Lockheed L-133 A & B

[Justo Miranda]

From Air Enthusiast /Eleven

 

[FarSight]

Lockheed L-1000

There is at least one L-1000 turbojet still intact:

http://hyperscale.com/features/2002/l133tc_1.htm

Nathan Price did quite a job!

 

[red admiral]

It is doubtful the L-1000 turbojet ever worked and the stats convince me that it couldn't have ever worked. Theres more chance of Griffith's CR.1/2 32 (IIRC) spool double reverse flow turbofan working.

The L-1000 has a pressure ratio of 25(or 17?) from a two spool compressor with 32 stages. Driving this is a four stage turbine. Somehow the engine weighs 1543lb. Starting the thing up would be awful when you consider the problems RR had with the Avon of 6.5 p.r. The pressure ratio itself means that aluminium is out so the compressor would have to be made from steel or inconel - for a weight of 1543lb?

 

[amsci99]

It is doubtful the L-1000 turbojet ever worked and the stats convince me that it couldn't have ever worked. Theres more chance of Griffith's CR.1/2 32 (IIRC) spool double reverse flow turbofan working.

red admiral,

Never heard of the Griffith, other than Metreo-Vickers. Could you tell us more?

 

[red admiral]

Never heard of the Griffith, other than Metreo-Vickers. Could you tell us more?

I thought I had a picture but I can't find it unfortunately. If you have Jet Aircraft Engines by Bill Gunston, its in there. The scheme is difficult to explain without a pictures but lets try;

There area bunch of individual compressor stages connect to a central shaft, outside of the compressor stage and directly connected to it is the turbine stage. Every compressor stage is driven by its own turbine stage. The air flows through the compressor along the axis and into the combustor where it is turned through 180° and exits through the periphery driving the turbine stages.

The RR Historical Society at Derby has the original, which they actually managed to get running in 1942 or 43.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

How did they get 5,000 lbs of power out of 1,543 lbs of weight with early-1940's era technology?

KJ Lesnick

 

[amsci99]

Never heard of the Griffith, other than Metreo-Vickers. Could you tell us more?

I thought I had a picture but I can't find it unfortunately. If you have Jet Aircraft Engines by Bill Gunston, its in there. The scheme is difficult to explain without a pictures but lets try;

There area bunch of individual compressor stages connect to a central shaft, outside of the compressor stage and directly connected to it is the turbine stage. Every compressor stage is driven by its own turbine stage. The air flows through the compressor along the axis and into the combustor where it is turned through 180° and exits through the periphery driving the turbine stages.

The RR Historical Society at Derby has the original, which they actually managed to get running in 1942 or 43.

Information on Griffith's CR.1/2 32 is suprisingly hard to find unlike the Metropolitan-Vickers F.1 & F.2 axial flow turbines. Are we referring to Griffith's work on 'contraflow' jet engines when he was at the RAE and before Metropolitan Vickers took over the project?

 

[AF]

http://tanks45.tripod.com/Jets45/Histories/Lockheed-L133/L133.htm

 

[FarSight]

Lockheed L-1000

How did they get 5,000 lbs of power out of 1,543 lbs of weight with early-1940's era technology?

KJ Lesnick

I think they never did. There seems to have been at least three different versions of this engine and only one (last design) was completed after the war by Menasco.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_J37

Wikipedia also mentions that Wright XT35 turboprop was based on L-1000/J37.

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Why would it use a clutching mechanism, did it have any weight reduction benefits on that particular design? Is that why the rear of the engine was so small (small turbines, through gearing driving a large compressor)?

The T-35 which it evolved into, did that evolve into the T-45 which ultimately evolved into the J-57?


-Kendra

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

Does anybody know if the T-35 and T-45 were related to each other, or if one evolved into the other?

KJ

 

[flateric]

Original Lockheed's cutaway of L-133 ca.1941
Lockheed Horizons, Issue 8

 

[Orionblamblam]

I am compelled by Federal Law to point out that issue V1N4 of Aerospace Projects Review has a nice big fat article on the L-133 design...

http://www.up-ship.com/eAPR/ev1n4.htm

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I am compelled to add eAPR is criminally cheap, and should be mandatory for all members.

So there.

;D

 

[Orionblamblam]

I am compelled to add eAPR is criminally cheap,

Anbd soon to get cheaper. And more expensive. Figure THAT one out....

 

[KJ_Lesnick]

I take it the canarded L-133 model was the final choice?


Kendra Lesnick

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Just got the latest issue of Air Classics (Feb. 2013) and the featured cover story is on the L-133, by Will Hawkins, son of the L-133's designer.

I'd say just the artwork alone makes it well worth it for $8.99! Couldn't resist.

(The photo was taken on my POS phone, so it came out lousy. Now you have a good reason to go get the magazine. )

 

[circle-5]

Lockheed L-133 manufacturer's desk model.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Nice!

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Any truth to the statement that the L-133 used the P-38's wings? My understanding was that the L-133's wings were used on the P-80.

 

[royabulgaf]

It's my understanding from the Air Classics article that the P-80 wings were based on the L-133 design. The article in AC is woefully optomistic, based on a jet engine that to me, had too many futuristic bells and whistles to be workable in that era. For pete's sake, they weren't even sure where to put the intake! Some drawings show the guns mounted IN the smallish intake.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Yeah, I noticed that about the guns. Now as for the statement about P-38 wings, I'd like to recant. I went back and looked. I had read it on Wikipedia, which states they were "essentially the outer wing sections of a Lockheed P-38." But hey, it's Wikipedia.

 

[J_Matthews129]

Yeah, I noticed that about the guns. Now as for the statement about P-38 wings, I'd like to recant. I went back and looked. I had read it on Wikipedia, which states they were "essentially the outer wing sections of a Lockheed P-38." But hey, it's Wikipedia.

Never posted here, but "hi" to all. I've been working on this plane off-and-on (mostly off, depending on the kids' activities) for a year as a 3D model. The wings do bear a striking resemblance to the P-80's, which was why I used the P-80 when I set about doing the image maps for the panel lines). Here are a couple renders of the unfinished model (see attachment, sorry about the second one being so big) from last year, before I started not liking it and starting over with a new version.

 

[J_Matthews129]

Yeah, I noticed that about the guns. Now as for the statement about P-38 wings, I'd like to recant. I went back and looked. I had read it on Wikipedia, which states they were "essentially the outer wing sections of a Lockheed P-38." But hey, it's Wikipedia.

The intake and cannon arrangement didn't make sense to me, either. Wasn't that supposed to have been four 20mm cannon in the nose, and stuffed into the intake at that? Can't imagine effect from all off the spent gasses and possible debris from the guns getting sucked into the engines. Then there's what I'm guessing are auxiliary intakes, top and bottom, toward the aft end. I'd think the bottom pair would have to be closed during taxi/takeoff/landing due to FOD. Seems like all the drawings I've seen of this plane depict it with a pair of those intakes, top and bottom. Not that there are many drawings I've found, mind you, since there seem to be very few (at least available on the Interwebs that I've found... Ha!). Scott's eAPR that featured the L-133, was interesting.

Still working on the 3D model and hope to have the exterior finished soon. It's the first aircraft I've modeled and since there are so many blended shapes it's kind of a (fun, challenging) pain.

 

[roadrunner2]

Fabulous !!
Is it possible you post 4 views plan of your 3D ?

 

[Stargazer]

J_Matthews129, your work is fabulous! Thanks for sharing it with us.

Hope you can complete it and set it to a beautiful background, that would be something...

 

[J_Matthews129]

Roadrunner, thanks for the compliments! I'm working on the third version of the mesh now. Almost happy with the engine exhaust area now and then I need to model the secondary air intakes (can't really think of anything else to call them...) on the top and bottom of the fuselage. After I do that I'll be happy to post three-views of the plane .

Stargazer, thank you, too. I'll be happy to post something with a background when it's closer to being finished. I'm trying to also model the cockpit and a pilot. Never modeled a person before, so that should be interesting.

Kind of seems like the main landing gear was different than other planes (thinking P-80, specifically). From the drawings I've seen, they seem to tuck into the centerline, as opposed to being spread farther apart under the wing. I think I saw a Fantastic Plastic model kit of the L-133 and it's mains looked a lot like either an F-18 of an F-111 (not sure whether that was part of the kit, or a nice-looking modification by the builder). Seems as though that would have been more complicated then the more "normal" placement under the wings, like most pursuit/fighter aircraft of that time.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

The Air Classics article mentioned that the L-133's designers never finalized a definitive nose or intake configuration but weren't pleased with stuffing all those guns in the nose either.

 

[sienar]

I think the bit about the wings being off a P-38 is a bit of confusion. I wouldn't be surprised if it used the same airfoil as the p-38, and the planform of the wing seems to be a bit too different from the p-38. However, the constellation had what was essentially a scaled up p-38 wing, so who knows.


But thats a great model J_Matthews. The one suggestion that I'd give is the "spine" of the aircraft appears to blend a bit more with the fuselage as it approaches the rear and vert stabilizer. And I have to ask what are you going to do with the model when you are finished? I've been thinking about making a L-133 for X-Plane, but between the XP-77 I've been working on and a few other projects, I haven't had any time to think about making a good 3d model of it for xplane.

 

[J_Matthews129]

I think the bit about the wings being off a P-38 is a bit of confusion. I wouldn't be surprised if it used the same airfoil as the p-38, and the planform of the wing seems to be a bit too different from the p-38. However, the constellation had what was essentially a scaled up p-38 wing, so who knows.

The first time I saw drawings of the plane my first thought was how similar the wing planform looked to the P-80. I guess I never noticed resemblance to the P-38 wing. Is it me, or does it seem to have a very thick chord and airfoil. Doesn't seem like it would have been extremely fast with that thick a wing (of course, I have no engineering shingle hanging anywhere, so I'm likely wrong ).

But thats a great model J_Matthews. The one suggestion that I'd give is the "spine" of the aircraft appears to blend a bit more with the fuselage as it approaches the rear and vert stabilizer.

Thank you very much! You may be right about the blend from the fuselage to the tail. However, from the images I've seen of the desktop promo models, the blend seems pretty consistent (see attached). Those images I uploaded were of the first and second iterations of my model (with my hamfisted attempts at texture mappng). I checked last night and I'm on the third, and likely last, version. As soon as I can reach a happy point regarding the exhaust area I'll start modeling the other intakes and the cockpit.

And I have to ask what are you going to do with the model when you are finished? I've been thinking about making a L-133 for X-Plane, but between the XP-77 I've been working on and a few other projects, I haven't had any time to think about making a good 3d model of it for xplane.

I'll have to see about that. This has been an on-again/off-again project for the past year. I'll have idea when I'm finished. Ideally, I wanted to model a German design or two and make a few images of them dogfighting. I'll have a better idea once I'm finished ;D .

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Referring back to the article, it does state that the L-133's wing was reused for the P-80. Guess between that and Wikipedia's statement about the P-38 wing, it threw me off.

Do check out that article though. It does have some nice CG artwork of the L-133 with and without nose intakes, plus the "Finnagler" variants (the name's explained in the article).

 

[J_Matthews129]

I haven't picked-up that magazine yet, but it's on my to-do list for the day. Looking forward to reading the article.

I've only seen one other set of drawings, other than the ones from Lockheed. The artist had moved the guns from inside the intake to the upper and lower fuselage in the nose. I'm thinking another part that may have been redesigned might have been the cockpit windscreen (changed from the original one-piece "wrap around" to something more like other fighters with flat, bullet-resistant glazing in front).

What would be the shape of egress tech around this time? Can't imagine the pilot just jumping out of this.

Would this have proceeded further had Lockheed not been pushing the aircraft design and the L-1000 engine? Designing and developing the aircraft and the engine was probably a bit too ambitious, even for a successful airframer like Lockheed.

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

It was somewhat of a tall order for that time.

 

[lark]

It's interesting to read in the article -which is one of the best I ever read about- that the
nose shape was still not definitive ,when the Lockheed concept was offered...

 

[XP67_Moonbat]

Yeah, it would have been interesting to see how the final nose configuration would have played out.

 

[circle-5]

Lockheed L-133 factory model

 

[Stargazer]

Amazing. Thanks circle-5.

Can't help thinking that if such radical designs had made it to production then, the shape of current combat aircraft and even airliners might be radically different today...

 

[circle-5]

If I may suggest (with all due respect and without any intention of offending anybody) the Lockheed L-133 should perhaps be moved to the "Early Aircraft Projects" section. It was designed by Kelly Johnson and his colleagues between 1939 and 1942 and the whole project was rejected by the Air Corps and abandoned long before the end of WWII.

 

[fightingirish]

Lockheed's First Jet Design
The L-133 was Lockheed's initial design study for a jet propelled fighter. Design objectives included 600 mph top speed, 40,000-foot altitude, four 20mm canon, three hours endurance, no takeoff assistance, and one-pilot crew. Lockheed also designed the engine, designated L-1000. The final design evolved as the L-133-02 (shown here). It had a design takeoff gross weight of 18,000 pounds. In evolving the design, Lockheed built a similar, 3/4-scale, propeller-driven configuration. The design effort began in January 1942.

Picture: http://www.codeonemagazine.com/images/media/2013_L_133_web_1267828237_5688.jpg

 

[sienar]

From code one


Interesting bit of text with the first pic;


"The L-133 was Lockheed's initial design study for a jet propelled fighter. Design objectives included 600 mph top speed, 40,000-foot altitude, four 20mm canon, three hours endurance, no takeoff assistance, and one-pilot crew. Lockheed also designed the engine, designated L-1000. The final design had a takeoff gross weight of 18,000 pounds. In evolving the design, Lockheed built a similar, 3/4-scale, propeller-driven configuration (shown lower right). The design effort began in January 1942."


Does anyone know more about the demonstrator? Do any photos exist?