Worst aircraft of WW2?

[Njaco]

Really?
I had always understood that the Me110 was originally designed as a long-range bomber escort and when its defficiencies as a fighter became glaringly obvious, its role was changed to that of a multi-purpose Attack Bomber, not unlike our own A-20 (and later, A-26) and B-25.
This was why the 410 project came about. It was supposed to be a "better Me110".

This is how I've always understood it, anyway.

I apologize as I'm going off memory, but the long-range bomber escort may not have been so much a priority in the Luftwaffe at that time as 1) they believed the He 111 was faster than fighters or something similar 2) they really had no long-range bombers and weren't concerned so much 3) bombers were mainly to support the Army in Blitzkreig so that Stuka was emphasized. The Bf 110 was the fighter but it was IIRC to destroy enemy bombers and not so much as escort. But like you said, once deficiencies appeared the role was changed.

and there may be many things wrong with this post as I can't seem to get my head clear this morning!

[vikingBerserker]

Originally Posted by airboiy

So they're as aerodynamic as a warthog's behind...interesting...[sits alone in thought]...I wonder-what about an engine with two radials across from each other and a shaft in between?

The one problem I could see is air cooling. With the radials perpendicular to the air flow, the air is hitting all cylinders. With it being parallel, the cylinders in front would get they air flow, but the ones in the rear would not or would just get the hot air flowing off of the font ones. I would think this would lead to cooling issue

[Vincenzo]

Originally Posted by vikingBerserker

The one problem I could see is air cooling. With the radials perpendicular to the air flow, the air is hitting all cylinders. With it being parallel, the cylinders in front would get they air flow, but the ones in the rear would not or would just get the hot air flowing off of the font ones. I would think this would lead to cooling issue

would be usefull you see a pics of 2 row radial

[Elvis]

I don't know about this one.
Sounds like a recipe for destruction, if you ask me.
You're better off going with a multi-bank arrangement, like what they actually did.
Less moving parts, simpler design and it achieves the same objective.


Elvis

[airboiy]

How 'bout putting intake tubes right behind the prop that lead cool air to the back cylinders? would that satisfy everybody?

Hey Elvis, isn't everything a recipe for disaster if you look at it the right way?

[Elvis]

Airboiy,

Tubes for the back cylinders?
I don't understand. Can you draw me a picture?

Also, don't forget, by incorporating drivesahfts and a gear arrangement, you're also increasing weight, and that will have to be balanced out with some other aspect of the plane.
That's another "plus" or the multibank arrangement. It's lighter in weight.



Elvis

[FLYBOYJ]

Airboiy;

The best way to cool an air cooled recip engine is by getting airflow around the cylinders, and the best way to do that is with baffling. Engineers calculate how the baffling should go around the engine and determine airflow that will sufficiently cool the engine.

While your concept has merit, you have to determine a few things. Can this configuration work? Can it be assembled cost effectively? Will it be easy to produce? Will it be reliable? Will it be easy to maintain? Will it be cost effective to maintain? And finally, will it have a cost effective service life?

[airboiy]

Originally Posted by FLYBOYJ

Airboiy;

The best way to cool an air cooled recip engine is by getting airflow around the cylinders, and the best way to do that is with baffling. Engineers calculate how the baffling should go around the engine and determine airflow that will sufficiently cool the engine.

While your concept has merit, you have to determine a few things. Can this configuration work? Can it be assembled cost effectively? Will it be easy to produce? Will it be reliable? Will it be easy to maintain? Will it be cost effective to maintain? And finally, will it have a cost effective service life?

Ah, the logistics of the problem...my worst weakness!

Hey Elvis, here's the pic of the "tubes" I designed.

[Elvis]

Ah, ok.
Yeah, I have to side with FlyboyJ on this one.
Baffling would do a better job, because airflow could be directed over the whole engine(s), as opposed to just a few cylinders.
They'd also be lighter in weight and cheaper to produce than actual "tubes".
On top of all that, how would you exhaust the air? That exhaust HAS to be just as effective as the intake, otherwise you run across a "pressurazation" condition that would limit the amount of incoming air.
This was a problem that drag racers and auto designers dealt with for years, concerning "hood scoops", which is essentially the same idea that you're proposing with your "cooling tubes".

That's the great thing about a radial's typical positioning. You get even airflow around all the cylinders and the "cooling baffles" (aka, the engine cowling) is simple, cheap-to-produce and serves a double purpose very effectively, in that it helps direct airflow around the engine effectively and also works to streamline the airplane.

Sorry, but while your idea is quite interesting, I really think a typical multi-bank arrangement is just a more effective design.

If the designers worry is streamlining, he could opt for liquid cooled type of engine, or a multi-bank radial with a smaller diameter (such as the P&W Wasp Jr. vs. their original Wasp).



Elvis

[airboiy]

The exaust tubes would be an extention of the cooling tubes. BTW, what's "baffling"? I've heard it but never understood it.

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by airboiy

The exaust tubes would be an extention of the cooling tubes. BTW, what's "baffling"? I've heard it but never understood it.

Its a series of sheet aluminum strategically placed around the cylinders so airflow cools the engine.

This is what baffling looks like on a GA aircraft engine

[airboiy]

Thanks, Flyboyj, for the pic!

[Elvis]

An even more common example are the older VW Beetles that had the air-cooled engines ('38-'02).
If you look under the engine, you can see some "tin" plates under the cylinders.
That's baffling, used to ensure the most airflow from the fan is always going across the cylinders.


Elvis

[FLYBOYJ]

Originally Posted by Elvis

An even more common example are the older VW Beetles that had the air-cooled engines ('38-'02).
If you look under the engine, you can see some "tin" plates under the cylinders.
That's baffling, used to ensure the most airflow from the fan is always going across the cylinders.


Elvis

Yep - just about the same thing.

[airboiy]

Ok, I now know what you mean, Elvis! Thanks guys for the info!