@@aaronmills4238 A Wasp has a single row of cylinders. A double wasp has two rows. It's like a second engine attached right behind the first. Almost double the power but with the same frontal area.
There are very few military hardware contractors who have consistently delivered top quality products like Pratt & Whitney. I wish they all were that way.
This is excellent - and frankly essential for the longevity of any company with an engineering emphasis. I'm glad wherever I hear such culture survives.
God bless you. You work for a company that you can be very, very proud of. If it weren't for the unmatched reliability of the R2800 engines powering the A-26 Invader my dad took to the skies above Korea in, I naturally wouldn't be writing this!
Pratt & Whitney’s machining prowess continues to this day. The PW1000G geared turbofan engine, arguably the most advanced airline jet engine in existence today, has a gearbox which can handle 30,000 horsepower. This gearbox is so well put together that it requires no scheduled maintenance besides oil changes for the entire life of the engine.
That is mind-boggling precision! Just to be able to create metal alloys to withstand that kind of force, torque, tension, and bearing loads wouldn't have been possible not so long ago.
@@FiveBlackFootedFerrets the blisk rotors in the turbine are just as insane too. They are entire turbine stages machined out of a single crystal of superalloy, designed to spin at 20000rpm while each capturing over 1000hp from the over 1000 degree exhaust. Blisk rotors really are an unbelievable feat of manufacturing
@@toby1248 I'm a geologist by degree and I've also studied materials science particularly metallurgy. I knew of efforts for quite some time to be able to grow a single turbine blade from one crystal of an alloy. That makes it inherently stronger. Now that that's normal to be able to grow turbine blades in all shapes and sizes from a single crystal, technology has taken a huge leap forward. It does take more time however to grow a single crystal instead of machining a turbine blade from a block of alloy. But the result is worth the wait. Happy Thanksgiving!
@@FiveBlackFootedFerrets oh no the blisks are machined too. They are machined out of a massive crystal with crazy advanced CNC machines that can precisely mill out the blades
What a coincidence that I just got the DC-6 plane for Microsoft Flightsim. I was never interested in piston engine aircraft, now I'm bingewatching R2800 vids and suddenly CD comes around with a vid.
@@PeteCourtier Yes, it is. The build is... challenging. No two pieces want to fit together without a bucket of putty. I'm using Quickboost resin R-2800 engines to which I added brass push-rod- tubes, and I'm currently adding the ignition harnesses using thin copper wire. It's a tedious slog, but it'll be worth it in the end.
Very informative. My dad was a R-4360 Wasp Major mechanic for the B-36 in the USAF from 1953-1957. We are very proud of his accomplishments as a mechanic in the USAF.
My grandfather lead team 4095 at Pratt and Whitney until he retired in the late 90’s. He helped test the turbine fans and we actually have a prototype of one of the blades. He’s my hero and my biggest inspiration.
Fascinating history. As an A&P mechanic student in 1960-62, I sat next to a cutaway of a R-4360 in our classroom. It was a beast and on the opposite end of the scale of the four-cylinder, 65 hp engines we worked on during training. I love to hear the distinctive (and relatively rare) sound of a radial engine flying overhead.
We had a cut away 4360 at my school too, it was in impressive monster of an engine. Especially when you remember it was built before computers and CAD.
I make a bunch of parts for Pratt engines and I can tell you that quality is a big deal with them. It’s actually really frustrating when they won’t take a part because there is a scratch on a cast area that is meaningless but they want perfection so thats what we give them.
As someone who gets those castings and inspects them before machining and after machining and before assembly . Military and commercial hot section . Our quality is strict and we aren't allowed to accept anything expect the best. Working on 1.5 years with the company so far.
@@brianmessemer2973 Well, sloppy work is sloppy work, if you can see faults what can you see? The above is not necessarily true. Many years ago (40 or so) I bought a Winchester 308, CZ, bolt action rifle, it was quite cheap, actually excellent value - maybe I was lucky. Although it looked a bit rough (in some places more than a bit), all the surfaces that needed to be accurate and well machined, were. Several (many) hours with files, needle files, W&D sandpaper, and polishing compounds, followed by a high quality hot bluing, produced an attractive, accurate, and useful firearm.
As an A & P mechanic over fifty years retired, I have worked on many radial aircraft engines restoring antiques and flying them. Grumman Goose, DeHavilland Beaver, Ford Tri-motor, etc. Love the sound.
The Wright radials such as the Cyclone were also very reliable good engines. The seven cylinder Lycoming R760 engines were on some Ford Tri-Motors due to the short flights and fuel economy. Otherwise they used Wright R975s or Pratt and Whitney R985s. I have built seven sets of engine mounts for EAA, MW Aviation, Great Lakes Aviation, Grand Canyon, Herrick, Kermit Weeks, which are different depending on the engine.
@@todd3285 No, my oldest brother was 10 years older than me and died a few years ago. My Dad retired in 1976 and my brother retired from there in 2001. I don’t really know what my grandfather did there but my Dad worked there during the war because the military didn’t want him as he was a TB survivor getting it at a CCC camp in the late 30s. He worked on all different things including going to West Palm for a year in 1962 to work on RL-10 rocket engines. After that he worked at Windsor Locks on the fuel cells used in the Apollo program. Then he worked at Middletown doing tools design on JT-9s. My brother worked on the electronics for the lasers used in turbine blade manufacturing for 25 years. I worked on the assembly floor for almost two years assembling JT-8s and JT-9s in the late 70s. It wasn’t for me as I wanted a career in electronics and communications. I quit and moved to Alaska and did that.
It's still that way in L bldg. I know they stopped the machinests from smoking pot on the job and drinking beer in the company bar in the cafeteria at lunch time.
Thanks for the historic overview. I have a R-2800-99 sitting in my shop waiting for me to restore. They built over 125,000 of these in many variants and I can still get parts. Yes, the power section halves have no gaskets. Having worked as an aerospace engineer for 31 years, I'm not sure we could reproduce this feat of precision in mass production today.
It really is a feat of precision, especially when you consider there was no CNC at the time. They were doing all of this by hand, spinning knobs to adjust in three dimensions.
@@jeffpiatt3879 I'm pretty sure you'll find that the machines at Pratt&Whitney back then that had 3 knobs spinning were run by punch cards, not quite CNC but for all intents and purposes for what they were doing they were essentially CNC machines.
I’ve flown behind a PW985 for 36 years and the old gal NEVER let me down! A wonderful bit of engineering that’s coming up on 100 Years in service in just a few more years
The more I learn about the wasp family , the more I love it. I am not a pilot, but I want to fly in a DHC-2 Beaver before I leave this planet. The r-985 junior is such a beast of a workhorse. Perfect for the Puget Sound and Canada in general. My #1 bucket list item.
@@robertmannel4446 If you ever get to the west coast wether it be Seattle,Victoria,Vancouver or further up the coast book a scenic flight in a beaver and talk to the pilot about your interest in the 985 and the Beaver, he might let you sit co-pilot! But make sure there are no beautiful women on the flight as that may affect you chance at the right seat! Yes us pilots have been known to favor the ladies (weight and balance ya know)
@@waynemanning3262 Ha ha Ha. I have watched YT vids of Jim Howard and I have been in contact with NW Seaplanes. Almost went this past Sept., but had to write a check to Uncle Sam. Guy on the phone (NWSP) said right seat an option, ' depending on who is in the group' . Maybe this coming Sept. Day trip to Friday Harbor and back was looking good to me. Got friends in Port Townsend, but they don't land there. Best!
@@robertmannel4446 If you ever get up to Vancouver or Whistler then take a Harbour Airs mountain tour in the Beaver! It is almost a religious experience!
Paul, you're an almost unbelievably good storyteller and teacher. Your lessons (videos) are so rich in content, broad in scope yet full of all the important details, and organized and presented so well. I always find myself learning new things about topics I've been interested in since I was a kid. I just to say thank you for all the wonderful work you've done and shared with us all over the years. Cheers 🍻
Excellent and well researched story. Their logo says Dependable Engines. Their PT6 turbine is still in production and is the most reliable turbine engine there is . Production started in 1960 and still going.
I work in aviation repair and companies will often look for replacement assemblies before committing to costly component overhauls for PT6 hot section parts because there's so many out there. We have a hard time getting a customer to go through with a $35k large exit duct swap when a used outer combustion liner assembly can be had for a similar price. The PT6 is everywhere. From King Airs to converted DC-3s. If it flies, it can probably be re-engined with a PT6.
@@marshallblythe7240 Yep, I spent some years flying the 208, and even more, years flying Beech 99's not so much as a hiccup. I did have to shut down an engine in the Beech 99, the issue was a fuel leak. No big deal, I feathered the engine shut the fuel off and all the switches to that engine off, re-trimmed the airplane and finished flying the ILS, just like an ATP check ride. One I ever did in real life in 47 years of flying.
Do not forget THE most important part of the head/fins design - the blanks for the heads were FORGINGS. No pinholes or cold laps from pouring molten aluminum. Saw a chunk off of a massive slab of 7075-T6 alloy, drop it in the female half of the forging die - and BLAMMO - the metal flows in the desired way (called the "grain") and is practically unbreakable and extra dense for best heat flow.
When I went to East Coast Aero Tech, one of my instructors said" If a Pratt and Whitney leaked oil, you had problem. If a Wright engine didn't leak oil, you had a problem".
It always blows my mind how people were able to create these complex mechanical designs on paper and then transfer them to forging and milling stations.
A pair of R-2800's powered the Northrop P-61 Black Widow, the US first "purpose built", radar equipped, nightfighter. My Dad was a crew chief with the 427th NFS and loved the R-2800's!
And it was a dud Northrop had the Brit /German planes to emulate and failed. Mossie NKXIX 21000lb Max P61 32000 to 40000lb Junkers Ju 88 G 32000lb The P61 was so bad it took almost 3 miles of runway for take off Source Mike Spick Fighters page 363
I was around a few P&W R4360"s and I can tell you that they were maintainence intensive, but they were also a work of art. I loved to listen to them on startup. Pratt & Whitney's motto- "Dependable Engines."
The double wasp was a brilliant and reliable bit of kit. The other issue that ensured it's long use was the interchangeability of parts. My late father worked to Field Aviation services at Croydon airport and their business was overhauling and repurposing WW2 twin wasps for use in civil aviation. They bought up what spares they could on the surplus market and even sent out crews to recover damaged engines from all over Europe. In it's fitment on the DC3 / C47 it was the foundation of post war civil aviation.
Nothing is as mesmerizing as the sound of a big radial engine, such as the R2800. I've heard them up close and personal, and the sound is awesome. I find the counter-rotating, four=lobe cam rings (one for intake, one for exhaust), that operate at 1/4 engine speed, hard to fathom and understand just how they function. Amazing. Nothing like the big radials.
I once visited the USAF museum at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio and saw the B-36 up close, along with an engine on display nearby. Good Lord, what a gigantic beast! I always loved Pratt & Whitney's logo, with the eagle and the motto "Dependable Engines". Can't get much more plain language than that, and reminds the managers and employees what they are supposed to be striving for.
@@Mentaculus42 Both, but mostly the plane. There are hatches in the bomb bay that allow the crew to enter the wing in flight, which is almost thick enough to stand up inside. And the early model hydrogen bombs it carried could only fit in a B-36 because they are so big and heavy. They have an inert one on display next to the aircraft and it's huge.
What an excellent video, I loved it. Back in the ‘80s I worked on the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-100, -200 & -220 Jet engines in the F-16s & F-15s and I loved them even though there were teething issues in the early versions, those were quickly resolved. I made Airforce Master Technician working on those great engines… I am forever a P&W Fan
Dear Paul: I showed this video to a few friends and they really enjoyed it. Keep up the fantastic work! Nice to hear that you are on the mend from you cancer scare. Curious Droid is one of the best channels on UA-cam, IMOHO.
Can you also do an episode on the rotary engines? I find these so fascinating, but can't read through an article on them. A video format would be awesome! Thanks for the video on the radials too! All these WW1 and WW2 engines are so cool!
They were wild. Gyroscopic forces made the planes behave weirdly, snap-turning in some directions but stubborn in others. They flung oil everywhere (and the oil was a laxative), and were throttled by controlling the spark rather than the air-fuel mixture.
@@Solnoric I think also they didn’t have a throttle. It was either on or off and pilots would shut the engine off a few times to bleed airspeed on landing. I’ve heard the engine cutting out on repro WW1 aircraft when landing.
@@jojobar5877 that what he means I believe. By controlling spark he is referring to the magnetos. If you ever have the chance give a visit to old Rhinebeck aerodrome in NY. They still fly a lot of WW1 birds. There were throttles in some WW1 aircraft though. I believe the Fokker Dvii might've had one. But still they are fascinating! I didn't know caster oil was a laxative though XD. Must've lead to some interesting debriefings
@@jojobar5877 Correct, no throttle, only a magneto cut off to slow it down for landing, once one was lit off they took off running much to the chagrin of the crew chief who had to hustle out of the way after running the prop through when starting one, for more than one the last thing he heard in his life was "contact" before tripping.
@@Solnoric yep, they used castor oil (a plant based oil) and it was a total loss oil system. Castor based oils where the only thing that could handle the operating conditions of the engine at the time. Rumor is, one of the reasons for the big scarves over the nose and mouth was to catch the oil before inhaling. I'm sure the cold was the main reason.
I have clear memories a couple years after the war at Hamilton Field, California, of my dad firing up his B29 close to the fence where my mom and I were standing. I have a distinct recall of the sound the exhaust made rushing past the opening valves just as each motor began to start. Love your presentations, and wardrobe, lol.
The Pratt & Whitney were famous for the very high quality of their radial engines and generally were reliable and relatively easy to to maintain. Of course my favourite engine was the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 that was the most produced engine of this company. I loved the sound of this engine as a child as we were flying very often the Convair CV-240 from Copenhagen to Stockholm. In truth the 28-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major was truly a mechanical nightmare packed with very heavy mantainace like continuous replacement of sparkplugs and other related problems. As you stated it made it very unprofitable for civilian use...
Yes standard for Dakotas with P&W engines if it was dripping oil on the runway get in and go, if no oil it has all run out. Those oil coolers always leak, no matter what you do, and the semi official fix is a set of wooden plugs and a mallet to fix the leaky tubes on the flight line.
@@Turbodog1000 and what about the hallucinating six 28-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major radial engines of the B-36? Try to change 336 spark plugs after almost every mission....
@@paoloviti6156 You did not change them, merely removed, cleaned and put back, because they were hard to get, and a lot of them were actually serviceable, in that you could take them apart to remove carbon build up.
I'm working on a final paper, for my class on the American Presidency, which explores the space policy of Eisenhower, and it was this channel, and Amy Shira Teitel (Vintage Space) which has provided a lot of background information of aerospace history, so thank you!
Thanks for this video. It touches on so much of the aviation history of here in central Connecticut. Rentchler field is a sport area in East Hartford but I had no idea of the background.
I used to live in East Hartford and loved hearing about PW. There was a Japanese fellow talking about how in the war (I can't recall which one sadly) his PW engine got shot multiple times and still ran. He came home safe to his kids because of that damn incredible reliability.
Thank you Sirs for pointing out that That it was Part to & Whitney's R-2800 WASP 16-Cylinder Aviation Engines that won WWII with Their Precision Engineering, The Precise Machining of the final Engine, and the Precise Quality Control of Mass Production and Distribution of the Engines to the Many American Aviation Airplane Factories such as Grumman F6 Hellcat, Chance Vought Corsair F4F, and many more like McDonald Douglas!
R/R and Packard have entered the room Lancaster[ Merlin/Packard] 608612 long tons of ordnance dropped in 3 years Almost as much as the B17 and B24 together . Same time period . Don't forget we were in combat from Oct39
Loved the video. You should have a look at the Pratt and Whitney PT6 turboprop. The thing was originally built in the 60’s iirc, and is still being updated and built to this day. I believe it’s the most popular turboprop ever. I think it’s really cool.
The buzzing wasp is literally on all our fav aircraft, weather it be the F4u Corsair or the b-17 (rip Texas raiders), it’s a beautiful, reliable engine that vibrates us all into looking above, and admiring the nostalgic sound it creates!!!
@@6h471 Some of the 1820 Cyclone copies made by Studebaker had such a bad reputation that Robert K. Morgan refused to use them on the Memphis Belle according to his book. And even the best factory fresh Cyclones leaked oil prodigiously. Boeing would have done better to use P&W 1830s.
Good video. I found it amazing that every P&W radial engine was test run, taken completely apart, every part examined, put back together, run again, and then shipped out.
@@kenneth9874 Why is flying solo a big thing? How many pilots have flown solo across the Atlantic? Negligible numbers probably. Being the first person to do something that nobody else can bother to do again is a strange thing, don't you think? Flying across an ocean is good, but why would you need to do it on your own? Do you know who was the second woman to fly solo from Britain to Australia? I'm pretty sure nobody has ever bothered to do it again. Lindy flew from a North American city to a predetermined European city. That was the achievement, the fact that he did it without another pilot to share the burden of flying (or without a safe view out) is irrelevant.
@@MartinWillett it was also the longest flight ever made at the time, and the first nonstop between transatlantic city hubs(the other flight landed on a beach in Ireland)
A superior-grade presentation! I've seen plenty of the engines described at various aviation museums around the world, but I recently visited the Air and Space Museum at Dulles and many of these engines were lined-up, in a single row, and well lit so one could see all of the detail. Quite a labor intensive manufacturing and maintenance process, no doubt, but quite impressive pieces of high metallurgy and high design power plants. I'm sure "interesting and educational" was the intent, and so it is. Thank you. G. p.s.: I always look forward to your presentations because I know they'll always be a productive use of valuable time. - I did notice the proximity and precision of that fin separation. Now I know. ;)
Hard to believe that they were basically considered to be disposable engine's that once they reached a certain operational hours were basically meant to throw away and install a new one. Like anything else they can be rebuilt but that wasn't really the idea, like a Bic lighter they were meant to throw away and install a new one.
It's pretty amazing the amount of defense manufacturing is or was located in Connecticut. Pratt and Whitney, Hamilton Standard,Colt, Winchester, Marlin, Mossberg, Electric Boat , Sikorsky,Kaman and all the numerous subcontractors. I still work in the defense industry for a subcontractor.
16:20 this is the clearest footage I've ever seen (in color too) of the B-36 Peacemaker I'm in awe, this plane was so huge they couldn't fit inside a hangar
That footage is from the movie Strategic Air Command starring James Stewart. That's why it's so clear. The film is full of great sequences of B-36s and B-47s in flight. And Jimmy Stewart wasn't just playing a pilot--he was the real deal and qualified to fly those birds and flew B-24s in combat in WW II.
@@Mentaculus42 The XC-99 is truly awesome with that HUGE fuselage and the B-36 wing. But it was a one-off, and they never attached the jets to it like they did with the B-36D and later models. So the XC-99 was just "six turning." It also had those GIGANTIC landing gear wheels like the original B-36 prototype, which restricted the number of runways which it could use.
@00:38 the person is working on what is called "Master Rod" on a Radial engine the PW Double Wasp R2800 which is what powers the Chance Vaught F4U CORSAIR
I’d like to hear about Pratt Whitney’s newest fan engine undergoing testing today. There seems to be little information over the last year. The demonstration of its much quieter operation greatly impressed me as I live close to an airport. 😊
The airfield right next to Pratt & Whitney in E Hartford CT is Rentschler field. It now has a football stadium on the property used by the U Conn Huskies.
Just to add to the multitude of Pratt people here ... I sat behind 1340's for over ten years in Bull Stearmans over rice in south Louisiana. The great stories are beyond count!! I had more than a few faults over the years ... but that Pratt always got me on the ground in one piece (course the old Stearmans help with that too!). An entire cylinder could leave the airplane, and that damn engine would still keep running. In our experience the two main failures (only one of which was in the engine) ... were the super-charger oil seal (which led to a very impressive sky-writing display!) ... and the prop bolts -- that one goes to Ham-Sandard. I'm still here today because of Pratt's superb engineering. The engine might have a serious internal failure, yet often would run for a time ... enough to get you safely on a strip. Not enough kudos available to express my appreciation of a great firm that knew nothing but quality. I once put a Stearman into the ground in a rice field ... and after the world stopped spinning, I'm sittting in the cockpit ... airplane sans gear, belly on the muddy ground .... prop blades wrapped back around the cylinders .... and that thing was STILL attempting to run!! At about a revolution per second or so. Had to literally kill the mags to stop it!!! Incredible engines!! Incredible engineering. Thank you Pratt and Whitney!!!
the F-35 also got one of the latest cutting edge P&W jet engines that even out performs and are far more compact then the P&W jet engines the B-52 uses.
Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major engine still surprizes me today how they managed to get piston engine outpowered jet engines on its era always fascinates me
And yet the standard R-4360 was not the ultimate expression of the aircraft piston engines as there were turbo-compounded contemporaries that went one step further.
@@serdarcam99 I was not being critical, and it is one of my favorites and it probably was the most successful of the last big engines. Just that the engineers pushed the technology one step further. Interestingly that one step further (turbo-compounding) is being being used today in non aircraft engines to increase efficiency. Also that ultimate expression of it was effectively the marriage of a piston engine and a rudimentary jet engine.
@@serdarcam99 One of the best engineering professors that I ever had worked for P&W during the war and had great stories about engine development. One sorta exaggeration was the development team for the R-4360 prided themselves on “breaking every part at least one” of that engine during the prototyping process. The professor was a jet engine person (technically a turbo machinery person) and I always got the impression that he was impressed by the R-4360 but knew that the future was in jet engines.
Both, in that order,, used to be mine as well until I watched Greg's multi part video on the engineering of the P-47. Under the skin of that beast is an elegant work of engineering art.
A friend of mine has a Stearmen Bi-plane with a Pratt & Whitney R-985 450 hp engine. With the prop in the climb pitch and full power the sound is beautiful.
Yes, the very engine became a point that resisted change in direction, and when the pilot changed the control surfaces, it just went in bizarre directions.
also to my knowledge controlled carburation (aka "throttle") was difficult/impossible at the time, thats why they controlled these engines via ignition, cutting spark on single pistons to reduce power. Depending on the aircraft they could cut all, every second and none of the cylinders. With more sophisticated engines able to alternate which sparks to kill as not to foul the plugs. In addition to the big rotating mass in a ligthweight aircraft that made them extremely difficult to fly. Imagine balancing the (nonexistant) "throttle" for a landing, making sure to not foul any plugs, increasing the power in an instant, whilst the plane is jerking to one direction or the other at every adjustment. Also they where spweing hot oil into the faces of the pilots, castor oil, conveniently a laxative (yes, thats where the name "Castrol" comes from), and thats why they had scarfs to cover their faces. Rotary engines are fascinating, bizzare machines and the pilots of the time brave, stupid geniouses. Those that got old at least.
@@Cre80s I At low speeds gyroscopic progression meant that you controlled angle of attack with the rudder and left and right with the elevator. The problem was that at high speed aerodynamic forces became greater than gyroscopic forces and control surfaces regained their usual function.
@@philiptownsend4026 also the torque of all that flying metal round and round with a prop atached to the crankcase made for insane amount of tourque ( almost imposible to control on take off and taxing)
6:21 British aviators John Alcock and Arthur Brown made the first non-stop transatlantic flight in June 1919, Charles Lindbergh had the first solo crossing.
You're great at what you do, Paul. History, science, engineering come together so well in all your videos. Well presented too. I hope you are doing ok and treatment is working mate. Cheers from Australia o/
Always a wonderful informative and helpful viewing. Paul, you are so interesting and intelligent and engaging with your presentations. Always a pleasure. Wishing you many many more years of success
Curious Droid is my favorite guy on my favorite channel I have always been impressed with his ability to share his vast knowledge in a most pleasant and concise manner. I tip my hat to you good sir.
Mind blowing but the truth is they weren't really very good engine's. One thing that's required from an aircraft engine is reliability, and the Pratt&Whitney "Corn Cobb" engine just didn't have it, as they pointed out in this video like the Wright R3350 engine the Pratt&Whitney R4360 just had too many problems with overheating being the main issue with them. Other companies and countries tried building monster engine's like that and they all suffered from the same problems with overheating being the biggest, seems like Pratt&Whitney hit the nail right on the head with the R2800 being about the biggest you can go without causing reliability issues, some time during the war Pratt&Whitney bench ran an R2800 engine at 5,000 HP for some insane amount of time like 2 weeks around the clock with no appreciable wear shown after doing a post test teardown, that was information that Pratt&Whitney and the government kept secret well into the 1950's.
Hi. The first transatlantic flight was not Lindburgh, but Alcock and Whitten-Brown in 1919, flying an ex-RAF Vickers Vimy bomber powered by two Rolls Royce Eagle engines. This fact doesn't detract from the great job P&W did with their engines, or that you're doing with your videos. Thanks, P.R.
Not true. About a month before Alcock/Whitten-Brown, the US flew fying boats across the Atlantic in May vs.June for Alcock/Whitten Brown. Now, admittedly, the US navy flying boats stopped multiple times to refuel, making it a legged journey, whereas Alcock/Whitten-Brrown's flight was a non-stop flight (I think?). So, really, it depends on how you count FIRST flight. The FIRST PLANES to completely cross the atlantic on their own power were American Navy flying boats, the first NON-STOP flight was British, and the first SOLO (ie. one pilot) flight was Lindberg.
@@carlpolen7437 Quite right Carl, but the non-stop aspect of the Vimy's flight made commercial transatlantic air services a realistic possibility. The Vickers Vimy qualifies as the first in my opinion. They only just made it across the narrowest part of the Atlantic, and their landing in an Irish bog was less than dignified. The Brits always get bogged down in Ireland. The US Navy also did ongoing repairs at the Azores, all the stuff that scares "the romance of flying" out of fare-paying passengers. The Navy's use of flying boats didn't exude confidence in success, making it a "how many planes will make it?" sort of exercise. Not good for air-travel publicity. Hats off to Lindburgh, his flight was the first truly intercontinental transatlantic flight, N.Y. to Paris, not stopping at an island on the way for a cup of tea like Alcock and Whitten-Brown, or doing repairs like the US Navy, so his achievement really made commercial flights possible. It shows how good the Ryan monoplane was, especially its single engine!! Greater faith hath no man. What incredible courage! Honestly, they were ALL very brave. pioneers. Cheers, P.R.
The only category that mattered was the one involving an American and ideally an American ‘airplane’. Flying Solo and routing from Long Island to Paris are critically important as it excludes the two non American VICKERS(!) Vimy pilots. Have a nice day Y’all.
My dad was an engineer at Pratt's main plant in Connecticut. Great company he said until it got run by pencil pushers. Oh well, Pratt isn't the company it is now...
I watch a lot of engines, cars and planes videos; this one is wonderful. Jampacked with info, clear and unassuming. I just learned a lot, such as the lead P & W got from starting as a JV with a machine tools company
That was great Paul. Another great video essay. Two things - you mentioned about the precision tooling on the Pratt & Whitney engines and this was par for the course in ALL US made engines. As we all know, the venerable Rolls-Royce Merlin was made in the US as the Packard V-1650, and to but a fine point on it, the US versions were better. The British Merlins were hand-made, but the Packard Merlins were made with mechanized tooling which, you said it before, did not leak and were more fuel efficient, and thus had a longer range. Second, for these of us who still remember engines in cubic inches, the Military designations of the engines are the cubic inches (capacity) of the engine. So the P&W R-1340 Wasp had a capacity of 1,340 cubic inches. So, get ready, that means the infamous Wasp Major R-4360 had a capacity of 4,360 cubic inches! Shoehorn THAT into your ’67 Mustang!
To think that all those marvels came literally from the DRAWING BOARDS, with calculations made using slide rulers... No CAD. No DMLS. Amazing what men could do and a bit concerning the probably couldn't now...
I find it amazing the engineering, ingenuity and craftsmanship that went into the radial over the years. This was truly a perfected, mature technology that only time ended.
A brave thing to-do Pratt & Whitney and Joseph Biden and God save American Heroes✔ The two rows of nine cylinders are marvellous with superb Pratt & Whitey and job done.
I grew up a couple miles from Pratt in the 60s and 70s . We could hear them testing jet engines from my backyard. Many family members and friends were lifelong Pratt employees.
Click here bit.ly/3EyARXG for the Eight Sleep Black Friday Sale: $550 off the Pod Mattress, $300 off the Pod Cover Promo code DROID at checkout.
l always enjoy all of your excellent video's Paul....Best of everything to you my friend 🙏👀👍
Shoe🇺🇸
What does soluble wasp mean
@@aaronmills4238 lt means double the cylinders = more power....Shoe🇺🇸
I'm sorry I don't mean to be a troll but I think you would look better in plad
@@aaronmills4238 A Wasp has a single row of cylinders. A double wasp has two rows. It's like a second engine attached right behind the first. Almost double the power but with the same frontal area.
There are very few military hardware contractors who have consistently delivered top quality products like Pratt & Whitney. I wish they all were that way.
Lockheed Martin gang represent.
GE
Very true
Eeeehh, I think GE kicks P&W's butt most days.
Grumman was called the iron works for a good reason.
As a PW employee, I take pride in the quality and culture I work in. Producing some of the best engines in the world.
This is excellent - and frankly essential for the longevity of any company with an engineering emphasis. I'm glad wherever I hear such culture survives.
Everybody fussing over little details till it's correct. Without that these engines wouldn't have succeeded.
The company I work for makes the castings for some of the piston rings in the PW engines :)
I worked for PW now RR, i want to go back
God bless you. You work for a company that you can be very, very proud of.
If it weren't for the unmatched reliability of the R2800 engines powering the A-26 Invader my dad took to the skies above Korea in, I naturally wouldn't be writing this!
Pratt & Whitney’s machining prowess continues to this day. The PW1000G geared turbofan engine, arguably the most advanced airline jet engine in existence today, has a gearbox which can handle 30,000 horsepower. This gearbox is so well put together that it requires no scheduled maintenance besides oil changes for the entire life of the engine.
Yes. Anybody can make a gearbox. But making a gearbox that can handle insane amount of power and last, that is the "secret sauce" 😁
That is mind-boggling precision! Just to be able to create metal alloys to withstand that kind of force, torque, tension, and bearing loads wouldn't have been possible not so long ago.
@@FiveBlackFootedFerrets the blisk rotors in the turbine are just as insane too. They are entire turbine stages machined out of a single crystal of superalloy, designed to spin at 20000rpm while each capturing over 1000hp from the over 1000 degree exhaust. Blisk rotors really are an unbelievable feat of manufacturing
@@toby1248 I'm a geologist by degree and I've also studied materials science particularly metallurgy. I knew of efforts for quite some time to be able to grow a single turbine blade from one crystal of an alloy. That makes it inherently stronger. Now that that's normal to be able to grow turbine blades in all shapes and sizes from a single crystal, technology has taken a huge leap forward. It does take more time however to grow a single crystal instead of machining a turbine blade from a block of alloy. But the result is worth the wait. Happy Thanksgiving!
@@FiveBlackFootedFerrets oh no the blisks are machined too. They are machined out of a massive crystal with crazy advanced CNC machines that can precisely mill out the blades
What a coincidence! I'm currently building two R-2800 engines for my B-26... in 1/48 scale. Hey, it's all I could afford!
What a coincidence that I just got the DC-6 plane for Microsoft Flightsim. I was never interested in piston engine aircraft, now I'm bingewatching R2800 vids and suddenly CD comes around with a vid.
Must be the Monogram/Revell👍 How’s the build going?
Hey that ain't bad, requires only 47 more of you to get the real deal
@@PeteCourtier Yes, it is. The build is... challenging. No two pieces want to fit together without a bucket of putty. I'm using Quickboost resin R-2800 engines to which I added brass push-rod- tubes, and I'm currently adding the ignition harnesses using thin copper wire. It's a tedious slog, but it'll be worth it in the end.
@@marshallblythe7240 nice one. Filler queens are a pain😩. I’m sure it will turn out great.
Very informative. My dad was a R-4360 Wasp Major mechanic for the B-36 in the USAF from 1953-1957. We are very proud of his accomplishments as a mechanic in the USAF.
My grandfather lead team 4095 at Pratt and Whitney until he retired in the late 90’s. He helped test the turbine fans and we actually have a prototype of one of the blades. He’s my hero and my biggest inspiration.
i love seeing new curious droid videos. im glad youre doing well after your health issues a few years ago. wishing you and your family all the best.
me too
Fascinating history. As an A&P mechanic student in 1960-62, I sat next to a cutaway of a R-4360 in our classroom. It was a beast and on the opposite end of the scale of the four-cylinder, 65 hp engines we worked on during training. I love to hear the distinctive (and relatively rare) sound of a radial engine flying overhead.
We had a cut away 4360 at my school too, it was in impressive monster of an engine. Especially when you remember it was built before computers and CAD.
Pittsburgh Institute of Aeronautics?
@@dukecraig2402 not quite as prestigious. Iowa Western Community College, 08-10. It was a good program though, and it was close to home.
No, Institute of Aviation, University of Illinois, class of 1962.
@@prsearls
That's back when there was just a few of them, I went to PIA in 86.
I make a bunch of parts for Pratt engines and I can tell you that quality is a big deal with them. It’s actually really frustrating when they won’t take a part because there is a scratch on a cast area that is meaningless but they want perfection so thats what we give them.
Wow interesting, thanks for sharing.
As someone who gets those castings and inspects them before machining and after machining and before assembly . Military and commercial hot section . Our quality is strict and we aren't allowed to accept anything expect the best.
Working on 1.5 years with the company so far.
@@brianmessemer2973 Well, sloppy work is sloppy work, if you can see faults what can you see?
The above is not necessarily true. Many years ago (40 or so) I bought a Winchester 308, CZ, bolt action rifle, it was quite cheap, actually excellent value - maybe I was lucky. Although it looked a bit rough (in some places more than a bit), all the surfaces that needed to be accurate and well machined, were. Several (many) hours with files, needle files, W&D sandpaper, and polishing compounds, followed by a high quality hot bluing, produced an attractive, accurate, and useful firearm.
Should have been "Well, sloppy work is sloppy work, if you can see faults what can't you see? "
@@robertnicholson7733 agree 100%
As an A & P mechanic over fifty years retired, I have worked on many radial aircraft engines restoring antiques and flying them. Grumman Goose, DeHavilland Beaver, Ford Tri-motor, etc. Love the sound.
The Wright radials such as the Cyclone were also very reliable good engines. The seven cylinder Lycoming R760 engines were on some Ford Tri-Motors due to the short flights and fuel economy. Otherwise they used Wright R975s or Pratt and Whitney R985s. I have built seven sets of engine mounts for EAA, MW Aviation, Great Lakes Aviation, Grand Canyon, Herrick, Kermit Weeks, which are different depending on the engine.
Just wanted to say - thank you for all the work you do to make new videos.
My grandfather started working for P&WA in the early 1930s and retired from there. Both my Dad and oldest brother also retired from there.
I had a friend in high school that moved to Florida after we graduated and got a job at Pratt&Whitney down there in West Palm Beach
And they're still alive ??
@@todd3285 No, my oldest brother was 10 years older than me and died a few years ago. My Dad retired in 1976 and my brother retired from there in 2001. I don’t really know what my grandfather did there but my Dad worked there during the war because the military didn’t want him as he was a TB survivor getting it at a CCC camp in the late 30s. He worked on all different things including going to West Palm for a year in 1962 to work on RL-10 rocket engines. After that he worked at Windsor Locks on the fuel cells used in the Apollo program. Then he worked at Middletown doing tools design on JT-9s. My brother worked on the electronics for the lasers used in turbine blade manufacturing for 25 years. I worked on the assembly floor for almost two years assembling JT-8s and JT-9s in the late 70s. It wasn’t for me as I wanted a career in electronics and communications. I quit and moved to Alaska and did that.
The production floor at P&W in CT was wood blocks in the 70’s to prevent damage to parts dropped during assembly.
It still is in some parts
Wood blocks also were more comfortable to walk on
The wood blocks are still there…..as well as some of the employees.
It's still that way in L bldg. I know they stopped the machinests from smoking pot on the job and drinking beer in the company bar in the cafeteria at lunch time.
@@danielroncaioli6882 Yup and they still get high and drunk at lunch !!
Thanks for the historic overview. I have a R-2800-99 sitting in my shop waiting for me to restore. They built over 125,000 of these in many variants and I can still get parts. Yes, the power section halves have no gaskets. Having worked as an aerospace engineer for 31 years, I'm not sure we could reproduce this feat of precision in mass production today.
It really is a feat of precision, especially when you consider there was no CNC at the time. They were doing all of this by hand, spinning knobs to adjust in three dimensions.
@@jeffpiatt3879
I'm pretty sure you'll find that the machines at Pratt&Whitney back then that had 3 knobs spinning were run by punch cards, not quite CNC but for all intents and purposes for what they were doing they were essentially CNC machines.
They may not have gaskets but you better use some tar.
I inspect Pratt and Whitney parts and the overhaul manuals routinely call for .002"-.00" tolerances.
We could if we hadn't outsourced most of our manufacturing.
I’ve flown behind a PW985 for 36 years and the old gal NEVER let me down! A wonderful bit of engineering that’s coming up on 100 Years in service in just a few more years
The more I learn about the wasp family , the more I love it. I am not a pilot, but I want to fly in a DHC-2 Beaver before I leave this planet. The r-985 junior is such a beast of a workhorse. Perfect for the Puget Sound and Canada in general. My #1 bucket list item.
@@robertmannel4446 If you ever get to the west coast wether it be Seattle,Victoria,Vancouver or further up the coast book a scenic flight in a beaver and talk to the pilot about your interest in the 985 and the Beaver, he might let you sit co-pilot! But make sure there are no beautiful women on the flight as that may affect you chance at the right seat! Yes us pilots have been known to favor the ladies (weight and balance ya know)
@@waynemanning3262 Ha ha Ha. I have watched YT vids of Jim Howard and I have been in contact with NW Seaplanes. Almost went this past Sept., but had to write a check to Uncle Sam. Guy on the phone (NWSP) said right seat an option, ' depending on who is in the group' . Maybe this coming Sept. Day trip to Friday Harbor and back was looking good to me. Got friends in Port Townsend, but they don't land there. Best!
@@robertmannel4446 If you ever get up to Vancouver or Whistler then take a Harbour Airs mountain tour in the Beaver! It is almost a religious experience!
@@waynemanning3262 Harbor Air out of Vancouver, no? Working on my passport.
Paul, you're an almost unbelievably good storyteller and teacher. Your lessons (videos) are so rich in content, broad in scope yet full of all the important details, and organized and presented so well. I always find myself learning new things about topics I've been interested in since I was a kid. I just to say thank you for all the wonderful work you've done and shared with us all over the years. Cheers 🍻
Excellent and well researched story. Their logo says Dependable Engines. Their PT6 turbine is still in production and is the most reliable turbine engine there is . Production started in 1960 and still going.
The PT6 would make a great video too
I've got roughly 4,000 hours behind PT6s driving Cessna 208s, and never had a problem with them. Very solid engines.
I work in aviation repair and companies will often look for replacement assemblies before committing to costly component overhauls for PT6 hot section parts because there's so many out there. We have a hard time getting a customer to go through with a $35k large exit duct swap when a used outer combustion liner assembly can be had for a similar price.
The PT6 is everywhere. From King Airs to converted DC-3s. If it flies, it can probably be re-engined with a PT6.
@@marshallblythe7240 Yep, I spent some years flying the 208, and even more, years flying Beech 99's not so much as a hiccup. I did have to shut down an engine in the Beech 99, the issue was a fuel leak. No big deal, I feathered the engine shut the fuel off and all the switches to that engine off, re-trimmed the airplane and finished flying the ILS, just like an ATP check ride. One I ever did in real life in 47 years of flying.
I hate to be that guy, but….the PT6 is built by Pratt & Whitney Canada, which is an independent division.
Blimey I hadn't realised the cooling fins were machined in! Those cylinders and heads are a work of art.
they are pretty aren't they?
All done before the advent of the modern computer.
Simply amazing design, engineering and manufacturing.
Do not forget THE most important part of the head/fins design - the blanks for the heads were FORGINGS. No pinholes or cold laps from pouring molten aluminum. Saw a chunk off of a massive slab of 7075-T6 alloy, drop it in the female half of the forging die - and BLAMMO - the metal flows in the desired way (called the "grain") and is practically unbreakable and extra dense for best heat flow.
When I went to East Coast Aero Tech, one of my instructors said" If a Pratt and Whitney leaked oil, you had problem. If a Wright engine didn't leak oil, you had a problem".
Terrific video and one close to my heart.. I started my aviation apprenticeship on the P&W R-1830 and have been a P&W devotee ever since!!
B24 Liberator engine.
As my uncle Al worked for P&W, he was given a draft exemption in WW2. That's how important the firm was to the US War Effort
It always blows my mind how people were able to create these complex mechanical designs on paper and then transfer them to forging and milling stations.
it was time when no Artificial intelligence was in place but human intelligence
With a slide-rule...
It’s why they were the greatest generation.
with blackboards and slip sticks
Yes - no computer simulations, no CNC manufacturing, etc. What a great era of USA and UK technology.
A pair of R-2800's powered the Northrop P-61 Black Widow, the US first "purpose built", radar equipped, nightfighter. My Dad was a crew chief with the 427th NFS and loved the R-2800's!
And it was a dud Northrop had the Brit /German planes to emulate and failed. Mossie NKXIX 21000lb Max P61 32000 to 40000lb Junkers Ju 88 G 32000lb
The P61 was so bad it took almost 3 miles of runway for take off Source Mike Spick Fighters page 363
I was around a few P&W R4360"s and I can tell you that they were maintainence intensive, but they were also a work of art. I loved to listen to them on startup. Pratt & Whitney's motto- "Dependable Engines."
That's such a perfect, to-the-point motto!
They have lived up to it very well.
The double wasp was a brilliant and reliable bit of kit. The other issue that ensured it's long use was the interchangeability of parts. My late father worked to Field Aviation services at Croydon airport and their business was overhauling and repurposing WW2 twin wasps for use in civil aviation. They bought up what spares they could on the surplus market and even sent out crews to recover damaged engines from all over Europe. In it's fitment on the DC3 / C47 it was the foundation of post war civil aviation.
Nothing is as mesmerizing as the sound of a big radial engine, such as the R2800. I've heard them up close and personal, and the sound is awesome. I find the counter-rotating, four=lobe cam rings (one for intake, one for exhaust), that operate at 1/4 engine speed, hard to fathom and understand just how they function. Amazing. Nothing like the big radials.
I once visited the USAF museum at Wright Patterson Air Force Base in Ohio and saw the B-36 up close, along with an engine on display nearby. Good Lord, what a gigantic beast! I always loved Pratt & Whitney's logo, with the eagle and the motto "Dependable Engines". Can't get much more plain language than that, and reminds the managers and employees what they are supposed to be striving for.
Are you referring to the engine or the B-36. I have always felt that the engine was relatively compact for power output vs duty cycle.
@@Mentaculus42 Both, but mostly the plane. There are hatches in the bomb bay that allow the crew to enter the wing in flight, which is almost thick enough to stand up inside. And the early model hydrogen bombs it carried could only fit in a B-36 because they are so big and heavy. They have an inert one on display next to the aircraft and it's huge.
I've been there many times! Must visit if you ever get near Dayton.
I used to ground handle DC-6 cargo planes in Alaska. There's nothing quite like the sound of those 4 big radials starting up.🙂
What an excellent video, I loved it. Back in the ‘80s I worked on the Pratt & Whitney F100-PW-100, -200 & -220 Jet engines in the F-16s & F-15s and I loved them even though there were teething issues in the early versions, those were quickly resolved. I made Airforce Master Technician working on those great engines… I am forever a P&W Fan
Dear Paul: I showed this video to a few friends and they really enjoyed it. Keep up the fantastic work! Nice to hear that you are on the mend from you cancer scare. Curious Droid is one of the best channels on UA-cam, IMOHO.
Can you also do an episode on the rotary engines? I find these so fascinating, but can't read through an article on them. A video format would be awesome! Thanks for the video on the radials too! All these WW1 and WW2 engines are so cool!
They were wild. Gyroscopic forces made the planes behave weirdly, snap-turning in some directions but stubborn in others. They flung oil everywhere (and the oil was a laxative), and were throttled by controlling the spark rather than the air-fuel mixture.
@@Solnoric I think also they didn’t have a throttle. It was either on or off and pilots would shut the engine off a few times to bleed airspeed on landing. I’ve heard the engine cutting out on repro WW1 aircraft when landing.
@@jojobar5877 that what he means I believe. By controlling spark he is referring to the magnetos. If you ever have the chance give a visit to old Rhinebeck aerodrome in NY. They still fly a lot of WW1 birds. There were throttles in some WW1 aircraft though. I believe the Fokker Dvii might've had one.
But still they are fascinating! I didn't know caster oil was a laxative though XD. Must've lead to some interesting debriefings
@@jojobar5877
Correct, no throttle, only a magneto cut off to slow it down for landing, once one was lit off they took off running much to the chagrin of the crew chief who had to hustle out of the way after running the prop through when starting one, for more than one the last thing he heard in his life was "contact" before tripping.
@@Solnoric yep, they used castor oil (a plant based oil) and it was a total loss oil system. Castor based oils where the only thing that could handle the operating conditions of the engine at the time. Rumor is, one of the reasons for the big scarves over the nose and mouth was to catch the oil before inhaling. I'm sure the cold was the main reason.
I have clear memories a couple years after the war at Hamilton Field, California, of my dad firing up his B29 close to the fence where my mom and I were standing. I have a distinct recall of the sound the exhaust made rushing past the opening valves just as each motor began to start. Love your presentations, and wardrobe, lol.
The Pratt & Whitney were famous for the very high quality of their radial engines and generally were reliable and relatively easy to to maintain. Of course my favourite engine was the Pratt & Whitney R-2800 that was the most produced engine of this company. I loved the sound of this engine as a child as we were flying very often the Convair CV-240 from Copenhagen to Stockholm. In truth the 28-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major was truly a mechanical nightmare packed with very heavy mantainace like continuous replacement of sparkplugs and other related problems. As you stated it made it very unprofitable for civilian use...
Yes standard for Dakotas with P&W engines if it was dripping oil on the runway get in and go, if no oil it has all run out. Those oil coolers always leak, no matter what you do, and the semi official fix is a set of wooden plugs and a mallet to fix the leaky tubes on the flight line.
Twenty eight cylinders each with 2 spark plugs equals fifty six spark plugs per engine, that's a wheelbarrow load of sparkplugs per engine. Yikes!
@@Turbodog1000 and what about the hallucinating six 28-cylinder Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major radial engines of the B-36? Try to change 336 spark plugs after almost every mission....
@@paoloviti6156 You did not change them, merely removed, cleaned and put back, because they were hard to get, and a lot of them were actually serviceable, in that you could take them apart to remove carbon build up.
@@SeanBZA thanks for clearing this issue! 👍👍
I'm working on a final paper, for my class on the American Presidency, which explores the space policy of Eisenhower, and it was this channel, and Amy Shira Teitel (Vintage Space) which has provided a lot of background information of aerospace history, so thank you!
Thanks for this video. It touches on so much of the aviation history of here in central Connecticut. Rentchler field is a sport area in East Hartford but I had no idea of the background.
I used to live in East Hartford and loved hearing about PW. There was a Japanese fellow talking about how in the war (I can't recall which one sadly) his PW engine got shot multiple times and still ran. He came home safe to his kids because of that damn incredible reliability.
Tool and die maker here, I love what we do!
Another winner, Paul. Filled in a lot of gaps for me. Thanks!
Thank you Sirs for pointing out that That it was Part to & Whitney's R-2800 WASP 16-Cylinder Aviation Engines that won WWII with Their Precision Engineering, The Precise Machining of the final Engine, and the Precise Quality Control of Mass Production and Distribution of the Engines to the Many American Aviation Airplane Factories such as Grumman F6 Hellcat, Chance Vought Corsair F4F, and many more like McDonald Douglas!
Of course the Rolls Royce Merlin as used in the Lancaster - Spitfire - Mosquito and P51 Mustang had nothing to do with winning the war!!!
R/R and Packard have entered the room Lancaster[ Merlin/Packard] 608612 long tons of ordnance dropped in 3 years Almost as much as the B17 and B24 together . Same time period . Don't forget we were in combat from Oct39
Loved the video. You should have a look at the Pratt and Whitney PT6 turboprop. The thing was originally built in the 60’s iirc, and is still being updated and built to this day. I believe it’s the most popular turboprop ever. I think it’s really cool.
In the late '80s I worked on R-1340 and R-985 PW engines One Summer and so this video is really interesting to me
The buzzing wasp is literally on all our fav aircraft, weather it be the F4u Corsair or the b-17 (rip Texas raiders), it’s a beautiful, reliable engine that vibrates us all into looking above, and admiring the nostalgic sound it creates!!!
All B17's were powered with Wright R1820 engines.
@@6h471 Some of the 1820 Cyclone copies made by Studebaker had such a bad reputation that Robert K. Morgan refused to use them on the Memphis Belle according to his book. And even the best factory fresh Cyclones leaked oil prodigiously. Boeing would have done better to use P&W 1830s.
Only the YB-17s had a Pratt engine. The production versions had a wright engine in them.
You always deliver these videos at the perfect time. Recently, I became fascinated with aviation and this was the perfect treat.
Good video.
I found it amazing that every P&W radial engine was test run, taken completely apart, every part examined, put back together, run again, and then shipped out.
THAT sir is quality control.
First non-stop trans-Atlantic flight was Alcock and Brown, in a Vickers Vimy. Lindbergh came later, but was first solo.
And why is Lindberg famous? Who cares about a solo flight? Why is it a notable achievement? Can anyone name the second solo pilot across the Atlantic?
@@MartinWillett Lindberg was famous for other things as well, he is well remembered for many things whereas no one will remember you
@@kenneth9874 Why is flying solo a big thing? How many pilots have flown solo across the Atlantic? Negligible numbers probably. Being the first person to do something that nobody else can bother to do again is a strange thing, don't you think? Flying across an ocean is good, but why would you need to do it on your own? Do you know who was the second woman to fly solo from Britain to Australia? I'm pretty sure nobody has ever bothered to do it again.
Lindy flew from a North American city to a predetermined European city. That was the achievement, the fact that he did it without another pilot to share the burden of flying (or without a safe view out) is irrelevant.
@@MartinWillett you can't be that dumb, under the constraints of the time and the available equipment it was quite a feat
@@MartinWillett it was also the longest flight ever made at the time, and the first nonstop between transatlantic city hubs(the other flight landed on a beach in Ireland)
It's always a pleasure to hear about these old engines and the power they developed.
A superior-grade presentation! I've seen plenty of the engines described at various aviation museums around the world, but I recently visited the Air and Space Museum at Dulles and many of these engines were lined-up, in a single row, and well lit so one could see all of the detail. Quite a labor intensive manufacturing and maintenance process, no doubt, but quite impressive pieces of high metallurgy and high design power plants. I'm sure "interesting and educational" was the intent, and so it is. Thank you. G.
p.s.: I always look forward to your presentations because I know they'll always be a productive use of valuable time. - I did notice the proximity and precision of that fin separation. Now I know. ;)
Hard to believe that they were basically considered to be disposable engine's that once they reached a certain operational hours were basically meant to throw away and install a new one.
Like anything else they can be rebuilt but that wasn't really the idea, like a Bic lighter they were meant to throw away and install a new one.
It's pretty amazing the amount of defense manufacturing is or was located in Connecticut. Pratt and Whitney, Hamilton Standard,Colt, Winchester, Marlin, Mossberg, Electric Boat , Sikorsky,Kaman and all the numerous subcontractors. I still work in the defense industry for a subcontractor.
16:20 this is the clearest footage I've ever seen (in color too) of the B-36 Peacemaker
I'm in awe, this plane was so huge they couldn't fit inside a hangar
ua-cam.com/video/5xn16Jp0_5w/v-deo.html
And yet the Convair XC-99 was significantly bigger (which was derived from the B-36). Go 6 turning & 4 burning!!
@@Mentaculus42 was/is
That footage is from the movie Strategic Air Command starring James Stewart. That's why it's so clear. The film is full of great sequences of B-36s and B-47s in flight. And Jimmy Stewart wasn't just playing a pilot--he was the real deal and qualified to fly those birds and flew B-24s in combat in WW II.
@@Mentaculus42 The XC-99 is truly awesome with that HUGE fuselage and the B-36 wing. But it was a one-off, and they never attached the jets to it like they did with the B-36D and later models. So the XC-99 was just "six turning." It also had those GIGANTIC landing gear wheels like the original B-36 prototype, which restricted the number of runways which it could use.
@00:38 the person is working on what is called "Master Rod" on a Radial engine the PW Double Wasp R2800 which is what powers the Chance Vaught F4U CORSAIR
I’d like to hear about Pratt Whitney’s newest fan engine undergoing testing today. There seems to be little information over the last year. The demonstration of its much quieter operation greatly impressed me as I live close to an airport. 😊
What engine ? The GTF ?
Yeah if you're referring to the GTF, it's been out for a few years and there's a decent amount of public info on it.
The airfield right next to Pratt & Whitney in E Hartford CT is Rentschler field. It now has a football stadium on the property used by the U Conn Huskies.
Just to add to the multitude of Pratt people here ... I sat behind 1340's for over ten years in Bull Stearmans over rice in south Louisiana. The great stories are beyond count!! I had more than a few faults over the years ... but that Pratt always got me on the ground in one piece (course the old Stearmans help with that too!). An entire cylinder could leave the airplane, and that damn engine would still keep running. In our experience the two main failures (only one of which was in the engine) ... were the super-charger oil seal (which led to a very impressive sky-writing display!) ... and the prop bolts -- that one goes to Ham-Sandard. I'm still here today because of Pratt's superb engineering. The engine might have a serious internal failure, yet often would run for a time ... enough to get you safely on a strip. Not enough kudos available to express my appreciation of a great firm that knew nothing but quality. I once put a Stearman into the ground in a rice field ... and after the world stopped spinning, I'm sittting in the cockpit ... airplane sans gear, belly on the muddy ground .... prop blades wrapped back around the cylinders .... and that thing was STILL attempting to run!! At about a revolution per second or so. Had to literally kill the mags to stop it!!! Incredible engines!! Incredible engineering. Thank you Pratt and Whitney!!!
I've worked on countless P&W R-985s and R-1340s and if they're not leaking oil, they're out of oil!
Yet another great and interesting video from CD. Thanks
It is a good day indeed when there is a new Curious Droid video!
yesss, my friday is complete. 11.42 pm and an 18 min CD video to see in the weekend. Thanks !
the F-35 also got one of the latest cutting edge P&W jet engines that even out performs and are far more compact then the P&W jet engines the B-52 uses.
Outstanding video. Great job guys.
Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major engine still surprizes me today how they managed to get piston engine outpowered jet engines on its era always fascinates me
And yet the standard R-4360 was not the ultimate expression of the aircraft piston engines as there were turbo-compounded contemporaries that went one step further.
@@Mentaculus42 ofc it wasnt the ultimate one but thinking about on its era it outpowered everything that made to that day
@@serdarcam99 I was not being critical, and it is one of my favorites and it probably was the most successful of the last big engines. Just that the engineers pushed the technology one step further. Interestingly that one step further (turbo-compounding) is being being used today in non aircraft engines to increase efficiency. Also that ultimate expression of it was effectively the marriage of a piston engine and a rudimentary jet engine.
@@Mentaculus42 i know i know i just wanted to add time detail cuz its shows how far pratt&whitney engineers were ahead of its time
@@serdarcam99 One of the best engineering professors that I ever had worked for P&W during the war and had great stories about engine development. One sorta exaggeration was the development team for the R-4360 prided themselves on “breaking every part at least one” of that engine during the prototyping process.
The professor was a jet engine person (technically a turbo machinery person) and I always got the impression that he was impressed by the R-4360 but knew that the future was in jet engines.
The Vought F4U Corsair is my favorite out of all of the WW2 Warbirds, with the P-38 lightning coming in as a close 2nd.
I wonder why the two cooling exit flaps in front of the cockpit were tied down in Fleet Air Arm service?
Both, in that order,, used to be mine as well until I watched Greg's multi part video on the engineering of the P-47. Under the skin of that beast is an elegant work of engineering art.
A friend of mine has a Stearmen Bi-plane with a Pratt & Whitney R-985 450 hp engine. With the prop in the climb pitch and full power the sound is beautiful.
Another issue with the rotary engine would seem to be the gyroscopic action of the entire engine spinning around at high speed.
Yes, the very engine became a point that resisted change in direction, and when the pilot changed the control surfaces, it just went in bizarre directions.
also to my knowledge controlled carburation (aka "throttle") was difficult/impossible at the time, thats why they controlled these engines via ignition, cutting spark on single pistons to reduce power.
Depending on the aircraft they could cut all, every second and none of the cylinders.
With more sophisticated engines able to alternate which sparks to kill as not to foul the plugs.
In addition to the big rotating mass in a ligthweight aircraft that made them extremely difficult to fly.
Imagine balancing the (nonexistant) "throttle" for a landing, making sure to not foul any plugs, increasing the power in an instant, whilst the plane is jerking to one direction or the other at every adjustment.
Also they where spweing hot oil into the faces of the pilots, castor oil, conveniently a laxative (yes, thats where the name "Castrol" comes from),
and thats why they had scarfs to cover their faces.
Rotary engines are fascinating, bizzare machines and the pilots of the time brave, stupid geniouses.
Those that got old at least.
@@Cre80s sort of. It didn't like turning in a couple directions but would snap-turn in others.
@@Cre80s I
At low speeds gyroscopic progression meant that you controlled angle of attack with the rudder and left and right with the elevator. The problem was that at high speed aerodynamic forces became greater than gyroscopic forces and control surfaces regained their usual function.
@@Solnoric
That was mostly torque steering at work.
Excellent and extremely interesting documentary!
Wow, thank you Paul, it's fascinating to imagine cylinders rotating around the crankshaft like that.
Some of them had their intake valve in the piston crown - opened by the cylinder's suction . . . clever stuff : )
Would only work with near constant running speed engines surely? So much rotating mass - inertia?
@@philiptownsend4026 also the torque of all that flying metal round and round with a prop atached to the crankcase made for insane amount of tourque ( almost imposible to control on take off and taxing)
6:21 British aviators John Alcock and Arthur Brown made the first non-stop transatlantic flight in June 1919, Charles Lindbergh had the first solo crossing.
TRUE
I'd love to see more about Pratt and Whitney.
Yusssss more CD content! You and Mustard are killing it!!
I survived about 800 hours behind two R985 AN-14B wasp juniors. I miss the sound.
The old Beech 18, made music!
The first non stop flight across the Atlantic was by Brown and Alcott in 1919, flying a Vickers Vimy. Enjoyed the video, thx
You're great at what you do, Paul. History, science, engineering come together so well in all your videos. Well presented too. I hope you are doing ok and treatment is working mate.
Cheers from Australia o/
Another super droidian presentation! Pushing the limits of the ETengine/fascinating design & engineering.
Curious Droid is like the Pratt and Whitney of UA-cam (see what I did there?) Always reliable, always quality. :-)
I used to rebuild P&W 985's and 2800's when I was 18 in the early 70's to pay for my flight training. One of the best times of my life.
It feels like christmas everytime you post a new video ;)
Always a wonderful informative and helpful viewing. Paul, you are so interesting and intelligent and engaging with your presentations. Always a pleasure. Wishing you many many more years of success
I never knew the pratt-wright connection
Great video! What a series of engines! Beautiful engineering masterpieces!
Thanks, Techno Varys
Must like
@@JavierBriz same 😂
Curious Droid is my favorite guy on my favorite channel I have always been impressed with his ability to share his vast knowledge in a most pleasant and concise manner. I tip my hat to you good sir.
4 row, 7 cylinder enginge, all done without computers. These where the days of real engineers.
Another Pratt employee here. We are proud of our lineage and look forward to the challenges we will face and overcome in the future.
The Wasp Major, holy sh*t that was an insane engine. It should almost be called the Un Moderation
Mind blowing but the truth is they weren't really very good engine's.
One thing that's required from an aircraft engine is reliability, and the Pratt&Whitney "Corn Cobb" engine just didn't have it, as they pointed out in this video like the Wright R3350 engine the Pratt&Whitney R4360 just had too many problems with overheating being the main issue with them.
Other companies and countries tried building monster engine's like that and they all suffered from the same problems with overheating being the biggest, seems like Pratt&Whitney hit the nail right on the head with the R2800 being about the biggest you can go without causing reliability issues, some time during the war Pratt&Whitney bench ran an R2800 engine at 5,000 HP for some insane amount of time like 2 weeks around the clock with no appreciable wear shown after doing a post test teardown, that was information that Pratt&Whitney and the government kept secret well into the 1950's.
Outstanding video! Very informative. What machining!
R-2800 was the greatest aero engine of WWII
Great report. I learned some things I hadn’t known. Thank you.
Fascinating video! Your presentations are outstanding!
Hi. The first transatlantic flight was not Lindburgh, but Alcock and Whitten-Brown in 1919, flying an ex-RAF Vickers Vimy bomber powered by two Rolls Royce Eagle engines. This fact doesn't detract from the great job P&W did with their engines, or that you're doing with your videos. Thanks, P.R.
Not true. About a month before Alcock/Whitten-Brown, the US flew fying boats across the Atlantic in May vs.June for Alcock/Whitten Brown. Now, admittedly, the US navy flying boats stopped multiple times to refuel, making it a legged journey, whereas Alcock/Whitten-Brrown's flight was a non-stop flight (I think?). So, really, it depends on how you count FIRST flight. The FIRST PLANES to completely cross the atlantic on their own power were American Navy flying boats, the first NON-STOP flight was British, and the first SOLO (ie. one pilot) flight was Lindberg.
@@carlpolen7437 Quite right Carl, but the non-stop aspect of the Vimy's flight made commercial transatlantic air services a realistic possibility. The Vickers Vimy qualifies as the first in my opinion. They only just made it across the narrowest part of the Atlantic, and their landing in an Irish bog was less than dignified. The Brits always get bogged down in Ireland.
The US Navy also did ongoing repairs at the Azores, all the stuff that scares "the romance of flying" out of fare-paying passengers. The Navy's use of flying boats didn't exude confidence in success, making it a "how many planes will make it?" sort of exercise. Not good for air-travel publicity.
Hats off to Lindburgh, his flight was the first truly intercontinental transatlantic flight, N.Y. to Paris, not stopping at an island on the way for a cup of tea like Alcock and Whitten-Brown, or doing repairs like the US Navy, so his achievement really made commercial flights possible. It shows how good the Ryan monoplane was, especially its single engine!! Greater faith hath no man. What incredible courage! Honestly, they were ALL very brave. pioneers. Cheers, P.R.
The only category that mattered was the one involving an American and ideally an American ‘airplane’. Flying Solo and routing from Long Island to Paris are critically important as it excludes the two non American VICKERS(!) Vimy pilots. Have a nice day Y’all.
@@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935 Hi. Why does it matter so much that an American pilot and plane are the only categories included? Cheers, P.R.
@@philliprobinson7724 I think he was trying to make and anti-american tongue in cheek comment. But maybe it fell flat?
great video mate, your detail is amazing.
My dad was an engineer at Pratt's main plant in Connecticut. Great company he said until it got run by pencil pushers. Oh well, Pratt isn't the company it is now...
You got that right !! I left that hell hole years ago .
Do they still have guys dropping dead from brain cancer ??
I watch a lot of engines, cars and planes videos; this one is wonderful. Jampacked with info, clear and unassuming. I just learned a lot, such as the lead P & W got from starting as a JV with a machine tools company
As there was nowhere 50,000 aircraft flying at one time, it makes you think how many airmen died to use up that many engines.
That was great Paul. Another great video essay. Two things - you mentioned about the precision tooling on the Pratt & Whitney engines and this was par for the course in ALL US made engines. As we all know, the venerable Rolls-Royce Merlin was made in the US as the Packard V-1650, and to but a fine point on it, the US versions were better. The British Merlins were hand-made, but the Packard Merlins were made with mechanized tooling which, you said it before, did not leak and were more fuel efficient, and thus had a longer range. Second, for these of us who still remember engines in cubic inches, the Military designations of the engines are the cubic inches (capacity) of the engine. So the P&W R-1340 Wasp had a capacity of 1,340 cubic inches. So, get ready, that means the infamous Wasp Major R-4360 had a capacity of 4,360 cubic inches! Shoehorn THAT into your ’67 Mustang!
To think that all those marvels came literally from the DRAWING BOARDS, with calculations made using slide rulers... No CAD. No DMLS. Amazing what men could do and a bit concerning the probably couldn't now...
I find it amazing the engineering, ingenuity and craftsmanship that went into the radial over the years. This was truly a perfected, mature technology that only time ended.
A brave thing to-do Pratt & Whitney and Joseph Biden and God save American Heroes✔
The two rows of nine cylinders are marvellous with superb Pratt & Whitey and job done.
God bless America and save us from the Biden gang
I grew up a couple miles from Pratt in the 60s and 70s . We could hear them testing jet engines from my backyard. Many family members and friends were lifelong Pratt employees.
You should do one on how Russia changed aviation by shooting down American pilots spying over Moscow. Lol.
I worked on Pratt and Whitney PT6 engines for 0ver 20 years. The rear accessory housing was almost identical to the one shown on the first wasp!