Pinnacle of Piston fighter: XP-72 vs Spiteful Mk XVI? (2 Viewers)

[GregP]

The XP-72 might have been an interesting fighter when in contact with other piston fighters. But even 5,000 hp wouldn't help it all that much against jets, at least speed-wise and likely rate of climb-wise, too, since even relatively early jets were climbing like thoroughbred pistons ... even if not quite as good way up high. So, it is perfectly understandable why the big pistons died out in favor of jet development.

I still like the piston fighters. Personal favorites.

And, hopefully, we'll soon get to see our airworthy Gloster Meteor T-7 fly out of Chino!

 

[z42]

The fastest propeller aircraft ever is supposedly the Tupolev Tu-114, Tupolev Tu-114 - Wikipedia , a civilian variant of the well-known Tu-95 bomber (Tupolev Tu-95 - Wikipedia ). Cheating a bit considering the topic of the thread, since both are turboprops, not piston engine powered. Curiously, wikipedia says the Tu-114 maximum speed is 870 km/h (540mph), whereas the Tu-95 max speed is supposed to be 925 km/h (575mph), but I suppose this latter figure hasn't been officially verified. In any case, both are very high speeds for a propeller aircraft. Any idea what the "secret" might be? Aerodynamics of the plane itself ("modern" swept wings etc.)? Significant jet thrust from the turboprop engines? Or just sheer grunt of the engines (4x15000hp!), but presumably once the prop tips start going supersonic more power doesn't really help that much? If the first, I wonder if it would have been possible to build a piston engine fighter that could have reached similar speeds?

As for maximum speed of a WWII fighter, in Clostermann's book there is a story about intercepting a German high-altitude photo reconnaissance Bf-109G over Scapa Flow, flying a high-altitude Spitfire Mk VII. Upon being detected, the German tried to escape in a vertical dive from around 43000ft. Eventually a single shell hit him, and the damage from the hit combined with the aerodynamic forces tore the aircraft to confetti in an instant. When trying to pull up, Clostermann noticed the controls were more or less locked solid. He was able to save himself by using the trim tabs, which were capable of generating sufficient forces to black him out temporarily.

 

[GregP]

The "secret" is 15,000 SHP per engine and the largest propellers ever fitted to any airplane. The props are supersonic for more than half of their blade length at high speed.

The Russians take pride in succeeding where others have failed, and they have the loudest, fastest, propeller-driven airplane in the world. It also accelerates VERY well in flight.

As an aside, the Bf 109K didn't have a trim tab. It had a variable-incidence stabilator, like a Piper Cub has.

 

[Dimlee]

The Russians take pride in succeeding where others have failed, and they have the loudest, fastest, propeller-driven airplane in the world.

Not nitpicking, but rather to add some details.
"Russians", in this case, were a multi-ethnic group. Typical of Soviet engineering overall.
To name a few...
The aircraft:
Leonid Kerber (equipment, systems, Tupolev's deputy) - Baltic/German.
Iosif Nezval (airframe, chief designer in later years) - Czech.
Sergey Yeger (aerodynamics) - German.
Robert Bartini (aerodynamics) - Italian.
Aleksandr Nadashkevich (armament) - Polish/Belarusian.
The engine.
While Kuznetsov (Russian) was the chief designer, Germans did the actual engineering. They were "imported" from Germany after WWII:
Ferdinand Brandner (technical director), Alfred Scheibe (head of the designer team), J.Vogts, K.Prestel (thermodynamics).
Engines production:
Leonid Chechenya (director of the factory from 1961 to 1982) - Ukrainian.
Sorry for this off-topic...

 

[GregP]

No offense taklen. Nice to know. It is still the oly propeller airplane that regularly cruises with the props at least half supersonic.

I bet the crews are rather noise-weary when they land! The racket must be awful!

 

[mig-31bm]

The XP-72 might have been an interesting fighter when in contact with other piston fighters. But even 5,000 hp wouldn't help it all that much against jets, at least speed-wise and likely rate of climb-wise, too, since even relatively early jets were climbing like thoroughbred pistons ... even if not quite as good way up high.

correct me if I'm wrong but weren't Me-262 only climb at around 3900 ft/min?

 

[GregP]

Yes, that's about right. The Me 262 was fast, and when fast, the zoom climb was formidable, Initial climb rate was nothing to write home about.

But, if they accelerated to a decent airspeed, they could zoom climb conbsiderable better to achieve rapid separation from pursuing piston fighters ... assuming they could get fast before being shot down.

Early jet acceleration wasn't anything to write home about, making them easy targets in the landing pattern unless defended by piston fighters, likely Fw 190s or Ta 152 (if any Ta 152s were about and operational ... usually not).

 

[eljefe]

Since we seem to be talking about everything from jets to Tu-114s to air racers, I'd like to put in a word for the Do-335. 474 mph on suboptimal fuel. I suspect that it's the general plan that all fighters would have evolved to, had not jets existed. It does need to go on a diet as it absolutely dwarfs a P-47. Use the best 1945 western engineering and fuel, give it a "Bearcat treatment" (deliberately revising the plan to build a small, lightweight, slippery fighter), and you might have your 550 mph fighter.

 

[PAT303]

A MkXVI Spiteful powered by a RR Cressy would outrun everything mentioned in this thread thus far.

 

[GregP]

Since we seem to be talking about everything from jets to Tu-114s to air racers, I'd like to put in a word for the Do-335. 474 mph on suboptimal fuel. I suspect that it's the general plan that all fighters would have evolved to, had not jets existed. It does need to go on a diet as it absolutely dwarfs a P-47. Use the best 1945 western engineering and fuel, give it a "Bearcat treatment" (deliberately revising the plan to build a small, lightweight, slippery fighter), and you might have your 550 mph fighter.

The Do 335 SHOULD have been bigger than a P-47. It was a twin engine aircraft.

Can you name me a successful "heavy fighter" in WWII other then the P-38? Don't even come with Mosquito. There were fighter versions, sure, but they weren't exactly greatly successful against single-engine fighter opposition. They were GREAT at evading single-engine fighters. The only successful twin heavy fighter I know of is the the P-38 Lightning.

They never made a Spiteful with a RR Cressey engine. Hard to say what it would and would not do since it is a fantasy airplane. AT least the XP-72 was a real airplane that was built and flown, That makes is miles ahead of the potential RR Cressey Spiteful.

 

[PAT303]

The Spiteful was made, the Cressy was made but both were overtaken by jets as were all super props, Ricardo designed the Cressy to fit aircraft the Merlin/Griffon powered so it wasn't fantasy just overtaken by progress. From what I can find they only made two XP 72's and they were both different prototypes so in reality we are clutching at straws here.

 

[Shortround6]

The Spiteful was made, the Cressy was made but both were overtaken by jets as were all super props,

It was made but never flown.
A lot of 'advanced' piston engines were made/built but rarely flown, not due solely to jets but because they weren't actually very good or needed more development than jets.
RR didn't have the resources needed to bring it to production/service status. P&W and Wright did but they weren't trying to push the envelope as far.
RR Built 6 Cressy V-12s and a number of V-2 test engines.
Light weight, compact and high power was a very tough target to hit.
And a "new" engine has to decisively beat the exiting engines. A few percent improvement is not worth the change over.
Cressy development started in 1937 and after a number of twists and turns a complete V-12 engine was run April 11th 1941.
The Wiki entry seems to be fairly good but it is Wiki.
Goal post was moved several times but there is a huge difference between achieved power and planned power and there is a difference between power on the test stand and power used in flight.

 

[GregP]

The Spiteful was made, the Cressy was made but both were overtaken by jets as were all super props, Ricardo designed the Cressy to fit aircraft the Merlin/Griffon powered so it wasn't fantasy just overtaken by progress. From what I can find they only made two XP 72's and they were both different prototypes so in reality we are clutching at straws here.

True enough. The XP-72 was made. The J 47 was made. But they never nade a J 47-powered XP-72 either.

 

[wuzak]

It was made but never flown.
A lot of 'advanced' piston engines were made/built but rarely flown, not due solely to jets but because they weren't actually very good or needed more development than jets.
RR didn't have the resources needed to bring it to production/service status. P&W and Wright did but they weren't trying to push the envelope as far.
RR Built 6 Cressy V-12s and a number of V-2 test engines.
Light weight, compact and high power was a very tough target to hit.
And a "new" engine has to decisively beat the exiting engines. A few percent improvement is not worth the change over.
Cressy development started in 1937 and after a number of twists and turns a complete V-12 engine was run April 11th 1941.
The Wiki entry seems to be fairly good but it is Wiki.
Goal post was moved several times but there is a huge difference between achieved power and planned power and there is a difference between power on the test stand and power used in flight.

Just to be a pedant, there were no Rolls-Royce Cressy (or Cressey) made, or tested.

There was, however, the Rolls-Royce Crecy - Wikipedia

 

[PAT303]

It was made but never flown.
A lot of 'advanced' piston engines were made/built but rarely flown, not due solely to jets but because they weren't actually very good or needed more development than jets.
RR didn't have the resources needed to bring it to production/service status. P&W and Wright did but they weren't trying to push the envelope as far.
RR Built 6 Cressy V-12s and a number of V-2 test engines.
Light weight, compact and high power was a very tough target to hit.
And a "new" engine has to decisively beat the exiting engines. A few percent improvement is not worth the change over.
Cressy development started in 1937 and after a number of twists and turns a complete V-12 engine was run April 11th 1941.
The Wiki entry seems to be fairly good but it is Wiki.
Goal post was moved several times but there is a huge difference between achieved power and planned power and there is a difference between power on the test stand and power used in flight.

The same could be said for the big American radials, cooling the rear banks seemed to always be the first and most persistent issue to appear.