RR Griffon and prop rotation
I also discovered the P38 is not the only aircraft to have used twin counter rotating Allisons - the F82 used them too.
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: London
Age: 63
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The story of that difference in rotation is interesting in it's own right. When the F82 was first test flown, it refused to lift off. They discovered that the prop wash negated the lift on the centre wing section. Reversing the propeller rotations restored the lift and everything then worked as it should.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay now I'm even more confused; looking at pics of the P38 the unfortunate pilot seems to be faced with TWO critical engines as each are outward turning. Maybe something to do with the twin fin configuration? As I grow older and dimmer the world makes less and less sense
Folks,
I believe that, if you go further back into the history of the Griffin and, later, the Merlin, you will find in RAF specs. the notion that the Griffin would be too powerful for a fighter (??? I know, but I am only the messenger) as a "36 litre class engine", therefor a "24 litre class engine" should be developed, which became the Merlin.
As many of you will know, there were serious problems with the early Merlin development, up to and including into Squadron service. It is reasonable to say that many of the production standards problem with the Merlin were only (partly) solved when they were "productionized" by Ford of UK, and Packard later introduced further improvements.
As references, see "Not Much Of an Engineer", Sir Stanley Hooker, and the autobiography of Wing Commander Rod Banks, the fuel expert, and inter-war representative of International Octel.
I believe that, if you go further back into the history of the Griffin and, later, the Merlin, you will find in RAF specs. the notion that the Griffin would be too powerful for a fighter (??? I know, but I am only the messenger) as a "36 litre class engine", therefor a "24 litre class engine" should be developed, which became the Merlin.
As many of you will know, there were serious problems with the early Merlin development, up to and including into Squadron service. It is reasonable to say that many of the production standards problem with the Merlin were only (partly) solved when they were "productionized" by Ford of UK, and Packard later introduced further improvements.
As references, see "Not Much Of an Engineer", Sir Stanley Hooker, and the autobiography of Wing Commander Rod Banks, the fuel expert, and inter-war representative of International Octel.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sale, Australia
Age: 80
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Development of the Griffon did not come until much later than the Merlin, and was to meet an FAA requirement, rather than the RAF. Following the 'R' engine an engine called the Griffon was built prior to the Merlin, but went no further and had no relaitionship to the Griffon that went into production.
