![]() |
| |||||||
| Aviation Discussion on the aircraft of WWII. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Missouri
Posts: 379
| P-38 with Roll-Royce Merlins In Warren Bodie's book on P-38s, he feels that if the P-38 was retrofitted with the R.R. Merlin like the Mustang, it would have been a much better plane in Northern Europe. The problem with the Allison turbos in the cold and with the British fuel was a challenge to say the least. What do you think? |
| | |
| | #2 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: City of the Angels California
Posts: 809
| That's not an unheard of idea but since the ship did fine in warm climes like the Med and Pacific it would have been hard to justify re-engining just the ETO planes. And depending on the time it might have been superfluous if the P-51 had debuted.
__________________ |
| | |
| | #3 |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO ![]() Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,051
| Many folks have mentioned this and there was always "folklore" at Lockheed that this was thought of - it wasn't that simple of just slappin Merlins on the airframe. Many things would of had to be re-designed, it might of not been worth the effort....
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Londonium
Posts: 609
| The Merlin was also a heavier engine I think, The original Allison engined Mustang was considered the sweeter handling machine due to less weight on the front end, but of course, it lacked the power of it's Merlin engined siblings. THe P-38 was already quite a good aircraft as it was, if expensive and complicated compared to other aircraft. The turbocharged version wouldn't have lacked much power compared to a Merlin if any and could in fact have been better at altitude as the turbo is theoretically more adjustable. Reliability would perhaps be the only reason for the change and I dont think there were enough problems or even enough P-38s to warrant the change, especially with the Mustang coming on stream for much less and demanding the Merlin engine.
__________________ Never mistake knowledge for wisdom. One helps you make a living; the other helps you make a life. |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 10,283
| Lockheed did look at installing the Merlins on the P38 and there were indications of an increase in performance. It was also determined that the manufacturing process would have been easier, plus there would have been some room in in the booms made available for additional fuel cells. But in the end, by the time they could have implimented the changes, it was decided the P51 was going to be the escort fighter and it just wasnt worth it to interrupt production.
__________________ "Pilot to copilot..... what are those mountain goats doing up here in the clouds?" |
| | |
| | #6 |
| Banned Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| R988, how much did the Allison weigh with turbochargers? V-1650-9 - 1,690 lbs V-1710 G6R/L (V-1710-143/-145) - 1,595 lbs from http://www.unlimitedexcitement.com/default.htm The idea of putting Merlins in the P-38 was squashed by lobbying by General Motors. |
| | |
| | #7 | |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO ![]() Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,051
| Quote:
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Banned Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| Allison was a GM company. Btw, R-R had a P-38 delivered to Hucknall in 1944 for a trial installation of Merlin XXs in 1944. When it became known, they were told to return the a/c immediately. Seems it would be not that much trouble to replace the Allisons having experence previously with the P-51 conversion. Lockheed did extensive engineering evaluations of Merlin P-38s and would have transformed the P-38 in a simular manner to the P-51. |
| | |
| | #9 | |
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO ![]() Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,051
| Quote:
I doubt there was any serious lobbying by Allison. Bottom line if the decision was made to replace the Allison with Merlins the powers to be would of seen it through, just as they did on the P-51. Back then as it is today, propulsion manufacturers must cater to the prime airframe manufacturer, not the other way around....
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" | |
| | |
| | #10 |
| Banned Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 795
| Did I say Allison did the lobbying? |
| | |
| | #11 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Missouri
Posts: 379
| I read that Lockheed had desinged an alternate installation detail to accomodate the Merlins from the beginning. |
| | |
| | #12 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 374
| One thing stopped the P-38 from receiving Merlin engines. THe production lines would have had to be shut down for two weeks in order to re-tool for Merlin installation. The loss of two weeks production was judged more important than having a better performing aircraft. |
| | |
| | #13 |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,175
| I'd have to look it up to get a name but the General in charge of procurement was a former GM executive and held stock in GM. This man decided the Allison would stay in the P-38. Lockheed designed the installation of Merlins as early as '41, as an optional power plant. It was felt that the overall performance would increase but climb would suffer. The problem here is the supercharger/prop reduction gearing which can be geared for power (climb) or speed, an example of this can be seen at the following site http://spitfireperformance.com/ You will need to go to the Mustang tests you'll note MS (.42 reduction I belive these are right but there not stated on this material) and FS (.477 reduction) gear and its affect on speed/climb. Note: the pertinent test is of a P-51H, listed as a Mustang III with a Merlin 100, the test is quite far down the page. The turbo being less dependant on RPM for power is not affected and use the middle ground. The P-38F/Spitfire tests on the following site illustrates this extremely well showing the P-38F climb right in the middle of the two Spit IXs one of each reduction ratio. http://prodocs.netfirms.com this is the Pro Docs page and has a huge collection of WWII aircraft info, that address doesn't always work but its all I have. I've seen several estimates of the results of the installation form 1,000lbs added to an even swap. The drawings range from a profile like the early, more streamlined version, to a front radiator installation like the J/K/L models but without the radiators on the booms. Drag wise that would not be a big difference in drag, the front radiators are in a propeller wash area and add very little drag and the rear radiators are in the wing turbulence area and follow the "Meredeth Rule" to add a little thrust over the drag produced. wmaxt Last edited by wmaxt; 04-03-2006 at 06:56 PM. |
| | |
| | #14 | |||
| IP/Mech THE GREAT GAZOO ![]() Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 16,051
| Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It was also mentioned that there was a desire to keep the design "All American" although Packard eventually built the Merlin - Possible and probable... I know the procurement folks for the AAF were out of Wright Patterson, (and are still today) and I would find it hard to believe that one general could of attempted to stop Lockheed from pursuing Merlins on the P-38. If it was true and Allison (GM) had this guy in their pocket, why not do the same when North American was planning to drop the Merlin in the Mustang?
__________________ "IF ITS RED OR DUSTY, DON'T TOUCH IT" Last edited by FLYBOYJ; 04-03-2006 at 07:27 PM. | |||
| | |
| | #15 | |
| Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,175
| Quote:
1. Allison was at capacity of an expanded factory. 2. A different officer was in charge of P-51 production, a colonel who had ties to a congressman. I certainly don't know all the ins and out of this but 1. Why no second source for the P-38 until Jan, '45? Until March '44 it was the only AAF air superiority fighter with range and numbers to take the fight to the enemy of a 1:1 basis. 2. P-38K squashed for +/- 50 airplane (~two weeks) delay? 3. Why no unified mixture/prop/throttle control that was ready for installation but denied by the WPB. I'm sure the "All American" argument was used in '41 and the "Don't want to delay production" argument was probably used later but who really knows? I certainly don't dispute what you are saying, just that there seems to be more to it. wmaxt Last edited by wmaxt; 04-03-2006 at 07:46 PM. | |
| | |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
| |
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Merlins > Packard vs RR | KraziKanuK | Aviation | 110 | 11-16-2008 07:20 AM |
| Corsair vs Zero | Cougar | Aviation | 261 | 03-20-2008 07:53 PM |
| Which theater of War Would you choose for flying? | horseUSA | Polls | 521 | 12-22-2006 06:45 PM |