Which country designed the best engines for WWII?

[Shortround6]

A few R-2800s made it home with cylinders missing. How many out did of how many that got hit is unknown.
However a few other types/makes of radials seemed to be able to shed parts (like propellers) in flight without any interference whatsoever by the enemy.

Somehow the R-2800 news makers got applied to all radial engines?

Radials did have no radiator or cooling lines so there was that much less for the enemy to hit.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

If I'm going into harm's way, I'd just as soon do it behind an R-2800. Not as aerodynamic, not as graceful ... and not as tender.

 

[pbehn]

If I'm going into harm's way, I'd just as soon do it behind an R-2800. Not as aerodynamic, not as graceful ... and not as tender.

You would prefer a Lockheed Ventura to a Spitfire Mk XIV?

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

You would prefer a Lockheed Ventura to a Spitfire Mk XIV?

I had thought it obvious I was talking about fighterin', but in case it wasn't, I was. F4U, P-47, F6F -- all rugged and dependable, and fairly capable.

 

[pbehn]

I had thought it obvious I was talking about fighterin', but in case it wasn't, I was. F4U, P-47, F6F -- all rugged and dependable, and fairly capable.

On a forum you get to choose, in a military organisation you don't.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

On a forum you get to choose, in a military organisation you don't.

Fortunately for me, the question was posed in a forum, and not in a unit.

 

[Sid327]

According to USN stats damage to the power plant was the leading cause of loss of aircraft (22% of losses). In terms of percentage 70% of hits to this area resulted in loss. As a percentage this was only exceeded by the oil system (hit less often as a it was smaller target).
Of aircraft that survived serious damage only 7% suffered engine damage. The invincibility of the radial engine is greatly exaggerated.

The source for the data is the Rand Corporation paper "Aircraft Vulnerability in World War II"

Good post RP.

No doubt the myth will continue.

 

[GrauGeist]

A radial engine's survivability over an inline (water-cooled) is not nessecarily exaggerated, as the water-cooled engined is reliant on the integrity of the cooling system to keep the engine operable.
Axis and Allied radial powered aircraft had this advantage - add to this, rugged aircraft like the P-47 that could absorbe a considerable amount of punishment that would down lesser types, and the myth starts to have a grain of truth.
Case in point: Robert Johnson's P-47 that was attacked Fw190's, suffering extensive 20mm and 7.92mm hits, including the engine, still managed to cross the channel and return safely home.

 

[Sid327]

A radial engine's survivability over an inline (water-cooled) is not nessecarily exaggerated, as the water-cooled engined is reliant on the integrity of the cooling system to keep the engine operable.
Axis and Allied radial powered aircraft had this advantage - add to this, rugged aircraft like the P-47 that could absorbe a considerable amount of punishment that would down lesser types, and the myth starts to have a grain of truth.
Case in point: Robert Johnson's P-47 that was attacked Fw190's, suffering extensive 20mm and 7.92mm hits, including the engine, still managed to cross the channel and return safely home.

Yes, I understand.

a ''grain of truth'' is a long way from being a bucket load of examples.

But one example of how many that didn't make it.
There was also an incident of a P-51 losing it's coolant and returning in full rich mixture and minimum power setting.

The same applies to people who have suffered multiple gunshot wounds and survive; yet it just takes one round in a critical place with others to cause a fatality ...and it's exactly the same with any single-engined plane including the much vaunted P-47.
A 7.92mm round into the oil system is going to ensure you start looking for a flat area to make a forced landing within a few minutes after complete loss of pressure and the temp starts redlining.
To guarantee good survivability (imo) it is with planes like the P-38, Mosquito, Beaufighter etc. These would give the best feeling of security.

 

[swampyankee]

Yes, I understand.

a ''grain of truth'' is a long way from being a bucket load of examples.

But one example of how many that didn't make it.
There was also an incident of a P-51 losing it's coolant and returning in full rich mixture and minimum power setting.

The same applies to people who have suffered multiple gunshot wounds and survive; yet it just takes one round in a critical place with others to cause a fatality ...and it's exactly the same with any single-engined plane including the much vaunted P-47.
A 7.92mm round into the oil system is going to ensure you start looking for a flat area to make a forced landing within a few minutes after complete loss of pressure and the temp starts redlining.
To guarantee good survivability (imo) it is with planes like the P-38, Mosquito, Beaufighter etc. These would give the best feeling of security.

...except that OEI performance may be sufficient to maintain flight, it's not enough to maintain combat capability.

 

[GrauGeist]

Yes, I understand.

a ''grain of truth'' is a long way from being a bucket load of examples.

But one example of how many that didn't make it.
There was also an incident of a P-51 losing it's coolant and returning in full rich mixture and minimum power setting.

The same applies to people who have suffered multiple gunshot wounds and survive; yet it just takes one round in a critical place with others to cause a fatality ...and it's exactly the same with any single-engined plane including the much vaunted P-47.
A 7.92mm round into the oil system is going to ensure you start looking for a flat area to make a forced landing within a few minutes after complete loss of pressure and the temp starts redlining.
To guarantee good survivability (imo) it is with planes like the P-38, Mosquito, Beaufighter etc. These would give the best feeling of security.

Tens of thousands of fighters (of all types) never made it home (for various reasons) but the survivors, who should not have made it back, are of interest especially when there is a greater frequency of survivors in one type over other types.
The P-47 was known to be one such type: flying through Olive groves, belly-bouncing off a field, striking a smoke-stack with a starboard wing, taking a direct flak hit to the aft fuselage and the list goes on.
Add to that list, Lt. Johnson's P-47 that was mauled by cannon and MG hits, creating extensive damage to the aircraft, including the engine, propeller, flight controls. The armor plate behind the cockpit was battered, bent and broken in places, the port-side portion of the canopy was shattered with some portions completely gone.
Johnson, despite his injuries and being covered in engine oil, still made the journey across the channel to his base.

 

[mad_max]

Yes, I understand.

a ''grain of truth'' is a long way from being a bucket load of examples.

But one example of how many that didn't make it.
There was also an incident of a P-51 losing it's coolant and returning in full rich mixture and minimum power setting.

The same applies to people who have suffered multiple gunshot wounds and survive; yet it just takes one round in a critical place with others to cause a fatality ...and it's exactly the same with any single-engined plane including the much vaunted P-47.
A 7.92mm round into the oil system is going to ensure you start looking for a flat area to make a forced landing within a few minutes after complete loss of pressure and the temp starts redlining.
To guarantee good survivability (imo) it is with planes like the P-38, Mosquito, Beaufighter etc. These would give the best feeling of security.

Just do a search for photos using for search terms. "p-47 thunderbolt battle damage" and you'll see more than a "grain of truth". The one that shows the engine cowl all smashed in and the prop in basically one piece is awe inspiring. Others are just as impressive.

 

[buffnut453]

If I'm going into harm's way, I'd just as soon do it behind an R-2800. Not as aerodynamic, not as graceful ... and not as tender.

It rather depends on when you're going into harms way. R-2800 is definitely a good option from 1942 onwards when aircraft designed to accommodate it started to become available. Prior to that point, you'd have to pick a different engine to give the combat performance required.

 

[Thumpalumpacus]

It rather depends on when you're going into harms way. R-2800 is definitely a good option from 1942 onwards when aircraft designed to accommodate it started to become available. Prior to that point, you'd have to pick a different engine to give the combat performance required.

Yeah, if availability wasn't a constraint I'd go with an F404

 

[wuzak]

Which is basically what my post stated. Lockheed stayed with the turbo Allison in the P-38 as it could be fitted in that airframe, P-40 as the 2 stage Merlin couldn't be fitted to it and then the Allison came back in use with the P-82 when Packard quit building the Merlins.

The Merlin could have been fitted to the P-38. The problems were the time and effort required for the conversion, the interruption to aircraft production and the availability of engines.

The P-40 was fitted with the Merlin XX for the F and L models. This required numerous modifications to the airframe. Fitting the 2 stage Merlin would also be possible. But would you rather a 2 stage P-40 or a 2 stage P-51?

The XP-60 was, essentially, a P-40D with new wings. It was fitted with the Merlin 28 (British supply, originally). It was later modified to fit a Merlin 61, becoming the XP-60D.

I think the word you are missing from your bit about the P-82 is "reluctantly". As in, NAA reluctantly fitted the V-1710 to the P-82 when US Merlin production ended.

 

[GrauGeist]

Just do a search for photos using for search terms. "p-47 thunderbolt battle damage" and you'll see more than a "grain of truth". The one that shows the engine cowl all smashed in and the prop in basically one piece is awe inspiring. Others are just as impressive.

That sounds like the P-47 that flew through an Olive grove in Italy (dove a little too low while strafing German positions), damaging not only the cowling, engine and prop, but also the leading edges of the wings and still flew about 120 miles back to his base in Italy.

 

[Sid327]

Just do a search for photos using for search terms. "p-47 thunderbolt battle damage" and you'll see more than a "grain of truth". The one that shows the engine cowl all smashed in and the prop in basically one piece is awe inspiring. Others are just as impressive.

I've read the story and seen the pics, the prop protected the engine from any actual damage. The claim was about cylinders being ''lost''.

 

[GrauGeist]

...the prop protected the engine from any actual damage.

Please tell me you were just joking when you typed that...

 

[Sid327]

Please tell me you were just joking when you typed that...

Nope. quite serious; ...and I don't think any cylinders were missing?

The ''claim'' was about a radial engine losing one or more cylinders and still being able to RTB (I assume).
Which would be noteworthy enough for someone to have made an official record of, and certainly some photographs.
Let's dispel the ''myth'', rather than move off at a tangent, which has nothing to do with loss of any cylinders.

If you have seen the after flight report of that particular aircraft and particularly the engine inspection report you will have ground to stand on, if you haven't it's just your opinion.
No doubt it suffered severe vibration problems and radial cranks are not exactly unknown to shear off at the prop hub with a perfectly fine prop. Therefore we can assume they changed the engine
I'm not being hard-headed about it at all, there is a serious amount of knowledge here on this forum. If anyone here can help with information or photos about ''The Claim'' I'd be grateful.

 

[Sid327]

...except that OEI performance may be sufficient to maintain flight, it's not enough to maintain combat capability.

But in a much better position than any single engine fighter with a sick engine.
....Sorry, I missed the point you are making.