MOST OVERRATED AIRCRAFT OF WWII (2 Viewers)

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

However, if Ford diverted resources to produce Merlin engines, how would it have effected the output of their other wartime production lines, such as B-24s, Tanks, Trucks, Jeeps, and other materials?

Ford was approached to manufacture 9,000 Merlins and they originally accepted the deal, but then Henry turned the contract down, claiming that he would only build for U.S. defense. there must be more to the story that we're not being told, but as it is, Ford's plant in Trafford Park produced over 35,000 Merlins.

Packard had a modern, state of the art manufacturing facility, producing roughly 55,000 V-1650 engines...a total actually higher than Ford's Trafford Park plant.
 
As you say Packard had modern plants, so they could have picked up what Ford had to turn down to build the Merlin. Ford had much greater engine manufacturing and production capacity than Packard. Henry Ford's political leanings are well known.
 
RCAFson said:
As you say Packard had modern plants, so they could have picked up what Ford had to turn down to build the Merlin. Ford had much greater engine manufacturing and production capacity than Packard. Henry Ford's political leanings are well known.
Click to expand...
Keep in mind that Ford's aircraft engine plant in Dearborn was already laid out, tooled and committed to manufacturing radial engines.

During the war, this plant produced 57,851 (Pratt&Whitney) R-2800 engines.
 
The availability of the Merlin XX for the XP-51 (version 2) in parallel with the Mustang I production series would have enabled the NAA design team to solve about six months of May-November 1942 time to go from P-51-1/Mustang 1A to P-51B. The whole airframe/Carb/firewall/ dropped wing/radiatior issues would have been solved by the time the Merlin 61 was available in spring 1942.

That said, it had to be in the hands of the Brits to define the engine as British GFE.
 
GrauGeist said:
Keep in mind that Ford's aircraft engine plant in Dearborn was already laid out, tooled and committed to manufacturing radial engines.

During the war, this plant produced 57,851 (Pratt&Whitney) R-2800 engines.
Click to expand...
Ford initially agreed to produce Merlins. Are you saying that he was planning to use the same production facility that had already been laid out for the R-2800? It seems more likely that Ford would have used alternate production facilities for a Ford Merlin.
 
Not all of Ford's facilities were geared toward engine manufacturing, the ones that were, had already been dedicated to production of vehicles, tanks and (as already mentioned) aircraft.

He initially agreed to 9,000 engines, not a full production committment. 9,000 engines would not have been entirely out of the question, as it wouldn't have tied up his already busy foundry facilities.

Packard, on the otherhand, was able to engage and fully commit their foundry for a dedicated production run.
 
I am not sure where the 6 month advantage comes from. It might have been closer to 2 months, if that.
Talks with Packard started within just a few weeks of the Ford deal falling though (June 1940) and Packard got most of the drawings and the sample engines a few weeks after that. The deal may not have been "signed" until Sept 1940 but Packard was at least making plans before then.
Ford had started work on the R-2800 plan during July and August. Edsel Ford had visited the P & W Plant on 8-22-1940. Ground was broken on the NEW factory Sept 17 1940, the same day payment of 14 million dollars was made to Ford for the factory construction.
Obviously some preliminary discussions and plans had gone on before this official dates.
Ford pretty much duplicated the P & W factory layout.
Ford had very little existing machinery from the car factories that was suitable for aircraft engine production.
How much Packard had is certainly debatable and their old aircraft machinery may very well have been tied up making PT-boat engines. Not that they made aircraft engines by the hundreds in any case (except perhaps Liberty engines).

I am afraid the idea the Ford could make hundreds of engines months sooner than Packard doesn't hold up very well.
I would also note that engine production is related to the resources allocated to it and not some "magic" from one company or engineer.
The Ford aircraft engine factory was "planned" to build 800 engines a month. It did reach 2400 a month at one point but that point was only reached after the floor space ( and machinery) had been tripled in size from the original plan.
A lot of the machinery for these plants was either supplied by the government or allocated by the government in a ration scheme. No company could go out on the open market and purchase hundreds of new machine tools. Allison at one point in 1940 was short almost 800 machine tools and it had an a A1A priority rating.
 
The Only path that shortens the delivery of the Mustang with Merlin is for BPC to specify the Merlin as Brit GFE and supply the Merlins. And, BTW, the Brits often engaged in dialogue to get manufacturing license with NAA - so it isn't inconceivable.

Take Ford out of the equation. The early Mark I's Could have been designed around the Merlin had the Brits committed to the idea and gambled that they could supply the Merlins, slow down the Hurricane, until the 1650-1 and then 1650-3 came off the Packard production lines.

With that substitution, the Mustang I flies in 1940, maybe delayed - but the XP-51B is ready to go in June/July 1942 rather than November 1942.
 
Ford MC was far far larger than Packard. Ford had far greater engineering capability and manufacturing capacity. Ford actually went on to design a Merlin competitor, in record time, and build a variant of it for use in tanks:
Ford GAA Engine

IMHO Ford could have gotten the Merlin into production (~6 months) sooner and achieved higher volume sooner than Packard.

BTW, Packard was given the same 9000 engine contract as Ford.
 
Last edited:
I wouldn't say far far larger, more spread out perhaps, after all, the Packard factory was HUGE, I think their manufacturing and engineering capability was pretty close to Ford. They built better cars as well (personal opinion).

The Ford GAA, well, yeah, not sure the wisdom of designing a piston aircraft engine at the dawn of the jet age but opinions vary, especially considering the excellent V-1710 already in production.
 
Peter Gunn said:
So if the XP-51B is ready in June 1942, does that mean we'd have operational Mustangs (P-51B edition) in the ETO sometime in June/July 1943?
Click to expand...

A lot of other moving parts were running along the A-36 and P-51A designs that were crucial to the P-51B. The most important was migrating to a true mass production line when the funding for the A-36/P-51A materialized in April-June 1942. The second most important derivative of the A-36 was the external bomb rack/fuel tank design to augment internal fuel.

In parallel with those two initiatives, were the efforts to stimulate the development of ferry tanks then combat tanks. Independent of the P-51B, the pressurized 75 gallon tank and the systems in the airframe to manage the pressurization were in the formative stage and I don't see that problem being solved any sooner. The 85 gallon tank initiative started after February 20 meeting driven by Arnold to solve the Long Range Escort 'problem'.. so the XP-51B had been flying 80 days and the first P-51B-1 was near starting on the production line. The first flight was mid July in a highly modified P-51B-1 and the production drawings completed by first of September. The first Base Depot mod was in early November. (That timeline doesn't change so the March, 1944 Berlin mission wasn't happening any sooner.)

So the answer to the question is "yes, with a caveat". Given the introduction of the Merlin based on BPA making the Merlin decision in 1940 - then the answer is Yes. That said, the P-51B would have been deployed in time to match the 353rd, 352nd, 355th, 356th as well as 9th AF 354th FG's in parallel with their operational deployment.

The limit of escort however would have been limited to Hamburg, Brunswick, and Ulm - Additionally, the 8th AF really didn't have the airplanes and crews to execute the Combined Bomber Directive to Joint Chiefs satisfaction in June-August 1943. Nor could they have prevented the Schweinfurt/Regensburg, Munster thumpings. To be sure the 8th AF losses would have been less and the LW operational losses greater.
 
Another possibility would be to fit Allisons into some Hurricanes to free up RR Merlins for Mustangs.
 

Ford had bigger manufacturing capacity but as note it was scattered around and was mostly building

Sorry but this doesn't seem to hold up.
Packard was given a the contract for 9000 Merlins and built a factory capable of building 800 engines a month. The "deal" was signed in Sept of 1940 although Packard had some of the preliminary drawings and at least on sample engine in either late July or early August.
Packard hit 801 engines in July of 1942.
Ford likewise signed the "Deal" for the R-2800 factory in Sept of 1940 but had been in talks earlier. The Ford factory was also supposed to build 800 engines a month. Ford built 798 engines in Dec of 1942. Their peak until March of 1943 but construction at the factory (1st expansion) may have disrupted things.
Granted the R-2800 is a larger heavier engine with 18 cylinders but even measured by the horsepower of engines built (plus spares) Packard built 1,248,000 hp worth of engines/parts in July of of 1942 while Ford built 1,147,000 hp worth of engines/parts in the same month. (570 engines at 2000hp each plus spares?)
Now consider that Packard had to redraw thousands (if not tens of thousands) of drawings/blue prints to US standards, had the on site help of only two RR engineers and had to adapt the engine to a US propshaft, a US carb and a US (Packard) supercharger drive.
Detroit is over 3600 miles form Derby.
Ford got all the drawings for the R-2800, didn't have to redraw anything (duplicate yes), got the P & W factory layout and parts flow diagrams, and was only 540 miles From Hartford. Ford did change from the "A" series to the "B" series R-2800 engines but built pretty much standard R-2800 engines. At times they may have used different magnetos depending on supply.

I am just not seeing how Ford was going to gain 6 months on Packard.

I wouldn't put a lot of stock in the Ford V-1650 either. It's easy to design/build a prototype engine. Getting to pass a type test and fly (even in a test hack) takes lot longer. P & W started work on the R-2800 "C" series in May of 1940, first test engine ran in Sept 1940, 150 hour model test of the single stage engine was completed in Sept of 1943 and the 150 hour model test of the two stage engine was completed in Jan of 1944.
 
RCAFson said:
Another possibility would be to fit Allisons into some Hurricanes to free up RR Merlins for Mustangs.
Click to expand...

The problem with that is that the RAF were desperate for every airplane they could lay their hands on - especially fighters. Its teh reason the Hurricane remained in production and that the Spitfire went from Mk II to Mk V since going to the superior Mk III would have cost too much production.

Changing the Hurricane to the V-1710 would surely have cost more production than the change from Hurricane I to Hurricane II.

Also, I'm not sure the production of the V-1710 at the period in question was sufficient to support Hurricane production. Which would mean even fewer aircraft for the RAF.

It also makes the supply line very vulnerable. Shipping Merlins west and Allisons east. Over the U-Boat hunting grounds. Sure, the British could have taken engine-less P-51s and installed the Merlins in the UK. But they would still have to ship V-1710s from the US to the UK.
 

The R-2800 had a rather tortured development and it wasn't ready for volume production until 1942 (and not really then), unlike the Merlin which had been in volume production from 1937. You can't expect Ford to mass produce an engine that was still in design and development.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 3 (members: 0, guests: 3)

Similar threads

T
Early records of UK preparation for WWII
Replies
3
Views
697
yulzari
Aircraft in Battle of Păuliș? Hungary vs Romania 1944
Replies
0
Views
424
CHen10
WWI Aces Flying WWII Planes
Replies
15
Views
933
tyrodtom
T
M
Mission 760 WWII
Replies
1
Views
552
Snautzer01
G
Ditching qualities of WW2 Aircraft
Replies
14
Views
2K
ThomasP
T
Menu
Log in
Register