Heinkel He-162 engine.

[delcyros]

Could be an explenation that the J-33 engine of the P-80 led to the development of the RR Nene (which became copied and renamed RD-45 in case of the Mig-15)?
A Nene modified P-80 would have been intersting, as well.
The problems with fuel containings have been fixed, later, yes. The airflow seperation was (I must say mostly) under controll in mid 46, when Lockheed decided to suck off the whole boundary air flow around the air intake. This added some further weight, but it worked fine (while it never succeded in the whole problem, as your experiances show...).

 

[plan_D]

The J-33 didn't lead to the development of the Rolls Royce Nene - the power of the 4000 lbs engines of the U.S made the British designers realise they were thinking too small, that's all.

 

[delcyros]

That´s exactly what I wanted to say:
There was wide cross influence in the engine department over there.
The british designers shared their Whittle units and I believe later also the early Ghost engines, which led to the development of the J-36 from Allison Carmers. The next step was a US one: Realising that the poweroutput of the Ghost engine could be improved much by larger dimensions and some further improvements (particularly in the fuel regulation and turbine stage), the US designers went on the drawing board and began to design the J-33. British technicians, as you said, found this design in advanced stage when they visited the US facilities and relaized that more poweroutput is possible, also. This led to the RR Nene (and later to the down scaled Dervent V).
Without the J-33 program, the British would have moved much slowlier(maybe in another direction, also). And taking this into account, it is reasonable to say that the J-33 led to the RR Nene.

 

[plan_D]

The J-33 led to the development of a larger engine. The U.S scientists had no influence on the design of the Rolls Royce Nene - nor did the J-33 itself.

 

[delcyros]

I can agree in this. The main layout of the J-33 was originated in the Ghost, also. The main layout of the Nene, while beeing said to lay on the J-33 is otherwise also Ghost based. So it´s british, I think.

 

[plan_D]

And no one is going to disagree that the RD-45 was a direct copy of the Rolls Royce Nene engine - so that's that settled. 8)

 

[delcyros]

Yes, and even a bad made copy...

 

[FLYBOYJ]

Hey, you got to give credit where credit is due - sure the Ruskies copied the Nene. Although they had an actually engine given to them, just duplicating it isn't that easy if they couldn't duplicate the materials its made from. Soviet spies were invited into the RR factory wearing soft sole shoes. If any of you were ever in a machine shop that makes aircraft components, there are metal chips thrown everywhere from the various machines. The Ruskie spies simply walked over to the machines that were producing Nene components and allowed the metal chips to become embedded into their shoes - INGENIOUS!

No way were the RD-45s compatible to any western centrifugal flow engine in terms of reliability. The Soviets just came up with something real simple - rather than attempting to get 1200 or even 2000 hours out of one of their engines, just "throw away the hot sections at 300 or 600 hours! At that point you eliminate the need for specialized personnel to examine the engine at 300 or 600 hour intervals (like we do in the west), specialized equipment and facilities to do these inspections and you could also train relatively unskilled labor to disassemble and replace hot sections very easily.

The finest genesis of the Nene/ J-33/ RD-45 saga lies with the Czech-built M701. Although only putting out 2000lbs thrust, this engine was probably the finest centrifugal flow engine produced in terms of reliability, producibility and maintainability. This engine has it's origins from the RD-45 and we already know where that came from. I've worked on Nenes, J-33s and -701s and I could tell you the -701s are bullet proof and way more reliable although the first ones were produced 13 years after the RD-45. In my oppinion the M701 is what was sought from early centrifigual engines in the mid 1940s!

 

[plan_D]

It's hardly worth mentioning if it came from the Nene that was bench tested in October 1944! It was extremely reliable, powerful and durable back then.

By 1947 Britain was already well on their way to more powerful engines - the Avon for one was in development that would soon produce 24,000 lbs (rounded)!

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It's hardly worth mentioning if it came from the Nene that was bench tested in October 1944! It was extremely reliable, powerful and durable back then.

By 1947 Britain was already well on their way to more powerful engines - the Avon for one was in development that would soon produce 24,000 lbs (rounded)!

Agree - but by then RR engineers left the centrifigual flow engine design behind, they knew where the real power was!

 

[CharlesBronson]

Delcyros wrote:

While the He-162 has virtually no armor protection, except for the pilot,

the 162 not even had an armoured windshield....

 

[me262]

It's hardly worth mentioning if it came from the Nene that was bench tested in October 1944! It was extremely reliable, powerful and durable back then.

By 1947 Britain was already well on their way to more powerful engines - the Avon for one was in development that would soon produce 24,000 lbs (rounded)!

Agree - but by then RR engineers left the centrifigual flow engine design behind, they knew where the real power was!

are you refering to the axia flowl jet engine?( a german invention)

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It's hardly worth mentioning if it came from the Nene that was bench tested in October 1944! It was extremely reliable, powerful and durable back then.

By 1947 Britain was already well on their way to more powerful engines - the Avon for one was in development that would soon produce 24,000 lbs (rounded)!

Agree - but by then RR engineers left the centrifigual flow engine design behind, they knew where the real power was!

are you refering to the axia flowl jet engine?( a german invention)

Yes I am but your statement about the axial flow engine is WRONG - 1921 Maxime Guillame patented the Axial-Flow turbine engine

 

[plan_D]

It was probably being developed or at least written down in theory before then by the same man - it certainly was not an invention of the Germans.

In fact - it could all be said that Sir Isaac Newton was the founder of the jet engine but we won't go that far. The jet was not new to the 1940s - in fact the real theory began during World War 1 - and Whittle first wrote his theory on it in the early 1920s! The only reason Britain was not well advanced beyond the rest of the world was because the RAF did not accept the idea! And then the idea was given away to the rest of the world in 1930 (after Whittle patented it) - giving the rest of the world to start developing the idea that Stern and Whittle had practically invented.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

It was probably being developed or at least written down in theory before then by the same man - it certainly was not an invention of the Germans.

Absolutely - I read somewhere when Whittle started his engine development he stayed away from thr axial flow concept because of complexity and costs.

In fact - it could all be said that Sir Isaac Newton was the founder of the jet engine but we won't go that far. The jet was not new to the 1940s - in fact the real theory began during World War 1 - and Whittle first wrote his theory on it in the early 1920s! The only reason Britain was not well advanced beyond the rest of the world was because the RAF did not accept the idea! And then the idea was given away to the rest of the world in 1930 (after Whittle patented it) - giving the rest of the world to start developing the idea that Stern and Whittle had practically invented.

In 1923 an English engineer published a paper that stated turbine powered aircraft were unpractical can can never be achieved.

 

[plan_D]

It was jealousy from the Head of Engineering in the RAF that prevented the jet engine becoming more sooner. I cannot remember his name but he was writing his theories on the jet engine and it took his approval to get the RAF to accept it - he didn't give his approval because he'd been so wrong all that time and was jealous of Whittle who had got it so right while being much younger.

It's sad really that personal feelings get in the way of things like that.

 

[FLYBOYJ]

I heard the same theing - Whittle was an engineer who "Walked the Walk" and "Talked the Talk." He was able to explain to you the aerodynamics of a wing design (for example), show you how to construct it, and then go out and fly the aircraft. A remarkable man!

 

[delcyros]

Yes, the axial jet engine conception isn´t a german invention, they have been the first to design, build, test and fly one but the theories behind these conceptions were much older. This shouldn´t reduce the pioneering aspect, however.
The largest axial jet engine on paper (as far as I know) was under construction by Daimler Benz from sept. 1943 on. They wanted to redesign their DB-007 for a much larger unit, DB-016, a construction chart note some 16.000 Kp thrust (around 35.000 lbs) for a twelve stage compressor, three stage turbine engine with 18 combustion chambers. Design went not very far, I am not sure if the scaled down test engines ever left the drawing board, I just know that drawings have been under consideration of several meetings from late 1943 till wars end. I expect that the difficulties to build a full scale unit would have been beyond the possibilities. Under normal conditions it would take some further 3 years to come to a solution. The construction charts show some interesting design features: thrust redirection for break , a large fan and so on, interesting!
The armor protection of the He-162 consisted of the back plate of the ejection seat and some reinforcement in front of the cockpit panels. That´s all. The bubble blown canopy had no protection (a bullet proof glass was foreseen in the more armored subtype A-3/A-4.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

The Germans were having eneogh problems with there Jumo's They did not need to even think about a 30000lb thrust engine!

 

[delcyros]

My mistake. It´s not 16.000 Kp but 13.000 kp (I just checked the drawing of the DB-016), that are still something around 26.000 lbs of thrust.
I agree totaly, Adler. But I think, if we count the latest Jumo developments also, that the main problems have been fixed for their Jumos: reliability by means of more sophisticated alloys for the -004B4 and -D as well as -E. I expect that DB was doing something more pioneering in their concepts than military useful for the next years. Some points like surface cooling systems, engine controll and engine geometry was very advanced. Most modern commercial jet engines have similar aspects.