P-38 fan wrote:
Just curious about what differences there are between the Packard built Merlins and the RR Merlins. Just an engineer's curiosity (as there's minimal chance I'd ever be able to afford anything with this powerplant). One thing that has always got my curiosity was the choice of bolts/nuts/fasteners. Obviously we in the US use SAE type bolts/threads, but it's my impression that the British had their own bolt specs (the bolt type name escapes me at the moment). I was wondering if Packard converted their tooling to use the same fastener configuration as the British, or if Packard engines used SAE bolts in their construction.
I've searched around on the web for information, but have struck out so far.
Thanks for any info.
Mike
Its a loaded question.
RR design evolved over time so even within RR produced examples there are many changes.
The Brits use a different spline on their prop hubs so a US Prop uses SAE 50 or 60 Spline design. So US and RR engines have different Prop Shafts.
Early Merlins used a Float Type Carb, Americans used a Bendix Pressure carb, Later RR used a version of a Pressure Carb but called it Fuel Injection. So on an American Packard you had an adapter for a US Fuel pump.
The front of the nose under the prop shaft had a V drive. On american versions on the left side was the prop gov, american made, and on the right was a vacuum pump for the instruments and to pressurize fuel tanks. The Brits had Vacuum pumps that were a copy pretty much of the American pumps. Unsure if the base is any different or the drive interface. I really don't know what Prop Gov was used on the RR engines. Much later RR engines had a different gov setup.
About the only thing with SAE threads on Packard engines is the Cuno oil filter on the R/H side by the oil regulator and on a couple of the adapters to American accessories.
Packard engineered some improvements, RR used some.
I believe US paid RR $5k an engine in royalty costs. With the P-82 that is why they went with GM after the war ended. At least one reason.