B-17 ENGINES IN DEPTH! Genius Or Insanity?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 8 бер 2024
- Take an in depth look at the legendary "Memphis Belle" Engines and learn about the equipment and role in which all B-17s flew to their target. Learn about the bloody war in the skies above Europe in M.A.C. B-17 series.
#history #aviation #eaa #airplane #b17 #b-17 #boeing #airforce #warbirds #bomber #ww2 #ww2games #germany #usa #usaf #planes #bombers #disney #disneyplus #apple #appletv #hbomax #documentary #war #engineering #enginesound #engines #radialengine - Авто та транспорт
Genius or insanity? Clickbait titles deserve to be ignored. Buh bye
Great job ignoring it. Comments feed the system and there's thousands of likes and views here.
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Yeah, I'm sure you're making enough to keep you up to your arse in Airfix models.
Dude! Being a little Weasel is WHY She Cheated on you in the first place !!! That and your tiny junk
@@ps5801 I love these guys! If he watched any of the rest of the channel he may learn our models all fly with people inside and shoot live ammo.
Hey Scottie, I’d tell you to check out that lo$ers ☝🏻“videos” but your probably out flying in the B-29 today OR the B-17 OR the B-24 OR the Mustang OR even that B-25 , OR perhaps you’re driving one of the Tanks down to Shoot it … besides his “Videos” are Smoldering GARBAGE Anyway - with VERY Few Views and even Fewer Likes!!! WHATEVER He suggests Do The Exact Opposite
The nine-cylinder radial engine has two cam rings. One exhaust, one intake. Each ring has four lobes and rotates opposite the crankshaft's rotation. Also, each cam ring rotates at one-fourth engine RPM. I'm quite familiar with engine mechanics, but this arrangement still amazes me, and I don't fully understand how it works. But it does. The cam rings are partially visible in the cutout. Also they had roller lifters, which are very common today, but unusual for the 1930s and 1940s. Remarkable engineering, and achieved w/o computers, CAD-CAM, or CNC. Those engineers were geniuses. Up close and personal, nothing sounds quite as awesome as a big, radial engine. I got to ride in a B-17 about a decade ago, for $450, and it was worth every cent. I sat in the nose gunner's seat and "strafed" herds of cattle that we flew over in fields surrounding the airport. Quite an experience. No cattle were harmed!
On one hand it's UFO technology, when you look into it, it's amazingly simple to understand compared to today's engines. Thankyou for watching! Glad you got a 17 experience flight in!
Roller lifters were only uncommon in automobile engine's back then, every motorcycle engine I've seen the inside of from the mid teens up had roller lifters even the flathead motorcycle engine's.
The only reason I can think of why the automobile industry used flat tappet lifters so extensively is because with them you don't have to solve the rotation issue like you have to with roller lifters, it simplifies the design, aside from that I couldn't guess as to why they used flat tappets in their engine's when it seems like everyone else used roller tappets.
Good reasoning. Likely flat tappets were cheaper to manufacture, too.@@dukecraig2402
Each cam ring operates at 1/8 engine RPM . . . . . not 1/4. Each cam ring does, indeed, rotate opposite the crankshaft's rotation. You're right . . . . these 1820s were a work of genius!
Thanks for that correction.@@PhrankTube
The piston engine planes from WW2 are some of the most incredible engineering in a time of only pencil to paper and slide rules, no computers just pure genius, I love them
all accomplished without what modern society calls "diversity". it is amazing what our people can accomplish when left alone.
Absolutely! And the time constraints on top of it!!
@westerncivilization And sadly we gave a lot of things away!!
@@westerncivilization That's a pretty silly statement. Do you mean made by white people?
@@mikes9759 Britain gave a lot to us, too. But if you agree with him, I don't expect you to think past your comfort level...
I flew with my dad in one of these. He was an engineer in WW2 in them. He told me the engines were under powered for the job they had to do. MIss you dad, he left us at 97
Incredible to have a memorable experience like that. If he was an engineer check out our top turret video in the series.
Beautiful Memories 🇺🇸 God Bless him 🙏
Then your dad was wrong.
@@prophetsnake A WW2 B-17 Veterans opinion counts for a lot, right or wrong. Here's a Prophet for you Prophet Snake, your opinion doesn't matter.
@@HH-COactual Then you are a liar. And guess one, one of us has flown an airplane powered by 1820s, and it wasn't you.
I was in the Navy for 20 years, 1970-1990 and worked on 3 aircraft that used the R-1820. The T-28, Grumman S-2 and the Grumman C-1. Always a reliable piece equipment.
I had no idea the engine was in service that long. Very impressive.
Yup. Although I was a jet guy, I was lucky enough to fly all 3 of those birds. Great engine.
@@bobharrison7693 I also worked on a EC-121 Lockheed Constellation in my first squadron. I also worked on the F-4, A-3, A-4, H-2 helicopter, A-6 and the F-4. I carried 5 aircraft NECs. The first squadron I was in, VAQ-33, had 4 different aircraft types. I was also on the Forrestal (VA-85), and Nimitz (AIMD). I worked on the F-14 at the Depot in Norfolk and just retired from the Coast Guard Depot in Elizabeth City, N.C. on Dec. 31st.. I'm 72 and it's all I've ever done. I was also raised on Naval Air Stations until I joined the Navy.
Thank you for your Service 🇺🇸
a Fascinating time in Aviation
You forgot the Grumman HU-16 Albatross Rescue Amphibian, burning 115\145 grade avgas its twin late model R-1820 Cyclone 9,s had a pony count of 1525 for take off, not bad for a single row radial partly designed by Ex Armstrong Siddeley Engineer S,D Heron in the late 1920,s .
As a retired aerospace senior quality engineer, it’s mind-boggling that these engine systems were designed with brain-power, math books, and slide rulers!
When looking at the cut-away display engine, the complexity of the gears, cylinder firing sequence, fuel injection, compressed air, and oil distribution systems were all made by manual manufacturing equipment. And interchangeable from different manufacturing companies. Absolutely impressive. 🇺🇸
You are absolutely right, unbelievable some of the things we come up with.
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany
Today, we celebrate the prospect of losing the ability to do such things.
How? We are inviting Artificial Intelligence into our lives.
Take a look at a cut away of a Bristol sleeve valve radial if you like complicated .
Truth!
They were made by Machinists. lol look that one up, not green button pushers! What an incredible trade!
Radial engines are a fantastic combination of sheer genius and utter insanity.
Someone who finally understands my well thought out title! Welcome to the channel my friend.
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Another idiot, in other words
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany I don't see the insanity though. Everything in the engine made sense. It was a smart evolution of the ICE, optimized for higher altitude.
Gamers and armchair generals don't appreciate the value of America's compression technology. Our aircraft could operate at 30,000 feet while the Germans struggled to be relevant at 20,000 feet. Germany's lack of supercharging meant they had to have huge displacement engines, at a cost of range.
Thanks to the automobile manufacturers' understanding of materials, critical engine components were made from specific alloys, tricks like sodium-filled valves to combat predetonation, and of course the materials to build 20,000rpm blowers and knowing the appropriate boost settings all played a critical role in dominating the air.
The B-17 airframe is so classic. It's fun to daydream about a civilian B-17 that is powered by two turboprops. That would be the ultimate Rich Person's toy.
Two turboprop DC3 do exist. Great plane
My father was a ball turret gunner in B-17s in North Africa during WWII. When I was a young kid, he was always telling me that the superchargers and turbochargers on the B-17 engines increased their Volumetric Efficiency(VE). I never knew what that really meant until I took a class in thermodynamics in college.
Note: From an online Brian Nutter Tech Article ------ At sea level, the air is more dense. This means that there are more air molecules inside the cylinder. In the mountains, the opposite is true. The same engine would operate at a higher VE at sea level than in the mountains. You can improve VE by making it easier for air to flow. This is the idea behind aftermarket intake manifolds, cold air kits, porting and polishing cylinder heads, and headers. Pumping more air is also the idea behind superchargers, turbos, and nitrous. These power adders force more air into the cylinder. When the fuel and ignition systems are properly tuned, this can raise VE over 100 percent and make tons of power. (From "On All Cylinders" Tech Article 05/11/2017 by Brian Nutter
First rate description! Thankyou for the information. Stay tuned with us, a huge Ball Turret video comes in 2 weeks. It will be the best one on the internet.
great description. That thinner air was much easier to fly through. All the trade-offs; burning the fuel to get up there, saving fuel by being there, less accuracy in bombing, which led to development of better bomb sights, then almost gliding back to base.
Several years back, I worked on the ramp when the Collins Foundation was visiting during one of their B-17 and B-24 tours. Both planes started up together and did their engine warm-ups. During the warm-up, you could hear the difference in the B-24's R-1830s and B-17's R-1820s sound. The Wright engines sounded smoother running, versus the Pratt engines which had more of a tick to them. Great engines both, which you could count on in bringing you home.
He mentioned Sam Heron, who was a genius whose contribution to aircraft engine development came at a critical time in history. His employment of sodium as a heat transfer medium was paramount in the development of other industries as well. Respect.
Yes absolutely. Jeff was the right man for the job on this topic!
Sodium, having a low melting point, would slosh around inside the valve to improve heat transfer.
Wow every day is a school day, Sam worked for Armstrong Siddeley Motors of Coventry Warwickshire UK, for he designed the Jaguar first half way reliable twin row radial in the early 1920,s.
Should be called Heron valves.
@@peterclark6290 I think you are right, with out Sam,s breakthrough, we could not have won the Battle of Britain,. Rollers of Derby used sodium cooled exhaust valves on the Merlin and Griffon, enabling high power ratings with improved reliability.
The aircraft I worked on in the Navy had 1820-9 radial engines Grumman S-2 Anti Submarine Warfare. This was in early 70s I was fortunate to have a "Turn card" so I could start engines to insure Hydraulic leaks and issues were properly repaired. I loved starting those round motors. Still my favorite engine type to hear run.
The courage and determination of the air crew is definitely worthy of praise but the ground crews and logistics that kept these planes in the air was nothing short of remarkable. Everyone understood that they had a job to do and lives depended on their getting it right.
Very true. Agreed!
My dad was an aircraft powerplant mechanic during WW2 based in India. They would do the maintenance and overhauls of the engines. One thing that my brother reminded of was that once an engine was ready to go back into service, that engine, using a test stand, was run at full throttle for 24 hours before it could be put into an aircraft.
@@user-do8ul2zi4v
Better to break on the stand. 24 hours seems like a lot. They earned their title of “greatest generation”.
Very true. On the other hand the Germans had engines manufactured by forced workers and prisoners, with lost of sabotaged key elements. Also courageous resistant people.
Grangeville Idaho is home to Aero Motor and they rebuild these engines. I have family over there and I stumbled across this place and was amazed. They gave me a tour and they rebuild everything, heads, crankshafts, all the major and minor assemblies. The dyno run is cool.
Very cool! Didn't know there was a place in Idaho for that. I would imagine it's a rare skill set to maintain.
I'm not sure which Pratt it was, but many years ago I read an article about the recollections of a WWII German engineer. He said they knew they were in trouble when they dissected a downed P&W engine. They couldn't believe the case halves were so well machined that they didn't need a gasket between them, and worse, that these were being built in high production quantities.
American industry in High Gear right there.
Then he was lying. The Germans were building licensed copies of Pratt and Whitney engines before the war.
I took a ride on the movie version of the Memphis Belle back in 2013 in Wichita, KS. I went with my 83 yr old dad, it was a great time. They flew us for about 45 minutes all around Wichita including flying over the old Boeing factory and our local McConnel Airforce Base. It was exciting because the gunner doors were open and you could literally lean out of the airplane while taking pics and videos. Also, the top gunner's bubble was just a hole that you could stick your head out of as well. An experience that I will never forget. Sadly, my dad passed away only one month later, but, he had a blast on the flight and couldn't quit smiling.
Glad you got to experience a 17 ride! With you dad makes it better. Check out our video on Bomber Camp, Lots more happening in a B-17 then just the ride!
The Depth of Mr Duford’s knowledge is astounding - he was Absolutely the Right man for that job!
When we talk about the bombing campaign in Europe, we often think of the brave crews that risked their lives but we rarely discuss the gorund crews keeping these planes in the air. These old radials were effective and reliable but under war time conditions rewuired a lit of maintenance. Just the 20 hour checks alone were involved. I can't remember the exact interval but around 200 hours, they need top overhauls. They really pushed as much horsepower they could get out of them. My grandad was A&P mechanic on the B-24 but went to school on the B-29. There was a course he took to learn how to do an overhaul blindfolded. This was incase they were in bombing blackout conditions and still had to get the planes repaired. He had a lot of good stories to tell.
Great information. Welcome to the channel! Ground crew of course need time in the spotlight. Hopefully we can cover them in depth. Also the guys back him working tireless hours with coke bottle lens glasses and a drafting board to make ideas become reality. I have full B-17 plans. 21000 technical drawings in there.
One of the big advantages of turbochargers is the ability to vary the amount of boost they produce. In an airplane, this helps to keep engine power constant as they climb, even though the ambient air gets thinner. With mechanical superchargers, there's a single altitude where the supercharger delivers maximum boost. Turbos can deliver constant manifold pressure over a wide range of altitudes, varying the speed of the turbine (and thus boost) by varying how much exhaust was sent through the turbine or bypassed through a wastegate.
Isn't there a 'waste gate' or a 'bleed gate' between the 'charger and the engine to allow the correct boost to the engine & either bleed or waste the excess compressed air?
@@danquigg8311 You're probably thinking of a blow-off valve like that found on cars, but that's mainly for cases when the throttle slams and leaves the boost air nowhere to go. Aircraft engines generally operate at mostly or wide-open throttle, and don't have times where the throttle slams closed like when you shift a car's transmission, the throttles generally stay at a particular setting for long periods of time. Wouldn't surprise me, though, if there was a blow-off valve in the intake somewhere to deal with transients.
My stepfather was an aero engineer and I remember how we looked at a cutaway of a radial, and I exclaimed that it looked insanely complicated and that it must be expensive as hell! But he said no, what is really difficult is making the mould for a V12 block. It requires very experienced workers and that is a major obstacle in ramping up production war-time. All steps in the manufacturing of a radial is a lot simpler. We looked around and found a quite reliable source that stated a price for a Merlin about twice that of an R2800.
Very interesting perspective. What could that say about the British using their V blocks in medium and heavy bombers even though they had radial engines as well? Would their design be more complicated and more expensive then the US counterparts?
What is really amazing about all of these engines, they were designed, and blueprints were all done by hand. The manufacturing process was done by hand. Sheet metal work, casting, forging, machining, all done on manual machine tools. No CAD. Yet you could take any part off the assembly line and fit it to any engine. There was some parts matching, either in dimensions, or in weight, but they did not have to custom machine a part to fit an engine. That is an amazing accomplishment for the time.
Agreed! Glad you enjoyed the video.
I have a friend that owns both a Harvard T-6, and a T-28B. He has quipped on a few occasions that a radial engine is the best means of turning money into amazing sound.
That engine was one of the secret weapons of the 8th AF. Bombers returned home with entire cylinders shot away, and the engine still turning. It's a major factor in the legendary status of the B-17.
Absolutely. Agreed.... the insanity of believing it would work and the genius in making it a reality.
Got any references for that on 4 engine bombers? Surely the pilot would shut down a damaged & overheating through oil loss engine and fly home on 3 or two engines, rather than risk a fire and catastrophic wing failure.
Cutaway: I was surprised at how thin the cylinder walls were. Exhaust driven Turbo and superchargers do actually take a littler engine power to run because of the exhaust back-pressure.
Exactly! The turbine wheel, and the plumbing leading to it (diameter/density changes, bends etcetera) all creates resistance against the piston trying to push that exhaust out, but people seem to forget that as you're forcing more air (and flowing more fuel) to produce much more power than it costs. It creates a bit of a deadly circle with turbo-superchargers (and modern-day turbocharging) as the more air/fuel you force into the cylinders, the more exhaust gases need to come out, and therefore more back-pressure
@@YouNameItGaming I always thought it was really neat how Boeing tucked the landing gear inside the rear of the engine nacelle. Seemed to work well even with a bit of the tire showing. Amazing how the B-17 was state-of-the-art at its important place-in-time. And, one of the only things the Damn Ruskys didn't copy.
On the Wright R-3350 Duplex-Cyclone engines they used exhaust turbines NOT as superchargers.
These engines had 3 turbines in the exhaust system(s) that each fed 150 kW onto the crankshaft of the engine.
That makes sense when fuel efficiency is more important than performance at height.
These were the engines used in the Constellation and the Super Connie.
Also I think the A1 Skyraider... the warbird I wish I owned
I want to say thank you all for your work, friends. I sent the link to my friend, his grandfather, who served at the Poltava airfield. He was glad to hear and see this plane and the “brave Americans” again. Thanks again. Best wishes.
Danny.
Thanks for watching mate! Plenty more coming! Its B-17 season currently however tanks will make a big appearance again soon.
I was a recip engine mechanic in the Air Force back in 62-66.
I worked on the R-2000, R-1300, R-4360 and sometimes the R-3350 PRT.
Love sound of those big radials.
Absolutely a one of a kind sound!
So many moving parts. Truly incredible
Fying in one of them on a bombing run must have been scary as hell at 40 below in a non-pressurized plane. The crew must have felt very vulnerable with 109s flying around at about 100 mph faster and flak popping up everywhere. Makes me glad I wasn't born yet.
Absolutely. Brave men. Thanks for watching.
1:40 Some Mopar guys are really confused about seeing a hemispherical chamber on an aircraft engine...
Hemispherical combustion chambers go WAY back, at least to 1901 for car engines.
Amazing how fast technology changed in a very period of time. The developments during WWI and before II you see so many major developments
In a constant speed prop, full power is at full fine pitch where it effectively is just a fixed pitch prop. You use this for takeoff and landing in the event of a go around.
Its great advantage is that it can go to feather position in the case of an engine failure.
Another advantage of it is the blade shape doesn't need to be as compromised as a fixed pitch where every shape is a compromise.
For those that don't know, when in variable pitch mode, the prop RPM is controlled by propeller pitch lever and tacho, the throttle controls manifold pressure. The prop governor infinitely varies the propeller blade pitch (between the coarse and fine stops) to maintain the selected RPM.
Say you set 2100rpm and 35" manifold pressure, then the manifold IN HG power setting + RPM + indicated airspeed cause the propeller pitch to vary infinitely to maintain that RPM no matter what - the pitch in this instance would be fairly coarse than if you say changed the manifold pressure to 24" with the same RPM where it would 'fine off' a bit.
Usually there is a power setting chart that tells the pilots the optimum combo of manifold pressure & RPM for a given weight and altitude that factors for cruise speed and fuel consumption.
When the prop pitch control is the full fine position then the throttle acts as it would in a fixed blade aircraft, or similar to a car throttle where more throttle = more RPM usually.
Also re turbochargers, he's dead wrong about it not costing HP. It is a direct engine engine pumping loss. If you're using engine exhaust to pump pressure then you're using power. Work is being done. It is true that the power loss vs a mechanical supercharger is less. Also Superchargers are at a disadvantage on their own, since each revolution delivers a known volume of air. As elevation increases the air can't fill the supercharger so it's effect drops off since it's a positive displacement pump.
A turbocharger is free spooling so can provide boost - however it also begins to suffer the effects of altitude gain - as do jet engines. It is a fact of life the higher you go the less power you can make but the fuel efficiency increases due to the fact that you also pick up a lot of airspeed for free. 150 knots indicated airspeed is probably closer to 220 ground speed in still air at say 25,000ft. That's 70 knots of free speed meaning less time to destination therefore less fuel burn.
As someone who has thousands of hours in radial engine airplanes and an AME, I find many flaws in your statement on how these engines work.
I saw the Sentimental Journey B17 at an airshow in the mid '80s. A couple of interesting things I remember about the engines. 1 was tagged Wright Aeronautical, 2 were General Motors, and 1 Studebaker. The center hub of the turbocharger exhaust bucket wheels were branded Allis Chalmers.
Amazing you remember those details! There's Passion in the subject right there.
I flew on the Sentimental Journey in July of 2013 in the nose. Navigator and bombardier seat. What an experience! And I checked that one off of my bucket list. 😊
Isn’t it WONDERFUL ? We are Blessed to have done It
ALL such flights are now no longer allowed because of a recent B17 crash that took multiple lives.
IIRC it was pilot error
The FAS is not allowing these pay to fly flights any longer
@@philgiglio7922 That's why I flew on one a long time ago. I saw the writing on the wall even back then thinking that insurance companies were going to stop allowing it.
As they say "If God intended engines to be in-line, Pratt & Whitney would have built one"
Thats hillarious lmao
The radial engine was fantastic in its design and an amazing piece of engineering,turbo supercharger is amazing.
Glad you enjoyed the video, check out the rest of the B-17 Series.
I’ve got many thousands of hours behind a radial engine, a PW 985. They never let me down in almost 40 years behind them!
Hell yea! Love radials. We see them in the tank world as well.
The radial engine that blows my mind is the British sleeve radial, Centaurus, no overhead valves, talk about mechanical motion
Turbochargers are increase their efficiency with higher altitudes since the pressure drop across the turbine is greater as the atmospheric pressure drops. Great system!
I am so glad to see the Memphis Belle restored to her original self. When I was a kid in Memphis, the Belle sat on a concrete pedestal in front of the National Guard Armory located on East Parkway at Central Avenue. There she sat, rusting and deteriorating for years before being rescued for preservation.
Very cool! Yes she's in the best place she could be now!
My father was a waist gunner on a B17 became a flight engineer after the war sat on a wing on a C47 while he changed an exhaust manifold then we taxied down the runway to test the repair. He served in WW II Korea and Vietnam the greatest generation
Thankyou to him and Thankyou for watching
I remember the scene in the movie "Memphis Belle" in a raid when a crew member spills a flask of tomato soup and thinks he's bleeding to death.
Navy ADR 2 in the early 70s and loved working on these radial engines. 1800s and 2800s.
Radial engines were clearly engineering genius from that era. The low melting point of sodium allowed for better heat dissipation as it sloshed around the internal chamber of the exhaust valve. Not mentioned in the engine description and of interest: all radial engines have odd numbers of cylinders to facilitate the every other cylinder firing order, which even applies to multi-bank engines like the R-2800, R-3350, R-4360. The crankshaft travels in a concentric path around the propeller drive gearing, There is a master cylinder with a fixed connecting rod, while the remaining cylinders have articulating connecting rods.
Excellent information.
The issue was the wright was an older engine design but very reliable engine by the time of the war. It couldn’t be easily upgraded to the Pratt and Whitney double wasp more powerful engine, because of all the electric attachments which were essential for the B17. Ironically the Boeing B-50 Superfortress revision of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, addressed this similar issue by fitting the more powerful Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radial engines post war.
MAP had a strategy of power egg or pod, so each major aircraft could be powered by an alternative engine whilst maintaining the specification. This can be argued it was unnecessary over engineering and waste of resources, but it allowed errors to be addressed. Consequently you had the Tempest II Bristol Engined and Tempest V Napier Engined chosen for production, but Tempest I, III and IV design being rejected but ultimately leading to the Bristol engined Sea Fury.
The Handley Page Halifax had a similar issue originally with Merlin XX , but incorrectly positioned on the wing resulting in additional drag. This was corrected with the mark III with the installation of the Bristol Hercules with aerodynamic improvements. Handley Page had developed their own design for the power egg instead of using the typical, slimmer Rolls-Royce counterpart; despite generating increased drag, this was a mistake. Obviously the ultimate successful reengineering was the fitting of the Merlin 65 in the outstanding North American P51 airframe.
The R-1820 in the post war Navy E-1A (ne WF) Tracker was rated at 1500 hp.
Highly interesting! Tnx. alot!
One of the biggest advantages of the turbo supercharger was its ability to maintain the right amount of boost no matter what altitude (though it would gradually reduce once the waste gate was fully closed).
A single-stage supercharger was “ground boosted” meaning that it produced way too much boost at low altitudes.. so it was reduced with the throttle. The problem was that the engine had to work hard to produce full boost all of the time.
A two speed supercharger had the problem of cutting in and out at certain altitudes. Fly a bit too low and the low speed would cut in, reducing horsepower.
The Luftwaffe did solve this by having a hydraulic drive for the superchargers that always ran at the correct speed for the conditions.. as well as having direct injection which allowed for much higher boost levels without detonation.
One thing you must remember too about the turbocharger is TINSTAAFL. It indeed costs engine power to operate it.
Great feedback, excellent information.
I read that the Belle was re-engined 9 times in the course of its service life.
We have a future video coming out on the Belle and all its in field Mods and upgrades.
Wow great video.
Thanks Jeff for the explanations.
The DWG # and high and low angle info on blades is really important. The hydrostatic prop is ground adjustable. Inside the hub are 2 stop rings . One for high angle and one for low angle . Have degree marks on them.
all the engineering done with paper pencils and slide rulers. Incredible. Connecticut's Hamilton Standard. Excellent video
Thank you very much! Glad you enjoyed it. Please check out the rest of the series.
The “belch!” of oil smoke when a radial starts….
Love it!
Damn Skippy !!!! 💨
Speed of technological development at that time is astounding. 1930s...Imagine airplanes just 15-20 years before that..
Absolutely. Part of the "Genius" in the title.
Then sadly they are looking at the wrong videos,
I am lucky to have worked around and flown piston props, radials and big Vs,
Generations coming through now never will have that honour to experience, these videos are a contact point for them.
Stay safe
they were vastly outdated by 1943, but due to the electrical systems being intertwined with the engines it would have cost too much to refit them with newer engines, which is why the G model remained with them while other bombers gained engine upgrades
Out dated? The R-1820 was used up into the 1980s on the Navy C-1.
youre comparing a non direct combat aircraft that hunts submarines with no risk of air to air action with a direct combat heavy bomber that saw action against enemy fighters. the engine was outdated for the use on heavy bombers
the RAF and USAAF continuously throughout the war updated the powerplants on all their bombers, even the B29 had two engine updates, yet the B-17 was stuck with an engine first designed in 1930s when there were other radial options that could have aided the B-17 but couldnt be implemented because of bad aircraft designing by boeing on the part of electrical systems@@bobharrison7693
I was amazed when I found out that it was only a single bank radial.
Absolutely. Thanks for watching.
Samual Heron was born and educated in England attending Goldsmiths College and Durham University.
"Heron worked at the Royal Aircraft Factory. From 1915 to 1916 he worked with Professor A.H. Gibson on the first systematic research into the design of air-cooled engine cylinders. They concluded that (1) aluminium should be used for efficient conduction (2) the cylinder head should be in one piece because conduction through metal-to-metal interfaces could not be guaranteed (3) the cylinder head should provide the shortest escape path for heat at the hottest parts across the greatest cross section".
Very interesting.
And he wrote a whole book explaining these developments and others. History of the Aircraft Piston Engines: A Brief Outline. Published in 1961. A must read for motorheads. It’s not cheap if you can find a copy.
The statement that turbo superchargers dont use engine power is false. Turbochargers are driven by the exhaust stroke of the pistons, they generate parasitic loses. Turbochargers cause backpressure in the exhaust system, and the crankshaft has to apply energy to drive the piston upwards on the exhaust stroke to force air through the turbocharger. It is not free energy.
That was a really good explanation of superchargers! I finally understood what they were really for; for squeezing the very thin air at high altitude. Thank you for the great explanation!
Glad you enjoyed. Thankyou for the kind words. Plenty more on B-17
In 1979-80 I got to work on A US-2B Tracker powered by the R-1820-82. That was with a Naval Air Reserve Unit. NARU
"valves filled with sodium" and tipped with stellite... we were trained on these engines in the 70's at Aviation High School.
Very cool! Thanks for watching.
Great job explaining the engine design especially the turbo charger/super charger system
Thankyou for watching and for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the video.
Powering the supercharger with exhaust gas probably made it more reliable, too. A perfect link between throttle and boost.
The supercharger was gear driven,
My Dad was a B 24 Driver, he used to talk about them flying 4,000 feet higher and watching the B 17s slowly falling behind as they headed home. The B24s had R2250s.
I Had dear friends who had flown both the 17 and the 24 - I loved how they’d bust eachothers ballz…
the best wisecrack I recall was a 17 pilot who said the B-24 was the Box a B-17 came in 😁 I love them both / been fortunate enough to have flown in both
The B-24 had Pratt & Whitney R-1830 twin row 14 cylinder radial engines.
We have big plans to cover B-24 as well! "Diamond Lil and Strawberry Bitch." Let us know what you want to see from them.
Wrong the late model Flying Whale were fitted with turboed Pratt& Whittney R-1830 Twin Wasps, similar to those in the DC-3 C-47 Dakota 'Gooney Bird' and Bristol Beaufort.
My grandmother was a ‘Rosy the Riveter’ at Willow Run B24 bomber plant near Detroit, Michigan. She used to tell of writing notes on chewing gum wrappers. She stuck them between the aircraft’s ribs and skin to encourage air crewmen later.
At 9:30 when he is talking about the turbocharger, what he says is not correct. A turbocharger DOES cost horsepower. You can't get something for nothing. The exhaust gases that are coming out of the engine have to do work to get the centrifugal compressor to compress the air going to the engine. The cost is, the pressure in the cylinder on the piston's exhaust stroke is higher (than if there was no turbocharger) because there is resistance of the hot exhaust gases going through the turbine impeller. You can't create free energy.
It’s a commonly held myth. Of course turbos cost power
timothy that pressure in the exhaust due to the turbocharger is called BACK PRESSURE and yes it does cost some horsepower but the turbo more than makes up for it actually increasing the HP .
Don't think the fella interviewed explained why they used Turbo-charging at all well. Turbo-charging was one way to go, others went with two staged super chargers.
they didnt catch fire like the 29
One of the things you never hear about in discussion on these engines is oil burn. On the B-17 that I worked on a good engine was 2 gallons an hour. I think I read in the manual that when it got to 7 gallons an hour it was due for an overhaul. I am betting none of the planes in combat ever got to that point before being damaged.
Sencillamente IMPRESIONATE!!!
Thankyou!
I shoked At the Complexity of the Engines 😊
Gentleman really explained it well how these engines worked
Thankyou for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the video. Please check out the rest of our B-17 series.
This is the Best episode Yet Scottie !!!
What makes this one stand out above the rest?
Round Engines turning gas into Noise !!! 😊-👍🏻
U ok ???
Excellent video but just one slight issue that i think was put across in a confusing manner. A variable pitch prop is far more efficient than a fixed prop, but can be a lot of work for the pilot. A constant speed prop autonatically varies the prop pitch to keep the engine rpm according to where the pilot sets the throttle. Essentially an automatic variable pitch prop.
Interesting feedback. Always learning here. Thankyou for watching.
My dad worked on these as a corporal in the army air corps back in WW2...called out wrong engine sounds he heard in any war movie we watched...
Hell yea. That's a skill you cant buy!
Ain’t nothin like a ROUND Engine !!!
Especially when it’s on a B-17 !
Proper term is "radial".
😆 thanks man! I restore old airplanes for a living - including a B-17 ( with 4 Round engines ) 🇺🇸
It’s a term airplane guys use
@@GuidosDad really. I'm an A&P mechanic.
Very fine explanation by this gentleman, and really makes me want to visit the museum. Thanks!
Thanks for watching! Please check out the rest of the B-17 series to see more of the Belle.
Amazing video, thank you!!!!!
Glad you liked it! Check out the rest of the B-17 series. Thankyou for the kind words.
My Father was a mechanic on these planes in WWII in the USAAF. There were a lot of farm boys out there that knew their sh.t. He increased horsepower and fuel consumption simply by adjusting the mag timing outside of what the books said.
Very cool! Glad you found our video. Check out the rest of our B-17 series for other in field modifications they did.
cool so was my dad he was stationed at watton raf england 44-45 and he wrenched the b-17 and the mosquito he was a staff sgt. ground crew usaaf he told me of the amazment of the damage those 17s could sustain and make it back from a bomb run this is what he said when the b-17s would return from a run if they could land safely the dead or injured crew was attended to first then the holes were patched engine oil changed re fueled re armed new crew and back to germany it went rip ssgt edward c mayer niagara falls ny 25th bomb group 1944-1945
Harley-Davidsons are built the same way the question is did Harley come first or the radio engine?
Ahhh, the blue ox or Norton. Bombsight or whatever they called it sitting behind the engine is one of my favorite pieces of technology history been fascinated since I was a kid. The engine is borderline insanity, the amount we manufactured and the fact that the b-17 was initially developed in the mid 30s was incredibly interesting to me I was not aware of the fact of the matter. The early thermodynamic principals of the compressors or density accumulators are the reasons we have jets today
Edit the pilots
Glad you enjoyed the video. We have plenty more coming on the subject.
The radial engine aircraft that I got to fly in were the T-6 Texan, P-2 Neptune, C-118, Stearman, 2 B-17s, and a B-25. One of the B-17s, "Sentimental Journey", had three Studebaker made engines at the time.
Great stuff! You know a round engine when you hear one!
They didn't have time to put stickers on the props, great vid mate, thanks for sharing ❤️👍
Thankyou for watching and supporting the channel.
Great episode. One of the Best Ever!!!❤
Glad you enjoyed it! What made this one the best?! We try to improve each episode.
ENGINES! they bring the Airplane to life / keep it from being Static
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany the fact that you went deep to make an episode solely about the engines specs, theres something about radial engines specially WW2 aircraft engines that for some reason we men love!
Glad you can appreciate our work. Hopefully you find the rest of the series enjoyable. Scott.
Exhaust driven turbochargers do take power to turn. Excellent video and so informative. Just wanted to correct a minor point. Very good video. Wow what a fantastic era. Pretty much the height of I.C.E. technology. And besides the technology, the unbelievable manufacturing accomplishments have never been completely acknowledged. A good book about it is: Freedom’s Forge. Thank you for this great video you’ve made here
Thankyou for watching and remaining professional with your corrections. We appreciate the support of the channel. Glad you enjoyed the series. Plenty more to come.
As for the books I read some 50 years ago. They said that the turbo, produced about 450 Hp, the supercharger took 400 hp to run them so there was a net gain for using a Supercharger system for maintaining Hp up to altitude.
Absolutely.
My dad used to describe a radial starting sounding like some kicking over empty trash cans in the alley. Aviation Machinist Mate , First Class Joseph Meidlinger.
HA! Best description i have ever heard.
Well explained! Bravo!
Glad it was helpful! Plenty more coming.
It was genius how that Turbo Super Charger operated. It's amazingly what they accomplished back then with Slide rules and no computers.
Our creative title attempted to show that. Insanity believing only a few short years after first flight we could achieve a 30000 ft Bomber, Genius in making it a reality.
Engine output power is proportional to the weight of fuel burned. The proportion of fuel mass (call it weight if you like) to air mass also controls power output. The ideal proportion (mixture) is 14.7:1 (pounds of air:pound of fuel) at which point all the fuel will be burned and release its maximum heating value. Heat is what makes propellers turn. Since air at high altitudes weighs less than the same volume at sea level, the amount of fuel the engine can burn is also less and produces less heat and power. The turbocharger corrects this problem by increasing the mass of air entering the cylinders so that more fuel can be burned to produce more power.
I find it interesting that the proper air fuel ratio is the same number as the weight of air pressure at ground level...14.7 psi
It is an interesting coincidence but only the per square inch bit and don't forget that is 14.7psia absolute pressure. The ratio is the same in kilograms or tons or ounces. Reciprocating aircraft engines have adjustable mixture controls because an economy mixture is just over 15:1 and highest power is around 12.5:1. Different fuels have different ratios, natural gas for instance is around 10:1.
Excellent presentation
Thankyou for watching, glad you enjoyed it.
Well done and accurate information.
Glad you enjoyed it! Plenty more coming.
Love! This! Video !!! 🇺🇸
The guy really loves to say "turbosupercharger", and I can't blame him
Extremely interesting, thanks.
Glad you enjoyed it! Be sure to check out the whole B-17 series. Plenty more coming.
Is that the original Memphis Belle? The one that used to be on display at Mud Island in the Mississippi River in Memphis? I remember seeing that plane back in the early 70s. Then a couple of years ago, while visiting my son in England, we went to the Imperial War Museum in Duxford and saw a B-17 all painted up in the Memphis Belle livery. It started up and took off with paying passengers. What a thrill that must have been.
She sure is! There are 3 "Memphis Belles" out there. This one being the real deal and the legend. Then there were 2 painted up for the 1990 Memphis Belle film. Nose art is slightly different. You saw one of those in UK, also known as "Sally B". The other is "the movie Memphis Belle." Currently with Palm Springs Air Museum in California.
having ridden in two different B-17s, one being the Memphis Belle Movie plane shown in the first clips of this video, I have to say, they are worth the money to take a ride in.
Absolutely! We have done 909 and Ye Olde Pub. Check out our Bomber Camp video to see modern B-17s today dropping bombs and working guns.
That engine inginition had moisture problem in start. It taked down one recently.
@6:29 B17 engines are the best white noise ever!
Agreed!
A turbo does rob power from the engine just like a supercharger, it's just taking it from a different place.
If you're using engine exhaust to turn a fan, you're increasing the pressure the engine has to push exhaust out, thereby working against the piston stroke trying to push the exhaust out and slowing the engine down.
Good information. Thanks for watching!
Very enjoyable video
Thankyou for the kind words! Check out the rest of the B-17 series.
The turbo supercharger restricts exhaust flow which has to reduce power output to some degree, also such a system is probably impractical on a sleeve valve engine, Wright engines had poppet valves which where easier to achieve in an aero engine.
I want to know how the system works that adjusts the props to change pitch or "feather" them
Great series on the B-17 / Memphis Belle. Cheers fm Oz
Glad your enjoying the series mate! We need more Aussies on the channel. Scott has big plans for film work in Australia soon. "G For George!"
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Cheers. It's been a few years since I last visited Canberra & the AWM. "G for George" is a great exhibit.
I'm now based in Perth & the RAAF Museum here also has a beautifully preserved Lancaster, as well as many other WW2 aircraft....PBY Catalina & Spitfire to name just a few.
Take it easy mate. Cav all the way !
@@chopper7352 You work with that Lancaster in Perth? How can i get hold of you?
@@MilitaryArmamentsCompany No mate, I don't work with it. I've just been a visitor to the "RAAF Association Bullcreek Museum" a few times over the last several years. I'm keen on all things Military History, be it Army, Airforce or Navy (especially WW1 & WW2). The museum does allow a few visitors at a time to go inside for a look & experience the various crew positions, but that is a higher tier $ ticket. Maybe for my next birthday.
I do like the idea of maybe one day being a volunteer at either the Fre'o Army Museum (they've got a good number of AFV's) or the RAAF Museum, but that's approx 10 years away, unless I get lucky with Lotto / Powerball. 😂 Keep up the great work over there.
Cheers
It isn't quite true that a Turbosupercharger running on exhaust doesn't cost the engine some Power. It does. It's just lsomewhat ess of a drag on an engine compared to taking the Power from the engine mechanically through a gear. The engine will still have to do more work pushing that exhaust through the Turbosupercharger turbine than is the exhaust was just allowed to escape into the atmosphere unhindered. It's a basic principle of the laws thermodynamics. You never get any Energy for free.