What about a turbocharged P36?

[fastmongrel]

Thats a lot of weight to put behind the pilot and where does the equipment displaced by the Turbo go. Radio, Oxygen, Battery and IFF none of it easy to put in a wing.

 

[pinsog]

Does anyone have the dimensions of a GE B series turbocharger? I looked on the net and couldn't find anything

 

[fastmongrel]

The actual Turbo isnt very big its the pipework, intercooler and controls that are the space grabbers.

 

[pinsog]

The actual Turbo isnt very big its the pipework, intercooler and controls that are the space grabbers.

They fit one in a P35 to make the P43, BUT I'm not sure how much bigger, if any, the P35 is than the P36.

 

[tomo pauk]

Does anyone have the dimensions of a GE B series turbocharger? I looked on the net and couldn't find anything

Check out the pdf I've posted the link.

 

[wuzak]

They fit one in a P35 to make the P43, BUT I'm not sure how much bigger, if any, the P35 is than the P36.

The P-43 had a wing span 1" greater than the P-35 and 2.7sq.ft more wing area, was 1'8" longer and ~1,400lb heavier.

And it was still without armour or self-sealing fuel tanks.

 

[tomo pauk]

The crisp scheme of P-36, FWIW: picture

 

[pinsog]

Very nice Tomo. Wonder if a turbo would fit behind the fuel tank? If there was a balance issue, they could just move the engine forward a bit.

 

[tomo pauk]

Reduce the height of the rear tank by half, and install the radio in the upper, rather than lower part of the fuselage?

 

[pinsog]

That would cut fuel capacity too much…

 

[tyrodtom]

Wouldn't placing a hot turbo-charger, directly behind the fuel tank make you just a little unsure about it's ability to take battle damage?
And the hot exhaust would probably have to go right under that fuel tank too.

This is a fighter, it's going to get shot at.

 

[GregP]

Looking at the guns, you aren't going to move the cockpit forward much. Looks to me as if you could put the turbo farther back and to compensate without adding length, you could move the wings back a bit. But that would be a significant design effort. I'd go back to the 2-stage supercharger myself.

 

[tomo pauk]

The decision to convert basic P-36 airframe to V-12 engine looks as good today as it looked than 75+ years ago

 

[GrauGeist]

Very nice Tomo. Wonder if a turbo would fit behind the fuel tank? If there was a balance issue, they could just move the engine forward a bit.

And then you'd end up with this:

 

[tomo pauk]

Not sure what's wrong with that...

 

[fastmongrel]

Not sure what's wrong with that...

Except your not going to get a combat ready version before 1942 and then its still not going to be as good as a proper Jug

 

[GrauGeist]

Not sure what's wrong with that...

Well Tomo, once you start running all the ducting and adding all the supercharger gear to the rear, then enlargen the fuselage to fit it all, you'll need to put a larger engine in. Then you'll need larger wings, so why not add larger fuel tanks...and while you're at it, add more MGs.

So basically, we started with a P-36 and after rebuilding it, we've created another P-47.

 

[tomo pauk]

Perhaps you're right. Even if we got a combat capable version in 1941, the 1200 HP at 25000 ft acomplished by turboed radial are probably as good as 1100 HP at same altitude acomplished by turboed V-12 engine (less drag), and 1000 HP by non-turboed V-12 (less weight, bulk and drag, use of exhaust thrust). On the other hand, the American's don't have a V-12 in 1939-41 that can do 1000 HP at 25000 ft, so it is a turboed either R-1830 (that was done, the result was less than spectacular) or V-1710 (went good on P-38, not that good on XP-39, problematic in XP-37, probably usable but too late in XP-60A, unfortunately never materialized in XP-40H).

USAF can also use the R-2800 in non-turbo installation, either as single- or 2-stage versions, that would give them a very useful performing 1-engined fighter. Sorta the early Bearcat with a thinner wing and no fancy blow-off wing panel, or Tempest II-looking fighter.

 

[GrauGeist]

I suspect that the real reason why the P-47 was able to perform as well as it did, is because it was a seven ton beast that beat the air into submission!

 

[pinsog]

I wonder what the cutaway diagram of a P43 Lancer looks like? It shouldn't take until 1942 to have a turbocharged P36, they had the P43 flying in 1939 and it was ready long before 1942. (I'm still not sure it would fit either) But since an 1830 is much smaller than a 2800 the turbo system to feed it should be smaller also. They got it to fit in a P43. I think they were on to something when they built the P43, I just think they used the wrong airframe, they should have used the P36 instead.