Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Give Allison in 1941 the centrifugal compressor technology they developed in the 1990s giving the later variants of the 250C series turboshaft engines a pressure ratio of 9.2:1 from a single stage compressor - that engine has the equivalent of a manifold pressure of 135psi.
This would give a smaller supercharger that would put all the two stage superchargers to shame.
Add fuel injection of the latest continuous flow variety to ensure even mixture distribution and hey presto.
The manifold pressure would still have to remain at WW2 levels without major redesign of the rest of the engine but the far more efficient supercharger and would provide far more hp at the propeller.
Well since I have little to no engine design knowledge I say put me on the axis side and I will set them back a decade or more.
Can your engineer from now take his Cray supercomputer with him?? Does your time machine have that large a transit chamber? A lot of the super efficient technologies like the compressor that was mentioned are achieved with fluid dynamics calculations that aren't practical on a slide rule and require materials (cerametallics, etc) that weren't possible with available technology of the time.I guess the idea is, could an engineer from now, go back to then, and with just his smarts put into production the common ideas of today's engine design, and heavily tweak their existing hardware and make some incredible improvements
God, not overvaluing torque again.
All high-powered aircraft engines are will have reduction gearboxes. If there are X horsepower coming out of an engine provided to a prop at Y rpm, the torque is the same. That low-rpm, high torque engine will be heavier. One may want a longer stroke, as increasing stroke may reduce sfc, which is why many engines designed for efficiency are under-square, but propellers turn power into thrust; they don't turn torque in thrust. Not once when designing and analyzing props and helicopter rotors, did I hear engine torque spoken of except when designing gears.
propellers turn power into thrust; they don't turn torque in thrust.
Semantics, semantics! Sounds like a collision between engineerthink and operatorthink.Having more torque means making more hp at a lower rpm, which means more power to the prop.
The Ford developed V12 should have gone into production.
I think it showed greater promise than either the Merlin or the Allison, but for politics.
The promise the Merlin and Allison had was being in production at the time they were required.
Ford could likely get their V-12 into production quicker than Packard could do so with the Merlin