US buying Packard made Merlins? Well, it was the same reason that the RAF was buying Allison-made V-1710's. There was a war on and the allies needed every engine they could get their hands on. It was normal for armed forces to buy engines and airframes separately, under different contracts, in the belief they could get a better deal from the manufacturers that way.
As to why the Merlin was procured, the USAAF was convinced that turbosuperchargers were the way to go for high altitude power. No military service anywhere in the world was more committed to superior performance at altitude as a way to attain air superiority. But while the turbo worked just great in heavy bombers, that was not the case for single engined fighters. The XP-37 was a P-36 with a V-1710 and a turbo and ended up looking like a Gee Bee racer, the cockpit being so far back; it was indeed faster at altitude but was unworkable. The P-39 was actually slower with the turbo than without it; the installation created too much drag. The P-38 with its turbos was indeed a world beater but while the P-43 could accommodate a turbo it did not have enough power, using only a R-1830. The huge P-47 did fine with a turbo. In any case there was no big push to improve the V-1710's supercharging, since it was thought that the turbo had solved the problem.
The Merlin with two stage supercharging was intended to be a back up to the use of turbocharging with radial engines in a special high altitude version of the Wellington, designed to emulate the Ju-86P. The RAF had found that you needed to be able to swap engine types on airplanes if you factories were in range of enemy bombers. Then they realized that the new FW-190 was a problem that was not going to handled by the Typhoon and stuck the new Merlin in a Spitfire V. One highly experienced Luftwaffe fighter pilot said that after that the Germans never caught up. And then they decided to try it out in the new Mustang I and the rest was history.
So, no, the surplus Liberty engines did not hurt the US aviation engine industry. And MDAC won the second contract for the GPS launches.
