Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
I agree. I dont think water-cooled, inline engines can even be called "easy mantinance".Over half the Spectres' regular armed combat destructiveness comes from shrapnel.... Where the shrapnel gonna come from with those pretty little twinkling lasers??
Wasn't the f-14 taken out of service because it was hard to maintain?Over half the Spectres' regular armed combat destructiveness comes from shrapnel.... Where the shrapnel gonna come from with those pretty little twinkling lasers??
I knew guys who worked on the F-14 - according to them, compared to the F/A-18 it was a pain in the @ss.Wasn't the f-14 taken out of service because it was hard to maintain?
Probably the least reliable was the
Great stuff.This might help. This is the CONUS figures during the war. What is interesting is the fact this the maintenance required for normal operations. No combat is involved.
You can see that a considerable number of the engines simply became scrap with no hope of overhaul or repair:
http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/aafsd/aafsd_pdf/t113.pdf
Airframes, generally airframes are pretty resilient and it takes quite a bit to turn them to scrap.
http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/aafsd/aafsd_pdf/t112.pdf
This breaks down the man-hours spent on specific engines. There is not much to choose from as all aircraft engines operate at 100% capacity and above. No matter which engine you choose, they are all being very stressed just by the fact they are an airplane engine. Power to weight is the most important airplane engine characteristic. Maximum power means very little if the power to weight is not within a certain range. Many early aviation pioneers made this mistake when attempting heavier than air flight. They went for the most powerful engine available instead of the engine that produces the most power per unit of weight.
http://afhra.maxwell.af.mil/aafsd/aafsd_pdf/t114and115.pdf
All the best,
Crumpp
I would say the Pratt and Whitney R-2800 series was the least reliable engine ever designed.
But I did read the conclusion and it was practically nothing but praise for the engine.
I found one reference in 355th microfilm to a 357FS P-51B-7 that was declared WW and subsequently used only as a hack after 640 airframe hours and two engine changes.. theoretically the highest hour airframe in the 355th FG. This was in October 1944 - for a Mustang that was in the original complement in March.
I would say the Pratt and Whitney R-2800 series was the least reliable engine ever designed.
At least according to the team that built it:
http://www.enginehistory.org/NoShortDays/Development of the R-2800 Crankshaft.pdf
However it was developed into a reliable aircraft powerplant by the start of the war and went on to join aviation folklore.
All the best,
Crumpp
There was no planes with bad reputation?
Seems to me that Methanol/water used as a coolant is flammable. Glycol/water is not.
Wasn't the f-14 taken out of service because it was hard to maintain?