Admiral Beez
Major
Whenever I see a post like this I always assume we're being sent to a thread started by the poster. And yep, true enough.
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Whenever I see a post like this I always assume we're being sent to a thread started by the poster. And yep, true enough.This is loking a lot like an earlier thread
This is the way it should have been from the beginning....
I was thinking about two things...
Blackburn Firebrand: How much performance could've been extracted out of the Blackburn Firebrand if it had a wing-design more like the Blackburn B.44?
Lockheed P-38: While the extreme modifications that NACA proposed for the P-38 were something that would have been too extreme from war production requirements. Would it have been too much to have added a tail-cone extension around either the time the P-38J came online (I saw a picture dated December 24, 1941, I'm not sure when tests were completed by the P-38J's came online in '43 if I recall)?
I'm not sure I understand?Blackburn: make other people's designs and everyone is happy.
Well they wanted them to extend the inboard wing chord, reposition the radiator in front of the wings, and add a tail-cone extension to the back of the gondola.NACA's modifications for P-38s were not that extreme.
I'm not sure I understand?
Well they wanted them to extend the inboard wing chord, reposition the radiator in front of the wings, and add a tail-cone extension to the back of the gondola.
I was told this was something that ...
Okay, I gotcha. That said the wing-design for the B.44 was quite an improvement.The less Blackburn is allowed to design, the better for British war effort.
True enough, but these were not small changes to the airframe. That said, the tail-cone seems fairly small'It wouldn't have been allowed at the time' and 'the extreme modifications' are not synonyms.
Okay, I gotcha. That said the wing-design for the B.44 was quite an improvement.
True enough, but these were not small changes to the airframe. That said, the tail-cone seems fairly small
Correct: Top speed was 360 mph. Regardless, the wings resemble the Tempest a little bit, though I don't know what the thickness/chord ratios are.For a floatplane fighter - yes, B.44 as a whole was something else.
Good point, but the Tempest wasn't considered a variant of the Typhoon. It was essentially viewed as a new design entirely. The La-5 and La-7 were also viewed as different aircraft.The changes were much smaller than what Hawker did with Typhoon -> Tempest -> Sea Fury, or Bf 109E ->109F. Or, Re.2000 -> Re.2001 ->Re.2005. LaGG-3 -> La-5 -> La-7?
I think they finally got one.
The Updraft carb was probably a mistake in hindsight as any air intake on the bottom of the plane and 4-6 feet behind the propeller is going to catch all kinds of crud the prop blast/swirl kicks up, especially when the tail wheel comes up and the prop is only inches from the sod, dirt, sand, coral, etc, etc.
P-40s and Allison P-51s had the air intake on top and only inches behind the prop so their intake of self made grinding compound was much less, However formation take-offs needed care as your buddy's/wingman's plane could sure kick up enough crap to kill your engine.
The Vokes filter was probably overkill but few people had designed air filters for aircraft at that time.
The B-26 sure got some large air intakes when they sized them to fit filters.
I believe the P-63 had a built in air filter, adjustable for filtered or non-filtered air from a knob in the cockpit.Many aircraft had air filters designed in; P-61 (bottom of nacelle right behind the engine), B-24 (that box at the rear opening of each nacelle under the wing), P-51B onward (sides of the chin intake), P-38 (inside the main landing gear bays), P-40D onward (between spinner and exhaust stacks). I'm sure many more did too.
Just to circle back on this: Lockheed only had one factory making P-38's?A lot of P-38 potential was probably not realized due not having another source, like the P-51, F4U, A-20, B-17, Bf 109, Ju-87 or P-47 had.
?? P-42 was a P-36 with modified cowling and spinner.Just to circle back on this: Lockheed only had one factory making P-38's?
While on the matter of different ideas: I'm curious if they could have modified the XP-42 design requirement to include the modifications desired for the P-38?
Just to circle back on this: Lockheed only had one factory making P-38's?
While on the matter of different ideas: I'm curious if they could have modified the XP-42 design requirement to include the modifications desired for the P-38?
It was a big factoryThough, it was supposed to make other aircraft, too.
Once the XP-39 was discovered what it really was by NACA, I'd cancel it all together and have Bell making the P-38s under licence.
It was a big factoryThough, it was supposed to make other aircraft, too.
Once the XP-39 was discovered what it really was by NACA, I'd cancel it all together and have Bell making the P-38s under licence.
I'm not sure that there was a relation between XP-42 and P-38.
What will you use for fighters in 1942? P-38 didn't get into combat until late '42.It was a big factoryThough, it was supposed to make other aircraft, too.
Once the XP-39 was discovered what it really was by NACA, I'd cancel it all together and have Bell making the P-38s under licence.
I'm not sure that there was a relation between XP-42 and P-38.
What will you use for fighters in 1942? P-38 didn't get into combat until late '42.