Re-engined planes

[tomo pauk]

How might have looked the Romanian 400mph + fighter: IAR-80 hull mated with engine salvaged from P-38J, along with four .05cals. Radiator copied from Hurricane. Supercharger between engine and windscreen.
Empty weight circa 2000-2200 kg propelled by 1425 HP - the ultimate lightweight fighter.

 

[tomo pauk]

What are the net benefits
of using a third powerplant to act as a supercharger for the two existing units?
I can't see the weight of even two supercharger assemblies approaching the weight of a powerplant and what effect will the third unit be having on fuel consumption/range?

The plane with added and deleted stuff would be perhaps 300 kg heavier ( cca 3%) more then ready-to-go JU-88A-4. The main benefit is about power, though: the main engines does not need to drive the superchargers themselves - that's the job of 'slave' engine (Argus). The more fuel could've been carried above the Argus to remedy the consumption. With more power, plane would flew faster higher (nothing new), better utilising residual thrust for even more speed.
The real plane using such arangement was Do-217P (one DB-605 as slave buried in hull, two DB-603 as masters), being way faster higher then Do-217Ms without DB-605 - despite added weight of DB-605 accesories.

 

[tomo pauk]

Another underdog - He-112.
Here is how those Romanians coul've used M-88 engine from captured Su-2 (1000-1200 HP, depending on who is talking) to make it go faster then Yak-1 stuff.

 

[tomo pauk]

Yak-1 with engine salvaged from P-40 would perhaps looked this way. Two 20mm under wings. Speed perhaps 600-630 km/h depending on engine.

 

[tomo pauk]

As promised on another thread, here is radial-engined Hurricane what-if.
Engines - R-2600 or Hercules, from 1500-1900 HP The additional fuel tank behnid pilot, to cater for increased weight of new engine.
The 1st image is an ad-hoc modification, and 2nd one is more throughout, with bubble-canopy from Typhoon and with clipped wings for extra speed roll rate. Also the dorsal fillet for better stability, following the idea from Tempest P-47D for example.

Almost a Hayate, won't you say Or Tempest II/Sea Fury.

 

[tomo pauk]

The real bomber buster, or German P-38: the He-280 with DB-601/605. 'New' engines mounted slightly more out up for prop clearance. 2 x MK 108 instead of 3 x MG 151. Empty weight climbs from 3200 kg to cca 4700 since new powerplant is much heavier. Maybe the cannons would be mounted in wing roots to remedy the CoG changes. Wing loading is hefty (He-280 did have a small wing), but power loading is pretty good. Perhaps as fast as Mustang, but not as maneuverable.

 

[tomo pauk]

How might have looked the Me-262 with some salvaged engines - depicted here with Merlins from Lancasters or Halifaxes. Perhaps as fast as P-82 with 1600 HP Merlins. Two MK-108 deleted from front, replaced with ones in gondolas from Bf-109 located to lower hull, behind wings because of CoG issues.
The similar venture was possible with DB-601/605 to solve the problem of awesome airframe waiting for engines.

 

[tomo pauk]

The tank-busting Defiant, with another engine:

 

[tomo pauk]

How to turn Fairey Battle into a proper bomber - delete Merlin and add two radials. The more throughout modification would've included addition of turret from Defiant - 2nd pic. Ready to pounce those damn bridges over Albert canal
The Australian Canadian production would've involved Twin Wasps instead of Taurus engines. With 2100-2400 HP vs. 4-4.5 tons empty it would beat many single-engined types.
Also as a night fighter it would've been pretty good.

One or two 40mm would've fitted in nicely, in place of bomb aimer.

 

[Colin1]

How might have looked the Me262 with some salvaged engines... ...Perhaps as fast as P-82 with 1600hp Merlins. Two MK-108s deleted from front, replaced with ones in gondolas

3-nacelle frontal cross-section, underwing gondolas; can't see it topping a P-82

 

[tomo pauk]

On a benefit side, it had swept wing.

 

[Shortround6]

On a benefit side, it had swept wing.

On the debt side the engines from a bomber were single stage supercharged engines and developed their power

at lower altitude than the engines in a P-82. Lower altitude=thicker air=higher drag.

Also I would be very careful about assessing performance based on nominal take-off HP ratings when max speeds were often obtained at much higher altitudes and in many cases using WEP ratings much higher than the nominal take-off rating.

 

[tomo pauk]

Valid points

edit: The Lancasters w/ Merlins have had service ceiling (with decent bomb load) of way above 20 000 ft, so 'my' 262 had merit too.

 

[Shortround6]

Valid points

edit: The Lancasters w/ Merlins have had service ceiling (with decent bomb load) of way above 20 000 ft, so 'my' 262 had merit too.

Service ceiling is usually the altitude at which the climb rate has dropped to 100ft per minute.

Please note that the Merlins used in the bombers performed almost the same as the Merlins used in Hurricane II's and in P-40F's. Most of these engines were rated for 1420HP at 11,000ft in high gear. Power decreasing with altitude after that.

Merlin 1650-7s, depending on what fuel they were feed were rated at 1625hp at 12,500ft (18lbs of boost) in high gear or 1860hp at 11,000ft (25lbs of boost) or 1580hp at 16,000ft (18lbs boost).

The -23/25 engine used in the P-82 was rated at 1500hp at 15700ft military power which is not WEP.

Allison engines used in later P-82s gave 1250hp at 32,700ft.

 

[hawkeye2an]

How about a Grumman F7F with DeHaviland Hornet engines? That beautiful slim,streamlined fuselage just asks for those engines. I am currently building one in 1/48th for our 'what if' contest for our local modeling club. The Hornet used "slimline" Rolls-Royce Merlin engines that were versions of the Merlin with engine ancillaries repositioned to achieve a minimum frontal area and less drag.

 

[Waynos]

How about a Grumman F7F with DeHaviland Hornet engines? That beautiful slim,streamlined fuselage just asks for those engines. I am currently building one in 1/48th for our 'what if' contest for our local modeling club. The Hornet used "slimline" Rolls-Royce Merlin engines that were versions of the Merlin with engine ancillaries repositioned to achieve a minimum frontal area and less drag.

That would, quite possibly, look even more beautiful than a Spitifre! In fact the description reminds of Supermarines own twin-Merlin proposals. Please post a picture here when its complete?

 

[tomo pauk]

Replacing R-2800 with anything is blasphemy

(steps from soap box)

It would've been a helluva plane.

 

[hawkeye2an]

It's true. But I'm just going for BEAUTIFUL!

 

[tomo pauk]

The what-if Skua III, or Roc :
Merlin in front takes advantage of generous original front part of Skua, pilot's seat is moved to aft part of reduced, single-seat cockpit, the place previously occupied by piot his equipment is fuel tank (a-la F-4U). 8 x 0.303 in wings for the starter, radiators a-la Spitfire so the bombs could be carried under centreline if needed. Clipped wings.
Hopefully as good as Sea Hurricane, Wildcat, or (don't laugh, by late 1941 it would've had 1300 HP), A6M Zero.

 

[tomo pauk]

A better looking version, late 1941/early 1942, 2-4 Hispano II in wings, Merlin with 1400 HP (1600 HP early 1943):