How about some October XP-82 love?

[Dan K]

http://xp-82twinmustangproject.blogspot ... etter.html

[JohnH]

Thanks. I've really enjoyed Tom's interviews on warbird radio the past year while on long car trips. He always is very personable and interesting.

[Mark Allen M]

Maybe one image here not seen on Tom's website. Outstanding restoration.










North American XF-82 44-83886(?) with 445-gallon droppable tank 105-inch rockets 110-gallon tank and a chemical tank

[C VEICH]

Am I the only one who thinks the finished Twin 'Stang would fit nicely into the Korean War section of the Collings Foundation collection? Any restrictions on offering rides in the XP-82?

[Dan K]

North American XF-82 44-83886(?) with 445-gallon droppable tank 105-inch rockets 110-gallon tank and a chemical tank

I love this publicity pic...not just for the impressive variety of external loads, but also for the fact that the engine/prop combinations are still mounted on the wrong sides (rotating outwards). I don't believe the XPs ever actually got off the runway with this set-up, let alone with junk on the hardpoints.

Can you imagine the pucker factor of having designed a fighter that refuses to fly?!

[Dan K]

I was curious about what the technical reason was that inward rotating props didn't work...found this info online posted by SoD Stitch on WW2aircraft.net.

Warren M. Bodie, in his book The Lockheed P-38 Lightning: The Definitive Story Of Lockheed's P-38 Fighter, states that, "Engine rotation was changed so that the propellers rotated outboard (at the top), thereby eliminating or at least reducing the downwash onto the wing centersection/fuselage juncture. There was, by then, no doubt that the disturbed airflow, trapped between the two booms, was having an adverse effect on the horizontal stabilizer. No problem was encountered in reversing propeller rotation direction; they merely had to interchange the left and right engines."

I suppose the same problem existed for the XP-82, as it has twin booms and a large horizontal tail as well and inward rotating props threw the propwash onto these surfaces. Is it me or do these engines in this headon photo look like they've been already swapped? Anyway, so the engines were swapped on the XP-82 as DanK wrote. Maybe this reason has been posted on WIX before, apologies if this be the case...

You're confusing two different critters.

The original outward rotating props of the two XP-82s (prop tips on the upswing as they come together) created excessive drag and were stalling the center wing section. The head-on photo above shows the second XP BEFORE the engines were swapped. Check every photo of a P-/F-82 after the XPs and you'll note that the rotation is "inward" (prop tips on downswing as they come together). Both XPs flew beautifully once engines were swapped.

Single engine flight in the P-38 was a special challenge in trim control. Not so the F-82. Former Col. John Sharp (commanded all F-82 squadrons in Korea) stated that it wasn't always immediately apparent when an engine cut out on the F-82.


viewtopic.php?f=3&t=36361&start=0