27 Ltr V12 - Why cant we build one??

[Ozgrade3]

Over the last few months I have been looking at the warbird scene. It appears that Flugwek in Germany are going to build new P-51 Mustang airframes to be operated under the experimental category. Thewy apparently will be identical to the Mustang airframe but not called a Mustang for obvious reasons.

So why couldnt someone design a 27 Ltr V12, using modern materials and technology (alloys, fuel injection etc). It wouldnt be a Merlin but would bolt on as a direct swap.

Surely if Farrari, McClaren, etc can build runs of 150 engines for their exclusive models, we could do the same for warbirds. Lots of engine designers around, Thielert can build any companents, just give them the blueprints. Sure it would cost but so does an F40 or Mclaren F1.

[henry crun]

The answer is in the first four words of your last sentence.

Motor sport, in particular motor racing, attracts massive sponsorship and TV funding, where is the equivalent in warbird flying ?

[Kolibear]

Remind me again of how long an F1 engine lasts? - 2 races - 4 hours? At if it does blow up, the driver parks the car by the side of the track & walks away.

[Ozgrade3]

We're not talking using F1 engines, or tech, just casting components to build a 1650 cubic inch V12. Its only 55 hp per litre to make 1500 hp out of 27 ltrs. Should be quite achievable given the state of the art in engine building, casting and machining.

There are ooodles of small engineering shops round the world designing and building their own engines, so it doesnt seem out of the question.

[Agaricus bisporus]

Of course the engineering can be done.

It might even be done at a commercial rate.

But it would be killed by certification costs.

Chuck in a PT6!

[jeppsbore]

Agaricus bisporus

Better still do a google for Piper PA-48 / Piper enforcer, seems Piper bought the rights to produce the P51 airframe in the early eighties and strapped a 2455shp lycoming T55 turboprop in the nose.
Must of been an awsome machine, shame they only built two :{

[Saab Dastard]

From the 1972 Observer's Book of Aircraft:

"The Piper PE-1 Enforcer was a structurally redesigned, newly-tooled development of the WWII NA P-51 Mustang, and was essentially a new aircraft, having no component commonality with the original Mustang. Development of the Enforcer was taken over by the Piper Aircraft Corporation from Cavalier Aircraft in 1970 and the first of 2 prototypes flew on April 29 1971, with the second in June 1971.

With the 2535 hp Lycoming T55-L-9 turboprop its performance was similar to the piston P-51 - Max clean 460 mph at 20,000 feet, with typical ordnance 432 mph and max cruise of 370 mph. Max range was just under 3000 miles."

Of course it did that on Avtur :ok:

And it had the ugliest exhaust stub in the history of aviation! :(

SD

[Ozgrade3]

You're all missing the point. If i wanted a PT6 I;d go buy a Meridian or TBM-850.

Doesnt an engine thats in the experimental category not have to go through the certification process?

If a new Merlin engine cant be bult, i want something that will take its place.

[Say again s l o w l y]

Nooo, you can't just lob in a turbo prop. They may have the power, but they have no soul.

Creating something like a Merlin from scratch is of course possible, but has anyone got the spare millions available to do it? Is there really a market for something like that?
Unfortunately I think the answer is always going to be no.

[Kolibear]

There are two paths to go down here, either buy the design rights to a V12 or design one from scratch.

If you buy the rights, then you have to use the original 1940s materials. Changing to a 21st century material which may not be a direct equivalent, would require re-certification.

The cost of tooling would be exorbitant bearing in mind the size of the market.

Which particular mark of V12 would you decide to make? Its all very well saying 'lets make a Merlin', but I suspect that if you looked at 50 Merlin powered aircraft today, not more than 5 would share the same Mark of engine.

If you decide to make design one from scratch, the development and tooling costs would be astronomical, running into £million.

[Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!]

27 Ltr V12 - Why cant we build one??
Simple. 12 doesn't go into 27 :8


duh!

[Agaricus bisporus]

Does if you stuff it in with a bloody great supercharger!

[Alf_Ripool]

I remember some American gentleman telling me that there was a lot of support for the Napier Sabre still available, due to some use in what he called 'Open Class Air Racing'.
The Merlin was one of the greatest engines of all time, and had 'the name', but the Sabre and it's brother in spirit the Centaurus were probably the last word in aero piston engines.
Sabre engined Mustang anyone?
(Pigeons target locked, cat released)
Alf

[treadigraph]

I think he was referring to Unlimited air racing in the USA - most of the racers are either Merlin or Griffon powered Mustangs, or Sea Furies re-engined with R-3350s. Still a couple of Bearcats going as well, and some Yaks. There are three or four specialist engine shops in the US "churning" out rebuilt race-tuned Merlins for the speed freaks.

The only potential Napier Sabre powered flyer I can think of is Kermit Weeks' Tempest currently undergoing rebuild with PPS at Booker. Whether it actually will fly is doubtful.

[tinpis]

This one works well.

http://www.thundermustang.com/images/gallery_pics/g05.jpg

[Brian Abraham]

What is the engine Tins?

[henry crun]

Brian Abraham: See here. http://www.thundermustang.com/falconer.htm

[Chimbu chuckles]

I saw the one and only Kiwi Thunder Mustang flying at Ardmore a week or so ago....VERY sexy!

Interesting that ALL the high end performance specs are within a knot or two of the original..except Rate of Climb which goes close to being twice the original...cost of ownership and DOCs are a different matter.:ok:

http://www.kiwithunder.com/

[tinpis]

Tin should have been a cook !

[Say again s l o w l y]

I have never wanted a machine as badly as I want one of those! What a stunning aircraft.

Are there any in the UK?

[Agaricus bisporus]

The uncharitable (or perhaps the true warbird-lover) might be heard to observe that the headline question on this thread might not need to be asked at all if it were not for those speedfreaks in Unlimited racing and their rather distasteful penchant for chopping large pieces off irreplaceable historic aeroplanes and cheerfully destroying their engines on a wholesale basis over the last couple of decades...

[tinpis]

I think what I was getting at is it would not be impossible to develop the Falconer engine further to power a 1:1 replica

Supercharging would not be required for sport flying and posing.

[AfricanSkies]

So if using new materials would require recertification, why use new materials? Why not just buy the rights and start making exact replica Merlins?
:confused:

[tinpis]

Because they werent all that good when they were new.:rolleyes:

[spekesoftly]

So if using new materials would require recertification, why use new materials? Why not just buy the rights and start making exact replica Merlins?
:confused:
According to an article I read on the problems of maintaining engines like the Merlin, some of the original specification materials are simply no longer available.

[tinpis]

If the Merlin wasn't that good, why was it licence built in the USA and fitted to the Mustang?

Making an EXACT replica would be self defeating

Have a look at the Falconer engine

Its not 1920's technology