Old designs with modern engines

[Scotaidh]

Some - OK, a lot - of us have already done this kind of thing - engine swaps.  It seems to be one of my favourite whifs - Whirlwind with DB601s instead of Peregrines; Brewster Buffalo with a Corsair engine; P-38 with DB601s; Cutlass with J79s; with more planned and parts accumulated. 

How well would some of those first & 2nd gen fighters have done with modern engines?  A Vampire with a Spey?  Airacobra with F404s? 

So that's my idea - take a - your favourite? -  early fighter design and alter it to accept an engine it (or you) could only dream of it having. 

Mods, would this make a good GB?  (or has it been done?  I've never done a GB, so I don't know)

[NARSES2]

Mods, would this make a good GB?  (or has it been done?  I've never done a GB, so I don't know)

It was done a couple of years ago

https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?board=220.0

Nothing to stop it being proposed again of course after the 2 year subject rest period.

[Weaver]

A Vampire with a Spey would have nearly three times the thrust, would need MUCH bigger intakes and exhaust, and would probably rip it's wings off. 

It tells you something about the speed of jet engine development that the 1940s vintage Goblin 3 engine in a Vampire put out 3,350lb thrust and weighed 1,550lb, while a late-model 1950s Viper put out about the same thrust and weighed around 600lb...

You could put TWO Viper 12s in a Vampire engine bay, have 5,400lb thrust and it'd STILL be about 400lb lighter while having around 400lb more thrust than any Venom.

[zenrat]

Or, you could put a Klimov VK-1 in a DH2...
(Any excuse to post my favourite build of the last few years.)



https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?topic=51911.msg1017559#msg1017559

[PR19_Kit]

Never mind fighters, if you want SERIOUS over-powering airliners are where it's at. 



The 'Re-engine It' GB was one of the best we've had in recent times I thought.

[Scotaidh]

Mods, would this make a good GB?  (or has it been done?  I've never done a GB, so I don't know)

It was done a couple of years ago

https://www.whatifmodellers.com/index.php?board=220.0

Nothing to stop it being proposed again of course after the 2 year subject rest period.

Right ... Oh well - back to the drawing board. 

[Mossie]

How well would some of those first & 2nd gen fighters have done with modern engines?  A Vampire with a Spey?  Airacobra with F404s? 

A Vampire with a Spey would have nearly three times the thrust, would need MUCH bigger intakes and exhaust, and would probably rip it's wings off. 

A bit less time difference, but there was a Sea Vixen Spey project. Given the length of time it took for the DH.110 to go from design to service, its in the same technological bracket as the Vampire and Venom. I've often thought this project feels mis-matched.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/dh-110-sea-vixen-projects.3236/

You cannot view this attachment.You cannot view this attachment.You cannot view this attachment.

[Weaver]

A bit less time difference, but there was a Sea Vixen Spey project. Given the length of time it took for the DH.110 to go from design to service, its in the same technological bracket as the Vampire and Venom. I've often thought this project feels mis-matched.
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/dh-110-sea-vixen-projects.3236/XZ

The thrust difference isn't that extreme, assuming the Speys aren't afterburning. The Avon 208s in the Sea Vixen put out 11,000lb each, while a dry Spey was good for 11,030 to 11,995lb depending on the version. THe main advantage would be massively lower fuel consumption: 0.932 lb/(lbf⋅h) for the Avon and 0.63 lb/(lbf.h) for the Spey.

[Diamondback]

One I white-papered in college, albeit with the then-new GE90s... USAF cuts the small-engine pussyfooting and puts four 134k-lb thrust GE9X's on a B-52.

GE9X - thrust 134000 - wt 21230
TF33 - thrust 17000 - wt 4605
ONE GE9X delivers almost as much power as all eight TF33's. Two for balance means almost DOUBLING the installed power for only about 1.25 TF33's worth weight increase. FOUR... well, now we're talking 536,000lb thrust available on an airframe that nominally grosses out at only 488k. Were going to need SOME weight increase because of a whole new stronger wing, I'd assume at least inserting a third spar and complete redesign/remanufacture with modern materials.

But if you can keep the empty-weight gain down enough to make a significant power gain, and can figure out how to safely raise the Bring Back weight... you could rack on some absolutely absurd tonnage, maybe add a second full pylon on each wing between engines equal to the original and maybe a third with lower limits between outboard engines and outrigger - but we'd have to combine the G/H wet-wing with the huge C/D/E/F 3000-gallon tanks to keep those monster engines fueled once they're pushed into the higher throttle ranges.

Now for some real Nightmare Fuel... imagine this thing being able to use its full ordnance tonnage packed absolutely FULL of SDB II's or similar. It'd be like an Arc Light strike but even bigger area and only one aircraft instead of six, or could loiter and rain ruin within a 40-mile swath either side of its flight path all day. And this is being conservative, we're not even talking about Dale Browning the thing... though now one wonders what kind of performance a 4x-F135 Bone would have.

[McColm]

There was a plan to replace the Rolls-Royce Griffons with Wright R3350-32W turbo-compound radials the same as those fitted to the Lockheed Neptune to provide better endurance and to address the shortcomings of the Avro Shackleton MR.1.

[Mossie]

The thrust difference isn't that extreme, assuming the Speys aren't afterburning. The Avon 208s in the Sea Vixen put out 11,000lb each, while a dry Spey was good for 11,030 to 11,995lb depending on the version. THe main advantage would be massively lower fuel consumption: 0.932 lb/(lbf⋅h) for the Avon and 0.63 lb/(lbf.h) for the Spey.

It's not thrust, it's a technological mis-match. The Sea Vixen was behind the times when it entered service and lasted a relatively long time for that era, adding new engines might have prolonged it way beyond its sell by date.

[Weaver]

The thrust difference isn't that extreme, assuming the Speys aren't afterburning. The Avon 208s in the Sea Vixen put out 11,000lb each, while a dry Spey was good for 11,030 to 11,995lb depending on the version. THe main advantage would be massively lower fuel consumption: 0.932 lb/(lbf⋅h) for the Avon and 0.63 lb/(lbf.h) for the Spey.

It's not thrust, it's a technological mis-match. The Sea Vixen was behind the times when it entered service and lasted a relatively long time for that era, adding new engines might have prolonged it way beyond its sell by date.

Yep: from what I can see there was no plan to update the radar, and that would have been stone-aged by the time a Spey Vixen got into service.

[Scotaidh]

I read somewhere that someone was new-building Me 262s with modern engines since the Jumos are not available anymore - the engines are reduced-thrust to (mostly) match the output of the Jumos (and "padded" to fill up the nacelles).  Apparently, when one isn't worried about engine reliability issues, it's a sweet-flying machine.

There are a lot, it seems to me, of aircraft that had a lot of promise - but the intended/designed-for engines weren't available and they got lumbered with engines putting out half or a third the designed-for thrust.  I find that regrettable, and wonder what might have happened had the engine makers pulled their fingers out and delivered their promises.

[PR19_Kit]

I read somewhere that someone was new-building Me 262s with modern engines since the Jumos are not available anymore - the engines are reduced-thrust to (mostly) match the output of the Jumos (and "padded" to fill up the nacelles).  Apparently, when one isn't worried about engine reliability issues, it's a sweet-flying machine.

They built five of them, powered by the GE CJ610 bizjet engine, and it worked pretty darn well apparently.

[Weaver]

We know that the Turbo-Mustang/Piper Enforcer was a viable idea, principally because Piper had a warehouse full of never-used Mustang bits. What other late WWII types might have been suitable for turbopropping post-war, for export and/or COIN use, had history worked out different?

I've always fancied a Turbo-Skyraider using an Armstrong-Siddeley Double Mamba (Gannet engines), rather than the abortive Skyshark.

You can replace radials with single turboprops using a cone-shaped extension. Look at the Taiwanese AIDC T-CH-1: basically a Turbo-Trojan.

There were lots of Merlins going spare after the war, so turbo-Spitfires or Mosquitoes are unlikely. A Turbo-Tempest, replacing the troublesome Napier Sabre with a turboprop, seems like it might have been a good idea for attack/COIN though.