Griffon powered Hurricane....

[Geedee]

.

 

[Lighthunmust]

My first guess would be you can only push an aircraft that has an aluminum can "mug" and a popsicle stick "can" so hard before it will not be pushed any further. Apologies to Hurricane lovers, of which I also am.

Weight gain and insufficient performance gains would probably not be justified.


P.S. The Hurricane was the real hero of the Battle of Britain, not that Super-model looking Spitfire.

 

[Jerry W. Loper]

Sydney Camm began working on the Hurricane's successors, the Typhoon and Tempest, in 1937, before the war even started. He said he might have made the Hurricane faster by tweaking the wing, but he knew that war was coming and he didn't have time for much fine-tuning of the design. The very fastest Hurricanes ever built, some PR (photo-reconnaissance) versions, had a speed of 350 m.p.h., there was only so much that could be done with a plane with such a thick wing (and non-retractable tail wheel).

 

[Readie]

Sydney Camm began working on the Hurricane's successors, the Typhoon and Tempest, in 1937, before the war even started. He said he might have made the Hurricane faster by tweaking the wing, but he knew that war was coming and he didn't have time for much fine-tuning of the design. The very fastest Hurricanes ever built, some PR (photo-reconnaissance) versions, had a speed of 350 m.p.h., there was only so much that could be done with a plane with such a thick wing (and non-retractable tail wheel).

The Hurricane did its job but, unlike the Spitfire, it had reached its logical development end. The next generation of Hawker would be available and take performance to the next level. The Typhoon had its fair share of troubles but, ended up as a bruiser along the lines of the Thunderbolt. The Tempest - Sea Fury was Camm's finest piston engined fighters.

Flying the Typhoon

Flight Lieutenant Ken Trott flew Typhoons with 197 Squadron and recalled:
Rather a large aircraft shall we say, for a single-engine fighter. Terrific power. Quite something to control. I liked it from the point of view of speed and being a very stable gun platform. You could come in on a target at 400 mph and the thing was as steady as a rock.
In early March 1943 at Tangmere the then new Squadron Leader of 486(NZ) Squadron, Des Scott, flew a Typhoon for the first time:
She roared, screamed, groaned and whined, but apart from being rather heavy on the controls at high speeds she came through her tests with flying colours...Applying a few degrees of flap we swung on down into the airfield approach, levelled out above the runway and softly eased down on to her two wheels, leaving her tail up until she dropped it of her own accord.
We were soon back in her bay by the dispersal hut, where I turned off the petrol supply ****. After a few moments she ran herself out and with a spit, sob and weary sigh, her great three-bladed propeller came to a stop. So that was it: I was drenched in perspiration and tired out...

Why not the Griffon? I guess the Napier was good enough with this sort of performance on tap.

Specifications (Sabre VA)

Data from Lumsden
General characteristics
Type: 24-cylinder supercharged liquid-cooled H-type aircraft piston engine
Bore: 5.0 in (127 mm)
Stroke: 4.75 in (121 mm)
Displacement: 2,240 in³ (36.65 L)
Length: 82.25 in (2,089 mm)
Width: 40 in (1,016 mm)
Height: 46 in (1,168 mm)
Dry weight: 2,360 lb (1,070 kg)
Components
Valvetrain: Sleeve valve
Supercharger: Torsion shaft drive to gear-driven, single-stage, two-speed centrifugal supercharger
Fuel system: Hobson-R.A.E injection-type carburettor
Fuel type: 100/130 octane petrol
Oil system: High pressure: Oil pump and full flow oil filter with three scavenge pumps
Cooling system: Liquid cooled: 70% water and 30% ethylene glycol coolant mixture, pressurised.
Performance
Power output:
2,850 hp (2,065 kW) at 3,800 rpm and +13 psi (0.9 bar, 56") intake boost
3,040 hp (2,200 kW) at 4,000 rpm war emergency power
Specific power: 1.36 hp/in³ (59.9 kW/L)
Compression ratio: 7:1
Fuel consumption: 117 gallons/hour (532 L/hr) at maximum cruise, F.S supercharger gear; 241 gallons/hour (1,096 L/hr) at maximum combat rating, F.S supercharger
Oil consumption: 47 pints/hour (27 L/hr) at maximum cruise 3,250 rpm and +7 psi (0.48 bar, 14"); 71 pints/hour (40 L/hr) at war emergency power
Power-to-weight ratio: 1.29 hp/lb (2.06 kW/kg)

Cheers
John

 

[RCAFson]

Mason states that the Hurricane V achieved 326 mph at 500ft, using a Merlin 32 producing "almost 1700hp". I am a bit sceptical about that as this matches a Seafire IILc at the same altitude, with the same engine. But an updated, and cleaned up Sea Hurricane might have served as a useful alternative to the Seafire, for example

BTW, the Hurricane originally had a retractable tail wheel but this was deleted in production aircraft.

 

[wuzak]

The Typhoon/Tornado was designed as a replacement for the Hurricane and the Spitfire. Performance estimates were well above the actual performance, mostly due to the thick wing.

Putting the Griffon in the Hurricane would have been a waste of resources.

 

[johnbr]

For me the Miles M20 with rr merlin 60 retractable undercarrige would be better I think.

 

[helmitsmit]

Napier Sabre was an awesome engine for tempest, even a merlin 30 was wasted on a Hurricane only 332mph from 1700bhp! The Sea hurricane with all equipment had a max speed of 280mph tops and wasn't as agile as the Spit in close combat

 

[davebender]

Why would anyone want to do that? If the RR Griffon engine had been produced in larger numbers during WWII I can think of all sorts of airframes more deserving of this powerful motor. The 618 Mustang Mk Is for instance.

 

[wuzak]

Why would anyone want to do that? If the RR Griffon engine had been produced in larger numbers during WWII I can think of all sorts of airframes more deserving of this powerful motor. The 618 Mustang Mk Is for instance.

I wonder if Packard could have started making the Griffon in a short period of time?

What else could use a Griffon? Lanc, Mossie, P-51, P-38, more Spitfires.

 

[Shortround6]

It took Packard almost a year and half to start making Merlins in any numbers (the 2 engines rolled out n Aug of 1941 don't count, it took several more months before the 3rd engine showed up). Maybe they could get into to Griffons faster but it is going to be 6-9 months minimum after R-R gives them the design and it is only going to be at the expense of Merlins. There will also be a loss of several hundred engines as the factory changes over.

 

[wuzak]

Maybe it would have been better to get another company building them. Maybe Chrysler, stop them messing around with the IV-2220. Or Continental, who built factories for the IV-1430, which never got anywhere.

 

[fastmongrel]

Maybe get Henry Ford to stop worrying about that nice Mr Hitler taking over all his European factories if he backed the wrong side and have Ford build the Griffon.

 

[Edgar Brooks]

To accomodate the Griffon would have meant a massive redesign, including bringing the wings forward by raking forward the stub spars. Camm had the drawings ready, but was told that there was more potential in the Tornado/Typhoon series, so to concentrate on them, and forget the Hurricane.
Edgar

 

[Shortround6]

Continental built other engines in that factory and eventual wound up building Merlins although not many, it wasn't idle. Same with Ford, Ford was working on a Factory to build R-2800s within two months of the Merlin deal. And once again, WHEN do you decide to build Griffons in the US. When was it sorted out and ready for production, 1942? First US production probably wouldn't be until some time in 1943.

 

[davebender]

Nothing prevents installation of British built Griffon engines in the U.S. manufactured Mustang airframe. Just as nothing prevented Packard built Merlin engines from being installed in British manufactured Lancaster bomber airframes.

 

[herman1rg]

Interesting idea though.

 

[Shortround6]

Nothing prevents installation of British built Griffon engines in the U.S. manufactured Mustang airframe. Just as nothing prevented Packard built Merlin engines from being installed in British manufactured Lancaster bomber airframes.

Nothing prevents it all except for the tiny detail of hundreds of Mustang air frames waiting around in 1942-43 waiting for those British made engines. You did mention the MK I Mustang in an earlier post didn't you? R-R doesn't start production until some time in 1942 and I would guess, if if followed the production history of every other engine that not many were built in 1942. By the time you have enough Griffons to really do anything it is 1943 and if you want the two stage version it will be the spring of 1944.

 

[wuzak]

Griffon production was slow due to the concentration on Merlins.

100 Spitfire MkXIIs were made late 1942/early 1943, so maybe some of them could have been used. Or pinch some from the FAA.

Won't give the altitude performance, but it would be plenty quick down low.

It took some time for the Mustang to be converted to the Merlin by NAA for production of the P-51B. Would that time have allowed time to set up and start building Griffons in a new factory?

Also, when Packard were setting up to build the Merlin, they were starting from scratch. Surely not the case to convert to Griffon production?

 

[Shortround6]

You have 3 questions to deal with. Yes the Griffon was delayed while they concentrated on Merlins but that doesn't mean that the Griffon was completely sorted out, finished testing and ready to go as soon as factory space could be found for it in 1941, early 42. Griffon (single stage) was much heavier than the Allison. It will fit but it is going to be about as much of an engineering job as putting in the two stage Merlin.
It seems to have taken the US about 18 months at BEST to get a new engine plant into production, at worst took a while a longer. Converting from one model to another does go much faster but can still take months. Packard started work on the two stage Merlin in Feb 1942, ran the first test engine in May but delivered the fifth production 2 stage engine in Dec of 1942. Making griffons might be 1/2 way in Between? Yes it is a -12 but there are few common parts.