Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
They must have taken out both the compass and the cabin heater to do that.
And nose armor - don't forget the nose armor...
design data is typically generated by companies trying sell a concept or get investments, which makes them the least of sources for comparison of performance, below even manufacturing estimates. Bench testing is far more reliable and procurement testing/flight testing the best. As such, as far as I can find in my research of "Turbojet History and Development, vol 1, Great Britain and Germany", Kay, Germany, in WWII, was never successful with any type of jet engine generating more than 2800 lbs thrust, this on a HeS 011 (and this was only for one hour). In comparison, the US company Westinghouse tested the all American developed , axial compressor, 24C (J34) at 3000 lbs/thrust in April, '45, Allison with a British helped centrifugal compressor design was starting production with the 4000 lb thrust J-33 in the beginning of 1945. in Britain, In early 1945, the 3000 lb thrust de Havilland Goblin II, although in reliability upgrades, was in production. By the end of 1944, the Rolls Royce Nene engine, which would be used in the mediocre F-9F Panther and the superb Mig 15 in the Korean War, was running at 5000 lbs/thrust. Because of the Nene engine's 5000 lb/thrust, I would have to select the British as the most advanced jet development. Soon the axial engines would eventually eclipse the centrifugal engines, but that was several years away.
The Allisons used glycol and didn't switch to a glycol water mixture until late in WWII. Glycol has a much higher boiling point than water.
I agree in general terms but the Germans and Japanese were developing axial engines from day one as was Griffith in England. Unfortunately the German authorities were ignoring the jet engine, the Japanese (and Germans) had metallurgy problems and Britain ignored Griffith.
This very interesting period is expanded upon in a very good paper here, written by Frank Armstrong (former head of the British NGTE facility, once
It always amazed me that people used something flammable for a combat planes coolant, what could possibly go wrong? Did they experiment with petrol?
Even in recent times - I worked with a Ximango motor glider that ran a liquid cooled Rotax engine. For a spell, they ran a flammable coolant!
Plus because Glycol has really low surface tension, it leaks like you woudlnt believe. I think by the time its about 50/50 with water its ok in that respect.
It'll also spread like crazy on a shop floor.
I have always had the opinion that the Germans made an error by abandoning the centripetal compressor too soon. Each axial flow compressor stage and associated stator stage has to be designed to unique varied airflow parameters and made to work as compared to the much simpler centripetal compressor which has only one stage to design to. Had the Germans pursued the simpler design they may have had a very capable fighter a couple of years earlier and kept their cities clear of the upcoming bomber formations and escorts. Had the Germans installed more reliable 2500-3000 lb thrust engines in the Me 262 in Jan 1944, the outcome of the war could have been altered, certainly extended.
