pinehilljoe
Senior Airman
- 740
- May 1, 2016
Were any studies done for a Griffon powered Mustang?
Griffon P-51
- Thread starter pinehilljoe
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Admiral Beez
Major
drgondog
Major
Yes. Same issue as with Allison two stage. NAA cited Major changes to airframe required.
Brits also studied mid fuse installation to maximize use of existing P-51B/D airframe. Project got to mock up study before jets made the idea obsolete.
GregP
Major
Here's one.
https://www.eaa.org/~/media/images/news/2015-briefing/11-16-15-960-n6wj.jpg
Of course, it is an air racer and not ready for flying combat missions. But the engine rather obviously CAN be put into a P-51 airframe. That they decided not to do so was probably the correct decision.
https://www.eaa.org/~/media/images/news/2015-briefing/11-16-15-960-n6wj.jpg
Of course, it is an air racer and not ready for flying combat missions. But the engine rather obviously CAN be put into a P-51 airframe. That they decided not to do so was probably the correct decision.
drgondog
Major
Try jamming it into the NA-73/XP-51 in 1941 and reflect on the many changes associated in the interim XP-51B with the smaller Merlin 61 - not the least the cooling system mods, revising the firewall/engine mount and dropping the wing. The weight, engine envelope also would have dictated much more ballast and moving the wing forward about 3". All issues Martin Baker was confronted with when they elected to go mid-fuselage.
All issues leading to tall tail and adding length to P-51H fuselage just to account for the increased HP of the Merlin series. Didn't say it couldn't be done, should have qualified that it posed just too many changes to meet RAF delivery schedules.
GregP
Major
Hi Bill,
I wasn't saying it should have been done or that it was a reasonable choice. I only posted that because it is a flying (or used to be before the fire) P-51 with a Griffon in it.
It's exactly like the P-39 thread. Yes, a Merlin could be shoehorned in, but it would not "fix" the airplane and wasn't exactly a good use of Merlin engines. That it could have been done does not mean it should have been done.
Same here. While a Griffon COULD have been used in the P-51, I doubt rather seriously that anyone with a practical eye would have suggested it should have been done. Any "improvements" would have been minor with respect to significant performance gains versus the production changeover nightmare and there might have been some losses, like maybe range. I don't know without an analysis and it just doesn't seem worth the effort since it never happened during the operational life of the P-51 and the linked airplane above is a purely racing aircraft with no thought at all given to range or military applications.
I wasn't saying it should have been done or that it was a reasonable choice. I only posted that because it is a flying (or used to be before the fire) P-51 with a Griffon in it.
It's exactly like the P-39 thread. Yes, a Merlin could be shoehorned in, but it would not "fix" the airplane and wasn't exactly a good use of Merlin engines. That it could have been done does not mean it should have been done.
Same here. While a Griffon COULD have been used in the P-51, I doubt rather seriously that anyone with a practical eye would have suggested it should have been done. Any "improvements" would have been minor with respect to significant performance gains versus the production changeover nightmare and there might have been some losses, like maybe range. I don't know without an analysis and it just doesn't seem worth the effort since it never happened during the operational life of the P-51 and the linked airplane above is a purely racing aircraft with no thought at all given to range or military applications.
Last edited:
I think that may require a bit of a re design and a lot more fuel. The last versions of the Merlin and Griffon were over 2000HP.
IMO - the P-51 basic airframe was too small & slender to house that big & complex powerplant.
Rolls-Royce did some studies and cut some mock-up metal for a behind-the-pilot, Griffon powered "Mustang" referred to as the Flying Test Bed. See the book "Rolls-Royce and the Mustang" by the late Dave Birch, Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust Historical Series No. 9. Also: Rolls-Royce Mustang Mk.X - Wikipedia
Attachments
Last edited:
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,019
- Jun 25, 2013
Then you would call it a P-47.
It would no doubt be faster but the Merlin engine variants (of the same era) were fast enough, it would also be heavier and use more fuel at almost all times, so unless it had much more internal fuel installed it would have less range and so less capability at what the P-51 was best at.
RW Mk. III
Airman 1st Class
Totally agree, if you begin encroaching on the long range of the Mustang then you are pushing together the Venn Diagram of Mustang and Spitfire.
A non-turbocharged, non-navalized R-2800 powered fighter could have been useful where extreme altitude performance and/or extreme range weren't necessary.
This could have provided more performance than the F4U and F6F overall and the P-47 at lower/mid altitudes.
This could have provided more performance than the F4U and F6F overall and the P-47 at lower/mid altitudes.
That would be the F8F Bearcat, first flown August, 1944. I doubt de-navalizing it would offer too much over its already spectacular performance for the time.
F8F is way too late to the game.
Need something to displace P-40's.
Something requiring less development time than the F6F, F4U & P-47.
GregP
Major
Thing is, there were not many Allied airframes really big enough for the R-2800 until the engine was developed and available for at least design calculations. I doubt the development could have been shortened much. As it was, it went through a lot of crankshaft designs before eliminating enough harmonics to be a good engine.
Perhaps you could shoehorn an R-2800 into a P-43 airframe, perhaps not. The R-2800 dry weight was some 2,300 pounds and the Allisons / Merlins were 1350 - 1550 pounds and the R-1830 in the P-43 was 1250 pounds. That's a lot of extra weight to haul around way out front of the firewall if it wasn't anticipated at design time. Still, there MIGHT be an airframe that could be adapted.
How about a Vultee Vengeance? It flew in late 1941 and had an R-2600 in it. Maybe an R-2800 would have made a difference worth producing? Any other suggestions for an existing airframe to adapt for the R-2800? I KNOW the R-2800 fits in an Fw 190 airframe, but I doubt we'd ask for license rights ...
The reason I know it fits is because the Planes of Fame flies one:
To get it to run cool enough, they added two small underwing oil coolers just outboard of the gear in addition to oil coolers all around the inside of the cowling.
Perhaps you could shoehorn an R-2800 into a P-43 airframe, perhaps not. The R-2800 dry weight was some 2,300 pounds and the Allisons / Merlins were 1350 - 1550 pounds and the R-1830 in the P-43 was 1250 pounds. That's a lot of extra weight to haul around way out front of the firewall if it wasn't anticipated at design time. Still, there MIGHT be an airframe that could be adapted.
How about a Vultee Vengeance? It flew in late 1941 and had an R-2600 in it. Maybe an R-2800 would have made a difference worth producing? Any other suggestions for an existing airframe to adapt for the R-2800? I KNOW the R-2800 fits in an Fw 190 airframe, but I doubt we'd ask for license rights ...
The reason I know it fits is because the Planes of Fame flies one:
To get it to run cool enough, they added two small underwing oil coolers just outboard of the gear in addition to oil coolers all around the inside of the cowling.
I saw a fromtal area comparison of the two, and while the Griffon is slightly larger, they're pretty close. I'll post it when I stumble back on it.
Thing is, there were not many Allied airframes really big enough for the R-2800 until the engine was developed and available for at least design calculations. I doubt the development could have been shortened much. As it was, it went through a lot of crankshaft designs before eliminating enough harmonics to be a good engine.
Perhaps you could shoehorn an R-2800 into a P-43 airframe, perhaps not. The R-2800 dry weight was some 2,300 pounds and the Allisons / Merlins were 1350 - 1550 pounds and the R-1830 in the P-43 was 1250 pounds. That's a lot of extra weight to haul around way out front of the firewall if it wasn't anticipated at design time. Still, there MIGHT be an airframe that could be adapted.
How about a Vultee Vengeance? It flew in late 1941 and had an R-2600 in it. Maybe an R-2800 would have made a difference worth producing? Any other suggestions for an existing airframe to adapt for the R-2800? I KNOW the R-2800 fits in an Fw 190 airframe, but I doubt we'd ask for license rights ...
The reason I know it fits is because the Planes of Fame flies one:
To get it to run cool enough, they added two small underwing oil coolers just outboard of the gear in addition to oil coolers all around the inside of the cowling.
Greg,
Is that a Flug Werks Fw190 with the R2800 in it?
Cheers,
Biff
Snautzer01
Honourably banned
- 42,902
- Mar 26, 2007
Not Greg but was interested, yes it is. Focke-Wulf Fw 190A-8/N 'Wurger' | Planes of Fame Air Museum
