While I was doing research on Soviet planes I noticed that quite a few aircraft projects seemed to be affected by the cancellation of the Mikulin AM-37 engine. Heavy fighter development seemed particularly affected since so many of the Soviet heavy fighter projects were designed for the engine. From this I had generally assumed the AM-37 was a fundamentally bad engine. But then I started reading google translated pages from a Russian Online Aviation Museum I was linked to. In the
write up on the Yer-2 bomber, the AM-37 is described as a modification of the AM-35, to the point where an AM-35 could be converted to an AM-37 by swapping a few parts.
I'm no engineer. For all I know those changes might have been enough to turn a decent engine in a terrible one. But it does make me wonder if the issues with the AM-37 might have been solvable had Mikulin not been ordered to concentrate on production of the AM-35 and AM-38 (the latter being the engine used by the Il-2).
Does anyone who is more knowledgeable then I am about aero engines have any thoughts on how viable it might have been to fix the AM-37?
I'm also curious about how the AM-37 becoming a production engine might have affected Soviet aviation in WWII though of course the various fighter and bomber projects that were designed to use it give some indication of that.
The reason for not working on the AM-37 is a combination of factors. I will start (as it seems to me) from the beginning. You understand perfectly well that the production of aircraft engines is a high-tech production. In Russia, and later in the Soviet Union, until the 1930s, there were no enterprises designing aircraft engines. The same goes for engineers. Plants started to be built, and people started to learn. The same applied to the production of fuel, engine oils, various gaskets, and of course metals (development and industrial production). We were never able to master these productions at the necessary high level. The technological lag was felt until the end of the war.
The beginning of the war had a negative impact. A huge number of enterprises were evacuated beyond the Urals. It was far from always possible to preserve the work collectives. Many skilled workers went to war, later they began to return to the enterprises, but not all remained alive.
Enterprises began to experience an acute shortage of raw materials. The quality of these raw materials was also not always at the proper level (for the same reasons). We had to save a lot of money.
To increase production of military equipment, research programs had to be reduced. It was forbidden to change technological processes if they could have a negative impact on the quantity of production.
All this was complemented by unskilled personnel, who were trained at short notice. Working conditions were very hard, working 10-14 hours, and at some point weekends were cancelled. There was an acute shortage of food. In the aviation industry, 18% of the workers were teenagers under the age of 16.
I have tried to name the main factors. You noted correctly that the production of AM-35 was curtailed for the sake of engines for IL-2. The AM-35 was installed on the MiG-3, Pe-8, but the IL-2 was needed.
In general, it is surprising that during the war, hungry, unskilled workers were able to provide their army with equipment.
Don't get me wrong, I am not trying to besmirch my country's history, I am saying that people made weapons out of their last effort, which made it possible to stop the enemy, and then to win.
At that time we could not afford to develop new engines, the work was in progress, but the funds were allocated on the residual principle. The VK-107 went into production with great difficulty. M-71, M-90 did not go into production.