The "best fighter engine in the world"

[PWR4360-59B]

I think there are a few special additions in racing applications. If it wasn't for the mods they would not take it for very long.
scroll down to the modifications.
Reno for Gearheads  
No matter life still goes down the more an engine is pushed for more power.

 

[Niceoldguy58]

The term "best fighter engine" is so vague as to be almost meaningless. Best in what way? Ability to survive damage? Least amount of maintenance required? Applicability to the greatest number of different types of aircraft? Actual use in the most different and different types of aircraft? Ability to be mass-produced? Available power for combat situations?

For me, the clear winner on ALL those categories is the P&W R-2800.

The R-2800 was legend for its ability to survive combat damage, with many, many stories of aircraft returning with cylinders hanging out a hole in the cowl and still chugging away. I'm on somewhat shakier ground on the amount of maintenance needed, but all U.S. radials were such that if they weren't leaking oil while sitting on the ground there was something seriously wrong with the engine. With ANY inline engine, one bullet in the wrong place would turn your sleek aircraft into a sleek brick headed toward the ground. The previous was a major reason that the P-47, for all its abilities as a fighter/escort, was moved so heavily into ground support in Europe and elsewhere.

As for the number of different types for which the engine was applicable, here is a list of only those that actually saw combat: B-26 Marauder; A-26 Invader; F6F; F4U; P-47; P-61. Many of the experimental fighters, attack aircraft and bombers were designed around the R-2800. And the F7F and the F8F were on the verge on combat when the war ended. the C-46 was also powered by the R-2800. Interestingly, the first B-32 off the production line was delivered with R-2800's with the thought that the later, high-powered methanol-injection versions were going to produce enough horsepower to push the aircraft in the combat requirements of the type - also because the R-2800 was a readily-available, highly-reliable and a well-known engine in all theaters. As such, the training regimens for maintenance and the logistics trail were also well-established.

The magnificent Merlin clearly meets many of the above criteria as well. However, its susceptibility to damage to the cooling system - to me at least - places it in a probable second place.

The United States had a tremendous lead in the design and production of radial engines. Much of this was due to the needs of commercial airlines who wanted light, powerful engines that were easy to maintain in the middle of nowhere. Up until the late 1930's the Army Air Corps was building its "fleet" around liquid-powered engines - especially the Allison the later into the 1930's you get. However, several important reports - the Kilner and Emmons boards - essentially stated that the U.S. was in dangerous territory putting all its eggs in one engine basket. At this point much greater emphasis was placed on higher-powered radials as well as more serious developmental work on the so-called "hyper engines."

I'd like to suggest that in such future questions a massive degree of additional specificity be part of the query. Otherwise we end up with questions that sound like "What color blue is the best?"

Respectfully submitted.

AlanG

 

[gomwolf]

I choose DB603 series. It was the best engine when war started and it was still one of the best engine when war was over.

Stupid Nazi bastards. They had to producing G.56 Centauro instead of shitty Zerstörers.

 

[PWR4360-59B]

I choose DB603 series. It was the best engine when war started and it was still one of the best engine when war was over.

Stupid Nazi bastards. They had to producing G.56 Centauro instead of shitty Zerstörers.

And what made it so good? Just my opinion I don't think any inverted V engine was very good.
It kind of kills all the logic of using an inline engine, and can have radial engine problems on steroids, that is the oil gathering in the lower cylinders problems and hydraulic locks. All the cylinders in that engine are lower cylinders. Then there is the problems for the mechanics all the valve gear is under neath, have you ever had to be constantly reaching up to work on something?
I do see a huge plus to it though, the crankcase/block looks to be a very strong design.

 

[Shortround6]

I am wondering what aircraft it powered in service in 1939-1940-1941 and 1942?

 

[Conslaw]

Niceoldguy58, I agree with you about the R-2800 bing the best. And it isnso much that it was qualitatively better than the other 2,000+ horsepower engines during the war, it was the quantity. I don't have figures for wartime production but over 125,000 were build by 1960. Presumably then ;about 100,000 were built during the war. That's enough, as you pointed out to power the P47, F4U, F6F, F7F, F8F, P-61, B-26, A-26, and C-46. Of course, so many engines could be manufacturered because the engine was simulataneously being built not just by P&W, but also Ford and Nash in converted auto plants.

The term "best fighter engine" is so vague as to be almost meaningless. Best in what way? Ability to survive damage? Least amount of maintenance required? Applicability to the greatest number of different types of aircraft? Actual use in the most different and different types of aircraft? Ability to be mass-produced? Available power for combat situations?

For me, the clear winner on ALL those categories is the P&W R-2800.

The R-2800 was legend for its ability to survive combat damage, with many, many stories of aircraft returning with cylinders hanging out a hole in the cowl and still chugging away. I'm on somewhat shakier ground on the amount of maintenance needed, but all U.S. radials were such that if they weren't leaking oil while sitting on the ground there was something seriously wrong with the engine. With ANY inline engine, one bullet in the wrong place would turn your sleek aircraft into a sleek brick headed toward the ground. The previous was a major reason that the P-47, for all its abilities as a fighter/escort, was moved so heavily into ground support in Europe and elsewhere.

As for the number of different types for which the engine was applicable, here is a list of only those that actually saw combat: B-26 Marauder; A-26 Invader; F6F; F4U; P-47; P-61. Many of the experimental fighters, attack aircraft and bombers were designed around the R-2800. And the F7F and the F8F were on the verge on combat when the war ended. the C-46 was also powered by the R-2800. Interestingly, the first B-32 off the production line was delivered with R-2800's with the thought that the later, high-powered methanol-injection versions were going to produce enough horsepower to push the aircraft in the combat requirements of the type - also because the R-2800 was a readily-available, highly-reliable and a well-known engine in all theaters. As such, the training regimens for maintenance and the logistics trail were also well-established.

The magnificent Merlin clearly meets many of the above criteria as well. However, its susceptibility to damage to the cooling system - to me at least - places it in a probable second place.

The United States had a tremendous lead in the design and production of radial engines. Much of this was due to the needs of commercial airlines who wanted light, powerful engines that were easy to maintain in the middle of nowhere. Up until the late 1930's the Army Air Corps was building its "fleet" around liquid-powered engines - especially the Allison the later into the 1930's you get. However, several important reports - the Kilner and Emmons boards - essentially stated that the U.S. was in dangerous territory putting all its eggs in one engine basket. At this point much greater emphasis was placed on higher-powered radials as well as more serious developmental work on the so-called "hyper engines."

I'd like to suggest that in such future questions a massive degree of additional specificity be part of the query. Otherwise we end up with questions that sound like "What color blue is the best?"

Respectfully submitted.

AlanG

 

[Shortround6]

Of course, so many engines could be manufacturered because the engine was simulataneously being built not just by P&W, but also Ford and Nash in converted auto plants.

I have no idea about Nash but Ford was using a brand new, built from ground up, facility that cost over 14 million dollars in it's first incarnation. It was latter tripled in size (cost unknown?).

In many cases the Auto plants not converted (you don't make cylinder heads with fender stamping machinery) but Automotive management teams and in some cases skilled labor went to the new plants and used mass production techniques to raise production to amazing levels. In some cases the automotive people introduced new manufacturing methods/techniques that increase production/ reduced scrap and made stronger parts.

 

[pbehn]

"

Being built "strong enough" is an interesting question.

.

In the Turbo era they got engine life down to reliable minutes in F1, this is still pretty much true today, changes to the rules mean they have to last hours but not a huge number of hours. In terms of reliability and performance a merlin engine was getting "tired" after 250 hours. But after 250 hours in squadron service a spitfire or hurricane was as likely to be replaced by another later model as it was to be rebuilt. Of all the thousands of Spitfires produced the front line strength was usually one thousand or a little more.

 

[special ed]

May I interject a bit from "Genda's blade". At the end of the book , while delivering three Shiden-Kai fighters to Yokosuka for transport to the US (they re still here), the three Japanese pilots decided to show what their planes could do with high octane american fuel for their Homare engines. They took off, with belly tanks full and beat the four escorting F4U's to Yokosuka.

 

[special ed]

Studebaker also built R2800s

 

[P-39 Expert]

R-2800 was magnificent, but it drank a lot of fuel.
Smaller displacement inlines got similar performance with better fuel economy.
With aircraft, everything is a tradeoff.

 

[Shortround6]

It drank a lot of fuel because it made a lot of power. The inlines, when cruising, burned almost the same amount of fuel per hp per hour as the R-2800 did when cruising.

Everything is a trade-off and if you want a 2000hp engine at a certain stage of engine/fuel development you pay for it in size/weight and fuel consumption.

Compare the R-2800 not to the Allison (which made nowhere near the power) but to the RR Vulture, The Napier Sabre, The DB603 or the Russian AM-35/38.

 

[windswords]

I thought I read somewhere that during WWII half of all the American Hp generated by its aircraft came from the R-2800...

 

[swampyankee]

R-2800 was magnificent, but it drank a lot of fuel.
Smaller displacement inlines got similar performance with better fuel economy.
With aircraft, everything is a tradeoff.

The sfc of the R-2800 was about .37 to 0.4, depending on model

 

[fastmongrel]

I thought I read somewhere that during WWII half of all the American Hp generated by its aircraft came from the R-2800...

I wonder what the proportion of British Hp generated by its aircraft came from the Merlin. Its going to be much higher than half I reckon.

 

[Conslaw]

I remember reading years ago in the book Flying the Old Planes by Frank Tallman, that when crusing the F4U did not burn much more fuel than the T6/SNJ. (I read this book over 30 years ago, so memory is fallable
.)

 

[pbehn]

I wonder what the proportion of British Hp generated by its aircraft came from the Merlin. Its going to be much higher than half I reckon.

In 1943/44 I would say the majority by a long way.

 

[windswords]

I wonder what the proportion of British Hp generated by its aircraft came from the Merlin. Its going to be much higher than half I reckon.

That may be true, but the total Hp of the American R-2800's may exceed the total Hp of the British Merlins.

 

[fastmongrel]

That may be true, but the total Hp of the American R-2800's may exceed the total Hp of the British Merlins.

Probably but then the R2800 was bigger and more powerful. Though more Merlins were built during the war about 150,000 to about 100,000 and change so it might be close.

 

[pbehn]

In 1940, the UKs front line fighter force had 500,000HP at its lowest, no way to gauge a military force.