Most Important Aircraft Engine of the War?
- Thread starter twoeagles
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Hi Twoeagles,
>what was the most important aircraft engine produced in WW2?
I'd say you have to look for an engine that successfully played an important role in Europe and could not have been replaced by any other engine type.
(As acknowledged by the Allied decision of "Europe first", that was the more important theatre, so the most important engine must be sought there. And if an engine could have been replaced by another, it was not important but just handy when needed ...)
My opinion, of course - but I don't think the question can be answered in a meaningful way without rather restrictive criteria as there were so many good engines in WW2.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>what was the most important aircraft engine produced in WW2?
I'd say you have to look for an engine that successfully played an important role in Europe and could not have been replaced by any other engine type.
(As acknowledged by the Allied decision of "Europe first", that was the more important theatre, so the most important engine must be sought there. And if an engine could have been replaced by another, it was not important but just handy when needed ...)
My opinion, of course - but I don't think the question can be answered in a meaningful way without rather restrictive criteria as there were so many good engines in WW2.
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
wingnuts
Airman 1st Class
I agree with Waynos about the Merlin, if the BoB had gone the other way and the Luftwaffe had enabled an invasion of the UK the US would not have had a suitable unsinkable aircraft carrier off the coast of occupied Europe.
No one engine can be the best, except the one Adler mentioned at the start, but the Merlin was available at the right time, to power the right aircraft to enable the UK to hang on until the US entry.
The war in the Europe and the Pacific theatre was mainly won by US engines but the Merlin played the most vital part at the most crucial point.
No one engine can be the best, except the one Adler mentioned at the start, but the Merlin was available at the right time, to power the right aircraft to enable the UK to hang on until the US entry.
The war in the Europe and the Pacific theatre was mainly won by US engines but the Merlin played the most vital part at the most crucial point.
claidemore
Senior Airman
Applying the "Europe first" logic, we have two theatres, east and west, and we have two warring factions, Axis and Allies.
For the Axis, I'd say the obvious choice is the DB 600 series on both the eastern and western fronts.
For the Allies, it's gotta be the Merlin in the west, and the Klimov in the east (used in Yaks, LaGGs, Pe2s, Pe3's, SBs and MDR float planes).
The Merlin and Klimov edge out the DB for contributing to the ultimate victory of the Allies (sorry 109 afficiandos, but the DB loses points for being on the defeated side). The Merlin would edge out the Klimov with higher total production numbers and for better developement and improvement over the course of the war.
So we end up with the Merlin.
My 2 cents.
For the Axis, I'd say the obvious choice is the DB 600 series on both the eastern and western fronts.
For the Allies, it's gotta be the Merlin in the west, and the Klimov in the east (used in Yaks, LaGGs, Pe2s, Pe3's, SBs and MDR float planes).
The Merlin and Klimov edge out the DB for contributing to the ultimate victory of the Allies (sorry 109 afficiandos, but the DB loses points for being on the defeated side). The Merlin would edge out the Klimov with higher total production numbers and for better developement and improvement over the course of the war.
So we end up with the Merlin.
My 2 cents.
Hi Claidemore,
>Applying the "Europe first" logic, we have two theatres, east and west, and we have two warring factions, Axis and Allies.
Good approach!
>For the Axis, I'd say the obvious choice is the DB 600 series on both the eastern and western fronts.
>For the Allies, it's gotta be the Merlin in the west, and the Klimov in the east (used in Yaks, LaGGs, Pe2s, Pe3's, SBs and MDR float planes).
Now the critical question - would it have been possible to replace either of these engines with a different one to get comparable performance from the aircraft that were equipped with them?
For example, the Jumo 211 was fairly comparable in most aspects with the DB 60x series engines, and maybe it could have been even fully equivalent had it been required to serve as the Luftwaffe's main fighter engine instead of just as its main bomber engine.
According to my line of thinking, that would then disqualify the DB 60x series engines from the "most important" list as it could be replaced by another engine type ...
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
>Applying the "Europe first" logic, we have two theatres, east and west, and we have two warring factions, Axis and Allies.
Good approach!
>For the Axis, I'd say the obvious choice is the DB 600 series on both the eastern and western fronts.
>For the Allies, it's gotta be the Merlin in the west, and the Klimov in the east (used in Yaks, LaGGs, Pe2s, Pe3's, SBs and MDR float planes).
Now the critical question - would it have been possible to replace either of these engines with a different one to get comparable performance from the aircraft that were equipped with them?
For example, the Jumo 211 was fairly comparable in most aspects with the DB 60x series engines, and maybe it could have been even fully equivalent had it been required to serve as the Luftwaffe's main fighter engine instead of just as its main bomber engine.
According to my line of thinking, that would then disqualify the DB 60x series engines from the "most important" list as it could be replaced by another engine type ...
Regards,
Henning (HoHun)
kool kitty89
Senior Master Sergeant
And while the Jumo 211 was somewhat bulkier and early models had an inefficient supercharger and unpressurized cooling, it would still have worked in most cases. With higher priorety it may have gotten improvements sooner as well. As Jumo 213 it topped the larer DB 605 (albeit at greater weight) and became competitive with the larger DB 603.
The Avia S.99 (Bf 109) mounted the Jumo 211 without much trouble, the main problems with this were related to the engine models used however. They were bober engines taken from He 111's and had lower speed reduction gearing with massive 3-blade paddle props which resulted in excessive torque and difficult handling. (and poorer high speed performance)
The BMW 801 was also quite important, and the only engine powerful enough to displace it in the early war period would be the DB 603, and even then there are cases where radial engines were more desirable.
On the allies side though, the Merlin was certainly important, but I think the importance of the C-47 (mainly with R-1830's, but some with R-1820 cyclones too) has already been established. In addition to the great number of other aircraft powered by these two (fairly interchangeable) engines.
The Mustang could have done alright with one of the early 2-stage Allison engines, there weren't really replacements available for the R-1820 and R-1830. (the P&W R-1690 Hornet wouldn't do)
In the BoB the importance of the merlin is paramount without any good alternative available. (barring increased use of Bristol radials and increased use of the Hercules, possibly Pegasus engined fighters. or possible development of the RR Buzzard)
The Avia S.99 (Bf 109) mounted the Jumo 211 without much trouble, the main problems with this were related to the engine models used however. They were bober engines taken from He 111's and had lower speed reduction gearing with massive 3-blade paddle props which resulted in excessive torque and difficult handling. (and poorer high speed performance)
The BMW 801 was also quite important, and the only engine powerful enough to displace it in the early war period would be the DB 603, and even then there are cases where radial engines were more desirable.
On the allies side though, the Merlin was certainly important, but I think the importance of the C-47 (mainly with R-1830's, but some with R-1820 cyclones too) has already been established. In addition to the great number of other aircraft powered by these two (fairly interchangeable) engines.
The Mustang could have done alright with one of the early 2-stage Allison engines, there weren't really replacements available for the R-1820 and R-1830. (the P&W R-1690 Hornet wouldn't do)
In the BoB the importance of the merlin is paramount without any good alternative available. (barring increased use of Bristol radials and increased use of the Hercules, possibly Pegasus engined fighters. or possible development of the RR Buzzard)
I am going to go with:
The most important engine was the one that brought said pilot home.
The most important engine was the one that brought said pilot home.
KrazyKraut
Banned
- 337
- Apr 21, 2008
Good summary koolkitty, I agree pretty much completely.
Burmese Bandit
Senior Airman
- 474
- Dec 5, 2008
Does anyone have any data (perhaps it has already been posted in another thread) on the average number of hours a type of engine would run before it would have to replaced or radically overhauled?
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
It depended on the engine - what do you mean by "radically overhauled?" For the most part overhauls are classified two ways - top and bottom. On a top overhaul you are overhauling the cylinder heads. A bottom overhaul you are going into the crankcase and inspecting and/ or replacing the crankshaft, cam and bearings.
Burmese Bandit
Senior Airman
- 474
- Dec 5, 2008
By a radical overhaul I meant to say any type of repair that put the aircraft the engine powered out of action for more than 48 hours.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
A repair and overhaul are two different things. A repair would be a condition encountered through normal use that would cause the engine to be inoperative. This could be through wear and tear or through combat damage if we're talking WW2. An overhaul is done when either the engine reaches a pre-determined time-in service or if during normal inspections it fails a compression test. In the latter of the two you're looking at cylinder head replacement especially in terms of a radial engine. I don't know where you're getting this 48 hours from.
Burmese Bandit
Senior Airman
- 474
- Dec 5, 2008
The '48 hours' I'm using as my criterion is the time usually given by many WWII reference books and articles on aircraft dividing aircraft into 'operational' and 'under repair'. If I'm not mistaken, German Luftwaffe practice was to count all aircraft that could be repaired and fit to fly in 48 hours as 'operational'. Please correct me if I'm wrong!
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
In the USAAF it was either NMC (non mission capable) MC (mission capable, meaning that some non-essential equipment may be inoperative) and of course FMC - Full Mission Capable. Don't know about the Luftwaffe though.
AFAIR most DB 6xx engines were sheduled for overhaul in the repair shop after about 100 hours of operation. Major overhaul in the factory after 200 hours.
Depending on date and type of engine used it was often possible to replace a damaged engine within an hour or so to get the aircraft operational again.
Depending on date and type of engine used it was often possible to replace a damaged engine within an hour or so to get the aircraft operational again.
Boss Calamari
Recruit
- 8
- Dec 1, 2008
I think the DB600 series were the most important engines. There were many licensed versions of it and it was produced in numerous quantity.
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
What was considered a major overhaul for DB 6xx engines?
Elvis
Chief Master Sergeant
When Denniss mentioned the "Major Overhaul" time, is that the same as what I've seen referenced as an engine's "TBO"?
------------------------------------------------------
As for this thread, I am one of the many who've chimed in and agreed with DerAdler.
...however, discussions like this can be entertaining and informative, so to keep the merriment continuing...
I agree with KoolKitty on the specifics.
I'd say its a close one between the R-1830 and the R-1820, but I'm gonna give the nod to the Wright engine, because not only did we use it, we also allowed it to be used by other countries and they subsiquently called it their own.
Elvis
------------------------------------------------------
As for this thread, I am one of the many who've chimed in and agreed with DerAdler.
...however, discussions like this can be entertaining and informative, so to keep the merriment continuing...
I agree with KoolKitty on the specifics.
I'd say its a close one between the R-1830 and the R-1820, but I'm gonna give the nod to the Wright engine, because not only did we use it, we also allowed it to be used by other countries and they subsiquently called it their own.
Elvis
FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
That's what I would assume...
I'm also assuming that the engines he mentioned couldn't have their crankcases split without special tools - again an assumption.
