P-61 Endurance

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

Dana Bell said:
I finally found a note I copied at the National Archives yesterday. On Christmas Day 1944, the Northrop rep embedded with the Fifth Service Command reported:

The ships with the extra gas tanks have just enough range for a good combat mission now.
Click to expand...
It's not exactly a rave, while the turbochargers were purposely omitted to increase endurance (which makes sense), but if two hours at full throttle was a requirement, I think the turbos might have been the better choice as you'd have more power at altitude, and by flying higher, one would, for the same IAS, fly further (TAS).

Do you know when the requirement for loiter changed to two hours at full throttle?
 
Shortround6 said:
I would guess that the change to two hours at full throttle went away pretty quickly as no US aircraft engines were really rated that way, unless max continuous or "normal" power is what is meant by full throttle (it sure wasn't military power).
Click to expand...
Were any built that way?
 
Maybe I missed it, but has anybody mentioned that the first production P-61's did not have provision for drop tanks, but later ones did? I can't remember if drop tanks made it on later A models or not until the B series.

I don't think the "ferry" tank which went into the space occupied by the turret is relevant to the loiter time discussion -- they'd never have flown combat with those installed.

An aside, when I really dug into P-61 history last year I was surprised to learn just how few made it to combat with the top turret. Many, if not most, had no .50's installed, while quite a few in the Pacific had what looked like a turret, but was actually a fixed installation of 4x.50's with a streamlined fairing, the work being done, if I'm not mistaken, in Hawaii before heading out to the final destinations. This fairing is not too hard to spot once you know what to look for -- it's kind of flat on the top. "Moonlight Mickey" and "Lady in the Dark" are two well-known Widows with this non-turret (although model builders persist in using the production rotating turret).
 
Dana Bell said:
The original spec called for a 2-hour endurance at full throttle; I hope to be copying the original flight test results later this week...
Click to expand...
If you found anything extra, I'm curious when 8 hours loiter time became a requirement. Also, when was the design solidified (by that, I mean the airframe had basically taken on it's final shape, the engine & supercharger was selected, the guns and cannon were placed as intended)?

I'm just wondering when the decision to abandon the turbocharger for the twin-stage supercharger (which was a decision made), and how this compared with loiter time. Looking at the 2 hour full throttle requirement, I'm not sure if the engine could run like that, as emergency power allows only 5 minutes, military power allows 30 minutes, unless normal rated power was to be used.

That said, there is a figure that lists the F4U's maximum endurance at maximum speed as 0.86 hours, or 51 minutes, 36 seconds.
 
Hi Zipper,

Nothing new yet. I'm finding lots of documents on early XP/YP-61 evaluations, but nearly everything is based on Northrop estimates rather than actual flight tests. Later field reports include complaints about speed, altitude, endurance, lack of a functioning turret, and other minor details, but no one was posting actual numbers. This week I'm downtown in the interwar Navy files, but I'll be getting back to the P-61 in mid-August...

Cheers,


Dana
 
Dana Bell said:
Nothing new yet. I'm finding lots of documents on early XP/YP-61 evaluations, but nearly everything is based on Northrop estimates rather than actual flight tests.
Click to expand...
I still figure that's gotta be useful in some way.
This week I'm downtown in the interwar Navy files, but I'll be getting back to the P-61 in mid-August...
Click to expand...
Sounds great.
 
This is something I found



The Shrike was a preliminary project by Northrop: I'm not sure if this was the earliest sketches for the P-61, or an earlier concept which inspired the ultimate shape of the P-61 Black-Widow. It clearly had many of the key features
  • Twin booms
  • 2-engines (which might have been R-2800)
  • 3-crew
  • A turret
While I'm not sure if the armament called for a 20mm armament off the bat, as this design had 6 guns in the nose.

The chronology seems to follow
  • August, 1940
    • General Emmons was briefed on the British development of radar, and that they were working on developing versions that could be carried aboard aircraft
    • British Purchasing Commission announces urgent need for night fighter: Some sources seem to imply an 8 hour time on station here
  • October, 1940
    • 10/21: Vladimir Pavlecka was told of the USAAC's need for night fighters
    • 10/22: Pavlecka was given the specifications: He wasn't told exactly how the radar worked, but was told that it assisted detecting fighters at night, and might have been given some basic figures on dimensions, and to keep it in his head as best he could; around this time period, Douglas was developing he A-20 into a night-fighter, and working on the XA-26A for this mission too.
      • The various endurance requirements, whether they were changed by this point, would require a large aircraft and the Shrike was used as a baseline.
      • Crew would be 3, with a pilot, a gunner, and a radar-operator
      • Aircraft would use 2 x R-2800 and a twin-boom configuration
      • Two turrets would be mounted fore and aft with either 2x0.50" or 4x0.50"
      • Weight was estimated to be: 16245 lb. empty, and 22654 lb. loaded
      • Dimensions were estimated to be: 45'6" in length; 66'0" in span, 13'2" in height
  • November, 1940
    • 11/14: Fore/aft gun arrangement were deleted; upper and lower turrets (2 x 0.50" apiece) were placed in lieu; an extra crew member was added
    • 11/22: Belly turret deleted, crew reverted back to 3
  • December, 1940
    • 12/5: Design was formalized into Northrop Specification 8A (NS-8A).
      • Personal thoughts: Not sure if this was the first specification that included a 2 hr full-throttle requirement, and if 8 hrs was still required at lower power-settings; is unsure if the supercharger selection had been made at this point either.
    • 12/17: Northrop requests a quote for two experimental prototypes
  • January, 1941
    • 1/11: After several design changes requested by the USAAC, Northrop signed the contract
      • I suspect that at this point the shape was largely finalized with the exception of the 20mm cannon positions
  • March, 1941
    • 3/10: Contract issued for 13 YP-61's
  • April, 1941
    • Mockup was ready for inspection
      • 4 x 20mm removed from wings and repositioned under the fuselage
      • Fuel capacity increased from 540 gallons in 2 tanks to 646 gallons in 4 tanks.
  • October, 1941
    • Pedestal mount for turrets replace ring-type mount
  • December, 1941
    • 12/24: Letter of intent initiated for 100 P-61 aircraft and spares for them
  • January, 1942
    • 1/17: 50 more aircraft ordered
  • February, 1942
    • 2/12: 410 aircraft ordered; 50 for the RAF under the Lend-Lease program
  • May, 1942
    • 5/26: Aircraft makes first flight
 
Last edited:
I read somewhere that the P-61 had over 100 kills, does anyone know anything about these? Were they against bombers, fighters, were there any aces? How did the P-61 handle, was it simply a gun platform with a radar capable of stalking at night or could it dogfight?
 
fubar57 said:
According to "P-61 Black Widow Units of World War 2" by Warren Thompson, there were 127 confirmed kills.
Click to expand...
Sweet, I wonder though if that was more of a night time stalk and shoot or if it had dogfighting ability. Currently reading "The Last Fighter Pilot" by Don Brown and Jerry Yellin. They mentioned the P-61 a bit. From what they describe in the book the radar system would let them know a plane was there but they couldn't see it per say and would have to stumble around in the dark looking for the plane the radar indicated. Also, it seems the P-61 was used frequently for long range navigation for the P-51 pilots.
 
Did North American ever propose a P-51N like the F6FN or F4UN? Or once the P-38N was in the pipe no USAAF single place night fighters were pursued?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

M
P-61 Performance
Replies
15
Views
1K
Snautzer01
Effectiveness of the P-38
6 7 8
Replies
145
Views
13K
Thumpalumpacus
V
P-51Ds over Normandy June 1944
Replies
1
Views
685
Geoffrey Sinclair
G
Paper comparing the flight performance of the P-40E Warhawk and the A6M2 Zero
Replies
8
Views
1K
Ivan1GFP
I
Flying Boeing P-26 Peashooter
Replies
10
Views
1K
GregP
Menu
Log in
Register