us fighters

[kriegsmarine221]

so fitting that huge engine to a small fuselage it only achieved around 450kmh? by world war 2 inline engine fighters which were generally weaker were making 500kmh plus.

[Mauser K98k]

Cut 'em some slack, the era of the G B's was like 10 years before WWII. And that 10 year period probably had more aeronautical advances than any other decade. AFAIK, the radial engine the Granvilles used was the most powerful one they could get at the time. The bizarre proportions of the fuselage were due to the theory at that time that a "teardrop" shape was the most streamlined.

[Takao]

I would disagree with you kriegsmarine221, the engine was not that "huge". At the time of the Gee Bee, the liquid cooled engines were more powerful, not the radials. The Pratt & Whitney mounted on the Gee Bee R1 was only producing 800HP, whereas, the Rolls Royce engine mounted on the Supermarine S.6 was producing 1,900HP and the engine of the S.6B was producing 2,350HP.

[kriegsmarine221]

well it was huge compared to the fuselage. it was just like an engine with wings elevator etc. and a cockpit on it.
well if those engines were more powerful why didnt they use them in the gee bee?

[Takao]

I am guessing that the floatplanes that flew in the Schneider Trophy air races had the best engines that their repective government could design and build, while the Thompson Trophy air racing teams, lacked any national backing, had the best engines that they could get, either through purchase or loan.

Here is a list of participating aircraft in the Thompson Trophy races, bottom half of the webpage, of the pilot, Plane & motor: http://www.airracinghistory.freeola.com ... Trophy.htm

Note, that not one plane completed the course with a speed above 300 mph, even the liquid cooled ones.

Some of the later liquid cooled planes:
Crosby CR-4: http://www.daisey-designs.com/nx13688/crosby/crosby.htm
Wittman Bonzo: http://www.daisey-designs.com/bonzo.html
"The Goon": http://www.fiddlersgreen.net/models/air ... Racer.html
Howard DGA-4: http://www.air-racing-history.com/aircr ... 0DGA-5.htm

[Mauser K98k]

...well if those engines were more powerful why didnt they use them in the gee bee?

One reason was that the Granville Brothers were on the brink of going out of business, since this was during the great depression and sales had vanished. They simply could not have afforded a Rolls Royce engine even if it was available. They had to make do with what they had on hand, and built the BG type Z as a last desperate attempt to win some money in air racing in order to keep their company afloat...which they did.

[Peter Brazier]

The best looking US fighter of WW 11 is the P-51D Mustang , oh the enging was developed by Rolls Royce, not from the Supermarine S.6Bs engine (Type R which became the Griffon), but along the same lines.

[Markus Becker]

P-40! No doubt about that: Good range and speed, excellent firepower and protection and extremely versatile. Not to mention it was the fighter that more than just held the fort before planes like the P-47 and P-51 finally reached operational status in mid/late 1943.

[Peter Brazier]

P40s where no good at high level, the Allison engine was to blame for that, it wasn't fast ,the P51, P47, P38 & F4U were alot faster and with drop tanks they all had a longer range, and they could carry heavier bombloads.

[Markus Becker]

P40s where no good at high level, the Allison engine was to blame for that, it wasn't fast ,the P51, P47, P38 & F4U were alot faster and with drop tanks they all had a longer range, and they could carry heavier bombloads.

error 1: It was the superchager, not the engine. Lightnings had Allisons too.
error 2: speed depends on altitude and at 15,000ft the planes mentioned above were all slower.

And last but not least where were they before 1943? Not availabe at all in case of the P-51 and -47 or in very small numbers in case of the P-38 and F4U.

[Peter Brazier]

Allison engined P-51A s wereavaliable before 1943.

[kriegsmarine221]

well they very soon realised the allison in the p-51 didnt work very well. so it wouldnt have made much difference. it wasnt good until they put the Merlin in it .

[Carl Schwamberger]

What were the fuel mixes used in the British aircraft experimental and racing engines of the 1930s? I've read how US pilots of the 1920s & 1930s frequently mixed their own custom fuels as the oil industry did not have a large interest in a tiny specialty fuel market.

[phylo_roadking]

Carl, at this time of night I can only put my finger on one combination; two of the Rolls Royce "R" engines, numbers R15 and R27 (the one in the Science Museum in London), were converted to run on high-methanol content fuel in 1929 and 1931 respectively for record-setting events. The alcohol-based methanol - "dope" - as well as being naturally high-octane-rated ran "cool" so for TWO reasons engines running on it could have well-hoiked compression ratios. See here how a speedway bike running on methanol has VERY abbreviated cylinder cooling fins???



One of the problems with dope-running engines is actually getting them UP to their optimal operating temperature! AND of course, if it's a bike or car...getting them turned over against that monstrous compression to start them!!!

[Markus Becker]

well they very soon realised the allison in the p-51 didnt work very well. so it wouldnt have made much difference. it wasnt good until they put the Merlin in it .

No, the P-51A was pretty awesome given the limitations of the supercharger. It still made 390mph at 18.000feet. The importance of the superchargers is underlined by the P-40 F and L. Both had Merlin engines, but not the latest ones with two supercharger stages, but the predecessor with one stage that could be run at two different speeds. As a result the critical altitude of the engines was not 25ft and more, but a mere 18 to 20ft.