Fly in a Spitfighter, anyone do this ?

They could actually do that? I would think all the oil would run out and the engine would seize. And regarding the R-3350s, I wonder if the turbo-compound versions were worse at dropping oil. They certainly smoked up a storm on start-up!

 

I think the only warbird I'd want to hitch a ride in - if I could afford it, or if someone else was paying - would be my favorite, the Mosquito. Fortunately, there are a few flying now (at least 3 that I know of), but so far I haven't seen anyone selling rides in one.

 

Jim- The B-29s now flying all have the turbos disconnected, I believe.

Dad flew P-38s, P-47s and P-51s, so I would like a ride in a dual control P-51. Mosquito must be sporty on take-off with both engines turning in the same direction. The early P-322s had the same set-up because the UK did not want counter-rotating props. Between that and no turbo-chargers, they were pretty useless.

 

With radial engines, when they are stopped, the oil in the engine runs down into the bottom cylinder(s). It burns on startup.

 

Terry, that's true, no more turbos on the surviving B-29's. No need for them when the airplanes aren't flying at umpteen thousand feet. I have guessed at a weight saving per nacelle to be in the neighborhood of 450 pounds, turbos(2), associated ductwork, support structure, a huge heat exchanger after cooler, and turbo oil and tanks.

 

Terry, that's true, no more turbos on the surviving B-29's. No need for them when the airplanes aren't flying at umpteen thousand feet. I have guessed at a weight saving per nacelle to be in the neighborhood of 450 pounds, turbos(2), associated ductwork, support structure,

Smoke at startup was burning oil that collected in the bottom cylinders. Pulling the props through on a cold R1830 produced a large puddle of thick black oil ,55-60 weight if I remember. There was a 1/8th inch diameter hole in the collector ring, dead center bottom, from which the oil oozed. Even after a lengthy pull through there was still a lot of oil in the bottom of the engine and that produced the thick white smoke.
Radials were tough to kill. They could take a shot in several cylinders and still try to run and did run many times. A shot in the crankcase would kill it, though.One of our crew chiefs claimed that they were too dumb to know when they were hurt.

 

Actually, the P-322's were originally ordered by the French, who wanted both engines to be interchangeable with their P-40's, so no counter rotation.

When the French were overrun, the planes automatically went to the Brits, who only took a few of them and refused the rest. Useless.

They ended up as trainers in the USA.

 

Any Allison-powered fighter without turbos was pretty useless above 10,000 feet; fortunately for the British, most P-40 combat in the desert was low-level, and of course the Soviets were famous for their exploits with P-39s at low level. Only at the very end of V-1710 production, with the engines used in some versions of the F-82, did they finally catch up to the Merlin in the aspect of supercharging.

 

Thre's an interesting Spitfire restoration film on Netflix: Guy Martin's Spitfire

 

That would be nice to watch if you could understand what the hell he was saying.

 

The funny thing about those Allisons was that they worked great in late P-38s, from about the J onwards. A P-38L, with further engine improvements, could outclimb just about any allied or Axis piston fighter.

 

But of course they had turbochargers, which made all the difference. Remember that the P-39 was supposed to have turbocharging as well.

I believe the P-38J added intercoolers, which were in the new scoops below the engines. That was a definite improvement.

 

LOL! I had to turn on CC to understand him. At any rate, what a gorgeous plane!

 

Sorry to nitpick, but not exactly...
The French and British P-38 were ordered together,as a joint order of 667 airplanes, of which 417 were Model 322F for French, and 250 were Model 322B for the British. The agreement for the order was voted by the french parliament at the beginning of March 1940, a first instalment for the planes were paid in advance by the "fonds d'accélération" and the order was passed for the whole 667 planes by the "Anglo-French Purchasing Committee".
When France fell, its order was passed to the british (the commission having become "British Purchasing Commission")

An interesting aside was that as soon as June 1940, the French Armée de l'Air has concluded that the p-38, as ordered "would be useless without turbo-chargers". An letter of modification for this was signed on June 26th, 1940.

This is said in full in Pierre Cot's report on the state of affairs for the french Armée de l'Air dated June 29th, 1940. You will find the link to the addedum about the matériel (types of Airplanes) herunder; it is an official report, so in French.

Pierre Cot has been Ministre de l'Air (Secretary of State for the Air Force) at the Air Force birth in 1933 (before that, it was not independant, but part of the Army). He refused the defeat and fled to London, but De Gaulle vetoed him as been "too leftist"; so, at the end of June, still in London, he occupied his time by writing a very interesting and official report on the Armée de l'Air and its Equipment.
The report is dated June 29, 1940; the paragraph about the P-38 start by saying "it is now absolutely essential to have these aircraft fitted with turbo-chargers, even at the expense of communality with the P-40 engines; without turbo-chargers, the P-38 would be useless at more than 7.000m (about 25.000 feet) altitudes at which a number of battles occured during the Battle of France".
He went even as far as saying: if it could help to have the aircraft so fitted now, let's tell Lockheed that were are able and willing to pay the full order at once.

http://www.1940lafrancecontinue.org/FTL/1940/juin-40-9-avenir-App.pdf




L e chasseur bimoteur Lockheed 322 (P-3 8 ) est très prometteur.
Cependant, à ce jour, il est capital de l’équiper des turbocompresseurs nécessaires à l’obtention de bonnes performances à haute altitude, même s’il est nécessaire pour cela de faire une entorse à la règle de standardisation des moteurs. Les leçons tactiques apprises depuis le début de la guerre montrent qu’un chasseur lourd ne présente toute sa valeur que s’il peut opérer à une altitude supérieure à celle des chasseurs monomoteurs ennemis et éviter de
s’engager dans des combats tournoyants. Les Bf 110 allemands ont été extrêmement dangereux quand ils ont pu être utilisés de cette manière, mais, à chaque fois qu’ils ont été pris à partie par nos propres chasseurs ou qu’ils ont cherché à les engager, cela a été à leur désavantage immédiat.
Le Lockheed-322 ne sera efficace que si et seulement si ses performances peuvent être conservées au-dessus de 7 500 mètres (25 000 pieds).

J’ai le devoir de vous informer que cette position va à l’encontre de ce que nous avions affirmé précédemment. En effet, quand le Lockheed-322 a été étudié pour la première fois par les spécialistes de l’Armée de l’Air et de la Royal Air Force, des moteurs optimisés pour une altitude de 5 000 mètres avaient été jugés adéquats, d’autant plus qu’ils permettaient une standardisation avec les moteurs des Curtiss H-81 et H-87.

Cependant, aujourd’hui, les services techniques de l’Armée de l’Air estiment que le plafond opérationnel de cet avion doit être impérativement relevé pour que ses capacités puissent être réellement mises en oeuvre.

Comme l’Aviation de l’Armée américaine est également très engagée dans ce programme, il pourrait être extrêmement utile d’informer le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis que nous serions prêts à payer d’avance et rapidement les avions prévus dans la lettre d’intention, à la condition expresse qu’ils soient équipés des turbocompresseurs prévus lors de leur conception. Le paiement d’avance d’un nombre significatif d’appareils contribuerait de façon très significative aux besoins d’expansion des installations industrielles de Lockheed, expansion
indispensable pour que les contrats passés avec l’Armée Américaine puissent être honorés en temps et heure.

Quoi qu’il en soit, nous avons signé le 26 juin un avenant stipulant :

- que les turbo-compresseurs sont à installer (ou réinstaller) ;
- que l’équipement des avions sera américain (circuit d’oxygène, radio, etc.)
- qu’un blindage pour le pilote et des réservoirs auto-obturants doivent être installés ;
- que l’armement sera de 1 x 20 mm et de 4 x 12,7 mm.
Le premier vol d’un Lockheed 322-F [similaire au P-38E] doit intervenir début août 1941 et les livraisons des 417 appareils commandés

 

Tres bien! Merci beaucoup!

 

Thank you...

 

They were right; the P-38 was virtually useless without turbochargers. The British weren't always happy with what they inherited from the French; consider that the first batch of Douglas DB-7s they inherited were pretty much used for training only; they managed to get Douglas to change the second batch to use British equipment before delivery. I believe that some of the original French-ordered aircraft were eventually converted to Havoc night fighters with Turbinlites n the noses.

 

A simple difference that many forget was the engine throttle: you pushed it for max power in Britain, but you pulled it in France n(= towards you), hence the old Armée de l'Air expression for max power: "Manette dans la poche" ("Throttle in the Pocket").
Rgds

 

Well, the French and the British still tend to do things differently; consider the sides of the road that they drive on. It's a good thing the Channel Tunnel doesn't allow drivers to drive through it; that would cause chaos!

 

We are even able to confuse things in France all by ourselves, without needing the Brits.
The trains drive on the left track in France, according to the British practice...except in the three "Départements" of Haut-Rhin, Bas-Rhin and Moselle, where the trains drive on the right track.
When arriving from central France in one of these three departments, the trains therefore change tracks by a kind of bridge over the track: left track climbing over the right track to become the new right track (this set-up is called "un saut-de-mouton", in railway parlance; you would say a "leapfrog" in English).
The explanation is that these three départements were annexed to Germany between 1871 and 1918, and the railway system was orgainsed according to german practice, that is, driving on the right track. It stayed so after the return to France in 1918.
Being born in Moselle, when returning in the family, each time the train climbed on the "saut-de-mouton" to cross tracks, I knew I was home.
(However, this doesn't work on the High Speed Line, built between 2004 and 2007: on which the trains drive on the left track from Paris to Strasbourg, thus creating an "exception inside the exception"; beautiful, isn't it?)

Rgds

 

Reminds me of the day - I believe it was around 1967 - when all traffic in Sweden stopped, and everyone carefully switched from driving on the left to driving on the right! Sweden was evidently the last country on the Continent to have had driving on the left.

It's also a little-known fact that following WW2, when Douglas MacArthur was the defacto leader of Japan, he had the power to switch Japan from driving on the left to driving on the right, but elected not to use it. How different the Japanese car industry would have been if he had done that!

 

Jim, you know that as far as Ferraris go, the Japanese are purists: they would not have anything to do with RHD cars, which would seem logical at first.
So all Ferraris built specifically by the factory for Japan (the letters "JAP" in the VIN, such as in ZFFXA19JAP000083017, the last 328 GTB ever produced) are Left Hand Drive cars, to be "Ferraris just like the Ferraris in Italy."..).
Rgds

 

Reminds me of riding in a taxi in the Bahamas, with a left hand drive car driving on the left side of the road. Passing on a two-lane road was a real adventure!

Getting back on topic, I think that the only "warbird" rides readily available in the Atlanta area are biplane rides (Stearmans or N3Ns, typically) at PDK and RYY. If anyone knows differently, post it here!

 

As far as I know (from France...) the guys at "Stallion 51" are still in the business, no? (I don't have a horse in this race, BTW, just saying...). not exactly Atlanta area, for sure.

http://www.stallion51.com/

Rgds