an airworthy Tempest possible?
Discussion
Both totally valid Tempests in my eyes.
In actual fact, they tried the Tempest out with three different engines, the Sabre, the Centaurus and the Griffon.
They decided that Griffons were needed elsewhere.
They really wanted the Centaurus but the engine wasn't quite ready for operational use before the war had ended.
They went with the Sabre for the first operational versions - even though the Sabre was notoriously complex and unreliable. At least they had been using them for a number of years in the Typhoon.
As soon as the war was over, the Typhoons were retired pretty smartly and the Tempest Vs didn't last all that long either. The Tempest IIs turned out to be a good stop-gap piston fighter until more Meteors and Vampires became available post war.
And, of course, the Centaurus Tempest was the starting point for the Sea Fury.
In actual fact, they tried the Tempest out with three different engines, the Sabre, the Centaurus and the Griffon.
They decided that Griffons were needed elsewhere.
They really wanted the Centaurus but the engine wasn't quite ready for operational use before the war had ended.
They went with the Sabre for the first operational versions - even though the Sabre was notoriously complex and unreliable. At least they had been using them for a number of years in the Typhoon.
As soon as the war was over, the Typhoons were retired pretty smartly and the Tempest Vs didn't last all that long either. The Tempest IIs turned out to be a good stop-gap piston fighter until more Meteors and Vampires became available post war.
And, of course, the Centaurus Tempest was the starting point for the Sea Fury.
Kermit does have a lot of aircraft, just with he had the resources to finish some of the projects he starts.
The Tempest with a Sabre would be an amazing sight and sound.
http://www.fantasyofflight.com/kermit-weeks/rare-h...
The Tempest with a Sabre would be an amazing sight and sound.
http://www.fantasyofflight.com/kermit-weeks/rare-h...
The Sabre was a tricky engine to operate in the 1940's. Without the back-up and expertise available then, you'd have to be a pretty brave pilot to fly one now.
Nevertheless I'd love to see one fly. I'm not sure it sounds particularly nice though, based on footage I've seen. But that may have been any old aircraft engine sound dubbed in.
Nevertheless I'd love to see one fly. I'm not sure it sounds particularly nice though, based on footage I've seen. But that may have been any old aircraft engine sound dubbed in.
It was a monster engine - 36 litres, 24 cylinders in an H arrangement, in line and liquid cooled with sleeve valves and delivered around 2,400 hp. It also used sleeve vales.
However, it was also very complicated and not that reliable.
As I said earlier, once WW2 ended, co did any development of the Sabre.
However, it was also very complicated and not that reliable.
As I said earlier, once WW2 ended, co did any development of the Sabre.
2013BRM said:
Awesome site thanks for the linky.Mo.
Eric Mc said:
It was a monster engine - 36 litres, 24 cylinders in an H arrangement, in line and liquid cooled with sleeve valves and delivered around 2,400 hp. It also used sleeve vales.
However, it was also very complicated and not that reliable.
As I said earlier, once WW2 ended, co did any development of the Sabre.
Any engine which makes the Centaurus look simple and straightforward has clearly been designed by fanatics.However, it was also very complicated and not that reliable.
As I said earlier, once WW2 ended, co did any development of the Sabre.
I mentioned before on another thread how most of the main air force fighter aircraft designed in the 1930s were designed with liquid cooled, in-line piston engines.
Nearly all the air forces of the world (the USAAF, Luftwaffe and the RAF) thought that the in-line engine gave better streamlining and therefore allowed higher speeds. It was felt that the extra weight of the cooling system was superseded by the streamlining advantages.
Navies on the other hand had other ideas. The navies with the most far sighted aircraft designs in the 1930s were the US Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy. The Japanese in particular were very forward thinking. Both the US and Japanese navies much preferred air cooled radials - because for naval operations they offered simplicity and ease of maintenance - as well as doing away with any need to store coolants such as glycol or ethanol on board the ship.
The Mitsubishi A5M Claude and the Mitsubishi A6M Zero were both advanced fighters for their day with the Zero being one of the best fighters in the world when it first appeared.
I think it was the Zero which showed to fighter designers that an air cooled radial, if properly enclosed, would not reduce an aircraft's streamlined profile. The Focke Wulf Fw 190 was built using these close cowling techniques. Initially there were problems with getting cooling enough air to the cylinders but a fan was fitted behind the propeller and this helped a lot.
The Zero and the Fw190 showed what could be done with radials and inspired Hawkers to design the Tempest and Fury (later Sea Fury) around the new Centaurus.
Nearly all the air forces of the world (the USAAF, Luftwaffe and the RAF) thought that the in-line engine gave better streamlining and therefore allowed higher speeds. It was felt that the extra weight of the cooling system was superseded by the streamlining advantages.
Navies on the other hand had other ideas. The navies with the most far sighted aircraft designs in the 1930s were the US Navy and the Imperial Japanese Navy. The Japanese in particular were very forward thinking. Both the US and Japanese navies much preferred air cooled radials - because for naval operations they offered simplicity and ease of maintenance - as well as doing away with any need to store coolants such as glycol or ethanol on board the ship.
The Mitsubishi A5M Claude and the Mitsubishi A6M Zero were both advanced fighters for their day with the Zero being one of the best fighters in the world when it first appeared.
I think it was the Zero which showed to fighter designers that an air cooled radial, if properly enclosed, would not reduce an aircraft's streamlined profile. The Focke Wulf Fw 190 was built using these close cowling techniques. Initially there were problems with getting cooling enough air to the cylinders but a fan was fitted behind the propeller and this helped a lot.
The Zero and the Fw190 showed what could be done with radials and inspired Hawkers to design the Tempest and Fury (later Sea Fury) around the new Centaurus.
ash73 said:
Radials were more robust too, one hit on the cooling system in a liquid cooled Spit and you were in trouble. Pilots even preferred them when attacking bombers because the engine afforded them some protection.
In-line engnes also afforded protection, but a cooling system was certainly an Achilles heel - I don't recall the name but one ace was killed returning from a rhubarb by small arms fire as he crossed the French coast. He ditched but was knocked unconscious and drowned as his aircraft sank.ash73 said:
I do like the Zero but it lived on maneuverability rather than speed and firepower, rather an early-war concept.
One thing the Japanese notably failed to do was innovate as the war progressed - unlike the Allies.Eric Mc said:
Both the US and Japanese navies much preferred air cooled radials - because for naval operations they offered simplicity and ease of maintenance - as well as doing away with any need to store coolants such as glycol or ethanol on board the ship.
I quite like the story of the US naval officer who pointed out that there were no air cooled submarines.Simpo Two said:
ash73 said:
I do like the Zero but it lived on maneuverability rather than speed and firepower, rather an early-war concept.
One thing the Japanese notably failed to do was innovate as the war progressed - unlike the Allies.Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff