PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - RAF Preference for in line engines vs radials in WW2
Old 24th Nov 2022, 05:23
  #25 (permalink)  
megan
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 5,952
Received 398 Likes on 210 Posts
In-line engines were water cooled - they had less frontal area, but had complex cooling systems and could be taken out by a single hit on the cooling system. Some of that drag advantage was given back due to the need for big radiators, plus you couldn't run them very long on the ground prior to takeoff without overheating.
Radial engines had more frontal area, but were air cooled so no plumbing, radiator, etc. and were far more tolerant of battle damage. Radial engined aircraft were preferred for ground attack due to the better tolerance to damage from ground fire, and since cooling airflow was provided by the turning prop, they didn't generally overheat sitting on the ground waiting to takeoff.
One of the major problems with the B-29 during WWII was overheating during the taxi for take off, such that there was a CHT limit laid down for commencing the take off run, reach that and it was back to dispersal, take off was commenced with the cooling flaps fully open and the flight engineer with an eye on the CHT's progressively closed them while barreling down the runway. They learnt that maintenance of the cooling baffles around the cylinders was critical. Certainly could take battle damage though, reports of radials making it home with cylinders missing, as in shot off, not misfiring.
A quick search brought up the Hurricane Mk VII Radial Hurricane with a Bristol Hercules installed

It says it flew with 320 squadron, but I can't find any other information
I think someone is having a leg pull with that site. 320 never flew fighters, they flew Fokker T.VIII, Anson, Hudson and B-25.
megan is offline