FLYBOYJ
"THE GREAT GAZOO"
Actually the process "was/ is" easier than you would think, especially if it saved money or it was a safety of flight issue.
P-35 V-1710 evolution?
- Thread starter gjs238
- Start date
Actually the process "was/ is" easier than you would think, especially if it saved money or it was a safety of flight issue.
GregP
Major
Rolls Royce cares a LOT about the Allison ort they would not try so hard to kill it, even today.
The reall cuplrit behind the tractor association rules may be simple Europen pride, and not Rolls Royce, and that is understandable given that the series is run in Europe. In any case, they tried very hard to kill the Allison in tractor pulls. Only the fact that Joe Yancey cared enough to make up new cylinder liners and pistons allowed it to continue. He probably cared because he has European customers running his engines.
The reall cuplrit behind the tractor association rules may be simple Europen pride, and not Rolls Royce, and that is understandable given that the series is run in Europe. In any case, they tried very hard to kill the Allison in tractor pulls. Only the fact that Joe Yancey cared enough to make up new cylinder liners and pistons allowed it to continue. He probably cared because he has European customers running his engines.
- Thread starter
- #23
Shortround6
Lieutenant General
If the put a displacement limit on them then the radials are out. The air cooled engines cannot use the boost the liquid cooled engines can, they also don't turn the rpm.
GregP
Major
Yes, we have a Danish friend running a tractor with a Wright R-3350. He does very well.
And, again, they dropped the displacement limit for liquid-cooled V-12's, so we are back to standard liners and [istons.
And, again, they dropped the displacement limit for liquid-cooled V-12's, so we are back to standard liners and [istons.
buffnut453
Captain
Forgive me but even the insinuation that Rolls Royce cares about such matters is ludicrous. You're telling me that Rolls Royce, an international company which, according to 2010 figures, generated GBP955 million profit before tax is worried about WW2-vintage engines installed in tractors??? Come off it!!
Last edited:
GregP
Major
Actually guys, I'm saying EVERY change had to be approved.
For instance, the P-38J was specified to be deilvered with V-1710-89 / 91 (F17R/L) engines. The dash 89 / 91 were exactily specified by the ArmyA ir Corps. They had 8.10 : 1 supercharger ratio, a Stromberg PD-12K7 injection type carburetor, and even the hardware down to teh part number for pal nuts was specified. Allison had to deliver the -89 and -91, and not some other engine with incorporated changes. If they wanted to make a change, it had to be approved, not by the War Materiel branch, but by a full vote of Congress.
Now, Congress DID approve changes but, unless the new type of engine tat was invented was approved, it could not be sold to anyone or shipped to anyone since the output of Allison was contracted for in its entirely.
So. Allison could experiment, but could not really do anything with it unless they could convince the procuring powers that the new changes were an improvement in either reliability, power, both, or cost without reliability and power impact. They DID get some changes through, but not nearly as many as , say, Rolls Royce did ... largely, but not entirely due to the red tape accompanying changes to Allisons.
Now the airframe manufacturers were free to request changes, and they could also request new models with new engine types be tried. That happened, too. But the engine company itslef, ALlison, had very limited ability to make any changes unless it was experiments on their own money. Most wartime companies didn't like to do that unless the government was known to want the change due to the likelihood that they might NOT want it nor pay for it.
The Navy was easier to deal with regarding changes but they, too, were difficult to get changes through at times. The slow roll rate of the Hellcat in could have been easily fixed (by eliminating outer wing panel dihedral), but the resulting change would have interrupted production and so was not allowed. So Allison was not alone in this, but was dealing largely with the very strict US Army Air Corps. These were the same guys who court marshalled Billy Mitchell in 1926.
For instance, the P-38J was specified to be deilvered with V-1710-89 / 91 (F17R/L) engines. The dash 89 / 91 were exactily specified by the ArmyA ir Corps. They had 8.10 : 1 supercharger ratio, a Stromberg PD-12K7 injection type carburetor, and even the hardware down to teh part number for pal nuts was specified. Allison had to deliver the -89 and -91, and not some other engine with incorporated changes. If they wanted to make a change, it had to be approved, not by the War Materiel branch, but by a full vote of Congress.
Now, Congress DID approve changes but, unless the new type of engine tat was invented was approved, it could not be sold to anyone or shipped to anyone since the output of Allison was contracted for in its entirely.
So. Allison could experiment, but could not really do anything with it unless they could convince the procuring powers that the new changes were an improvement in either reliability, power, both, or cost without reliability and power impact. They DID get some changes through, but not nearly as many as , say, Rolls Royce did ... largely, but not entirely due to the red tape accompanying changes to Allisons.
Now the airframe manufacturers were free to request changes, and they could also request new models with new engine types be tried. That happened, too. But the engine company itslef, ALlison, had very limited ability to make any changes unless it was experiments on their own money. Most wartime companies didn't like to do that unless the government was known to want the change due to the likelihood that they might NOT want it nor pay for it.
The Navy was easier to deal with regarding changes but they, too, were difficult to get changes through at times. The slow roll rate of the Hellcat in could have been easily fixed (by eliminating outer wing panel dihedral), but the resulting change would have interrupted production and so was not allowed. So Allison was not alone in this, but was dealing largely with the very strict US Army Air Corps. These were the same guys who court marshalled Billy Mitchell in 1926.
GregP
Major
If Rolls Royce doesn't care, why can't you get information about Allisons from them? Why have they filed for almost every web address with "Allison" in it? Why do they keep renewing the ownership of the make on the web and why is everything to do with Allisons copyrighted by Rolls-Royce.
YOU come off of it.
We have to deal with Rolls Royce interference on a daily basis since we build Allisons for a living.
YOU come off of it.
We have to deal with Rolls Royce interference on a daily basis since we build Allisons for a living.
wuzak
Captain
Not sure. I've never tried.
But I fail to see what that has to do with a tractor pulling championship which Rolls-Royce have nothing to do with directly.
Perhaps because they own the copyright?
Do you deal with Rolls-Royce who build gas turbines, or Rolls-Royce Allison division who build gas turbines, or the Rolls-Royce Heritage Trust who look after historic documents from Rolls-Royce, Bristoll Napier and Allison?
buffnut453
Captain
Thanks Wuzak - my thoughts exactly.
GregP, the actions regarding websites and copyrights are the entirely legitimate actions taken by many companies to protect a brand name, in this case Allison. Try creating a website with "Hershey" in the title and I bet you run into all sorts of copyright and branding issues.
As Wuzak intimated, perhaps you're asking the wrong part of R-R. Most large companies have a small team dedicated to answering historical questions from the interested public but they are often swamped with the scope and detail of the requests.
Finally, instead of seeing conspiracies everywhere consider for a moment that the R-R is under no obligation to provide any information to anyone, and that they're busy running a multi-million dollar global business. Perhaps tractor pulling isn't high on their agenda?
GregP, the actions regarding websites and copyrights are the entirely legitimate actions taken by many companies to protect a brand name, in this case Allison. Try creating a website with "Hershey" in the title and I bet you run into all sorts of copyright and branding issues.
As Wuzak intimated, perhaps you're asking the wrong part of R-R. Most large companies have a small team dedicated to answering historical questions from the interested public but they are often swamped with the scope and detail of the requests.
Finally, instead of seeing conspiracies everywhere consider for a moment that the R-R is under no obligation to provide any information to anyone, and that they're busy running a multi-million dollar global business. Perhaps tractor pulling isn't high on their agenda?
Last edited:
davparlr
Senior Master Sergeant
Was the Allison GFE?
Unless subcontractors have proprietary rights, ie, designs they spent their own money on, the government owns the rights. However, the government does not like to deal with proprietary rights.
It is unlikely that Congress would deal directly in the design process. They have no expertise. It would be as bad as Congress making fiscal policy
! Congress did seem to be intimately involved in the B-2 program because of cost, politics, and the black aspects of the program. When Aviation Week and Space Technologies was shown the B-2 simulator and wrote an article on the controls and displays, they made several errors in its operation. Being responsible for that system, I wrote a letter to correct the errors and submitted it to the Program office for approval. Boy, did that start a commotion. Professional Northrop writers and security descended on me and I had to resubmit to the Program office. I was told it had to be approved at the VP level, then it would go to the user community, SAC, then to AF Program office, and finally to a subcommittee in Congress. All of this occurred and the letter was submitted and printed in Avweek.
GregP
Major
Hi Wayne,
We've tried all the Rolls divisions and they won't talk with us about Allisons or supply any information. So, we have to fall back on original GM Allison documentation, which we have found around the world on our own, with no help at all from Rolls Royce who owns the documentation. We now have all the documentation we need along with the world's largest inventory of Allison V-1710 spare parts. The very few things we don't have, we make or have made to original specifications including Rockwell hardness.
Actually, Wuzak, we are just completing an overhaul for a P-39 (Brooklyn Bum) and it will be on a run stand within two days or so, and should be at an airshow within 3 weeks, flying. We have four completed engines waiting for the owners to take delivery, and are starting on one for a new Jurca Spitfire similar to Bob Deford's Jurca Mk V. Bob's is 100% scale, and has a real Spitfire interior complete with original British control column. If you didn't KNOW it was a replica, it would be VERY tough to tell from the outside the aircraft ... except for the smooth finish ... no rivets.
We also have four Allisons that the owners want changed out from JRS piston mods to standard pistons. They finally figured out that we were right ... the JRS mod is not a good mod for longevity in an Allison. It will only last 250 - 350 hours before you crack a cylinder liner. We have several with standard pistons at 1200+ hours still running well.
As to the European tractor pulls, I already stated several reasons why it might have been so. Once we modified the Allison to be legal, they dropped the requirement because they finally realized there was nothing they could do about it without also ruling out the Merlin. Pure and simple.
Keep 'em flying!
We've tried all the Rolls divisions and they won't talk with us about Allisons or supply any information. So, we have to fall back on original GM Allison documentation, which we have found around the world on our own, with no help at all from Rolls Royce who owns the documentation. We now have all the documentation we need along with the world's largest inventory of Allison V-1710 spare parts. The very few things we don't have, we make or have made to original specifications including Rockwell hardness.
Actually, Wuzak, we are just completing an overhaul for a P-39 (Brooklyn Bum) and it will be on a run stand within two days or so, and should be at an airshow within 3 weeks, flying. We have four completed engines waiting for the owners to take delivery, and are starting on one for a new Jurca Spitfire similar to Bob Deford's Jurca Mk V. Bob's is 100% scale, and has a real Spitfire interior complete with original British control column. If you didn't KNOW it was a replica, it would be VERY tough to tell from the outside the aircraft ... except for the smooth finish ... no rivets.
We also have four Allisons that the owners want changed out from JRS piston mods to standard pistons. They finally figured out that we were right ... the JRS mod is not a good mod for longevity in an Allison. It will only last 250 - 350 hours before you crack a cylinder liner. We have several with standard pistons at 1200+ hours still running well.
As to the European tractor pulls, I already stated several reasons why it might have been so. Once we modified the Allison to be legal, they dropped the requirement because they finally realized there was nothing they could do about it without also ruling out the Merlin. Pure and simple.
Keep 'em flying!
After some homework, the same book offers an explanation about the -121:
-the Aux compressor was driven at 7,23 times of shaft RPM, compared with 6,85 times as the previous engines featuring the engine-driven auxiliary compressor
-the 12-counterweight camshaft was enabling 3200 RPM, both in MIL and WER
-the carburettor was located between supercharger stages. That by itself enables, as stated by the book, to increase full throttle height by several 1000 ft - that means 1100 HP @ 28kft, rather than @ 25kft, compared with V-1710s featuring the carb located before the auxiliary stage
-engine was featuring ADI (maybe the gasoline injection also acted as ADI - cooling the air?)
-the increased FTH allows that WER too can be reached at higher altitudes, so those 1700 bhp at 26kft (with ADI) seem plausible - my guess is that figure is with ram effect, though.
The engine passed tests at 22th January 1944.
GregP
Major
We tried the Rolls Royce Historical Society, too.
Anyway, Allison did what they did. The later Allisons were every bit the high altitude engine the Merlin was, but the war was essentially over and jets were the upcoming things anyway, so later piston developments never made it into service ... for ANY engine maker.
I believe Allison could have sielded an altirude-rated engine MUCGH sooner but the US Army Air Corp dictated their development path. it wasn;t until rather late taht the Air Corps decided some altitude capacility might fit in the their requirenmts for the V-1710. Meanwhile, Allison was still cntrcted to deliver their standard "E" and "F" model engines.
Too bad, and that's the way it was.
I personally have nothing against the Merlin, even though it has 11,000 parts versus 7,000 for an Allison. As I've said many times, history has spoken and the Merlin was a great engine. The only V-12's I didn't really like were the Japanese copies of the DB serties, and I didn't like them due to reliability issues, not design issues. Some of teh Soviete ngines were crude, but they operated under conditions the better-known westerne engines could not, so how bad can they have been? Wish there were more floating about for restoration to flight status.
Wuzak, we finished the engine for Brooklyn Bum and will get it mounted to our test stand this weekend. We should be running it Monday! The holdup Friday was that we had another engine on the stand and had to remove it. Then a visitor bumped our cooling barrel outlet and bent it so it leaked. We had to drain the barrel, remove it from the system, and braise the bottom pipe so it didn't leak. We then had to remount the barrel, fill it, and get the stand on the red truck ready to run again. So we lost a day to normal interruptions.
Anyway, Allison did what they did. The later Allisons were every bit the high altitude engine the Merlin was, but the war was essentially over and jets were the upcoming things anyway, so later piston developments never made it into service ... for ANY engine maker.
I believe Allison could have sielded an altirude-rated engine MUCGH sooner but the US Army Air Corp dictated their development path. it wasn;t until rather late taht the Air Corps decided some altitude capacility might fit in the their requirenmts for the V-1710. Meanwhile, Allison was still cntrcted to deliver their standard "E" and "F" model engines.
Too bad, and that's the way it was.
I personally have nothing against the Merlin, even though it has 11,000 parts versus 7,000 for an Allison. As I've said many times, history has spoken and the Merlin was a great engine. The only V-12's I didn't really like were the Japanese copies of the DB serties, and I didn't like them due to reliability issues, not design issues. Some of teh Soviete ngines were crude, but they operated under conditions the better-known westerne engines could not, so how bad can they have been? Wish there were more floating about for restoration to flight status.
Wuzak, we finished the engine for Brooklyn Bum and will get it mounted to our test stand this weekend. We should be running it Monday! The holdup Friday was that we had another engine on the stand and had to remove it. Then a visitor bumped our cooling barrel outlet and bent it so it leaked. We had to drain the barrel, remove it from the system, and braise the bottom pipe so it didn't leak. We then had to remount the barrel, fill it, and get the stand on the red truck ready to run again. So we lost a day to normal interruptions.
fastmongrel
1st Sergeant
Perhaps evil time travelling Rolls Royce special agents sabotaged its development to prevent Allison motors winning tractor pulls 35 years in the future
- Thread starter
- #38
Users who are viewing this thread
Similar threads
