The Answer is actually the Wright R2800 18 cylinder radial, generating between 2,000 to 2,8000 Horsepower, produced from 1939 until 1960. Installed in the Brewster XA-32, Breguet Deux-Ponts, Canadair CL-215, Canadair C-5 North Star, Consolidated TBY Sea Wolf, Convair 240, 340, and 440, Curtiss P-60, Curtiss XF15C, Curtiss C-46 Commando, Douglas A-26 Invader, Douglas DC-6, Fairchild C-82 Packet, Fairchild C-123 Provider, Grumman AF Guardian, Grumman F6F Hellcat, Grumman F7F Tigercat, Grumman F8F Bearcat, Howard 500, Lockheed Ventura/B-34 Lexington/PV-1 Ventura/PV-2 Harpoon, Lockheed XC-69E Constellation, Martin B-26 Marauder, Martin PBM-5 Mariner, Martin 2-0-2, Martin 4-0-4, North American AJ Savage, North American XB-28, Northrop XP-56 Black Bullet, Northrop P-61 Black Widow, Northrop F-15 Reporter, Republic P-47 Thunderbolt Sikorsky CH-37 Mojave, Sikorsky S-60, Vickers Warwick, Vought F4U Corsair, Vultee YA-19B and many others. If I had to personally pick any propeller driven aircraft to fly in WW2, it would be the P-47D with it's 8 .50 caliber machine guns, good armor, super durable airframe and rear facing tail warning radar.
@@jager6863 The crucial part was the Battle of Britain. The turn around point. The R2800 didn’t exist effectively during the BoB. And it would not have worked in a Spitfire, Hurricane, Mosquito or Lancaster. So yes it was the Merlin and not the R2800.
Thanks for the video. That carburettor restrictor became known by some more bawdy people as Mis Shilling's Orifice. You didn't mention the license built Merlin's, such as the Packard Merlin 65 series or the ones built by Hispaño Suiza. Can you tell us about the related Rolls Royce Griffon engines which were used in later Marks of Spitfires, Seafires and the Avro Shackleton, and other aeroplanes?
The Merlin's sound was stuck in my head as a boy from war movies where that sound meant victory. It has that aggressive growl combined with a dark, vibrating white noise that made you unconsciously feel the prop tearing through the air.
I'm quite often working in an open barn workshop under a route often used by Battle of Britain flight training spitfires, and the noise is glorious. Plus I'll never forget one day hearing a bigger, deeper chorus: ran outside, the there was a Lancaster banking round in a great graceful curve. Sweet.
Packard when contracted by RR to build the Merlin opted to use the new Bendix pressure carb that REALLY solved the stalling problem, and be Noted the much aligned Allison V1710 used the Bendix pressure carb from 1938 on 3 years before Packard used them !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 except that Allison never made a successful high altitude engine. In early 1942 RollsRoyce successfully implemented the new anti-G carburettor RR/SU AVT 44/199/1 for the Spit IX. The US was still gearing up for war and realized they'd have to replace Allisons with Merlins, which they did until GM interfered. For the high power Merlin 66, Rolls Royce needed an even larger choke carburettor and decided to modify the Bendix PD18 type Pressure carburettor to suit. Suitably modified, this carburettor was fitted as the Stromberg 8D44/1. There were some problems with the Bendix pressure carburettor, the modifications of which the US copied for their own version of the PD18 on the Packard-Merlin 266.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 If that Bendix Carburettor was the Speed Density it was originally a R/R- S/U carbie the drawings of which were given to Bendix free of charge. No Packard or Allison went to 45700ft as did the Merlin 71 of the Mk VII H.F. Super Marine and R/R were always doing something
@@wilburfinnigan2142 If that was the Bendix Stromberg Pressure Carburettor then the Drawings had been given to them by Rolls Royce free of charge similar to other things given by the Tizzard Mission back in 1940 Source Part 9 Speed Density Systems for Aircraft Fuel Systems by Terry Welshans Bardstown Kentucky Aug 2013 Now don't faint Wilbur
_Obviously it detracted from the British war effort that_ *_RR had to update every Packard Merlin by hand,_* _but this was judged the least worst solution, as the effort of stopping Packard production to introduce modifications for which the parts/drawings would have to be shipped over the Atlantic first, was judged to likely be so difficult to manage, that RR judged it was by far the easier solution to manage the modification work themselves on our shores, and get a lower price for the engines, and more of them._ - Calum Douglas
Well said. I've also read that Packard engineers went their own way on some issues that had unfortunate ramifications. Early on, they decided to polish the con rods against RR advice, which led to con rod failures. Turns out that they were grinding impurities into micro fissures, which quickly became failure points. I believe that was the V-1650-3 or -7. NAA had to initially reject those for the P-51B.
I enjoyed that,really interesting as my Grandfather worked at Supermarine and did all of the cooling copper work on the s6.His name was Herbert colling.My Mother told me she watched the trials of the s6 and how fast it was in it's day!They're all gone now but the aircraft is still in the museum in Southampton.
Good show ! The marriage between RR & Supermarine gave RJ the experience needed for designing a great lightweight fighter, something that Camm lacked at Hawker.
@@jacktattis mistakes were made and admitted by Camm later. 20% t/c ratio airfoil and heavy weight was the Hurricane's downfall along with lack of redesign once mistakes were realized in 1936. .... A thinner wing and meredith (1935) radiator scheme would have kept the Hurricane competetive on the front lines.
I’m 75 . My Dad worked at Packard while it was making the Merlin engines . I use to have a set of mahogany building blocks the tool room guys built for me when I was born in 47 and they were starting up the car business.
Nice presentation. The stories of Rolls AND Royce are most intriguing. With just the hints provided, I would like to know more about the spirits that drove them. As a retired toolmaker from Detroit, I enjoyed watching the manufacturing operations, especially the mill work on aluminum valve head. Among others, I heard the sound of a Merlin engine on the Detroit River during hydroplane boat races. While in the pits I saw at least 6 tarted up Merlin's in the Miss Budweiser trailer. Thanks for all the memories generated!
I have similar memories watching the hydroplanes at Miami Marine Stadium when I was growing up. This was back when they used to call them Thunder boats (due to how loud those piston engines were) before they turned to turbine engines similar to the one in the Chinook helicopter. I remember one time my father and I were talking with Bernie Little, the owner of Miss Budweiser. He told us that one of the advantages they had was that they used the (more expensive from what I understand) Rolls-Royce Griffon engine when everybody else was using the Merlin or an Allison. But thank you for stirring up some incredibly fond memories I have of my father and I growing up.
Amazing amazing amazing thank you so much for making this video, I am a retired mechanical engineer and can relate to the problem issues that keep our mind churning for fixes to issues and thus keeping us from going to sleep!
Great bit of work, very well researched and presented. Quite right to point out that the engine was named after a bird, not after some hairy fairy comic book character. BUT. In the eleventh century a book 'The Death of Arthur' told of a wizard who helped Arthur and at the end of the story he promises to return if ever England was in trouble. In 1940 the Germans are amassing across the channel, the Peregrine planned for the spitfire replacement the Whirlwind and its 4 cannons, the Vulture planned for the Tornado, the Hurricane follow on and the Avro Manchester all over the floor and what are we left with?
@@572Btriode Not quite so simple, sleeve valve engines were initially named after rivers (Exe) but after deciding to name turbojets after rivers, the sleeve valve engines were named after mountains, the Exe was renamed the Boreous and then the Pennine was designed. The Crecy was a two-stroke and they were to be named after battles. The sleeve valve Eagle22 broke the rules.
@@flightdojo kind of the reason I’d love to see something on it with your level of detail and production quality is exactly that there seem to be so little information available on it ^^
I live Near East midlands airport uk and through the summer I am treated to the sound of the Merlin engine from the spitfire based at the airport it’s always a treat to hear and never gets old.
In German (Deutsch) the letter “W” is pronounced as if it were a “V”, the letter “V” is pronounced as if it were an “F”. So, it is Vermacht and Luftvaffe. It is Fau Vay, as in VW.
did his mispronunciation make it indecipherable? or is it just slightly irksome? if it's the former; you're justified in your critique. if it's the latter; you're being needlessly punctilious. language is about communication foremost. you come to embrace this view when no one ever pronounces your name correctly and you realize you would be happier if you just didn't worry about it.
My Old Man worked for Royce's from 1956 through to the early Noughties. Like Hooker, my Old Man was a Mathematician (he was a Stress engineer). My Old Man's final job at Royce's was as Project Director of the Trent. It was ALWAYS "Royce's", he had no time for Rolls.
@@jacktattis Very true, but as an engineer at Royce's he and his contemporaries looked to Royce, not Rolls as the spiritual head of the company. He once "corrected" (as an impetuous teenager), with the line "If you want a Roll's, but a car." If I remember that comment some 40 years later, I assure you it was memorable
Excellent professional video best by far of all the videos I have watched about the Merlin. Very impressed with the extent and detail of research you carried you and the archive video thoroughly enjoyed it thank you well done
Great work! Detail is amazing and delivery excellent! Got to love history, especially when so critical to ensuring the world remained decent and peaceful.
When I was about 6, I remember the sound of the planes flying around high over our school playground. We were close to Biggen Hill and they were almost certainly Spitfires. We used to emulate them running around with our arms out and making engine noises. Would have been about 1950.
Excellent stuff - thank you! Along with the P&W Double (and Twin) Wasp, it's hard to imagine the Allies winning WW2 without those two impressive engines, one liquid-cooled and the other air-cooled. Very minor nit to pick - Rolls did not learn to fly on the "literal very first powered airplane that existed" - the 1903 Wright flyer was wind damaged after its fourth flight on 17 Dec 1903 and never flew again after that. It was the Wright Model A that Wilbur demonstrated in France in 1908 and in which Rolls flew. The Wright Model A was the first serial production airplane in the world, so in that sense, it was a literal very first. :)
1:30 Can't believe you didn't mention the D.H. Mosquito in that list. Superlative aircraft that filled a number of roles, in a large part thanks to it's power plants.
In the initial design, they also seriously considered the Napier Sabre at a projected 2400hp (post-war Sabres were officially type-tested at up to 3050hp) each. After designing the Mosquito, DH began the design of the Hornet (the aircraft was put on hold till the end of the war), also considered with the Sabre (briefly). With the much larger and heavier Sabre, the design would have been considerably different. Twin Sabres, I am trying to think about how that would sound. The post-war Hornet used a counter-rotating Merlin 130 series pair of 2070hp each (Sea Hornet, 2050hp) - the most powerful Merlins ever put into production.
@@clive373 I would wish it so, but the pragmatist and professional engineer in me says no. Perhaps a ground-running one in the next few years, that alone would be fantastic. Unlike the Merlin, not only have few engines survived, but virtually no paperwork has survived. AFAIK, there are only a few sheets of engineering drawings in existence, and even they are of different marks. There were relatively few expert mechanics for the engine and virtually no engines to work on as there were only a few hundred Tempest V, Tempest VI, and Furies after the war, and no real attempts to keep them running once they went out of military service, so little if anything was learned from those few mechanics before they too were gone. Yes, there is one candidate for running, a factory-preserved engine, but this will have to be completely disassembled, inspected, reassembled, and tested. But remember, this engine has been sitting for 70 years, has it been turned over by hand or have the rings been sitting in exactly the same spot on the sleeves for those 70 years? And that is the elephant in the room, the sleeves! Everything else is relatively normal practice, but the sleeves are not, the final finishing process used by Bristol was so unusual that a couple of patent offices weren't going to allow it, it made no sense. If the money was available, the best thing would be to 3D scan every part of the engine, test all the materials to see what they were, determine tolerances, essentially computer analyse the entire engine, determine torque settings, etc for all the engines you could lay your hands on and then fabricate a new one using modern materials, machining techniques, etc. Probably a hybrid mark VII, there are at least two sectioned examples of these in existence, both the ones I know of are in Canada. Maybe then, if we are lucky, someone will be foolhardy to put that engine in a restored aircraft, and find someone equally crazy to fly it. I would be thrilled to just hear a modern recording of that engine at full song, it would be very unusual, the engine fired two cylinders at the same time, and it appears that at certain frequencies resonances between the exhaust were established and then there is the whine (scream) of the straight cut reduction gears transmitting that 2000hp to that huge propeller. Bill Gunston was no fan of the Sabre (he seemed to have a thing against Napier and Frank Halford) or the aircraft it was fitted to, but even he waxes lyrical about the thrill of hearing these aircraft taking off. The Germans were less a fan, the sound these aircraft made while attacking seemed to be etched into their brains. I will not naysay Eric Brown, but the power the engines produced can be calculated from the performance of the aircraft, I have not done so. It does seem unlikely that Napier would not put the record straight after the war (they were still trying to sell Sabres), but they did not. I will have to watch the video, I have many of Eric Brown's interviews, perhaps you can point me in the correct direction. Finally, this is the thing, the very thing! oldmachinepress.com/2014/10/14/hawker-fury-i-sabre-powered/
David Daniels NO RR Built merlin was ever used in a P51 mustang !!! ! They were ALL Packard merlins made in tha USA !!! And it was a different version from RR's version !!! Facts son do the research !! !
@@wilburfinnigan2142 sorry but that’s Not strictly accurate either: In April 1942, the Royal Air Force's Air Fighting Development Unit (AFDU) tested the Allison V-1710-engined Mustang at higher altitudes and found it wanting, but their commanding officer, Wing Commander Ian Campbell-Orde, was so impressed with its maneuverability and low-altitude speed that he invited Ronald Harker from Rolls-Royce's Flight Test establishment at Hucknall to fly it. It was quickly evident that performance, although exceptional up to 15,000 ft (4,572 m), was inadequate at higher altitudes. This deficiency was due largely to the single-stage supercharged Allison engine, which lacked power at higher altitudes. Still, the Mustang's advanced aerodynamics showed to advantage, as the Mustang Mk.I was about 30 mph (48 km/h) faster than contemporary Curtiss P-40 fighters using the same Allison powerplant. The Mustang Mk.I was 30 mph (48 km/h) faster than the Spitfire Mk VC at 5,000 ft (1,524 m) and 35 mph (56 km/h) faster at 15,000 ft (4,572 m), despite the latter having a significantly more powerful engine than the Mustang's Allison.[1] Rolls-Royce engineers rapidly concluded that the Mustang powered by a two-stage Merlin 61 would result in a significant improvement in performance and started converting five Mustangs to Merlin power as the "Mustang Mk.X" (i.e., Mk.10) With a minimum of modification to the engine bay, the Merlin engine neatly fitted into the adapted engine formers. A smooth engine cowling with an additional "chin" radiator was tried out in various configurations as the two-stage Merlin required a greater cooling capacity than could be obtained with the standard Mustang radiator alone. The Merlin 65 series engine was utilised in all the prototypes as it was identical to the Merlin 66 powering the Spitfire Mk IX, allowing for a closer comparison. Due to the speed of the conversions, engines were often swapped from aircraft to aircraft as well as being replaced by newer units. Scorched: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Mustang_Mk.X Also, The Mustang was designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which had limited high-altitude performance in its earlier variants. The aircraft was first flown operationally by the RAF as a tactical-reconnaissance aircraft and fighter-bomber (Mustang Mk I). Replacing the Allison with a Rolls-Royce Merlin resulted in the P-51B/C (Mustang Mk III) model, and transformed the aircraft's performance at altitudes above 15,000 ft (4,600 m) (without sacrificing range),[8] allowing it to compete with the Luftwaffe's fighters.[9] The definitive version, the P-51D, was powered by the Packard V-1650-7, a license-built version of the two-speed, two-stage-supercharged Merlin 66, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang So the P-51 was effectively a aircraft design built for British contract (the USAAF didn’t want any to start with), for he RAF. And powers with a licensed British engine for the most part…
Speaking as a "Pit Snipe", an Intercooler would be between the 1st and 2nd Stages of a Supercharger (or between a Supercharger and a Turbocharger), and an aftercooler is between whatever air compressor system you're using, and the carburetors/intake manifold.... I hope this clears up what he is talking about!
Well said. The intercooler on the Merlin was a compromise between effective cooling of the gas charge and the radiator size. A brilliant design. As I understand it, the coolant travelled from the inter-supercharger passages up to the after cooler, but diagrams label it all as an intercooler. The double choke carburetor was before the superchargers.
Yeh, just call them "charge air coolers". The intercooler term got used for everything as the American turbo-supercharged engines only had one charge air cooler and that was between the turbocharger and the mechanical supercharger, an intercooler, so suddenly every charge air cooler was an intercooler.
@@robertnicholson7733 true enough, but I'd say that it's an important distinction between Merlins with the intercooler and aftercooler vs the Allison attempt to tack on an auxilliary S/C with neither - a system which was rejected immediately by NAA in early 1941 they railed against that concept again with the P-82.
Early Merlins had a problem of throwing con-rods. The company really struggled and had to limit the V12 to 3000 revs (IIRC). Tests on V twin test bed versions worked just fine at much higher revs eventually led to them checking the oil pump. Basically it could not deliver enough oil at high revs. Bigger pump problem solved. This has always been an issue with RR. Development is always step-wise on the assumption that all before has been as good as possible. This oil pump cock-up was a great example of groupthink not looking at all options.
The engine was limited to 1600 rpm via a governor. My father ran them on final inspection Each one was run a full eight hour shift. He tested the PT boat version. First thing in combat the boat engineer removed the governor and the engines would rev 3600 rpm. Rated hp was achieved at 1600 rpm so quite a boost in combat.
@@wilburfinnigan2142You know that Ford UK did the production line development for Rolls and Packard only did it for their own production? All performance enhancing development was done by Rolls and Packard were forbidden to do any under the licensing agreement. Rolls manufactured over twice the number of Merlin engines as Packard.
@@SvenTviking Bull$hit !!! As RR had to agree to changes to seperate head and block just to get the merlin made, because RR had a special machine to machine the valve seats and guides, that machine was not available, and Packard made many other changes also, carb, supercharger intercooler, what you FAIL to understand is PACKARD had been making aero engines nd Marine enginess lon as RR. WW I Liberty V12 was designed by Vincent of Packard as well as many engines up to and including the M2500 PT Boat engine. It was NOT Packards first rodeo !!! of the 155,00) Merlins Made Packard made 55,525 Ford UK 33,000 thats 88,000+ more than half, 57 % were not made by RR !!!!! DUUUUH!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 P Merlins ran hotter that the RR versions. Late war (?)Lancasters had 3 RR and one P-Merlin. Pilots & FE's were told not to worry about that higher op temp. Having said that, early P-Merlins had reliability problems.
If you were on the ground or at the airfield, the sound was important as it warned of friend or foe that was coming at you. My father had a record of all the WWII engines and easily identified them all. Certainly a life saving skill for him in the war as he was strafed and bombed in Malta & Africa when he wasn't flying. He could tell the difference between the Hurricane and the Spitfire sounds as well.
I would like for SOMEONE to discuss the Bendix Stromberg Negative G Carb- from what I can find it went into the Spit 5's and later variants and the P-51 Mustang. A version of it was also used in the P&W Radial R2800 motors- and made inverted flight, as well as negative G dives a cake walk. Imagine the poor FW 190 pilot, assured a dive would get him out of trouble only to have a Spit or a Mustang, or even a P-47 glued to his tail in a dive.
Tim Mccreery ALL Packard built merlins whether the single stage 20 series merln or the later 1942 60 series V1650-3 or-7 or-9 Used the Bendix pressure carb, as well as the R2800 as you mentioned and the V1710 Allison from 1938 on. So ALL merlins in the P51 Mustangs and the P40 F & L's used the Bendix pressure carb. RR did not get around to using it untill the Merlin 60 2 stage came out used in the spitfire Mk IX & Mk VIII It was not used in the spitfire Mk V as it has the Merlin 20 series single stage supercharger !!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 the Mk.V used a number of progressively better engines, the Merlin 45,46 .... 55M and anti-G carburettors and other solutions were implemented. There is a fine video of Alex Henshaw flying a Mk.V inverted for long periods on the deck over the runway, back n forth.
@@bobsakamanos4469 There were some made but it was insignificant compared to US Manufactures who use it on all large displacement aero engines early on, way ahead of the Brits !!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Roll Royce fixed the vapor lock problem with the Bendix pressure carb and then Bendix used that solution on their own production lines. You're welcome.
@@bobsakamanos4469 BULL$HIT !!! US started using the Bendix pressure carb in 1938 and the Allison started it as the first to use it, and when Packard started making the Merlin in 1941 they used it that solved the problem. WE know what WE did over here don't need your lies
Thanks a million! For ever I have been trying to llearn what it was exactly that made the Merlin so special! I'. very grateful to you for finally answering my question.
after burner upto 40 000 ft ??????? germans were limited to about 30000ft or some thing like that most of those eng were made in american factorys not briton
Thanks for the book recommendations. I also really loved "The Secret Horsepower Race: Western Front Fighter Engine Development" ( (c) 2020) by Calum E Douglas. Extremely well researched from original source documents from both Ally & Axis archives that exist today.
Thank you for that, a completely absorbing video showcasing great British Engineering! I don't know if I missed it because I was called away a couple of times, but did you make any mentions of Sir Henry Royce's death and when it occurred?
If you think back to those times some 70+ years ago there were no such things as computer aided design, to that end the machining and fitment of the engines is still marveled by modern engine builders - mechanics and engineers. If you look closely at these engines they are literally works of art and to think they built thousands of those things that were not bespoke pieces, I’m sure you could take parts from one and put them in another as long as you followed proper assembly ethos that any modern engine builder would do to this day!
According to page 9 of Packard as an Aero Engine Builder The Packard Merlin Robert J Neal, 37,143 P-M's were made for "British Empire consumption". 31,143 of those were Lend Leased (not including Packard engines in 1,772 LL P51's). 16,485 were used by the US in P51's and P40's.
True Packard made 55,525 merlins total and the Brits received the 37,143 engines only and yes they received 1772 Lend lease P51 nmustangs with the Packard merlins !!! Also the P40 used the Packard V1650-1 single stage supercharged engine same as the 36,000 single stage V1650's the Brits received and 1040 of Packards 266 merlins, the 2 stage supercharged 2 speed version, the only 2 stage merlins the Brits received from Packard !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Two different engine lines, the V1650 and Packard Merlins were different engines, mostly to do with connectors, threads, etc. There was usually a particular dash V1650 closely related to each Packard Merlin.
@@robertnicholson7733 Well DUUUUHHHHH !!!! I have hammered for years here on you tube the difference, The Packard M2500 was being delivered to the US Navy and the Brits LONG before The Brits ever contracted Packard to build the merlin. two entirely different engines, unrelated as Ford to a Bentley engine. only similarity were they were both V12's and built by the same company !!! M2500 Packard was 50% larger than the merlin, 2500 cu in vs 1650 !!!! DUUUUUHH!!!!!
I would also recommend The Secret Horsepower Race by Calum Douglas. I grew up with Calum, let’s just say he’s knowledge on the subject is near encyclopaedic.
So glad that I chose to SUBSCRIBE to this Channel to further "fulfill" my WWII curiosity! In the Merlin "what does it sound like clip", it would have been nice to have a RPG Guage in the lower corner to be able to understand the RPM V.S. Sound...
@@flightdojo Actually the sound is best heard when the aircraft is at low altitude, full boost and revving, with the listener on the ground. The ground test rig didn't do it justice.
Love your content and indepth explanation and detail of engines. I would love you to do a segment on the ww1 rotary engines. There concept is insane and difficult to get your head around. Also the unloved Rolls Royce vulture, it is usually glossed over but surely with development it’s unreliability could have been overcome. Keep it up.🇦🇺
You failed to mention that the principle designed of the Merlin was the 20th century's greatest aero-engine designer, Arthur J. Rowledge. Finally, at last, someone mentions the Merlin' s start in life as an inverted V-12. Well done. However, what you failed to mention was that a barometrically controlled fluid-coupling was proposed (by Geoffrey Wilde) for the Merlin' s supercharger drive. You also didn't mention that a Rotary-Valve cylinder-head conversion was designed by Cross Manufacturing albeit not made.
Yes but Wilde and Hooker shopped around some manufacturers and the development time was far too long, so they went a different way and that was good enough. The German fluid drive could have some significant maintenance issues, I have seen photos of them choked up with "gunk".
@@robertnicholson7733 .... and subject to frequent over-heating issues not to mention substantial efficiency losses when in high-slip mode. Nor should it escape the attention of the fluid-coupling pundits that NAPIER went a different route when they designed the Nomad Mk I: they used an infinitely variable mechanical variator to drive the compressor. Very wise!
Aww, man. When you were talking about where the Merlin name came from and said the falcon of which there are two, I thought for sure you were leading into the African or European swallow, Monty Python joke. And it would have fit too, as an answer to the question, “what is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?” Many, many years ago, Atlas Van Lines had a cigarette racing boat that I remember was powered by a RR Merlin engine. They not only had the boat on display but a spare engine was set up on a stand. They are huge motors.
WOW DUDE !!!!!! you really went down the rabbit hole on this video ! This is one of the best researched and in depth explanations of any piece of war equipment i ever heard Great fukin job i really mean that !!!! Im a mechanic so i really enjoyed this THANK YOU !!!!!!!! : )
Royce spent his time in a small village on the south coast of England, just down the road from the RR car factory and on the circuit for the Schneider trophy on which the UK won outright with the R9 engine
@@wilburfinnigan2142 the Wright engine facility came under Senate investigation for poor quality control. Allison was without proper R&D and a 2nd tier engine. P&W was the blue ribbon engine of the USA.
@@bobsakamanos4469 What is also not known was Studebaker was the Prime engine builder for the Wright R1820 for the B17, Ford USA the R2800 for the P47. Allison delivered the engines the USAAF ordered, the customer !!!
For the Wellington about 220 were made out of the total production of over 11000 aircraft, most Wellintons were powered by the Hercules, the Merlin, and the Pegasus. The British often built batches of alternate engined aircraft to ensure that they could change should there be a production problem with one engine, thus the Hercules powered Lancasters.
It would have been interesting if you had compared a RR manufactured Merlin with a Packard V-1650 Merlin. BTW - RR had an agenda to discredit the Napier Sabre 24 cylinder sleeve valve engine because it was attempting to develop its own version the Lion. The Sabre was developed into the most powerful combustion engine once English Electric took over the company in 1942.
RR was adept at having things their way, well connected lobbyists in the Air Ministry. Several aircraft types were doomed by cancellations of RR engine projects, following into the jet age. They weren't able to bully Bristol quite the way they did to Napier.
Napier Sabre was a very unreliable engine until very late in the war (Sabre V used post war). Bristol's engineers were recruited to help Napier improve their metallurgy and design. Typhoon pilots hated the engine and aircraft which had horrible vibration and CO gas in the cockpit.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Not so, the Typhoon had many problems but a great many Typhoon pilots loved it, it was a hotrod. The engine was very much a part of it. Yes, they complained about the aircraft but try and take it away from them, unless it was for a Tempest. Bill Gunston, a prolific writer on aircraft, usually trashes the Sabre and the Typhoon, yet even he says that he greatly regrets not getting to fly a Typhoon or Tempest and also has written that the only thing more exciting to hear that a Typhoon taking off was a whole flight of them doing it. Bristol engineers were not recruited at all, it is much simpler but at the same time more complicated than that and was not something that Napier or Bristol wanted. Don't forget that Bristol spent an enormous amount of money on developing the material for and machining of sleeve valves, estimated to be twice the amount of money that the British spent on the entire turbojet program. Napier was a small company and the Sabre was complicated with a lot more parts than most engines of the day - more parts, more failures. The engine was quite well balanced for an aero engine, it was not the source of the vibration (which was corrected). The carbon monoxide was never fully solved but that was an airframe issue.
@@robertnicholson7733 Typoons and Tempests with the Sabre were scrapped after the war and Hawker went with the Bristol Centaurus on Fury's and Tempest II's for good reason. The Sabre was quite unreliable with engine failures on T/O and landing. I've spent a lot of time with vets who flew them and will believe their facts about the engine.
One point I would like to take issue with; I believe the first RR aero engine was the Hawk, Wikipedia is confused it says the Hawk was derived from the Eagle but also says the Hawk was first run in 1914 and the Eagle in 1915. As the Hawk was the same capacity as the Silver Ghost car engine it makes sense to me that it would have been the first.
I get to see these amazing power plants at Vintage V-12. They have them broken down during restoration so you can see all aspects of this Incredible engine.
@@jacktattis "Victory". All the victorious countries are turning into cesspools. Agreed that Germany is too but they lost the war. What is the victors' excuse???
Good video. A point of disagreement from your very opening remarks. it's historically correct to say that the Battle of Britain was the first significant defeat for the German forces. But it was a particular type of defeat that was new at that time: a defeat entirely in the air. In this, it was closer to a sea battle, where loss of territory isn't directly involved; the Battle of Britain was the precursor for the contest that never came. But unlike a sea battle, it didn't shift the German position of strength much vis-a-vis Britain itself. It just caused a redirection of effort to the East, where the Second War actually was fought and lost by Germany. Britain wasn't in the way of a larger plan for greater conquest as every other European battle was; indeed, Hitler probably saw Britain more strongly in the "natural ally of Germany" column than not. Placing the Merlin at the centre of this ignores the fact that the war in the east, including that war in the air, didn't have the Merlin at its centre; it was present, but the Soviets - who aren't popular with me, but still - made the same completely justifiable claim that Russia does today, that they were the nation that bore the brunt of the war, and won it for the Allies - and lets not forget, they were our Allies. The eastern war was at a scale far beyond the comparative skirmishing of the Battle of Britain. And I say this as the son of a still-living mother who as a 10 year old watched the Battle fought over her head in London. For her, that battle was heroic, horrifying, and glorious, and she understood that the existential stakes for Britain were absolute. But her historical understanding acknowledges that in the grand scope of the war, it was the so-called Great Patriotic War that made the difference that mattered most in Germany's defeat. The ongoing centralization of the Western conflict - and with it the Merlin, and British engineering in general - is persistent, but misplaced. And again, I say this as the son of Canadian engineer who worked for Napier (which I hope you've now learned to pronounce correctly), and apprenticed with some of the designers of the great Napier aero engines.
"Britain wasn't in the way of a larger plan for greater conquest" ... except that Hitler had his eye on conquering the USA, where he had a large number of supporters. And you are ignoring the support in terms of war materials that went from Britain to Russia.
It is of course absolutely correct to say that Soviet Russia eventually destroyed Nazi Germany. However, it is also likely that had Britain lost the Battle of Britain and been invaded and/or neutralised Hitler would have been fighting on only one front, the East. An isolationist USA would then have focussed only on Asia. Russia came within a hairsbreadth of losing against the Nazis and almost certainly would have done without UK/US assistance and Hitler’s incompetence. This is the importance of Britains survival. It was the fragile pin on which the pendulum swung to return it in the Western Allies favour.
@@johnashton4086 That's why Britain is such a rathole today, because it "won" the war. Had Britain stayed out of that skirmish, I submit she would be in better shape today.
@@johnashton4086 Germany was not about to invade Britain in 1940. It was a disrupt and delay strategy to protect their rear while they prepared to invade the USSR. From the Soviet retroactive perspective it was diversionary. BTW, the Sabre was NOT a good engine until the post war V was used in Tempests.
Excellent video as always but you had one notable ommission in the introduction of Allied aircraft powered by the Merlin : ie the legendary DH98 Mosquito.
@@davidreed6264 the mossie had two, was faster, could go to Berlin and back carrying a 6000lb bomb! Obviously horses for courses, but the mossie was the first multi role, aircraft. And it was much safer to operate than the 4 engined heavies.
@@clive373 clive The mossie could carry 4 500# bombs in the bomb bay with no guns, and later the modifies mossie could carry a modifies 4,000# cookie bomb !!! Lie to you friend but do not try to BS the rest of us !!!
A great engine available when it was most needed...YES. Did it "win the war"? No. The Pratt and Whitney R-2800 was a great engine. Did it "win the war"? No. Nor did the Shvetsovs, Allisons, Mikulins, Sabres, Hercules, Centaurus, Griffons, Cyclones etc. People who fought won that war. Without them, any of these engines were big paperweights! None were worth squat without a good airframe and most importantly, a trained, intelligent pilot who knew as much about aerial warfare as his (not always a "he") opponent. The same can be said of any weapon that "supposedly "won the war". Ridiculous!
Those pilots wouldn't have been worth their salt without proper equipment. It's a balance and blend of quality education, personnel and industry. The fact you would discredit marvels of technology shows me that you yourself would have been a terrible pilot, flying a biplane into the jet age out of arrogance.
This here is just plain stupid. Engines dont wage war, people do, so we can assume that there are always going to be people in a war. So if people are the constant it is indeed the Equipment that wins a war, i mean there are people on both sides.
I think the claim that the (brilliant) Merlin was the only reliable engine until 1943 fails to do justice to the Bristol Hercules. It was reliable as designed and had a similar power trajectory the the Merlin as it produced more power (1939 around 1400hp to 1943 1600-1700 hp). There is nothing like hearing the whistle of air over the airframe combined with the steady throb of a Merlin pulling a Spitfire through the air.
@@bobsakamanos4469 The Sabre was a much more highly stressed engine, revved much higher and produced more power out of slighlty less displacement. Yes, the Herc was a great engine, but the post was Fury prototype LA610 powered by the Sabre VII was superior in speed and rate of climb compared to the Centaurus powered prototype. Late in the war the Sabre did become reliable and post-war they were quite good in the Mark V and VA, this is to be expected, as the Sabre design was started much later than the Merlin or the Herc, Napier was the smallest of the three main manufacturers, and the engine was by far the most complex with a lot of parts to fail. Getting suitable workers for production and then managing them was a serious issue for Napier, the takeover did not really help and probably made things worse for a while. The Beaufighter was probably far more respected here in Australia than elsewhere, very effective against shipping.
While the Merlin was legendary and in its final form was a good engine, it wasn't the absolute best. The biggest issue I have with it was their outright suppression and bullying tactics to keep their engines at the top.
@@flightdojo If you ever have the chance, I know I'm not alone when I say we would love to see a video like this in depth history of the Wright engines and engine devolpment history and the Allison engines. Specifically, I'd like to know why the Allison's weren't able to match the RR engines neccesitating the need for the Merlin being put into the P51.
@@southronjr1570 Hi. The Allison V1710 was a very good engine, in many respects it was superior to the Merlin, but was let down by its supercharger which was optimised for low to medium altitudes. In the time period in question Rolls Royce had what were probably the best superchargers in the world, a result to a large extent of the lessons from the R engine for the Supermarine S6 and S6b Schneinder Trophy racers, plus they had the services of some superb engineers including Stanley Hooker. The 2 stage Merlin 60 series were originally being developed for use in a high altitude version of the Vickers Wellington bomber. When the German FW190 fighter appeared it completely outclassed the Spitfire MkV, the RAFs then main fighter. As an emergency measure a crash program was started to put a 2 stage intercooled Merlin into a MkV airframe creating the MkIX. This along with the MkXVI, which was basically the same plane with the Packard Merlin was to be the most produced variant. The Merlin 61 transformed the performance of the Spitfire at high altitude making it superior to most of the aeroplanes it was likely to meet at high level. At the same time the Mustang with the Allison engine was also in RAF service, but due to its poor performance at higher level it was relegated to operation at low altitude. I have often seen people on UA-cam and else where saying that the Allison Mustang was a failure, but I think this is just not true. At low/medium level it was considered the equal of anything it was likely to meet and was faster than most. Having seen the results of putting the Merlin 61 into the Spitfire Rolls Royce made the suggestion that similar results could be achieved by putting it into the Mustang. I think that when the Mustang was designed the possibility of the Merlin rather than the Allison was considered and so the job was not impossibly difficult. The first conversions were undertaken by Rolls Royce and the results exceeded the expectations of all but the Rolls people and their supporters. Allison were handicapped in attempting to match the supercharger of the Merlin due to supercharger development in the USA being handled by a separate organisation. The idea from the 1930's from when the development dated was that for high altitude flight the mechanical supercharger would be supplemented by a turbo supercharger which was being developed by General Electric, as in the Lockheed P-38. The problem for aeroplanes such as the P-51 Mustang, P-40 and P-39 was that they were simply too small to accommodate the turbocharger which was developed mainly for use in Bombers. Take a look at the plumbing in the P-47 to see the scale of the problem. A book I would recommend to anyone with more that a casual interest in the high power piston aircraft engines used by Germany, USA and the UK during WW2 is 'The Secret Horsepower Race' by Calum Douglas. He is a racing engine designer who also speaks German. In researching the book he had access to original German documents captured at the wars end and kept in store since.
@@southronjr1570 Actually the Allison engine out produced the merlins with the single stage superchargers, why the Allison Mustangs out ren the spitfire MkV below 20,000 ft and the 20 series merlin single stage had a second speed to give some boost above 20,000 ft. It was NOT Allison, it was their customer the USAAF and an arrogant ass that decided a turbocharger would be used for high altitude, but he was no engineer !!! Also interesting to note the 2 stage supercharger was invented and patented in The USA in 1938, and first plane to fly was the NAVY F4U-3 which used the PW R1820, and followed by the NAVYS F4U Corsair's PW R2800. RR did NOT invent the 2 stage supercharger, they improved the basic design !! ! The Allison was 1 liter , 60 cu in larger, 300# lighter and used only 1/2 as many parts as a merlin. and the Allison had a larger oil pump, stronger con rods and a roller tip on the rocker arms, merlin did not !!!
My Reynolds 531 tubing racing bicycle frame is an alloy containing Molybdenum. It was a high quality Steel-Manganese-Molybdenum alloy, highly desired in its time.
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 Probably 4130 drawn-over-mandrel (DOM). 4130 is steel alloy with main alloying constituents of Chromium and Molybdenum, commonly called Cro-Mo
A quick search gives the following production figures for the Merlin. For the UK; Derby, 32,377; Crewe, 26,065; Trafford Park, 30,428; Glasgow, 23,675. Giving a total of 112,545. Packard USA; 55,523. This at a time when the UK was totally mobilised for war with labour shortages, particularly skilled engineering trades, and under air attack and blockade by enemy submarines. I in no way disparage the production contribution of Packard, but to claim as some seem to that they were responsible for the bulk of Merlin production is simply wrong.
It needs to be added here that without Packard's assistance, RR would never have approached the volume they did in Merlin production. The Merlin needed to be built in large quantities by people of all ages and skill levels instead of only highly qualified craftsmen, and Packard knew how to make MANY Merlins and at a higher level of overall quality than RR was capable of before this collaboration began. In short, RR production became MUCH higher after Packard showed them how to do it and at the same time enhance quality.
The Merlin was certainly the big success story in WW2. They had it up to 2100 hp in the Spit IX and was sprint tested (WEP) up to 2640 HP on the bench in 1944 Production plans were scuttled when jet engines came on the scene. Ref 1940 Merlin III, the RAF was especially worried about the poor Hurricane performance and in March issued instructions for the modifications to prevent glycol leaks and to increase boost to 12 lb. When the USAAF was conducting trials of 150 octane (P-51D, P-47D, P-38L) The Merlin was fine with 75" MP and in fact Merlins were operational in 1944 with 81" MP (25 lb boost), the P-38L Allisons (G variant) had problems as usual at only 70" & needing further engine improvements.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 LOL, not even close to being reliable at high boost. Look at the Wright Field tests of the P-38L with 150 Octane - failure. P-82 - failure.
Loving your videos sir! 🫡 amazing content, narration, editing. Made me smile to hear you say RPM like we do this side of the pond and not RPMs! 😂 The R is the plural of course.. thank you!! Keep up the amazing work ❤️🇺🇸🇬🇧🍻👍🤩👍
How independent was Packard’s inter/after cooling? I saw some cutaway drawings that suggested the Packard intercooling was at the output plenum of the first stage as opposed to RR’s second stage inlet position. It might not be the very most high tech part of the engine.
Those were ONLY used on the Packard V1650-3 or -7 or -9 which were only used on the P51 Mustang as almost all engines Packard delivered to the Brits, 37,137, were of the series 20 design using the SINGLE stage 2 SPEED version of the Merlin. ONLY the later 60 series and on used the 2STAGE 2 SPEED supercharger. Most people erronously believe ALL Merlins were the 2 stage 2 speed, but ooooh so WRONG !!!
Coolant ran through passages between the superchargers then to the aftercooler. Many diagrams refer to both as "intercooler". It was a brilliant design - a compromise between intercooling effectiveness and radiator size (ie increased drag) - something that the Allison lacked when they introduced their auxilliary supercharger system and NAA rejected them every time, starting in early 1941. The Packard ran hotter, so they created a larger aftercooler. The result of that can be seen with the bulged upper cowl of the Spit XVI and late mark IX.
Stanley Hooker's arrival at RR was shambolic. He applied for a job there, but hadn't told his government employer that he was looking to leave. Earnest Hive (who ran RR by then) phoned Hooker's boss in the middle of the job interview to ask what he thought of him! Talk about intimidating... His start in the job involved him being left alone with nothing to do. Eventually, he got a copy of a report on the supercharger performance. He made some calculation and comments on it, and put it back in the out tray. Somehow this reached the right person, who, astonished, immediately put him in charge of supercharger design. And the rest is history!
abarratt Hooker did NOT invent the 2 stage supercharger, that was invented and patented in 1938 in the USA !!! First plane to use it was the grumman F4F-3 Wildcat with the PW R1830 engine and the F4U Corsair with the PW R2800, Both Navy planes !!!
@@abarratt8869 Not really !!! There were several designs of 2 stage superchargers his was just one...Jesse Vincent of Packard had his that went on the 2 stage Merlins Packard built ie the P51 Mustang B/C D/K & H that was more automated and pilot friendly, PW had one for the R2800 and the R1830, and there were the TURBO charger systems that fed the mechanical superchargers that were also 2 stage, PW Wright, Allison
@@wilburfinnigan2142 wow, that's a lot of misinformation. The Packard had an automatic gear change for the 2 speed supercharger drive licenced from Wright. Used not because it was better but because they didn't have to pay higher licencing fees to Farman. Packard faithfully repoduced the Merlin and benefitted from the RR research. The P-51H, BTW, used the Merlin 100 series engine with the British designed fuel injection system.
That is a phenomenal amount of information regarding a single end-product. Done through collaborative engagement? Teamwork makes the dreamwork? Nice one! 😊
Whilst you mentioned the R-R 'X' configuration aero-engines you completely failed to mention that they were the work of one of the 20th century's greatest aero-engine designers, Arthur J. Rowledge. No mere bystander, Rowledge became a lead designer of the Merlin.
Rowledge did not have anything much to do with the Vulture, he headed the team on the Exe X24 which was the starting point for the X24 Pennine, he also designed the Napier Cub X16, a most unusual engine. Rowledge did some preliminary design work on the Merlin but after Royce died Elliot took over the project with a catastrophic effect on the engine. Of more importance, he designed the Kestrel, the Condor III, the Buzzard, and did much of the development work on the R. And of course, he also designed the Napier Lion
@@robertnicholson7733 I know that but did you know he designed a 2-speed propeller reduction gearbox for the R-R Eagle Mk IX? It was flight-tested in the mid-1920's.
@@andrerousseau5730 Yes,I knew he did the design but did not know it was flight tested, the need for such a thing was diminishing by then due to forced induction. He also did design work on both Napier and R-R cars, both engine and chassis, such as the power braking system used on the R-R. Back to aircraft, I also vaguely remember he worked on compound turbochargers. He also had a patent on a sleeve drive system for open-ended, two-stroke, sleeve valve engines, obviously intended for the Crecy, but the one they finally used was far more elegant, I don't know whether R-R designed it or Ricardo. Sadly, little is written about him. Even worse, there is less on Stewart Tresilian, people hint about there being information on him but it never turns up. What I would really like to find out is who did what on the R (HX), there was Rowledge, Tresilian, Rubbra, Ellor, Banks, Hives, etc. I haven't found the names of all who were involved. It has been speculated that Tresilian kept pushing to get the rpm as high as possible and this sounds correct, he was a firm believer in over-square engines. After the war he worked for a number of car racing companies (his true love) and in a time when most engines were still under-square, he was advocating a bore to stroke ratio of 1.8!!! Yes, there are higher numbers these days but back then, unheard of, he just couldn't get anyone to take the risk. Tresilian had a tendency to get fired or quit before being fired, but Hooker knew a good thing when he saw it and had Tresilian as his right-hand man at the time of Tresilian's untimely death. As an aside, W.O. Bently employed him to design the Lagonda V12 engine.
@@robertnicholson7733 One of R-R's leading lights was a brilliant engineer who went by the good, solid British name of Thomas Pitt de Paravicini. Extremely gifted and developed a 2-speed propeller reduction gearbox for the Eagle H42. His nephew was an acquaintance of mine, himself a gifted audio electronics engineer and designer. A great shame that none of these great figures ever properly received the kudos they deserved. Just compare and contrast the situation with say, Bulleid, Gresley, etc.
@@andrerousseau5730 Are we talking about a two speed propellor for the Eagle Mk22 H24 sleeve valve engine? I knew the name as he was best known for his aerodynamic work, patented the so-called Meredith effect in 1936 and did the bulk of the design work on the Merlin's exhaust ejectors. I came across him as I am a great fan of Stewart Tresilian (as well as Rowledge, Halford, Ellor, Wilde, etc. but NOT Hives, at least not as an engineer) who was the Chief Designer at Armstrong Siddeley at the time Paravicini was there. Tresilian had worked for R-R when Paravicini was there before one of Tresilains rapid departures. I suspect that it was Treslian who lured Paravicini to A-S. There is a group of these engineers (and Hooker - remember - NOT an Engineer >:-)>) whose stories are all intertwined but are largely unknown except by aero engine nerds. All these books talk about the engines and this and that but we really need a book about all the engineers in the background as well as those in the light (Halford, Fedden, etc.) Even Callum's book gives most of these engineers short shrift. It would have been fascinating to find out why they made the decision they did, it is why I am not fond of books that have opinions and conclusions, they are always based on some hindsight, even a recent one, the conclusions in that one are based on hindsight such as knowing when the war would start and more importantly end. What would the stories of the Sabre, Jumo 222, Pennine, Jumo223, etc, be had the war continued to say 1948 without turbojets. Even with turbojets, in the Pacific with its vast distances and their limited range. Anyhow, his name is familiar for some other reasons but I can't bring them to mind, he may have worked on Tresilain's updated Wolfhound, probably the cooling - they almost got that dog of an engine >>:)> to work properly. Tresillian was working on a further Mark of the Wolfhound and Boorhound when he (yet again) rapidly departed, this time fired by Sopwith. Was he involved in the shrouding of the Exe? That was a Rowledge engine. So many unknowns
I acquired Graham White's marvelous ALLIED AIRCRAFT PISTON ENGINES OF WORLD WAR II very soon after it was published. Your wonderful video reminds me that I need to pull that book down from my bookshelf and go through it again. :-)
Check out the RR Historical Series books. The Merlin in perspective - the combat years Alec Harvey-Bailey and Rolls-Royce and the Mustang David Birch. Abe Books currently lists copies of both books.
As a bog standard Eniglishman, I would probably pronounce Agincourt, 'aszhin-court' , say it quickly and maybe drop the 't' if wanted to sound like a 'history buff' off the BBC , something like 'aszhincor' .. best I can do. All said and done, it's French so ask them :) It's a bit like how you guys say "shire", when it comes to places like Devonshire, however, we would generally pronounce it "Devonsher", Staffordshire would be "Staffordsher" and so on. Either way, wonderful Video and keep up the good work :)
Always interesting that the schools no longer teach elocution. These days, subtitles are needed when watching Brit shows, so I watch Irish programs & movies instead.
This is the great history lesson on a great engine… But as an engine builder, I’d prefer hands-on, taking it apart kind of stuff. I don’t know it’s just me ,anyway keep on rocking
Suggest reading the report (1946) by A.C. Lovesey, delivered to D.H. aircraft company, on Merlin development during it's service . Heavy reading, detailed analysis , lots of charts, and diagrams of failures and improvements. IOW, the kind of engineering geek stuff you don't often encounter these days.
Merlin == bird of pray. Rolls Royce started calling their aircraft engines after birds of prey with the World War One "Eagle". We then had the more famous ones - Merlin, Kestrel, Griffon, and the not-so-famous Goshawk, Exe, Peregrine, and Vulture. also they did use fuel injection on a later stage.
Sorry, but the Exe is not named after a bird of prey but after a river, as it was an air-cooled, sleeve valve X24, it was in a different classification to the Merlin. The only other engine in the class was the Pennine, which was named after a mountain. The Exe was later renamed the Boreas (after a mountain) when R-R decided to name their turbines after rivers. I am sure that clarifies things. If not, the last piston aircraft engine they designed was the Eagle 22 which should have been named after a mountain as it was a sleeve valve design, this engine was the third aircraft engine design with the same name (the second, the X16 Eagle never saw production). Now, conventions are made to be broken, but in two different ways, yep, why not. You also left out the Falcon, Hawk, Condor, and Buzzard.
thanks so much my dad and I watched this video dad 96 🙏 had his fist solo in a AT6 Harvard or American Texan then called to scrambled jumped in a spitfire it was he called the sports car of the air I'm lucky to have a friend and dad appreciate you
Had to have a chuckle at the part where you state 'a light compact aftercooler' You've obviously never tried to pick one up! Great video though, thanks for all your effort.
Great video thank you for sharing.. will say though before the last 6 years I always said I could never get bored of hearing the merlin planes in all their guises, but in the past 6 years there’s a spitfire ( a couple now and again going over this month) but in summer they have flights you can pay to have the experience in, the poor little plane goes over our house and back to land from 9 in the morning till about 8 at night and the flight probably lasts 7 minutes, honestly it’s constant I swear if you couldn’t see them land You’d think the passenger would have to jump out as the next got in without the planes wheels ever touching the ground 😂, and sometimes there’s 2 going, ( think if you pay a certain price) they do rolls and half loops which is cool and I only really see them doing that in the evenings ,I live in Gosport ( uk) right on the Solent where the shnider races took place. soo many great events took place in the past here like the fleet reviews eg .. must have been amazing to see. Kind regards Carl
Get 4 months for free on a 2-year plan here ➼ nordvpn.com/flightdojo It's risk-free
with Nord's 30-day money-back guarantee!
A TRULY AMAZING REVIEW OF THIS ENGINE.....Congrats my friend.....
Old Navy Flying Shoe🇺🇸
The Answer is actually the Wright R2800 18 cylinder radial, generating between 2,000 to 2,8000 Horsepower, produced from 1939 until 1960. Installed in the Brewster XA-32, Breguet Deux-Ponts, Canadair CL-215, Canadair C-5 North Star, Consolidated TBY Sea Wolf, Convair 240, 340, and 440, Curtiss P-60, Curtiss XF15C, Curtiss C-46 Commando, Douglas A-26 Invader, Douglas DC-6, Fairchild C-82 Packet, Fairchild C-123 Provider, Grumman AF Guardian, Grumman F6F Hellcat, Grumman F7F Tigercat,
Grumman F8F Bearcat, Howard 500, Lockheed Ventura/B-34 Lexington/PV-1 Ventura/PV-2 Harpoon, Lockheed XC-69E Constellation, Martin B-26 Marauder, Martin PBM-5 Mariner, Martin 2-0-2, Martin 4-0-4, North American AJ Savage, North American XB-28, Northrop XP-56 Black Bullet, Northrop P-61 Black Widow, Northrop F-15 Reporter, Republic P-47 Thunderbolt
Sikorsky CH-37 Mojave, Sikorsky S-60, Vickers Warwick, Vought F4U Corsair, Vultee YA-19B and many others.
If I had to personally pick any propeller driven aircraft to fly in WW2, it would be the P-47D with it's 8 .50 caliber machine guns, good armor, super durable airframe and rear facing tail warning radar.
@@jager6863 The crucial part was the Battle of Britain. The turn around point. The R2800 didn’t exist effectively during the BoB. And it would not have worked in a Spitfire, Hurricane, Mosquito or Lancaster. So yes it was the Merlin and not the R2800.
Just a minor tip: you use "as such" too much.
Thanks for the video. That carburettor restrictor became known by some more bawdy people as Mis Shilling's Orifice. You didn't mention the license built Merlin's, such as the Packard Merlin 65 series or the ones built by Hispaño Suiza.
Can you tell us about the related Rolls Royce Griffon engines which were used in later Marks of Spitfires, Seafires and the Avro Shackleton, and other aeroplanes?
The Merlin's sound was stuck in my head as a boy from war movies where that sound meant victory. It has that aggressive growl combined with a dark, vibrating white noise that made you unconsciously feel the prop tearing through the air.
I love that sound. It was like the entire British Empire and it's people wanted to put the fear of God into the Nazi's.
Great description!
@@garrisonnichols807 And they did!
I'm quite often working in an open barn workshop under a route often used by Battle of Britain flight training spitfires, and the noise is glorious. Plus I'll never forget one day hearing a bigger, deeper chorus: ran outside, the there was a Lancaster banking round in a great graceful curve. Sweet.
It's a shame they don't include startup sound, the Merlin sounds fantastic doing that too.
36:35 - the R.A.E. restrictor would fondly be referred to as "Miss Shilling's orifice" by pilots in the RAF.
Quite correct to do so, being as Gertrude Shilling came up with it.
Packard when contracted by RR to build the Merlin opted to use the new Bendix pressure carb that REALLY solved the stalling problem, and be Noted the much aligned Allison V1710 used the Bendix pressure carb from 1938 on 3 years before Packard used them !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 except that Allison never made a successful high altitude engine.
In early 1942 RollsRoyce successfully implemented the new anti-G carburettor RR/SU AVT 44/199/1 for the Spit IX. The US was still gearing up for war and realized they'd have to replace Allisons with Merlins, which they did until GM interfered.
For the high power Merlin 66, Rolls Royce needed an even larger choke carburettor and decided to modify the Bendix PD18 type Pressure carburettor to suit. Suitably modified, this carburettor was fitted as the Stromberg 8D44/1. There were some problems with the Bendix pressure carburettor, the modifications of which the US copied for their own version of the PD18 on the Packard-Merlin 266.
@@wilburfinnigan2142 If that Bendix Carburettor was the Speed Density it was originally a R/R- S/U carbie the drawings of which were given to Bendix free of charge.
No Packard or Allison went to 45700ft as did the Merlin 71 of the Mk VII H.F. Super Marine and R/R were always doing something
@@wilburfinnigan2142 If that was the Bendix Stromberg Pressure Carburettor then the Drawings had been given to them by Rolls Royce free of charge similar to other things given by the Tizzard Mission back in 1940 Source Part 9 Speed Density Systems for Aircraft Fuel Systems by Terry Welshans Bardstown Kentucky Aug 2013
Now don't faint Wilbur
_Obviously it detracted from the British war effort that_ *_RR had to update every Packard Merlin by hand,_* _but this was judged the least worst solution, as the effort of stopping Packard production to introduce modifications for which the parts/drawings would have to be shipped over the Atlantic first, was judged to likely be so difficult to manage, that RR judged it was by far the easier solution to manage the modification work themselves on our shores, and get a lower price for the engines, and more of them._
- Calum Douglas
Well said.
I've also read that Packard engineers went their own way on some issues that had unfortunate ramifications. Early on, they decided to polish the con rods against RR advice, which led to con rod failures. Turns out that they were grinding impurities into micro fissures, which quickly became failure points. I believe that was the V-1650-3 or -7. NAA had to initially reject those for the P-51B.
@@bobsakamanos4469
The production was controlled by RR, as it was their engine. When they did try and go their own way it failed.
I enjoyed that,really interesting as my Grandfather worked at Supermarine and did all of the cooling copper work on the s6.His name was Herbert colling.My Mother told me she watched the trials of the s6 and how fast it was in it's day!They're all gone now but the aircraft is still in the museum in Southampton.
Good show ! The marriage between RR & Supermarine gave RJ the experience needed for designing a great lightweight fighter, something that Camm lacked at Hawker.
@@bobsakamanos4469 No the Hurricane WAS a good fighter and its wing was a better gun platform Compromises were the thing back then
@@jacktattis mistakes were made and admitted by Camm later. 20% t/c ratio airfoil and heavy weight was the Hurricane's downfall along with lack of redesign once mistakes were realized in 1936. .... A thinner wing and meredith (1935) radiator scheme would have kept the Hurricane competetive on the front lines.
@@bobsakamanos4469 The Hurricane did use the Meredith System
I’m 75 . My Dad worked at Packard while it was making the Merlin engines . I use to have a set of mahogany building blocks the tool room guys built for me when I was born in 47 and they were starting up the car business.
Great and Mahogany Wow
Nice presentation.
The stories of Rolls AND Royce are most intriguing. With just the hints provided, I would like to know more about the spirits that drove them.
As a retired toolmaker from Detroit, I enjoyed watching the manufacturing operations, especially the mill work on aluminum valve head.
Among others, I heard the sound of a Merlin engine on the Detroit River during hydroplane boat races. While in the pits I saw at least 6 tarted up Merlin's in the Miss Budweiser trailer.
Thanks for all the memories generated!
I have similar memories watching the hydroplanes at Miami Marine Stadium when I was growing up. This was back when they used to call them Thunder boats (due to how loud those piston engines were) before they turned to turbine engines similar to the one in the Chinook helicopter. I remember one time my father and I were talking with Bernie Little, the owner of Miss Budweiser. He told us that one of the advantages they had was that they used the (more expensive from what I understand) Rolls-Royce Griffon engine when everybody else was using the Merlin or an Allison. But thank you for stirring up some incredibly fond memories I have of my father and I growing up.
Rolls was killed in a air accident very early 1910 or thereabouts
Amazing amazing amazing thank you so much for making this video, I am a retired mechanical engineer and can relate to the problem issues that keep our mind churning for fixes to issues and thus keeping us from going to sleep!
Great bit of work, very well researched and presented.
Quite right to point out that the engine was named after a bird, not after some hairy fairy comic book character. BUT. In the eleventh century a book 'The Death of Arthur' told of a wizard who helped Arthur and at the end of the story he promises to return if ever England was in trouble. In 1940 the Germans are amassing across the channel, the Peregrine planned for the spitfire replacement the Whirlwind and its 4 cannons, the Vulture planned for the Tornado, the Hurricane follow on and the Avro Manchester all over the floor and what are we left with?
Is quite correct. Indeed it is a RR tradition to name aero piston engines after birds of prey and jet/by-pass/fan-jets after UK rivers.
@@572Btriode Not quite so simple, sleeve valve engines were initially named after rivers (Exe) but after deciding to name turbojets after rivers, the sleeve valve engines were named after mountains, the Exe was renamed the Boreous and then the Pennine was designed. The Crecy was a two-stroke and they were to be named after battles.
The sleeve valve Eagle22 broke the rules.
I am once again here to request a Bristol Centaurus episode.
Love your work, keep it up!
I need to find a good source for data on the engine. I’ve seen your comments. Let me see if I can find something and put a Centaurus video together.
@@flightdojo kind of the reason I’d love to see something on it with your level of detail and production quality is exactly that there seem to be so little information available on it ^^
@@dodo98989 Catch 22 Yossarian, you'll see. he'll do the vid and then over the next few months they'll all repeat it in their vids.
I'd like a video on the R-2800 engine which powered the Corsair, Hellcat and Thunderbolt please!
@@paul_mumford there is one on the channel already, and it’s a good one
I live Near East midlands airport uk and through the summer I am treated to the sound of the Merlin engine from the spitfire based at the airport it’s always a treat to hear and never gets old.
In German (Deutsch) the letter “W” is pronounced as if it were a “V”, the letter “V” is pronounced as if it were an “F”. So, it is Vermacht and Luftvaffe. It is Fau Vay, as in VW.
...😂😂 schön erklärt, das mit "VW" find' ich total gut. 👍
in UK V stands for Victory 😂🇬🇧😉
did his mispronunciation make it indecipherable? or is it just slightly irksome? if it's the former; you're justified in your critique. if it's the latter; you're being needlessly punctilious.
language is about communication foremost. you come to embrace this view when no one ever pronounces your name correctly and you realize you would be happier if you just didn't worry about it.
@@mexorlight9635
You're very brave. 😅 🇬🇧
PS "Battle of Britain Day"
Oh how i love the folk wagon
Concise and well researched. Nice presentation with period footage!
I’m lucky enough to live on top of a hill in Kent, England. Most days we have a couple of spitfires and the occasional P51 buzzing around…
Spitfire County, above which much of the Battle of Britain was won..
My Old Man worked for Royce's from 1956 through to the early Noughties.
Like Hooker, my Old Man was a Mathematician (he was a Stress engineer).
My Old Man's final job at Royce's was as Project Director of the Trent.
It was ALWAYS "Royce's", he had no time for Rolls.
Charles Rolls had been dead since 1910
@@jacktattis Very true, but as an engineer at Royce's he and his contemporaries looked to Royce, not Rolls as the spiritual head of the company.
He once "corrected" (as an impetuous teenager), with the line "If you want a Roll's, but a car." If I remember that comment some 40 years later, I assure you it was memorable
Hooker was an amazing man not only merlin but was taken out of retirement to solve problems with rb211.
Excellent professional video best by far of all the videos I have watched about the Merlin. Very impressed with the extent and detail of research you carried you and the archive video thoroughly enjoyed it thank you well done
Great work! Detail is amazing and delivery excellent! Got to love history, especially when so critical to ensuring the world remained decent and peaceful.
When I was about 6, I remember the sound of the planes flying around high over our school playground. We were close to Biggen Hill and they were almost certainly Spitfires. We used to emulate them running around with our arms out and making engine noises. Would have been about 1950.
Happy to say that Biggin Hill still operates Spitfire, though no longer an RAF station.
Really good videos on here. Keep it coming 👍
I love that you read the script and not an AI voice. Ty.
can't wait for the wasp major!
@28:28 you should really trim that "offline media" frame. ;-)
Excellent stuff - thank you! Along with the P&W Double (and Twin) Wasp, it's hard to imagine the Allies winning WW2 without those two impressive engines, one liquid-cooled and the other air-cooled.
Very minor nit to pick - Rolls did not learn to fly on the "literal very first powered airplane that existed" - the 1903 Wright flyer was wind damaged after its fourth flight on 17 Dec 1903 and never flew again after that. It was the Wright Model A that Wilbur demonstrated in France in 1908 and in which Rolls flew. The Wright Model A was the first serial production airplane in the world, so in that sense, it was a literal very first. :)
1:30 Can't believe you didn't mention the D.H. Mosquito in that list. Superlative aircraft that filled a number of roles, in a large part thanks to it's power plants.
Mention along with pictures at 37 minutes or so.
37:32-37:33
In the initial design, they also seriously considered the Napier Sabre at a projected 2400hp (post-war Sabres were officially type-tested at up to 3050hp) each. After designing the Mosquito, DH began the design of the Hornet (the aircraft was put on hold till the end of the war), also considered with the Sabre (briefly). With the much larger and heavier Sabre, the design would have been considerably different. Twin Sabres, I am trying to think about how that would sound.
The post-war Hornet used a counter-rotating Merlin 130 series pair of 2070hp each (Sea Hornet, 2050hp) - the most powerful Merlins ever put into production.
@@robertnicholson7733 there is a you tube with Eric winkle brown saying the sabre developed far more power in service. One should be flying soon!
@@clive373 I would wish it so, but the pragmatist and professional engineer in me says no. Perhaps a ground-running one in the next few years, that alone would be fantastic. Unlike the Merlin, not only have few engines survived, but virtually no paperwork has survived. AFAIK, there are only a few sheets of engineering drawings in existence, and even they are of different marks. There were relatively few expert mechanics for the engine and virtually no engines to work on as there were only a few hundred Tempest V, Tempest VI, and Furies after the war, and no real attempts to keep them running once they went out of military service, so little if anything was learned from those few mechanics before they too were gone.
Yes, there is one candidate for running, a factory-preserved engine, but this will have to be completely disassembled, inspected, reassembled, and tested. But remember, this engine has been sitting for 70 years, has it been turned over by hand or have the rings been sitting in exactly the same spot on the sleeves for those 70 years? And that is the elephant in the room, the sleeves! Everything else is relatively normal practice, but the sleeves are not, the final finishing process used by Bristol was so unusual that a couple of patent offices weren't going to allow it, it made no sense.
If the money was available, the best thing would be to 3D scan every part of the engine, test all the materials to see what they were, determine tolerances, essentially computer analyse the entire engine, determine torque settings, etc for all the engines you could lay your hands on and then fabricate a new one using modern materials, machining techniques, etc. Probably a hybrid mark VII, there are at least two sectioned examples of these in existence, both the ones I know of are in Canada.
Maybe then, if we are lucky, someone will be foolhardy to put that engine in a restored aircraft, and find someone equally crazy to fly it.
I would be thrilled to just hear a modern recording of that engine at full song, it would be very unusual, the engine fired two cylinders at the same time, and it appears that at certain frequencies resonances between the exhaust were established and then there is the whine (scream) of the straight cut reduction gears transmitting that 2000hp to that huge propeller. Bill Gunston was no fan of the Sabre (he seemed to have a thing against Napier and Frank Halford) or the aircraft it was fitted to, but even he waxes lyrical about the thrill of hearing these aircraft taking off. The Germans were less a fan, the sound these aircraft made while attacking seemed to be etched into their brains.
I will not naysay Eric Brown, but the power the engines produced can be calculated from the performance of the aircraft, I have not done so. It does seem unlikely that Napier would not put the record straight after the war (they were still trying to sell Sabres), but they did not. I will have to watch the video, I have many of Eric Brown's interviews, perhaps you can point me in the correct direction.
Finally, this is the thing, the very thing!
oldmachinepress.com/2014/10/14/hawker-fury-i-sabre-powered/
Good presentation and great content!
The RR Merlin in the Mustangs was/is one of the most awesome sounds I've ever heard!
David Daniels NO RR Built merlin was ever used in a P51 mustang !!! ! They were ALL Packard merlins made in tha USA !!! And it was a different version from RR's version !!! Facts son do the research !! !
@@wilburfinnigan2142 sorry but that’s Not strictly accurate either: In April 1942, the Royal Air Force's Air Fighting Development Unit (AFDU) tested the Allison V-1710-engined Mustang at higher altitudes and found it wanting, but their commanding officer, Wing Commander Ian Campbell-Orde, was so impressed with its maneuverability and low-altitude speed that he invited Ronald Harker from Rolls-Royce's Flight Test establishment at Hucknall to fly it.
It was quickly evident that performance, although exceptional up to 15,000 ft (4,572 m), was inadequate at higher altitudes. This deficiency was due largely to the single-stage supercharged Allison engine, which lacked power at higher altitudes. Still, the Mustang's advanced aerodynamics showed to advantage, as the Mustang Mk.I was about 30 mph (48 km/h) faster than contemporary Curtiss P-40 fighters using the same Allison powerplant. The Mustang Mk.I was 30 mph (48 km/h) faster than the Spitfire Mk VC at 5,000 ft (1,524 m) and 35 mph (56 km/h) faster at 15,000 ft (4,572 m), despite the latter having a significantly more powerful engine than the Mustang's Allison.[1]
Rolls-Royce engineers rapidly concluded that the Mustang powered by a two-stage Merlin 61 would result in a significant improvement in performance and started converting five Mustangs to Merlin power as the "Mustang Mk.X" (i.e., Mk.10) With a minimum of modification to the engine bay, the Merlin engine neatly fitted into the adapted engine formers. A smooth engine cowling with an additional "chin" radiator was tried out in various configurations as the two-stage Merlin required a greater cooling capacity than could be obtained with the standard Mustang radiator alone. The Merlin 65 series engine was utilised in all the prototypes as it was identical to the Merlin 66 powering the Spitfire Mk IX, allowing for a closer comparison. Due to the speed of the conversions, engines were often swapped from aircraft to aircraft as well as being replaced by newer units.
Scorched: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Mustang_Mk.X
Also, The Mustang was designed to use the Allison V-1710 engine, which had limited high-altitude performance in its earlier variants. The aircraft was first flown operationally by the RAF as a tactical-reconnaissance aircraft and fighter-bomber (Mustang Mk I). Replacing the Allison with a Rolls-Royce Merlin resulted in the P-51B/C (Mustang Mk III) model, and transformed the aircraft's performance at altitudes above 15,000 ft (4,600 m) (without sacrificing range),[8] allowing it to compete with the Luftwaffe's fighters.[9] The definitive version, the P-51D, was powered by the Packard V-1650-7, a license-built version of the two-speed, two-stage-supercharged Merlin 66,
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_American_P-51_Mustang
So the P-51 was effectively a aircraft design built for British contract (the USAAF didn’t want any to start with), for he RAF. And powers with a licensed British engine for the most part…
Narr sorry, Lancaster low pass at full chat ua-cam.com/video/T8qkMTjE4mU/v-deo.html
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Aahh, more "finigan facts". Off you go, back on your tractor, wanker!
Eight Merlins in unison flying right over my head in the only two flying Lancasters takes some beating😉😉
Speaking as a "Pit Snipe", an Intercooler would be between the 1st and 2nd Stages of a Supercharger (or between a Supercharger and a Turbocharger), and an aftercooler is between whatever air compressor system you're using, and the carburetors/intake manifold....
I hope this clears up what he is talking about!
Well said. The intercooler on the Merlin was a compromise between effective cooling of the gas charge and the radiator size. A brilliant design. As I understand it, the coolant travelled from the inter-supercharger passages up to the after cooler, but diagrams label it all as an intercooler. The double choke carburetor was before the superchargers.
Yeh, just call them "charge air coolers". The intercooler term got used for everything as the American turbo-supercharged engines only had one charge air cooler and that was between the turbocharger and the mechanical supercharger, an intercooler, so suddenly every charge air cooler was an intercooler.
@@robertnicholson7733 true enough, but I'd say that it's an important distinction between Merlins with the intercooler and aftercooler vs the Allison attempt to tack on an auxilliary S/C with neither - a system which was rejected immediately by NAA in early 1941 they railed against that concept again with the P-82.
Early Merlins had a problem of throwing con-rods. The company really struggled and had to limit the V12 to 3000 revs (IIRC). Tests on V twin test bed versions worked just fine at much higher revs eventually led to them checking the oil pump. Basically it could not deliver enough oil at high revs. Bigger pump problem solved.
This has always been an issue with RR. Development is always step-wise on the assumption that all before has been as good as possible. This oil pump cock-up was a great example of groupthink not looking at all options.
David Elliot one of the problems solved when Packard used a different, larger capacity oil pump and stronger rods !!!
The engine was limited to 1600 rpm via a governor. My father ran them on final inspection Each one was run a full eight hour shift. He tested the PT boat version. First thing in combat the boat engineer removed the governor and the engines would rev 3600 rpm. Rated hp was achieved at 1600 rpm so quite a boost in combat.
@@wilburfinnigan2142You know that Ford UK did the production line development for Rolls and Packard only did it for their own production? All performance enhancing development was done by Rolls and Packard were forbidden to do any under the licensing agreement. Rolls manufactured over twice the number of Merlin engines as Packard.
@@SvenTviking Bull$hit !!! As RR had to agree to changes to seperate head and block just to get the merlin made, because RR had a special machine to machine the valve seats and guides, that machine was not available, and Packard made many other changes also, carb, supercharger intercooler, what you FAIL to understand is PACKARD had been making aero engines nd Marine enginess lon as RR. WW I Liberty V12 was designed by Vincent of Packard as well as many engines up to and including the M2500 PT Boat engine. It was NOT Packards first rodeo !!! of the 155,00) Merlins Made Packard made 55,525 Ford UK 33,000 thats 88,000+ more than half, 57 % were not made by RR !!!!! DUUUUH!!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 P Merlins ran hotter that the RR versions. Late war (?)Lancasters had 3 RR and one P-Merlin. Pilots & FE's were told not to worry about that higher op temp. Having said that, early P-Merlins had reliability problems.
2:27 Probably the best sound to ever come from an engine.
If you were on the ground or at the airfield, the sound was important as it warned of friend or foe that was coming at you. My father had a record of all the WWII engines and easily identified them all. Certainly a life saving skill for him in the war as he was strafed and bombed in Malta & Africa when he wasn't flying.
He could tell the difference between the Hurricane and the Spitfire sounds as well.
I would like for SOMEONE to discuss the Bendix Stromberg Negative G Carb- from what I can find it went into the Spit 5's and later variants and the P-51 Mustang. A version of it was also used in the P&W Radial R2800 motors- and made inverted flight, as well as negative G dives a cake walk. Imagine the poor FW 190 pilot, assured a dive would get him out of trouble only to have a Spit or a Mustang, or even a P-47 glued to his tail in a dive.
Tim Mccreery ALL Packard built merlins whether the single stage 20 series merln or the later 1942 60 series V1650-3 or-7 or-9 Used the Bendix pressure carb, as well as the R2800 as you mentioned and the V1710 Allison from 1938 on. So ALL merlins in the P51 Mustangs and the P40 F & L's used the Bendix pressure carb. RR did not get around to using it untill the Merlin 60 2 stage came out used in the spitfire Mk IX & Mk VIII It was not used in the spitfire Mk V as it has the Merlin 20 series single stage supercharger !!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 the Mk.V used a number of progressively better engines, the Merlin 45,46 .... 55M and anti-G carburettors and other solutions were implemented. There is a fine video of Alex Henshaw flying a Mk.V inverted for long periods on the deck over the runway, back n forth.
@@bobsakamanos4469 There were some made but it was insignificant compared to US Manufactures who use it on all large displacement aero engines early on, way ahead of the Brits !!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Roll Royce fixed the vapor lock problem with the Bendix pressure carb and then Bendix used that solution on their own production lines. You're welcome.
@@bobsakamanos4469 BULL$HIT !!! US started using the Bendix pressure carb in 1938 and the Allison started it as the first to use it, and when Packard started making the Merlin in 1941 they used it that solved the problem. WE know what WE did over here don't need your lies
Thanks a million! For ever I have been trying to llearn what it was exactly that made the Merlin so special! I'. very grateful to you for finally answering my question.
after burner upto 40 000 ft ??????? germans were limited to about 30000ft or some thing like that most of those eng were made in american factorys not briton
Thanks for the book recommendations. I also really loved "The Secret Horsepower Race: Western Front Fighter Engine Development" ( (c) 2020) by Calum E Douglas. Extremely well researched from original source documents from both Ally & Axis archives that exist today.
Looking at it as I read this comment.
Thank you so much for your presentation, it has inspired me to purchase the book you mentioned. Good job!
Thank you for that, a completely absorbing video showcasing great British Engineering! I don't know if I missed it because I was called away a couple of times, but did you make any mentions of Sir Henry Royce's death and when it occurred?
If you think back to those times some 70+ years ago there were no such things as computer aided design, to that end the machining and fitment of the engines is still marveled by modern engine builders - mechanics and engineers. If you look closely at these engines they are literally works of art and to think they built thousands of those things that were not bespoke pieces, I’m sure you could take parts from one and put them in another as long as you followed proper assembly ethos that any modern engine builder would do to this day!
According to page 9 of Packard as an Aero Engine Builder The Packard Merlin Robert J Neal, 37,143 P-M's were made for "British Empire consumption". 31,143 of those were Lend Leased (not including Packard engines in 1,772 LL P51's). 16,485 were used by the US in P51's and P40's.
True Packard made 55,525 merlins total and the Brits received the 37,143 engines only and yes they received 1772 Lend lease P51 nmustangs with the Packard merlins !!! Also the P40 used the Packard V1650-1 single stage supercharged engine same as the 36,000 single stage V1650's the Brits received and 1040 of Packards 266 merlins, the 2 stage supercharged 2 speed version, the only 2 stage merlins the Brits received from Packard !!!
Yes and the Brits were robbed Where did the $130 million go Nick
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Two different engine lines, the V1650 and Packard Merlins were different engines, mostly to do with connectors, threads, etc. There was usually a particular dash V1650 closely related to each Packard Merlin.
@@robertnicholson7733 Well DUUUUHHHHH !!!! I have hammered for years here on you tube the difference, The Packard M2500 was being delivered to the US Navy and the Brits LONG before The Brits ever contracted Packard to build the merlin. two entirely different engines, unrelated as Ford to a Bentley engine. only similarity were they were both V12's and built by the same company !!! M2500 Packard was 50% larger than the merlin, 2500 cu in vs 1650 !!!! DUUUUUHH!!!!!
@@robertnicholson7733 Yes and the V1650-3/7/9 were only used in the Mustang and the 1650-1 only used in the P40 F & L's....
An excellent synopsis - thank you!
I remember as a kid the sound of Merlins as I lived near the AV Rowe plant during the war.
I would also recommend The Secret Horsepower Race by Calum Douglas. I grew up with Calum, let’s just say he’s knowledge on the subject is near encyclopaedic.
Excellent book. He liaised with the old experts to write that book. A must read.
Great video! Interesting and informative. Thanks! I’m subscribed. Waiting to see more videos like this one.
So glad that I chose to SUBSCRIBE to this Channel to further "fulfill" my WWII curiosity!
In the Merlin "what does it sound like clip", it would have been nice to have a RPG Guage in the lower corner to be able to understand the RPM V.S. Sound...
Thanks for the tip! I tried to get a clip of it at a higher rpm.
@@flightdojo Actually the sound is best heard when the aircraft is at low altitude, full boost and revving, with the listener on the ground. The ground test rig didn't do it justice.
Try this one 🥹 ua-cam.com/video/T8qkMTjE4mU/v-deo.html
Love your content and indepth explanation and detail of engines. I would love you to do a segment on the ww1 rotary engines. There concept is insane and difficult to get your head around. Also the unloved Rolls Royce vulture, it is usually glossed over but surely with development it’s unreliability could have been overcome. Keep it up.🇦🇺
You failed to mention that the principle designed of the Merlin was the 20th century's greatest aero-engine designer, Arthur J. Rowledge. Finally, at last, someone mentions the Merlin' s start in life as an inverted V-12. Well done. However, what you failed to mention was that a barometrically controlled fluid-coupling was proposed (by Geoffrey Wilde) for the Merlin' s supercharger drive. You also didn't mention that a Rotary-Valve cylinder-head conversion was designed by Cross Manufacturing albeit not made.
Yes but Wilde and Hooker shopped around some manufacturers and the development time was far too long, so they went a different way and that was good enough. The German fluid drive could have some significant maintenance issues, I have seen photos of them choked up with "gunk".
@@robertnicholson7733 .... and subject to frequent over-heating issues not to mention substantial efficiency losses when in high-slip mode. Nor should it escape the attention of the fluid-coupling pundits that NAPIER went a different route when they designed the Nomad Mk I: they used an infinitely variable mechanical variator to drive the compressor. Very wise!
Aww, man. When you were talking about where the Merlin name came from and said the falcon of which there are two, I thought for sure you were leading into the African or European swallow, Monty Python joke. And it would have fit too, as an answer to the question, “what is the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?”
Many, many years ago, Atlas Van Lines had a cigarette racing boat that I remember was powered by a RR Merlin engine. They not only had the boat on display but a spare engine was set up on a stand. They are huge motors.
Very interesting. BTW Agincourt is pronounced 'ajincor', no doubt named after the famous Agincourt Battle that took place during the 100yr war.
A very good narrator.
The sound of the Merlin was a key part of the movie “ The Battle of Britain “ Long live the King “
Literally the Sound of Freedom
WOW DUDE !!!!!! you really went down the rabbit hole on this video ! This is one of the best researched and in depth explanations of any piece of war equipment i ever heard Great fukin job i really mean that !!!! Im a mechanic so i really enjoyed this THANK YOU !!!!!!!! : )
Royce spent his time in a small village on the south coast of England, just down the road from the RR car factory and on the circuit for the Schneider trophy on which the UK won outright with the R9 engine
I think the double wasp might have helped a little on that war thing.
robertloe as well as the Wrights, the Pratt Whitney, Allisons all out numbered the merlin by about 6 times !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142fragile ego arsehole x
@@wilburfinnigan2142 the Wright engine facility came under Senate investigation for poor quality control. Allison was without proper R&D and a 2nd tier engine. P&W was the blue ribbon engine of the USA.
@@bobsakamanos4469 What is also not known was Studebaker was the Prime engine builder for the Wright R1820 for the B17, Ford USA the R2800 for the P47. Allison delivered the engines the USAAF ordered, the customer !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 Allisons proved themselves unreliable over and over again.
Great wngine but the Pratt and Whitney r1830 was the most widely used in the war, from the Gramman Wildcat to the Vickers wellington
For the Wellington about 220 were made out of the total production of over 11000 aircraft, most Wellintons were powered by the Hercules, the Merlin, and the Pegasus. The British often built batches of alternate engined aircraft to ensure that they could change should there be a production problem with one engine, thus the Hercules powered Lancasters.
It would have been interesting if you had compared a RR manufactured Merlin with a Packard V-1650 Merlin.
BTW - RR had an agenda to discredit the Napier Sabre 24 cylinder sleeve valve engine because it was attempting to develop its own version the Lion.
The Sabre was developed into the most powerful combustion engine once English Electric took over the company in 1942.
RR was adept at having things their way, well connected lobbyists in the Air Ministry. Several aircraft types were doomed by cancellations of RR engine projects, following into the jet age. They weren't able to bully Bristol quite the way they did to Napier.
@@coreyandnathanielchartier3749 Quite so
Napier Sabre was a very unreliable engine until very late in the war (Sabre V used post war). Bristol's engineers were recruited to help Napier improve their metallurgy and design. Typhoon pilots hated the engine and aircraft which had horrible vibration and CO gas in the cockpit.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Not so, the Typhoon had many problems but a great many Typhoon pilots loved it, it was a hotrod. The engine was very much a part of it. Yes, they complained about the aircraft but try and take it away from them, unless it was for a Tempest.
Bill Gunston, a prolific writer on aircraft, usually trashes the Sabre and the Typhoon, yet even he says that he greatly regrets not getting to fly a Typhoon or Tempest and also has written that the only thing more exciting to hear that a Typhoon taking off was a whole flight of them doing it.
Bristol engineers were not recruited at all, it is much simpler but at the same time more complicated than that and was not something that Napier or Bristol wanted. Don't forget that Bristol spent an enormous amount of money on developing the material for and machining of sleeve valves, estimated to be twice the amount of money that the British spent on the entire turbojet program. Napier was a small company and the Sabre was complicated with a lot more parts than most engines of the day - more parts, more failures.
The engine was quite well balanced for an aero engine, it was not the source of the vibration (which was corrected). The carbon monoxide was never fully solved but that was an airframe issue.
@@robertnicholson7733 Typoons and Tempests with the Sabre were scrapped after the war and Hawker went with the Bristol Centaurus on Fury's and Tempest II's for good reason. The Sabre was quite unreliable with engine failures on T/O and landing. I've spent a lot of time with vets who flew them and will believe their facts about the engine.
One point I would like to take issue with; I believe the first RR aero engine was the Hawk, Wikipedia is confused it says the Hawk was derived from the Eagle but also says the Hawk was first run in 1914 and the Eagle in 1915. As the Hawk was the same capacity as the Silver Ghost car engine it makes sense to me that it would have been the first.
I get to see these amazing power plants at Vintage V-12. They have them broken down during restoration so you can see all aspects of this Incredible engine.
2:19 "What did the Merlin sound like?"... Victory!
Agreed!
Well, 80 years later we know what a lie that is.
@@BasementEngineer And what was my friend?
@@jacktattis "Victory".
All the victorious countries are turning into cesspools.
Agreed that Germany is too but they lost the war.
What is the victors' excuse???
Just beautiful, congratulations for the great video!
Good video. A point of disagreement from your very opening remarks. it's historically correct to say that the Battle of Britain was the first significant defeat for the German forces. But it was a particular type of defeat that was new at that time: a defeat entirely in the air. In this, it was closer to a sea battle, where loss of territory isn't directly involved; the Battle of Britain was the precursor for the contest that never came. But unlike a sea battle, it didn't shift the German position of strength much vis-a-vis Britain itself. It just caused a redirection of effort to the East, where the Second War actually was fought and lost by Germany. Britain wasn't in the way of a larger plan for greater conquest as every other European battle was; indeed, Hitler probably saw Britain more strongly in the "natural ally of Germany" column than not.
Placing the Merlin at the centre of this ignores the fact that the war in the east, including that war in the air, didn't have the Merlin at its centre; it was present, but the Soviets - who aren't popular with me, but still - made the same completely justifiable claim that Russia does today, that they were the nation that bore the brunt of the war, and won it for the Allies - and lets not forget, they were our Allies.
The eastern war was at a scale far beyond the comparative skirmishing of the Battle of Britain. And I say this as the son of a still-living mother who as a 10 year old watched the Battle fought over her head in London. For her, that battle was heroic, horrifying, and glorious, and she understood that the existential stakes for Britain were absolute. But her historical understanding acknowledges that in the grand scope of the war, it was the so-called Great Patriotic War that made the difference that mattered most in Germany's defeat. The ongoing centralization of the Western conflict - and with it the Merlin, and British engineering in general - is persistent, but misplaced. And again, I say this as the son of Canadian engineer who worked for Napier (which I hope you've now learned to pronounce correctly), and apprenticed with some of the designers of the great Napier aero engines.
"Britain wasn't in the way of a larger plan for greater conquest" ... except that Hitler had his eye on conquering the USA, where he had a large number of supporters. And you are ignoring the support in terms of war materials that went from Britain to Russia.
It is of course absolutely correct to say that Soviet Russia eventually destroyed Nazi Germany. However, it is also likely that had Britain lost the Battle of Britain and been invaded and/or neutralised Hitler would have been fighting on only one front, the East. An isolationist USA would then have focussed only on Asia. Russia came within a hairsbreadth of losing against the Nazis and almost certainly would have done without UK/US assistance and Hitler’s incompetence. This is the importance of Britains survival. It was the fragile pin on which the pendulum swung to return it in the Western Allies favour.
@@djtwo2 Bullshit.
@@johnashton4086 That's why Britain is such a rathole today, because it "won" the war.
Had Britain stayed out of that skirmish, I submit she would be in better shape today.
@@johnashton4086 Germany was not about to invade Britain in 1940. It was a disrupt and delay strategy to protect their rear while they prepared to invade the USSR. From the Soviet retroactive perspective it was diversionary. BTW, the Sabre was NOT a good engine until the post war V was used in Tempests.
Excellent video as always but you had one notable ommission in the introduction of Allied aircraft powered by the Merlin : ie the legendary DH98 Mosquito.
You can see many Merlin powered aircraft at IWM Duxford as well an an Eagle engine. I had the pleasure of doing so last week.
One day I’ll head over to Duxford.
To clarify, Eagle V12 not Eagle 22?
@@piersdowell832 V-12
Thanks for the book reccomendation... I really enjoyed it!
you didn't mention the DH 108 Mosquito! Proably the best aircraft in WW2.
Lived the British spitfire with the rolls Royce Merlin engine
The mosquito was a partisipant in WWII But was not "The Best" !!! !
@@davidreed6264 the mossie had two, was faster, could go to Berlin and back carrying a 6000lb bomb! Obviously horses for courses, but the mossie was the first multi role, aircraft. And it was much safer to operate than the 4 engined heavies.
@@clive373 clive The mossie could carry 4 500# bombs in the bomb bay with no guns, and later the modifies mossie could carry a modifies 4,000# cookie bomb !!! Lie to you friend but do not try to BS the rest of us !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142😅😅😅😅😅
I love your videos. I'm getting an education about engines, due to air racing, that I have been around for decades.
Very well explained and plenty of facts .
Can you show more historical photos of what your talking about instead of your face
if you pay to license them
The Aluminium in the crankcases was a R/R owned alloy R/R 50
jack and IF the Brits wanted engines and etc they had to "share" that info !!!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 It was their engines fool
@@jacktattis Only after they were paid for dumb @$$ !!!! Sadly the USA made and GAVE the Brits over 31,000 free Merlin engines !!!! DUUUUHHH!!!!!!!
A great engine available when it was most needed...YES. Did it "win the war"? No. The Pratt and Whitney R-2800 was a great engine. Did it "win the war"? No. Nor did the Shvetsovs, Allisons, Mikulins, Sabres, Hercules, Centaurus, Griffons, Cyclones etc. People who fought won that war. Without them, any of these engines were big paperweights! None were worth squat without a good airframe and most importantly, a trained, intelligent pilot who knew as much about aerial warfare as his (not always a "he") opponent. The same can be said of any weapon that "supposedly "won the war". Ridiculous!
Those pilots wouldn't have been worth their salt without proper equipment. It's a balance and blend of quality education, personnel and industry. The fact you would discredit marvels of technology shows me that you yourself would have been a terrible pilot, flying a biplane into the jet age out of arrogance.
Good soldiers still need good equipment. Even the German Luftwafe had experienced pilots, but inferior planes to the Supermarine Spitfire.
This here is just plain stupid. Engines dont wage war, people do, so we can assume that there are always going to be people in a war. So if people are the constant it is indeed the Equipment that wins a war, i mean there are people on both sides.
I think the claim that the (brilliant) Merlin was the only reliable engine until 1943 fails to do justice to the Bristol Hercules. It was reliable as designed and had a similar power trajectory the the Merlin as it produced more power (1939 around 1400hp to 1943 1600-1700 hp).
There is nothing like hearing the whistle of air over the airframe combined with the steady throb of a Merlin pulling a Spitfire through the air.
Yes , the Beaufighter was very effective in many roles and the Sleeve valve Hercules was far more reliable than the Napier Sabre.
@@bobsakamanos4469 The Sabre was a much more highly stressed engine, revved much higher and produced more power out of slighlty less displacement. Yes, the Herc was a great engine, but the post was Fury prototype LA610 powered by the Sabre VII was superior in speed and rate of climb compared to the Centaurus powered prototype.
Late in the war the Sabre did become reliable and post-war they were quite good in the Mark V and VA, this is to be expected, as the Sabre design was started much later than the Merlin or the Herc, Napier was the smallest of the three main manufacturers, and the engine was by far the most complex with a lot of parts to fail.
Getting suitable workers for production and then managing them was a serious issue for Napier, the takeover did not really help and probably made things worse for a while.
The Beaufighter was probably far more respected here in Australia than elsewhere, very effective against shipping.
While the Merlin was legendary and in its final form was a good engine, it wasn't the absolute best. The biggest issue I have with it was their outright suppression and bullying tactics to keep their engines at the top.
Yeah, it was interesting to learn about the suppression tactics they used on Napier.
@@flightdojo If you ever have the chance, I know I'm not alone when I say we would love to see a video like this in depth history of the Wright engines and engine devolpment history and the Allison engines. Specifically, I'd like to know why the Allison's weren't able to match the RR engines neccesitating the need for the Merlin being put into the P51.
@@southronjr1570 Hi. The Allison V1710 was a very good engine, in many respects it was superior to the Merlin, but was let down by its supercharger which was optimised for low to medium altitudes. In the time period in question Rolls Royce had what were probably the best superchargers in the world, a result to a large extent of the lessons from the R engine for the Supermarine S6 and S6b Schneinder Trophy racers, plus they had the services of some superb engineers including Stanley Hooker. The 2 stage Merlin 60 series were originally being developed for use in a high altitude version of the Vickers Wellington bomber. When the German FW190 fighter appeared it completely outclassed the Spitfire MkV, the RAFs then main fighter. As an emergency measure a crash program was started to put a 2 stage intercooled Merlin into a MkV airframe creating the MkIX. This along with the MkXVI, which was basically the same plane with the Packard Merlin was to be the most produced variant. The Merlin 61 transformed the performance of the Spitfire at high altitude making it superior to most of the aeroplanes it was likely to meet at high level. At the same time the Mustang with the Allison engine was also in RAF service, but due to its poor performance at higher level it was relegated to operation at low altitude. I have often seen people on UA-cam and else where saying that the Allison Mustang was a failure, but I think this is just not true. At low/medium level it was considered the equal of anything it was likely to meet and was faster than most. Having seen the results of putting the Merlin 61 into the Spitfire Rolls Royce made the suggestion that similar results could be achieved by putting it into the Mustang. I think that when the Mustang was designed the possibility of the Merlin rather than the Allison was considered and so the job was not impossibly difficult. The first conversions were undertaken by Rolls Royce and the results exceeded the expectations of all but the Rolls people and their supporters.
Allison were handicapped in attempting to match the supercharger of the Merlin due to supercharger development in the USA being handled by a separate organisation. The idea from the 1930's from when the development dated was that for high altitude flight the mechanical supercharger would be supplemented by a turbo supercharger which was being developed by General Electric, as in the Lockheed P-38. The problem for aeroplanes such as the P-51 Mustang, P-40 and P-39 was that they were simply too small to accommodate the turbocharger which was developed mainly for use in Bombers. Take a look at the plumbing in the P-47 to see the scale of the problem.
A book I would recommend to anyone with more that a casual interest in the high power piston aircraft engines used by Germany, USA and the UK during WW2 is 'The Secret Horsepower Race' by Calum Douglas. He is a racing engine designer who also speaks German. In researching the book he had access to original German documents captured at the wars end and kept in store since.
Do you have a reference to the suppression and bullying tactics please?
@@southronjr1570 Actually the Allison engine out produced the merlins with the single stage superchargers, why the Allison Mustangs out ren the spitfire MkV below 20,000 ft and the 20 series merlin single stage had a second speed to give some boost above 20,000 ft. It was NOT Allison, it was their customer the USAAF and an arrogant ass that decided a turbocharger would be used for high altitude, but he was no engineer !!! Also interesting to note the 2 stage supercharger was invented and patented in The USA in 1938, and first plane to fly was the NAVY F4U-3 which used the PW R1820, and followed by the NAVYS F4U Corsair's PW R2800. RR did NOT invent the 2 stage supercharger, they improved the basic design !! ! The Allison was 1 liter , 60 cu in larger, 300# lighter and used only 1/2 as many parts as a merlin. and the Allison had a larger oil pump, stronger con rods and a roller tip on the rocker arms, merlin did not !!!
Jolly good show old man!
Molybdenum - pronounced mull-ib-dinnum
Good old Molly B Damned. As when it was found in the early days we didn't have a use for it.
My Reynolds 531 tubing racing bicycle frame is an alloy containing Molybdenum. It was a high quality Steel-Manganese-Molybdenum alloy, highly desired in its time.
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935
Probably 4130 drawn-over-mandrel (DOM). 4130 is steel alloy with main alloying constituents of Chromium and Molybdenum, commonly called Cro-Mo
I remember as a kid those that had proper bikes had CroMo frames but dreamt of Aly.
@@GroovesAndLands 100% probably Reynolds 531 alloy as stated.
Just found your channel…glad I did. Good job
Without Packard building the majority of these engines, all the work that Rolls-Royce did would not have mattered.
A quick search gives the following production figures for the Merlin. For the UK; Derby, 32,377; Crewe, 26,065; Trafford Park, 30,428; Glasgow, 23,675. Giving a total of 112,545. Packard USA; 55,523. This at a time when the UK was totally mobilised for war with labour shortages, particularly skilled engineering trades, and under air attack and blockade by enemy submarines. I in no way disparage the production contribution of Packard, but to claim as some seem to that they were responsible for the bulk of Merlin production is simply wrong.
Typical yank nonsense.
Duff comment.
It needs to be added here that without Packard's assistance, RR would
never have approached the volume they did in Merlin production.
The Merlin needed to be built in large quantities by people of all ages
and skill levels instead of only highly qualified craftsmen, and Packard knew
how to make MANY Merlins and at a higher level of overall quality than
RR was capable of before this collaboration began.
In short, RR production became MUCH higher after Packard showed them
how to do it and at the same time enhance quality.
@@danforthe2006 Is that you Soaring Tractor?
The Merlin was certainly the big success story in WW2. They had it up to 2100 hp in the Spit IX and was sprint tested (WEP) up to 2640 HP on the bench in 1944 Production plans were scuttled when jet engines came on the scene.
Ref 1940 Merlin III, the RAF was especially worried about the poor Hurricane performance and in March issued instructions for the modifications to prevent glycol leaks and to increase boost to 12 lb.
When the USAAF was conducting trials of 150 octane (P-51D, P-47D, P-38L) The Merlin was fine with 75" MP and in fact Merlins were operational in 1944 with 81" MP (25 lb boost), the P-38L Allisons (G variant) had problems as usual at only 70" & needing further engine improvements.
NOT TRUE !!! The Allison was able to take more boost than a merlin, a stronger engine !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 LOL, not even close to being reliable at high boost. Look at the Wright Field tests of the P-38L with 150 Octane - failure. P-82 - failure.
@@bobsakamanos4469 BULL$HIT !!! Are you smokin that wacky tabacky again ?????
@@wilburfinnigan2142 LOL, sorry son, that's your unbalanced generation.
@@bobsakamanos4469 Unbalanced generartion ???? I am of the GREATEST Generation !!!
Loving your videos sir! 🫡 amazing content, narration, editing. Made me smile to hear you say RPM like we do this side of the pond and not RPMs! 😂 The R is the plural of course.. thank you!! Keep up the amazing work ❤️🇺🇸🇬🇧🍻👍🤩👍
How independent was Packard’s inter/after cooling? I saw some cutaway drawings that suggested the Packard intercooling was at the output plenum of the first stage as opposed to RR’s second stage inlet position. It might not be the very most high tech part of the engine.
Those were ONLY used on the Packard V1650-3 or -7 or -9 which were only used on the P51 Mustang as almost all engines Packard delivered to the Brits, 37,137, were of the series 20 design using the SINGLE stage 2 SPEED version of the Merlin. ONLY the later 60 series and on used the 2STAGE 2 SPEED supercharger. Most people erronously believe ALL Merlins were the 2 stage 2 speed, but ooooh so WRONG !!!
Coolant ran through passages between the superchargers then to the aftercooler. Many diagrams refer to both as "intercooler". It was a brilliant design - a compromise between intercooling effectiveness and radiator size (ie increased drag) - something that the Allison lacked when they introduced their auxilliary supercharger system and NAA rejected them every time, starting in early 1941.
The Packard ran hotter, so they created a larger aftercooler. The result of that can be seen with the bulged upper cowl of the Spit XVI and late mark IX.
BTW love that book behind you "Catch 22."
Stanley Hooker's arrival at RR was shambolic. He applied for a job there, but hadn't told his government employer that he was looking to leave. Earnest Hive (who ran RR by then) phoned Hooker's boss in the middle of the job interview to ask what he thought of him! Talk about intimidating...
His start in the job involved him being left alone with nothing to do. Eventually, he got a copy of a report on the supercharger performance. He made some calculation and comments on it, and put it back in the out tray. Somehow this reached the right person, who, astonished, immediately put him in charge of supercharger design.
And the rest is history!
abarratt Hooker did NOT invent the 2 stage supercharger, that was invented and patented in 1938 in the USA !!! First plane to use it was the grumman F4F-3 Wildcat with the PW R1830 engine and the F4U Corsair with the PW R2800, Both Navy planes !!!
@@wilburfinnigan2142 I never said he did.
But he was in charge of supercharger development at RR, and he was rather better at it than anyone else.
@@abarratt8869 well said. His education/trg in fluid dynamics put him head and shoulders above the others.
@@abarratt8869 Not really !!! There were several designs of 2 stage superchargers his was just one...Jesse Vincent of Packard had his that went on the 2 stage Merlins Packard built ie the P51 Mustang B/C D/K & H that was more automated and pilot friendly, PW had one for the R2800 and the R1830, and there were the TURBO charger systems that fed the mechanical superchargers that were also 2 stage, PW Wright, Allison
@@wilburfinnigan2142 wow, that's a lot of misinformation. The Packard had an automatic gear change for the 2 speed supercharger drive licenced from Wright. Used not because it was better but because they didn't have to pay higher licencing fees to Farman. Packard faithfully repoduced the Merlin and benefitted from the RR research. The P-51H, BTW, used the Merlin 100 series engine with the British designed fuel injection system.
The war in the pacific was won by the Pratt and Whitney Double Wasp, not the Merlin
Really enjoyed, thanks!
That is a phenomenal amount of information regarding a single end-product. Done through collaborative engagement?
Teamwork makes the dreamwork?
Nice one! 😊
1st time visiting your channel and I absolutely love it
Whilst you mentioned the R-R 'X' configuration aero-engines you completely failed to mention that they were the work of one of the 20th century's greatest aero-engine designers, Arthur J. Rowledge. No mere bystander, Rowledge became a lead designer of the Merlin.
Rowledge did not have anything much to do with the Vulture, he headed the team on the Exe X24 which was the starting point for the X24 Pennine, he also designed the Napier Cub X16, a most unusual engine. Rowledge did some preliminary design work on the Merlin but after Royce died Elliot took over the project with a catastrophic effect on the engine. Of more importance, he designed the Kestrel, the Condor III, the Buzzard, and did much of the development work on the R. And of course, he also designed the Napier Lion
@@robertnicholson7733 I know that but did you know he designed a 2-speed propeller reduction gearbox for the R-R Eagle Mk IX? It was flight-tested in the mid-1920's.
@@andrerousseau5730 Yes,I knew he did the design but did not know it was flight tested, the need for such a thing was diminishing by then due to forced induction. He also did design work on both Napier and R-R cars, both engine and chassis, such as the power braking system used on the R-R. Back to aircraft, I also vaguely remember he worked on compound turbochargers. He also had a patent on a sleeve drive system for open-ended, two-stroke, sleeve valve engines, obviously intended for the Crecy, but the one they finally used was far more elegant, I don't know whether R-R designed it or Ricardo. Sadly, little is written about him.
Even worse, there is less on Stewart Tresilian, people hint about there being information on him but it never turns up. What I would really like to find out is who did what on the R (HX), there was Rowledge, Tresilian, Rubbra, Ellor, Banks, Hives, etc. I haven't found the names of all who were involved.
It has been speculated that Tresilian kept pushing to get the rpm as high as possible and this sounds correct, he was a firm believer in over-square engines. After the war he worked for a number of car racing companies (his true love) and in a time when most engines were still under-square, he was advocating a bore to stroke ratio of 1.8!!! Yes, there are higher numbers these days but back then, unheard of, he just couldn't get anyone to take the risk. Tresilian had a tendency to get fired or quit before being fired, but Hooker knew a good thing when he saw it and had Tresilian as his right-hand man at the time of Tresilian's untimely death. As an aside, W.O. Bently employed him to design the Lagonda V12 engine.
@@robertnicholson7733 One of R-R's leading lights was a brilliant engineer who went by the good, solid British name of Thomas Pitt de Paravicini. Extremely gifted and developed a 2-speed propeller reduction gearbox for the Eagle H42. His nephew was an acquaintance of mine, himself a gifted audio electronics engineer and designer. A great shame that none of these great figures ever properly received the kudos they deserved. Just compare and contrast the situation with say, Bulleid, Gresley, etc.
@@andrerousseau5730 Are we talking about a two speed propellor for the Eagle Mk22 H24 sleeve valve engine?
I knew the name as he was best known for his aerodynamic work, patented the so-called Meredith effect in 1936 and did the bulk of the design work on the Merlin's exhaust ejectors. I came across him as I am a great fan of Stewart Tresilian (as well as Rowledge, Halford, Ellor, Wilde, etc. but NOT Hives, at least not as an engineer) who was the Chief Designer at Armstrong Siddeley at the time Paravicini was there. Tresilian had worked for R-R when Paravicini was there before one of Tresilains rapid departures. I suspect that it was Treslian who lured Paravicini to A-S. There is a group of these engineers (and Hooker - remember - NOT an Engineer >:-)>) whose stories are all intertwined but are largely unknown except by aero engine nerds. All these books talk about the engines and this and that but we really need a book about all the engineers in the background as well as those in the light (Halford, Fedden, etc.) Even Callum's book gives most of these engineers short shrift. It would have been fascinating to find out why they made the decision they did, it is why I am not fond of books that have opinions and conclusions, they are always based on some hindsight, even a recent one, the conclusions in that one are based on hindsight such as knowing when the war would start and more importantly end. What would the stories of the Sabre, Jumo 222, Pennine, Jumo223, etc, be had the war continued to say 1948 without turbojets. Even with turbojets, in the Pacific with its vast distances and their limited range.
Anyhow, his name is familiar for some other reasons but I can't bring them to mind, he may have worked on Tresilain's updated Wolfhound, probably the cooling - they almost got that dog of an engine >>:)> to work properly. Tresillian was working on a further Mark of the Wolfhound and Boorhound when he (yet again) rapidly departed, this time fired by Sopwith. Was he involved in the shrouding of the Exe? That was a Rowledge engine. So many unknowns
Very good presentation.
I acquired Graham White's marvelous ALLIED AIRCRAFT PISTON ENGINES OF WORLD WAR II very soon after it was published. Your wonderful video reminds me that I need to pull that book down from my bookshelf and go through it again. :-)
Check out the RR Historical Series books. The Merlin in perspective - the combat years
Alec Harvey-Bailey
and
Rolls-Royce and the Mustang David Birch.
Abe Books currently lists copies of both books.
Good explanation of Miss Shilling's Orifice.
As a bog standard Eniglishman, I would probably pronounce Agincourt, 'aszhin-court' , say it quickly and maybe drop the 't' if wanted to sound like a 'history buff' off the BBC , something like 'aszhincor' .. best I can do. All said and done, it's French so ask them :) It's a bit like how you guys say "shire", when it comes to places like Devonshire, however, we would generally pronounce it "Devonsher", Staffordshire would be "Staffordsher" and so on. Either way, wonderful Video and keep up the good work :)
Always interesting that the schools no longer teach elocution. These days, subtitles are needed when watching Brit shows, so I watch Irish programs & movies instead.
Really great videos , thanks
Can you do a vid covering how much engine difference fuel octane made in WW2?
This is the great history lesson on a great engine… But as an engine builder, I’d prefer hands-on, taking it apart kind of stuff. I don’t know it’s just me ,anyway keep on rocking
Great video
Suggest reading the report (1946) by A.C. Lovesey, delivered to D.H. aircraft company, on Merlin development during it's service . Heavy reading, detailed analysis , lots of charts, and diagrams of failures and improvements. IOW, the kind of engineering geek stuff you don't often encounter these days.
Well said. By the end of the war the new Merlin WEP was 2640 hp. Lovesey provided an excellent briefing note on the Merlin wartime development.
Merlin == bird of pray. Rolls Royce started calling their aircraft engines after birds of prey with the World War One "Eagle". We then had the more famous ones - Merlin, Kestrel, Griffon, and the not-so-famous Goshawk, Exe, Peregrine, and Vulture. also they did use fuel injection on a later stage.
Sorry, but the Exe is not named after a bird of prey but after a river, as it was an air-cooled, sleeve valve X24, it was in a different classification to the Merlin. The only other engine in the class was the Pennine, which was named after a mountain. The Exe was later renamed the Boreas (after a mountain) when R-R decided to name their turbines after rivers. I am sure that clarifies things.
If not, the last piston aircraft engine they designed was the Eagle 22 which should have been named after a mountain as it was a sleeve valve design, this engine was the third aircraft engine design with the same name (the second, the X16 Eagle never saw production). Now, conventions are made to be broken, but in two different ways, yep, why not.
You also left out the Falcon, Hawk, Condor, and Buzzard.
Seen one at the HARS museum in Albion Park NSW Australia.
Literally watched this the day it came out then the next day had a lecture on how rolls Royce came to be. Best pre-reading I’ll ever do lol.
thanks so much my dad and I watched this video dad 96 🙏 had his fist solo in a AT6 Harvard or American Texan then called to scrambled jumped in a spitfire it was he called the sports car of the air I'm lucky to have a friend and dad appreciate you
Had to have a chuckle at the part where you state 'a light compact aftercooler' You've obviously never tried to pick one up! Great video though, thanks for all your effort.
I prefer flying merlins they sound way better because they are airworthy , not junk on a trailer..
I love the video of the shop in tehachapi California. I don't fly but I did go to hydros in the '70s.
Great video thank you for sharing.. will say though before the last 6 years I always said I could never get bored of hearing the merlin planes in all their guises, but in the past 6 years there’s a spitfire ( a couple now and again going over this month) but in summer they have flights you can pay to have the experience in, the poor little plane goes over our house and back to land from 9 in the morning till about 8 at night and the flight probably lasts 7 minutes, honestly it’s constant I swear if you couldn’t see them land You’d think the passenger would have to jump out as the next got in without the planes wheels ever touching the ground 😂, and sometimes there’s 2 going, ( think if you pay a certain price) they do rolls and half loops which is cool and I only really see them doing that in the evenings ,I live in Gosport ( uk) right on the Solent where the shnider races took place. soo many great events took place in the past here like the fleet reviews eg .. must have been amazing to see.
Kind regards Carl