Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
Imagine if he had not been delayed/stopped in his tracks because Griffith rejected his project in 1929.Frank Whittle is such a genius the story seems almost implausible that one man can do so much.
Forum Experts: could we have had Jet fighters by 1942 and not 1944...
It made the Space Shuttle look like a short walk in the park, throw stick for the dog and dinner is done at 6 PM.Wasn't Lockheed working on a jet engine before America's involvement in WW II? The L-1000? Imagine if that project was funded.
Just in case you don't know, Yank's Air Museum in Chino, CA has a pristine FJ-1 on display minus tip tanks, painted Navy blue.Some things wrong up there.
First of all, Whittle was brilliant, no doubt, but Maxime Guillame's axial-flow jet patent was filed in 1921 - Whittle's design was an adaptation drawn from Alan Griffith's 1926 publication "An Aerodynamic Theory Of Turbine Design", which became the basis of development at the RAE.
In regards to the first fighters, had the RLM not yawned at the He178's first flight in 1939, and actually dedicated funding for engine and aircraft development, then the He280, which was the world's first jet fighter, would have taken the limelight from the later Me262.
As for the P-80 and American jets in Korea, the F-86 (which was introduced into service in 1949, before the Korean war) was powered by a GE J47 Axial-flow engine, not a centrifugal engine, like the P-80's Allison J33.
The F-86 itself, was derived from North American's FJ-1, which was powered by an Allison J35 Axial-flow engine.
The FJ-1 entered service in March 1948.
Well, since I'm planning on coming back to wipe my fingerprint off the Zero's cowling, I'll bring a feather duster.Just in case you don't know, Yank's Air Museum in Chino, CA has a pristine FJ-1 on display minus tip tanks, painted Navy blue.
View attachment 754563
The pic above is an old one and the FJ-1 now wears a canopy. Still trying to get tip tanks!
The Planes of Fame has a real, live L-1000 engine on display.
View attachment 754564
Definitely axial flow!
Needs dusting above!
You forgot to mention that the He178 was powered by a centrifugal turbojet, or that Griffith was, for an obvious conflict of interest, the sole culprit of delaying Whittle's work.Some things wrong up there.
First of all, Whittle was brilliant, no doubt, but Maxime Guillame's axial-flow jet patent was filed in 1921 - Whittle's design was an adaptation drawn from Alan Griffith's 1926 publication "An Aerodynamic Theory Of Turbine Design", which became the basis of development at the RAE.
In regards to the first fighters, had the RLM not yawned at the He178's first flight in 1939, and actually dedicated funding for engine and aircraft development, then the He280, which was the world's first jet fighter, would have taken the limelight from the later Me262.
As for the P-80 and American jets in Korea, the F-86 (which was introduced into service in 1949, before the Korean war) was powered by a GE J47 Axial-flow engine, not a centrifugal engine, like the P-80's Allison J33.
The F-86 itself, was derived from North American's FJ-1, which was powered by an Allison J35 Axial-flow engine.
The FJ-1 entered service in March 1948.
Britain, just to generalize, had no interest in jet-powered aircraft until 1938/1939, after Whittle demonstrated that a jet engine worked (April 1937).All inventors stand on the shoulders of giants. Whittle perforce was aware of those before him and used their knowledge as does every inventor. This is normal. It would be poor scientist or engineer who wilfully ignored the work of others before him.
The first British jet aeroplane was a 1939 requirement and the Meteor a 1940 one. The first flying in 1941 later and the second could have been flying in 1942 were the engines ready. The third one was a later 1941 requirement, flying in 1943. They were not fully fit for general service until 1947 even if they began in service in 1945/6. If we bring the engine development forwards by, say, three years then this would be then entering mass service in 1944 but with airframes of a three years older generation than IOTL. Standing back and looking at it objectively one wonders if late piston engined aeroplanes were not the best choice overall in those particular circumstances of the day. Very soon to be overtaken to be sure but the last of the old generation are often a sounder choice for the moment than the first of the new.
True, sort of, in the long run. But it took until the early 50s for the Axial compressor to show actual dominance/superiority.but his centrifugal engine was an evolutionary dead-end.