Last & Best of the Piston Engine Fighter Aircraft.

Post anything that doesn't belong in any other forum, including gaming and topics unrelated to motorsport. Site specific discussions should go in the site feedback forum.
Tommy Cookers
Tommy Cookers
527
Joined: Fri Feb 17, 2012 3:55 pm

Re: Last & Best of the Piston Engine Fighter Aircraft.

Post

J.A.W. wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:30 pm
T-C, as a perusal of the Pilot's Notes of the various Griffon-powered Seafire/Spitfire marks
will show - only the contra-prop equipped types - were cleared for full-power take-offs.
I have already shown that this is false and how this is false
if true that would have been material and stated in official correspondence/disputes at the time and available since to history

amusingly the contra-prop Seafires had less thrust for a given takeoff power (having smaller prop diameter)
ie the propstream being smaller would be faster and so have less efficient of conversion of power into thrust

good conversion of power into thrust at low speed eg Sea Fury 14' prop means sacrifice of conversion efficiency at high speed
the design of a fighter shouldn't be skewed towards low speed conversion - but the design for ground attack should be

J.A.W.
J.A.W.
88
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: Last & Best of the Piston Engine Fighter Aircraft.

Post

Tommy Cookers wrote:
Thu Jan 02, 2020 5:50 pm
J.A.W. wrote:
Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:30 pm
T-C, as a perusal of the Pilot's Notes of the various Griffon-powered Seafire/Spitfire marks
will show - only the contra-prop equipped types - were cleared for full-power take-offs.
I have already shown that this is false and how this is false
if true that would have been material and stated in official correspondence/disputes at the time and available since to history

amusingly the contra-prop Seafires had less thrust for a given takeoff power (having smaller prop diameter)
ie the propstream being smaller would be faster and so have less efficient of conversion of power into thrust

good conversion of power into thrust at low speed eg Sea Fury 14' prop means sacrifice of conversion efficiency at high speed
the design of a fighter shouldn't be skewed towards low speed conversion - but the design for ground attack should be
Well T-C, I've cited verbatim from the 'Pilots Notes' & posted a link to a site where they can
be checked, so any "false" claims can be debunked at source, for those who are interested...

As for the contraprop offering neutral torque effects & thus allowing a max-available boost
power-level for take-off accordingly, that would indeed tend to negate yet another assertion.

The Centaurus radial powered Hawker Fury used a smaller diameter (albeit a 5-blade) prop
than the 14ft unit of the Sabre Tempest, while the Fury prototype which also flew with the
R-R Griffon - ran contraprops, which were duly cropped in an attempt to find the predicted
performance - yet the Martin-Baker MB5 also utilised a contraprop set up, sans drama.
Dr Moreau sez..
"Who breaks the law... goes back to the House of Pain!"

J.A.W.
J.A.W.
88
Joined: Mon Sep 01, 2014 4:10 am
Location: Altair IV.

Re: Last & Best of the Piston Engine Fighter Aircraft.

Post

This vid shows how a longnosed Spitfire Mk 18 contrasts with a shortnosed FW 190A,
staccato growl & supercharger whine of the R/R Griffon vs BMW's grumbling rumble:

Dr Moreau sez..
"Who breaks the law... goes back to the House of Pain!"