Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
The work on the M-71 started in 1939, 5th prototype in Jan 1940 had modified crankshaft. Engine did not pass state tests until summer of 1942 but was not placed in production. Two of the four aircraft that did fly with it were bombers or attack aircraft. 10 other planes/projects were planned to use it but production canceled, why?.
The Russians mounted equally bulky Shvetsov M-71s on Lavochkin Polikarpov hulls from 1941 on with good results. M-71 already in 1941 offered 2000 HP (for take off)
Grumman themselves once proposed this but didn't go very far with it.Among the possible hulls we could list F4F Wildcat,
The all-new plane would've been better.
The R-2600 was in production already in 1940, making that the main advantage vs. R-2800.
Three years from 1st drawings to clearance for production - pretty cool, don't you think.The work on the M-71 started in 1939, 5th prototype in Jan 1940 had modified crankshaft. Engine did not pass state tests until summer of 1942 but was not placed in production.
Two of the four aircraft that did fly with it were bombers or attack aircraft.
10 other planes/projects were planned to use it but production canceled, why?
Grumman themselves once proposed this but didn't go very far with it.
In production in what numbers?
In production in what form?
Given the time needed to tool up factories (months) and retool them does it make sense to expend the effort to tool up for an interim engine and airframe when you already have better planes and engines either on drawing boards or in testing that are not that far behind in timing?
Three years from 1st drawings to clearance for production - pretty cool, don't you think.
No spare factories in 1941-42-43 I understand, no spare factories in 1944-45-46?Conventional wisdom says Soviets didn't have any spare factories to produce it.
Because of engine, or because of airframe, or because of some other reason?
In much greater numbers than R-2800 before 1943, for many planes.
There is no need to retool Wright engine production line, they're already producing it.
of 1941.
I vote for the Fw-190A powered by a license built copy of the R-2600. This assumes the license arrangement can be made to happen. Or perhaps the Abwehr simply steals a copy of the engine blueprints.
Not really, work started on the M-70 in in 1937. An 18 cylinder engine with the same bore and stroke as the M-71. The M-72,also with the same bore and stroke , was supposed to enter production in the fall of 1945 but was replaced by the ASh-73, the first of the series to go into quantity production and that was in 1947.
No spare factories in 1941-42-43 I understand, no spare factories in 1944-45-46?
Once again, not without a major increase in production facilities or major changes in priorities.
Yep, they were producing it but Wright's production in 1944 was 22 times what it had been in 1939. "..Owing to the advances made in in manufacturing methods, and especially through the application of automatic special-purpose machine-tools, this was achieved with only 11 times the number of employees."
The Whirlwind series was farmed out to licensed manufacturers, Most early models of the Cyclone were dropped. The bulk of the G-200 series (powered B-17s) were built by Studebaker in a brand new plant. AND, wait for it...., a Brand new government owned plant was built in Cincinnati Ohio. It was the largest single aircraft engine factory in the world at the time and built over 50,000 Cyclone 14s before switching over to R-3350s in 1944. 3 additional factories were purchase and reequipped in the Patterson area to aid production of the old plant.
That is what it took to produce enough engines to meet the demand that was there historically. To produce thousands more Wright engines means that some other projects or factories weren't going to get done. Anybody want to cancel an R-2800 factory?
And which planes don't get produced because of the change in engine factories?
Or do we just limit production of A-20s and B-25s in 1941-42 to free up engines for these fighters?
Re: F6F - given the choice between available engines, R-2600 or R-2800, the choice seems clear.
However, what of the period prior to R-2800 availability?
Must the choice be limited to the R-1830 or V-1710?
afaik there were not neither experimental or air force backed project fighters with R-2600 so there were good reasons for this.
imho a fighter with R-2600 don't give in time and performance real advantage in comparion of actual fighter of US.
some writed that it's large, this maybe the problem for fighter installation, 55 inches more of the other 14 double row used on fighters, so imho they have not enough power for that drag.
Or there were bad reasons for not giving it a try. Like "fighters with the V-1710 and the allmighty turbosupercharger will reign supreme".
The first R-2800 were not much more powerful than R-2600. 1800 vs 1600hp in 1939 and I assume if work on an R-2600 fighter starts it would start in 1937 when the R-2800 was not ready. The diameter of both engines is barely different; 55 vs 53 inches.
All were 18 cylinder radials, the first 3 used the same cylinder dimensions. ALL were by the same design bureau.There are 4 (four) designs in the excerpt - not clearing the issue
How do you know you are going to win and how do you know what the Germans may issue next year. 1944-45?Why would you need a new piston engine at the end of WW2, while being at side that is going to win anyway?
While I think it would've been too much asking from Soviets (even prior Op. Barbarossa), or from Germans to make that extra 10 - 20 thousands of aircraft engines, the US was well able to so. How big was production of R-2600 -2800 combined - 200 000 perhaps (125k for R-2800 alone)?
maybe
200 hp more it's best that 200 hp less, and the first R-2800 were used in that fighters?
Or there were bad reasons for not giving it a try. Like "fighters with the V-1710 and the allmighty turbosupercharger will reign supreme".