Jay Leno P-51C

[Saville]

Didn't P-38's have Allisons and fly fairly high? I'm just sayin....

Gary[/quote]

I rad a book a few months ago that I found quite interesting:

"Development of the P-51 Long-range Escort Fighter" by Paul A. Ludwig

Now this book is clearly a pro-51 book so it doesn't have much good to say about other fighters including the P-38. As far as the 38 goes the book said that above 24-25,000 feet the allison would explode. due to ineffective wing leading edge intercoolers.

And after a rash of failures it was also concluded that the allisons and their turbosuperchargers failed at high alt with the bitter temps up there. And the issue was with the turbos and the oil in the turbo regulating servo. When it got at alt the cold congealed the oil altering the position of the throttle and the manifold pressure to where the engine was either overboosted or at 20 inches - not enough for combat speed.


Tony Levier was sent to Britain and he reported that ultimately, 2,000 allisons failed in the ETO alone. The fighting altitudes in the Pacific seemed to be much lower so the P-38 did very well there.

So the airplane was restricted to below 20k.

No flamewars..I'm only reporting what the book said. And the author just might be a little biased. The basic thrust of the book was that almost everyone tried to kill the 51 and it only barely made it into combat.

[Nathan]

Hi Bill......I just thought I'd let you know that you can FLY an Allison farther than you can SHIP a Merlin! JC

That's great!

Please post the pics of the P-40's escorting the B-17's and B-24's at altitude over Germany. I'll bet it was quite a welcome, comforting sight for the bomber pilots

The -7 Merlin makes about .9hp per cubic inch at up to 20 some thousand feet.........and the Allison in your P-40 makes...................how much?

Glenn

Didn't P-38's have Allisons and fly fairly high? I'm just sayin....

Gary

Had the P-40 been given a Turbosupercharger it would have been an even better airplane. I'll take the P-40 over the P-51 anyday..and yes in combat too!

[Zachary]

Phooey! PW R2800 beats them both!

Zack - running for cover...

[John-Curtiss Paul]

That's a strange post from you Bill. Quite strange.

JC

[RyanShort1]

Hi Bill......I just thought I'd let you know that you can FLY an Allison farther than you can SHIP a Merlin! JC

That's great!

Please post the pics of the P-40's escorting the B-17's and B-24's at altitude over Germany. I'll bet it was quite a welcome, comforting sight for the bomber pilots

The -7 Merlin makes about .9hp per cubic inch at up to 20 some thousand feet.........and the Allison in your P-40 makes...................how much?

Glenn

Didn't P-38's have Allisons and fly fairly high? I'm just sayin....

Gary

Had the P-40 been given a Turbosupercharger it would have been an even better airplane. I'll take the P-40 over the P-51 anyday..and yes in combat too!

When and where do you want to meet... Let's both go get a year of training and then do it. I'll take the '51.

Ryan

[The Inspector]

Getting back to the video that started all this mud chucking (and can't you all wait until after Labor Day to sling mud?) I've looked @ Jays car in the video a couple of times and having worked on both Packards and Allisons in unlimited boat racing (prefer Allisons, tougher, and you don't buy the SNAP-ON guy and his wife a dinner out by ordering a wrench) I donot see anywhere on the 'moskito Merlin' an aftercooler, granted, we took them off the boats because they didn't do much good when running at essentially sea level, but a 'Merlin' sans aftercooler would more correctly be a "Buzzard" used in British tanks would it not? And Buzzards into road cars are fairly common swaps-huge torque and the definate eyewash of all those cylinders

[ZRX61]

Getting back to the video that started all this mud chucking (and can't you all wait until after Labor Day to sling mud?) I've looked @ Jays car in the video a couple of times and having worked on both Packards and Allisons in unlimited boat racing (prefer Allisons, tougher, and you don't buy the SNAP-ON guy and his wife a dinner out by ordering a wrench) I donot see anywhere on the 'moskito Merlin' an aftercooler, granted, we took them off the boats because they didn't do much good when running at essentially sea level, but a 'Merlin' sans aftercooler would more correctly be a "Buzzard" used in British tanks would it not? And Buzzards into road cars are fairly common swaps-huge torque and the definate eyewash of all those cylinders

A *Tank* Merlin is a Meteor. Jay has one sat in his shop. & the reason Jay's Merlin seems to be missing a few parts is because it has a 800CFM Holley sat on top of it
The Buzzard was a 1920's race engine of about 37Liter & they only built about 100 of them.

[ZRX61]

Now put 2 Merlins on a Mosquito, and you've got an aeroplane with the same range and payoad of the legendary B-17, which takes no less than 4 of those funny, leaky round engines to drag around!

Ah yes, the famed "4 Engine medium"

[Obergrafeter]

If thats not enough arguing what about the comment about P-51s on aircraft carriers? Isn't the CF mission to teach history? Doesn't Rob know about the navalized version. Must not be a Wixer as it was discussed here many times. Seems from that interview the B-24 not B-24 argument comes from high atop the CF chain of command. Just wanted to hit that dead pony one more time.

[51fixer]

but a 'Merlin' sans aftercooler would more correctly be a "Buzzard" used in British tanks would it not?

Many Merlins were built without an Aftercooler and flown in many aircraft.
For example I believe Spitfires up to the Mk IX had single stage blower engines without the aftercooler.
The Merlins with two stage superchargers needed to cool the induction so they needed the aftercooler.
Rich

[Jack Cook]

what about the comment about P-51s on aircraft carriers?

I was going to avoid mentioning that But since you did........
P-51s being launched from carriers for special missions
Not bloddy likely

[B-25 C]

PS - The FAA registration database still has only one B-24 listed.

Well, I can't keep quiet anymore. Just because the FAA has it listed that way, doesn't mean it's the only B-24. For example...if the LB30 isn't a B-24, then how is it that Rob Collings doesn't have a B-24 type rating?



ROBERT FRANK COLLINGS
Address
Street 137 BARTON RD
City STOW State MA
County MIDDLESEX Zip Code 01775-1529
Country USA
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Medical
Medical Class: First Medical Date: 3/2008
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certificates
1 of 2
1 2
DOI: 9/5/2007
Certificate: AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT
Rating(s):
AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT
AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE LAND
COMMERCIAL PRIVILEGES
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE SEA

Type Ratings


A/B-17 A/CE-500 A/CV-LB30 A/N-B25 C/G-TBM

The point is that they are BOTH B-24s! One is a B-24A/LB30 (that paperwork IS in the process of being straightened out with the FAA) and the other is a B-24J. Geez, how many times do we have to say that? I personally think it's awesome that there are TWO B-24s flying, no matter what the FAA or anyone else calls 'em.

Please believe me when I say I'm not trying to stir the pot with this (already spoke with Jim H, via electric computer and we're cool). I just knew someone would bring up the FAA paperwork part and I thought I'd try to clarify it a bit.

Gary

Hey Gary how about you post your pilots information so every body can see it, along with private address!

[B-25 C]

Maybe the Collings Foundation is finally going to publically acknowledge that they don't really have the world's only flying B-24.

Walt

Well maybe the Collings Foundation Has the only flying B-24J that was not converted from something else!

[Jack Cook]

Hey Gary how about you post your pilots information so every body can see it, along with private address!

That's called public info and the pilot has the option to have their address withheld


FAA Registry
Name Inquiry Results

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CHARLES ELWOOD YEAGER
Address


Address is not available

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Medical

Medical Class: Second Medical Date: 4/2008

MUST HAVE AVAILABLE GLASSES FOR NEAR VISION.

NOT VALID FOR ANY CLASS AFTER.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Certificates

1 of 1
DOI: 7/30/2003
Certificate: COMMERCIAL PILOT

Rating(s):
COMMERCIAL PILOT
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE SEA
AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE LAND
AIRPLANE MULTIENGINE SEA
INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE
ype Ratings
C/L-18
Limits
AUTHORIZED EXPERIMENTAL AIRCRAFT: AV-L39 N-F86 N-P51 T-33.

[Ztex]

Hey Gary how about you post your pilots information so every body can see it, along with private address!

It's online...

http://www.faa.gov/licenses_certificate ... n_inquiry/

FAA Registry
Name Inquiry Results

ZANE SCOTT ADAMS

Address

Address is not available


Medical

Medical Class: First Medical Date: 5/1999



Certificates
1 of 1


DOI: 5/12/2008
Certificate: PRIVATE PILOT
Rating(s):
PRIVATE PILOT
AIRPLANE SINGLE ENGINE LAND
INSTRUMENT AIRPLANE


Limits

ENGLISH PROFICIENT.