Problems with British wartime high power piston engines

[tartle]

Production numbers for Centaurus...1938 to 1959= 5330
for Hercules [for comparison] = 65247
both numbers are totals from all factories
makes you think doesn't it?
Production of Griffons 42-1951 =8,108
The Griffon 57 in Shackleton had a life of 2,000hrs This had the same power as the 'R' engine of 1931 same b and s but 'R' only had a 1 hr life.
Something improved over the years... of course duties play a part so a fighter engine is more likely to be consuming life at high powers compared to a transport etc.
there was a wartime project to put a turbocharger on the Griffon but jets put paid to that!

 

[J.A.W.]

Indeed T, an hour of flat chat air race running - turning a fat fixed pitch prop - is going to be more taxing
than a careful flight-engineer fettled flight at economical patrol cruise - over the cruelly beckoning Atlantic..

( & what is with the recent adventuresome script size posting?)

 

[J.A.W.]

Production numbers for Centaurus...1938 to 1959= 5330
for Hercules [for comparison] = 65247
both numbers are totals from all factories
makes you think doesn't it?
Production of Griffons 42-1951 =8,108
The Griffon 57 in Shackleton had a life of 2,000hrs This had the same power as the 'R' engine of 1931 same b and s but 'R' only had a 1 hr life.
Something improved over the years... of course duties play a part so a fighter engine is more likely to be consuming life at high powers compared to a transport etc.
there was a wartime project to put a turbocharger on the Griffon but jets put paid to that!

So in total, ~18,000 of the big 3 Brit mills built, vs ~125,000 P&W R-2800s & even 20,000+ BMW 801s..

Poor bloody Blighty, eh..

Still, some of them - that were built - did all right for themselves, & no disgrace on a 1-to-1 tech level..

 

[JFC Fuller]

J.A.W,

No, the Tempest was not 2TAF's primary A2A asset, it was a part of 2TAFs A2A force but not a very big one. As has been pointed out to you several times the Tempest never equipped more than 10 squadrons during the war. The vast majority of 2TAFs fighter capability, not to mention ADGB was Spitfire based and that type was doing both top cover for the Tempest units and mass escort for bomber command daylight raids.

 

[J.A.W.]

J.A.W,

No, the Tempest was not 2TAF's primary A2A asset, it was a part of 2TAFs A2A force but not a very big one. As has been pointed out to you several times the Tempest never equipped more than 10 squadrons during the war. The vast majority of 2TAFs fighter capability, not to mention ADGB was Spitfire based and that type was doing both top cover for the Tempest units and mass escort for bomber command daylight raids.

JFCF, Dogmatic reiteration - sans evidence - offers nothing useful..

& your opinion, no matter how many times you repeat it - does not stand with the facts..
Do kindly provide something fresh to back your assertions..

 

[JFC Fuller]

The evidence is the fact that there were only ever a total of ten wartime Tempest squadrons and that on multiple heavy bomber raids Spitfires were the escort. That is not opnion, it is fact, happened and is demonstrable (and has been demonstrated in this thread)- it is you not providing evidence.

 

[J.A.W.]

JFCF, do try to provide some actual backing for your adamantly perseverated position..

I have posted excepts from written sources including Air Enthusiast & noted pilot/authors.
When will anything of equivalence be forthcoming from yourself?

The fact of the performance of Tempest as the best Allied fighter in 2nd TAF has been shown..
..the Tempest was specifically assigned the role of 'rat catching' - the futuristic & dangerous Me 262.

& it was not seconded to the role of fighter bomber, unlike the Merlin Spitfire, which was clearly passé in the primary A2A role..

It is true that there were not as many available as the RAF wanted, but if they had 'em, even more Spitfire
units, such as 485 (NZ) Sqdn would have been re-equipped, since the Tempest was proving much more effective..

Continue to post purblind denial of these facts if you will, but it can only reflect poorly on your credibility..

 

[Grey Havoc]

To get back to the topic at hand; So it can be argued that the focus (especially in terms of resources concentrated) on the Merlin family was ultimately detrimental to British engine development including work in the higher power brackets, hampering in turn the British war effort, not to mention the post-war era? With regards to what happened to the Vulture, you could argue that the Merlin was needed, but canning the Vulture altogether meant that a number of badly needed types had to be cancelled/were delayed/did not meet requirements, again with a detrimental effect on the war effort, which arguably became all too evident with the Fall of France and it's aftermath.

 

[JFC Fuller]

You have provided a series of interesting personal perspectives. I have provided facts, I am not going to repeat them but suffice to say that actual operations and the number of available Tempest squadrons are facts and do prove you wrong. Unless of course you think that 16 Squadrons of Spitfires escorting the first Bomber Command daylight heavy bomber raid against Germany since 1941 on 27th August 1944 is irrelevant?

That you are now resorting to insults rather than simply admitting that a fighter type that equipped a peak of just ten squadrons during the war and was only available operationally for less than a year of it was a relatively minor player in the grand scheme of things.

 

[J.A.W.]

The Merlin proved its worth with the Mosquito & Mustang in effective prosecution of the air war into Europe,
but I agree, there were thousands of aircraft of dubious utility built to soak up the tens of thousands built.

The Vulture was a dead duck from 1st principles, design-wise, (convenient claims of a 'cure' or no)..
& AFAIK, - no X-type aero engine ever amounted to anything..

 

[J.A.W.]

You have provided a series of interesting personal perspectives. I have provided facts, I am not going to repeat them but suffice to say that actual operations and the number of available Tempest squadrons are facts and do prove you wrong. Unless of course you think that 16 Squadrons of Spitfires escorting the first Bomber Command daylight heavy bomber raid against Germany since 1941 on 27th August 1944 is irrelevant?

That you are now resorting to insults rather than simply admitting that a fighter type that equipped a peak of just ten squadrons during the war and was only available operationally for less than a year of it was a relatively minor player in the grand scheme of things.

FYI - JFCF, since it appears you wish to take this debate into personality issues , rather than stay on topic,
It will serve no purpose to respond any further - to your repetitive, non-data backed opinion-based posts..

 

[JFC Fuller]

To get back to the topic at hand; So it can be argued that the focus (especially in terms of resources concentrated) on the Merlin family was ultimately detrimental to British engine development including work in the higher power brackets, hampering in turn the British war effort, not to mention the post-war era? With regards to what happened to the Vulture, you could argue that the Merlin was needed, but canning the Vulture altogether meant that a number of badly needed types had to be cancelled/were delayed/did not meet requirements, again with a detrimental effect on the war effort, which arguably became all too evident with the Fall of France and it's aftermath.

Complete and utter nonsense of the highest order that suggests you have not even bothered to read the thread.

The post war era was defined by jets- piston decisions not really relevant ultimately.

The only type affected by Vulture cancellation was the Tornado- the Manchester failed because it was too heavy for the HP that could come from a twin engine powerplant in this era.

Merlin development allowed over 14,500 Hurricanes, 20,000 spitfires, 15,000 Mustangs, over 7000 Mosquitos and 7,300 Lancasters to be built and used to equip the vast bulk of the RAF forces deployed against Germany from the outbreak of war to its close when it was still powering new types (such as the Lincoln and Hornet). By contrast the Sabre, having only been able to become operational over two and a half years after the start of the war, powered a measly 3,300 Typhoons (which were only useful at low altitude so were turned into attack aircraft) and barely 950 Tempests- the bulk of which saw little if any wartime service.

 

[JFC Fuller]

FYI - JFCF, since it appears you wish to take this debate into personality issues , rather than stay on topic,
It will serve no purpose to respond any further - to your repetitive, non-data backed opinion-based posts..

Please explain how pointing out that the Tempest was only available in a maximum of ten squadrons and only available at all during the last 11 months of the war (yes, that is "data") is taking the discussion into "personality issues"...?

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Thanks for destroying this topic, guys.