What's in a name?

Just Schmidt

Airman 1st Class
255
309
Jul 19, 2010
Tromsø
I started a new thread, as this might turn into too much of a thread drift. In the ongoing thread about single engined fighters with 9 cylinders Shortround wrote:

The Hawk 75, Hawk 81, Hawk 87 may very well hold the record for most different engines flown in on basic airframe. If any plane beats it I would be happy to hear about it.

I don't know, maybe the Spitfire? My reasoning is this:

On the face of it, of course it only had two different engines, the Merlin and the Griffon, at least to my knowledge. But comparing the Merlin of 1938 with the Merlin of 1945 makes me wonder to what extent that is the same engine. On the one hand they are both called Merlins, on the other the later engines have two stage superchargers, I'm not really savvy enough to deside if that is to be considered part of the engine or an add on. Then I always struggled with the American engines, mostly a couple of letters followed by apparantly almost equal numbers. Very confusing for one like me to discern how much different one Allison is from the other, when is it a gradual development, and when is it a new engine?

In airframes we have a similar situation, but I feel better equpped to discuss it. Take the Spitfire, just the difference from the Mk I to the Mk 21, not to mention later developments, is staggering. New engine, new profile, bubble canopy, new wing and double the weight. But undoubtedly they are all Spitfires.

Then take the Yak family, Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7, and Yak 9 to again stay in the war years. I could make a case that they basically was incarnations of the same basic fighter, on the other hand I'm tempted to divide them into 1, 3, and 7, 9 families. At which point do they 'really' become a new fighter?

To take the Japanese, the Zero changed quite a lot from A6M2 to A6M8, or at least to A6M7 if we only allow operational models. Not as much as the Spitfire and the yaks, but still. On the other side there's the Ki -and the Ki-100. It should not be controversial to claim that the latter was merely a Ki 61-II modified to accept a radial, but they are by nomenclature two different fighters.

On the other hand the tempest stayed the Tempest even when it got tubbier, the FW-190 only changed from A to D when it fitted an inline. Except the next derivative became the Ta-152, but was that 'really' so much more different from the D than the D was from the A. Same problem with the Laggs and La's really.

The italians may be said to do this in the most handy way. There's the MC 200, the 202 and the 205, the Re 2000, 2001 2002 and 2005 and the G 50 and 55 five. Same but different.

But as not everybody was so sensible as the Italians (never thought I'd say that), we are left with a question that I fear we cannot answear 100% consistently. Sometimes the gradual evolution ends with something new, it's just that we cannot always draw a firm line between one and the other.

So after this dose of postmodernism, i'm still wondering whether the Spitfire had more different engines than the Hawk 75, Hawk 81 and Hawk 87. At least the last two were still P-40's.
 

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
The Curtiss Model 75 had several different engines installed on it's airframe:
Wright R-1670 (Whirlwind)
Wright R-1820 (Cyclone)
P&W R-1830 (Twin Wasp)
Allison V-1710
and a proposal for the Hawk 75K to have a P&W R-2180 (did not happen, however).

So unlike many other types, the Hawk 75 alone, saw four different engines (from three different manufacturers) installed and used across the Model 75 spectrum.

The Bf109 *may* be in the same league, as it had several types of engines fitted to it, either as prototypes or operational:
RR Kestral Mk.VI
Junkers Jumo210 series
Daimler DB6xx series
P&W R-1830 (WkNmr 1770, D+IFKQ)
BMW810 (WkNmr 5608, D+ITXP)
 

pbehn

Lieutenant Colonel
11,882
8,360
Oct 30, 2013
Hawker Tempest had air cooled sleeve valve radial (centaurus), H- format sleeve valve (Sabre) and V 12 poppet valve Griffon.
 

Shortround6

Major General
19,751
11,728
Jun 29, 2009
Central Florida Highlands
Wright R-1670 (Whirlwind)
Wright R-1820 (Cyclone)
P&W R-1830 (Twin Wasp)
Allison V-1710
and a proposal for the Hawk 75K to have a P&W R-2180 (did not happen, however).
Some of this depends on how you count the engine :)
RR Kestral Mk.VI
Junkers Jumo210 series
Daimler DB6xx series
P&W R-1830 (WkNmr 1770, D+IFKQ)
BMW810 (WkNmr 5608, D+ITXP)
If we count the 109 as having 5 different the engine "Hawk" series needs a recount.
Wright R-1670 (Whirlwind)
P&W R-1535 Twin Wasp Junior(briefly)
Wright R-1820 Cyclone (several different types over time)
P&W R-1830 Twin Wasp (and repeats)
Allison V-1710 with turbo,
P37.jpg

Allison V-1710 without turbo. ( I won't count the change in reduction gear ;)
Merlin V-1650-1
Trivia
V-1710 with two stage supercharger
R-1830 with two stage supercharger (twice?)
There is some controversy about if this was a turbo or a two stage mechanical supercharger.
curtiss_75r.jpg

I favor the two stage mechanical and this was before Grumman flew an F4F with a two stage.

If people want to count the different superchargers on Merlin's and Griffons?
 

GrauGeist

Generalfeldmarschall zur Luftschiff Abteilung
I'm not counting series within an engine line, I am counting individual engine types.

And they never installed a Merlin into a Model 75, the Merlin was fitted to a modified Model 87A (P-40D) which had been designated a P-40F (Model 87B).
 

Shortround6

Major General
19,751
11,728
Jun 29, 2009
Central Florida Highlands
I'm not counting series within an engine line, I am counting individual engine types.

And they never installed a Merlin into a Model 75, the Merlin was fitted to a modified Model 87A (P-40D) which had been designated a P-40F (Model 87B).
What started this was my comment in another thread

"The Hawk 75, Hawk 81, Hawk 87 may very well hold the record for most different engines flown in on (e) basic airframe." edited to add the E.

I am not counting different "series" engines except to note it did happen. Like I am not counting the different Cyclones or two speed vs single speed (two stage is a bit different_
Not counting the Different R-1830s except the two stage superchargers and I put them on their own line, BTW the 2nd two stage R-1830 was the 4th fastest "Hawk" ever flown, only beaten by the P-40Q's.
And I am not counting the V-1710 C-15 different from the V-1710-39 through the -115 in the last of the P-40Ns
I am counting the Turbo Allison in the XP-37 and YP-37s with it's rather different engine installation.
And yes, trying to stuff the two stage Allison into a P-40 (Hawk 8?) counts in my book,

You want to count the DB 601 different from the DB 605, be my guest.
 

Shortround6

Major General
19,751
11,728
Jun 29, 2009
Central Florida Highlands
Then take the Yak family, Yak 1, Yak 3, Yak 7, and Yak 9 to again stay in the war years. I could make a case that they basically was incarnations of the same basic fighter, on the other hand I'm tempted to divide them into 1, 3, and 7, 9 families. At which point do they 'really' become a new fighter?
This almost the reverse :)
How many airframes (names?) using the same basic engine? OK some M-106s or M-107s showed up ;)
The Yak-3 used a smaller wing (not clipped, unless center section cut?)
To take the Japanese, the Zero changed quite a lot from A6M2 to A6M8, or at least to A6M7 if we only allow operational models.
Again, there were a lot of changes but until you get to the A6M8 you had one/two basic engines (3 if you count the prototypes) You had the single speed Sakae and then you had the two speed Sakae engine and the two speed stayed until the summer of 1945.
On the other side there's the Ki -and the Ki-100.
Basically 3 engines, The Ha-40, The Ha-140 and the radial,
 
Last edited:

Shortround6

Major General
19,751
11,728
Jun 29, 2009
Central Florida Highlands
We can also throw this into the mix.

4cf95ab5_xp42.jpg.cbb1a4c236f45e3fded1ea75b1e2f2f7.jpg

The 4th P-36A on the production line.

Yes it has an R-1830 engine but ...................
"
the XP-42 had a special 1050 hp Pratt and Whitney R-1830-31 radial engiine fitted with a long extension fitted to the propeller shaft and nose casing which permitted the use of a streamlined nose with a large propeller spinner. The intake for cooling air was located under the engine, and the intake for carburetor air was located above the engine.

The initial configuration of the XP-42 suffered from serious overheating problems and from vibrations of the propeller shaft. Attempts to cure these problems resulted in no less than twelve different cowling designs being tested on the XP-42. Various types of cowl flaps were fitted, and short-nose high- and low- inlet velocity cowlings were tried with and without fans. The nose was progressively shortened until the airplane gradually once again resembled a P-36A."

So far no details of the weight or extra length of the engine show up in most sources. Engine was also used in
one version of the XP-41 and possibly the Vultee P-48 (company designation)
with_original_long_nose_cowling_061024-F-1234P-029.jpg

seversky_ap-4_1.jpg


The long noses went away, I don't know if they got new engines or the engines were rebuilt with new nose cases and shorter prop-shafts.
I think only the Curtiss XP-42 got cooling fans and I don't know how they powered the fan. The XP-42 may have had several different length prop shafts as from looking at photos, there seem to be at least one intermediate length between longest nose and regular length.
 

Users who are viewing this thread