Military Review

Combat aircraft. Water cooled motors

59

What is the best engine?

1. Rolls-Royce Merlin, UK - 108 (64.67%)
64.67%
2. Allison V-1710. USA - 10 (5.99%)
5.99%
3. Klimov VK-105. USSR - 15 (8.98%)
8.98%
4. "Hispano-Suiza" 12Y. France - 0 (0%)
0%
5. Junkers Jumo 211. Germany - 6 (3.59%)
3.59%
6. Daimler-Benz DB 605. Germany - 19 (11.38%)
11.38%
7. Mikulin AM-38, USSR - 9 (5.39%)
5.39%
Combat aircraft. Water cooled motors

Immediately after this material, a comparison and a long and thoughtful analysis on the topic of who was better: air vents or liquid-cooled motors downright suggests itself. But before that, it is really worth looking at the best representatives of water motors. And then just compare who was better, who was more promising, who was more convenient.


Rolls-Royce Merlin, UK



Hardly anyone would argue that we have one of the most epochal motors of that time. Almost 20 years on the assembly line, 57 modifications, more than 150 copies - this suggests that the motor has gone beyond the usual framework. And flew away.

The list of aircraft that the Merlin flew into the sky is not only impressive. He is delightful. Hurricane, Spitfire, Seafire, Beaufighter, Mosquito, Whitley, Lancaster, Halifax and many others. And yes, if it were not for the Merlin and its licensed copy of the Packard V-1650, then the Mustang would have remained a flying coffin, not an excellent fighter.

TTX "Rolls-Royce" "Merlin X":

Volume: 27 liters.
Power: 1290 hp from. at 3000 rpm in takeoff mode.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: Two inlet and two outlet valves per cylinder.
Fuel type: gasoline with octane number 87 or 100.
Fuel consumption: 177 l / h - 400 l / h.
Dry weight: 744 kg.

The highlight of all the Merlins are the magnificent superchargers designed by Stanley Hooker. The downside is the love of engines for high-octane gasoline.

After the war, "Merlin" not only continued to fly on civilian aircraft, but even began to carry former opponents through the air.

Modification of the Messerschmitt Bf.109G-2, which was built in Spain, was modified by Hispano Aviación for the installation of the Rolls-Royce Merlin 500-45 engine with a capacity of 1 hp. under the brand name "Hispano Aviación" HA-600-M1112L "Buchon".


Another German, "Heinkel" No.111, which the enterprising Spaniards began to produce after the war, after the "native" engines from "Junkers" Jumo 211F-2, had run out, was converted to "Merlin".

The Italians had the same situation, after the war they had a Fiat G.59 fighter in service, in fact a G.55 with a Daimler-Benz DB 605A engine. When the German engines ran out, the 59th appeared under the Merlin.

All in all, the Merlin turned out to be one of the most demanded engines in the world. Seriously.

Allison V-1710. USA



The case when there was nothing and suddenly it was required. By the beginning of World War II, the United States came up with one liquid-cooled aircraft engine in general. But - what!

In general, it did not possess special characteristics, but it was distinguished by its reliability. Allison V-1710. Obviously, the fact that the United States produced (the only country in the world) turbochargers in large series helped out. That is why the twin-engine R-38 "Lightning" with a power of 1150 hp. developed at an altitude of 7 meters 000 km / h. And the Messerschmitt Bf.628C with DB 110N engines with a higher takeoff power of 601 hp. at this altitude it barely accelerated to 1 km / h.


Eventually aviation The USA received a very reliable engine with a good resource and even an abundance of positive aspects. Naturally, all US fighters that were developed for liquid engines received the Allison V-1710.

These are P-38 Lightning, P-40 Kittyhawk and Tomahawk, P-39 Airacobra, P-63 Kingcobra, even P-51 Mustang began his career with this engine.

TTX Allison V-1710:

Volume: 28 liters.
Power: 1500 HP at 3000 rpm takeoff mode.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: Two inlet and two outlet valves per cylinder.
Fuel type: gasoline with octane number 100 or 130.
Dry weight: 633 kg.

In total, almost 70 engines were manufactured.

Klimov VK-105. the USSR



Deep and very successful modernization of the M-100 engine, a licensed copy of the French-Swiss Hispano-Suiza 12Y engine.

It differed from the imported progenitor by a radically revised circuit of the motor itself, the gas distribution system and a two-speed supercharger.

And most importantly, the engine made it possible to use low-octane fuel such as B-78 or B-20 (OCH 93), and in the most extreme case - 4B-74. Neither British nor even American engines allowed such an outrage. And ours - nothing, flew. And if we dilute our gasoline with the American Lend-lease B-100, everything was fine.

The forced motors VK-105PF and VK-105PF2 were already running on no-mixture with an octane rating of at least 95, but still it could not be compared with foreign counterparts.

More than 91 M-000 / VK-105 engines were manufactured in total.


All Yakovlev's fighters (Yak-1, Yak-7, Yak-9, Yak-3), LaGG-3, bombers Yak-4, Pe-2, Er-2, Ar-2 flew on these engines. Plus, the P-40s were also equipped with these motors.

TTX VK-105:

Volume: 35,08 liters.
Power: 1 HP at 100 rpm.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: 3 valves (one intake, two exhaust) per cylinder.
Fuel type: leaded gasoline 4B-78, mixture No. 1, mixture No. 2, imported 1B-95.
Dry weight: 570 kg.

The pinnacle of the VK-105 development was the PF2 modification with a capacity of 1290 hp, on which the upgrade resource was considered exhausted.

"Hispano-Suiza" 12Y. France



The main engine of the French Air Force, which has given the world many licensed copies. The motors were produced in the USSR (M-100), Czechoslovakia (Avia 12Ydrs), Switzerland (SS-77).

The list of aircraft on which the HS 12Y was installed is quite extensive. The most famous: "Dewoitine" D520 and "Moran-Saulnier" MS.406. More than 50 aircraft models of the firms "Farman", "Pote", "Breguet", "Bloch", "Amiot", "Nieuport", "AVIA".


The main highlight of the 12Y was the symbiosis of the engine and the motor-gun from the Hispano-Suiza HS.404. The engine and cannon developed by Mark Birkigt saved a lot of time on the corresponding layout developments. And since both the engine and the cannon were quite good, it is only natural that the production of more than 40 engines is not something out of the ordinary. If France had not ended so quickly in World War II, the number of engines produced could have been higher.

TTX "Hispano-Suiza" 12Y:

Volume: 36,05 liters.
Power: 840 hp at 2400 rpm on takeoff.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: 2 valves per cylinder.
Fuel type: leaded gasoline with octane rating 92 or 100.
Dry weight: 475 kg.

Junkers Jumo 211. Germany



The Germans did it in a peculiar way. There was an engine for fighters, there was an engine for bombers. The Jumo 211 was carried in the sky by all German bombers. "Junkers" Ju.87, Ju.88, Ju.90, "Heinkel" No.111.


Exported, these motors were installed on the Italian "Savoy-Marchetti" SM.79 and the Romanian IAR 79, which was almost a complete copy of the Italian.

A total of 68 Jumo 248 units were manufactured in 211 modifications.

The engine from many contemporaries was quite advanced. Direct fuel injection in 1935 when the main majority used carburetors.

A great help to the engine was its ability to use low-octane gasolines. For the Germans, who had problems with oil, this was of great help. Aviation practically did not use synthetic gasolines, because the lower the octane number, the better it was for manufacturers.

TTX Jumo 211A:

Volume: 34,99 liters.
Power: 1 HP takeoff at 025 2 rpm.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: 3 valves per cylinder, two inlet and one outlet.
Fuel system: Direct petrol injection.
Fuel type: leaded gasoline with octane rating 87.
Dry weight: 585 kg.

Daimler-Benz DB 605, Germany



A competitor to the previous engine that captured the fighter market. It was produced in a slightly smaller number than the Junkers engine, only 42 copies.

Stood on all fighters "Messerschmitt" series 109, 110 and 210.


We can say that the evolution of these fighters was directly related to the development and improvement of this engine. In addition, under license, the DB 605 was produced in Italy, where it was flown by aircraft from the Macchi, Fiat, and Reggiana firms. In general, the engine served until 1950. The last aircraft to fly the DB 605 was the Swedish Saab J21 fighter.

The engine was mixed.

On the one hand, I used low-octane B4 fuel (RON 87) perfectly, but gasoline with RON 100 could also be used. The engine was flexible in this regard. The use of afterburner systems did not cause problems; it worked perfectly with both GM-1 with nitrous oxide and with water-methanol MW 50.

On the other hand, it was not safe. Fires due to overheating of bearings were completely normal. The problem was solved, but from modification to modification, the engine regularly trained both pilots and technicians. In addition, the engine was very demanding on the quality of fuel, and when at the very end of the war with this issue in the Luftwaffe it became very bad, engine failures became more frequent.

TTX DB 605AM:

Volume: 35,76 liters.
Power: 1475 hp at 2800 rpm, from MW 50 to 1800 hp
Number of cylinders: 12.
Valves: 4, two inlet and two outlet valves per cylinder.
Fuel system: direct fuel injection.
Fuel type: leaded gasoline B4 octane number 87.
Dry weight: 756 kg.

Mikulin AM-38, USSR



In fact, this is the engine of one aircraft. But what! Alas, the MiG-3 fighter did not have a significant impact on the course of the war, but the Il-2 ...

Yes, the alliance of IL-2 and AM-38 turned out to be fatal in the full sense of the word.


Not a high-altitude, but a high-torque engine capable of running on low-octane fuel - this was a godsend for the attack aircraft. More than 60 produced engines, which lifted 000 Il-36 attack aircraft of all modifications, is a force that the Luftwaffe could not resist. It is a fact.

The engine was not without flaws, over which work was underway all the time the engine was being produced. Yes, the AM-38 was not as versatile as the motors mentioned above, but such a contribution to the Victory as made by Ilyushin's attack aircraft cannot be underestimated.

TTX AM-38:

Volume: 46,662 liters.
Power: 1 HP at 500 rpm nominal at 2050 m.
Number of cylinders: 12.
Fuel system: carburetor.
Fuel type: leaded gasoline 4B-78 (OCH 95) or 1B-95.
Dry weight: 860 kg.

Liquid cooling engine played in stories aviation is no less important than the rotary engine and its further development - the "star" of air cooling. In the end, the world's first aircraft engine, which lifted the plane of the Wright brothers into the sky, was the most lightweight in the "custom" workshop, a four-cylinder engine that was water-cooled from a car.

And throughout their period, liquid-cooled piston engines competed with air vents on an equal footing, and in some ways even surpassed them.

In the very near future, we will compare the participants in these reviews.
Author:
Articles from this series:
Combat aircraft. About fiery hearts
59 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. mark1
    mark1 11 August 2020 18: 29 New
    +9
    the rotary engine and its further development are the "star" of air cooling.
    Maybe a rotary star and a stationary star?
    1. mark1
      mark1 11 August 2020 18: 41 New
      +1
      Probably points 4,5 and 7 in the rating would be worth excluding, and the rest are connected, at least, for fighter purposes (mainly) during WWII
      1. Bar1
        Bar1 11 August 2020 19: 04 New
        +4
        Vladimir Nikolaevich Ipatiev (November 9 [21], 1867, Moscow, Russian Empire - November 29, 1952, Chicago, USA) - Russian-American chemist, Lieutenant General of the Russian Imperial Army, Doctor of Chemical Sciences, Professor, Academician of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences / Russian Academy of Sciences / USSR Academy of Sciences (1916), member of the US National Academy of Sciences (1939).


        The second invention that made him famous was high-octane gasoline, which allowed American aircraft to achieve a decisive advantage in speed during World War II. The peculiarity of such gasoline is its resistance to detonation, the ability to force the engine operation, which was especially important in aviation. It was thanks to Ipatiev gasoline that the British army in 1940 was able to defeat the German Luftwaffe in the "Battle of Britain" [9


        https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ипатьев,_Владимир_Николаевич
        The father of the American oil industry, it was he who created the American chemical industry and high-octane gasoline. Practically unknown at home.
        1. Constanty
          Constanty 11 August 2020 19: 54 New
          +2
          Mark Semyonovich Solonin wrote about him "At peacefully sleeping airfields" or "June 22, or When did the Great Patriotic War begin?"
    2. Bar1
      Bar1 11 August 2020 18: 58 New
      -9
      In the end, the world's first aircraft engine, which lifted the plane of the Wright brothers into the sky, was the most lightweight in the "custom" workshop, a four-cylinder engine that was water-cooled from a car.


      the first aircraft engine was the Ahrbecker-Hamkens - a steam engine that lifted the world's first Mozhaisky plane.



      http://авиару.рф/aviamuseum/aviatsiya/nachalo-aviastroeniya-v-rossijskoj-imperii-2/nachalo-aviastroeniya-v-rossijskoj-imperii/samolet-mozhajskogo/
  2. Constanty
    Constanty 11 August 2020 18: 43 New
    10
    It's funny - the lack of "Marlin", according to the author, was the love of engines for high-octane gasoline, and it flew on gasoline with an octane rating of 87 or 100, the Allison V-1710 flew on gasoline with an octane rating of 100 or 130. and not a word about what it was. defect. The author simply had to find a flaw in this engine so that others (;-)) came out better - as before with the flaws of the Fw-190 and BMW-801.
    1. CTABEP
      CTABEP 11 August 2020 20: 28 New
      +6
      Therefore, "Merlin" is beyond competition in this list :). Well, the British knew how to make aircraft engines, with all their desire not to take this away from them.
      1. Constanty
        Constanty 11 August 2020 20: 35 New
        +5
        It should be added that this engine was the basis for the engines of the Meteor tanks used for more than two decades.
    2. The leader of the Redskins
      The leader of the Redskins 11 August 2020 22: 02 New
      +2
      And I have a question ...
      Wasn't the Beaufighter equipped with an air-cooled engine ?!
  3. mz
    mz 11 August 2020 18: 48 New
    0
    “That is why the twin-engine R-38 Lightning with a power of 1150 hp developed 7 km / h at an altitude of 000 meters. And the Messerschmitt Bf.628C with DB 110N engines of higher takeoff power of 601 hp at this altitude barely accelerated to 1 km / h. "
    I believe the merit here is primarily aerodynamics, not engine power
    1. mark1
      mark1 11 August 2020 19: 41 New
      +6
      Quote: mz
      I believe the merit here is primarily aerodynamics, not engine power

      Yes, in general, then the power at high altitude (glory to the turbochargers)
    2. irontom
      irontom 12 August 2020 00: 30 New
      +4
      Here is the case with the PD (piston engine) of that time, as a rule, excess boost was created by a drive supercharger driven into rotation from the engine itself, and the higher the plane flew, the more power was taken in order to create the required pressure in the cylinders, and from a certain height the engine usually started suffocate, so for example, on the AM-35 at an altitude of 6000 meters, I spent more than two hundred hp on the work of the monitoring station, on Messer there was an monitoring station operating through a fluid coupling with a constant power take-off. such an monitoring station has the disadvantage of wasting a lot of power at low and high altitudes. So the Hans had to raise the altitude by injection of nitrous oxide.
      TK (turbocharger) uses exhaust gases for operation, so that the boost is not tied to the power of the engine, here another trouble is the very high temperature of the exhaust gases of the order of a thousand degrees. TK of that time, direct exhaust could not withstand, it was necessary to make a complex overall system of preliminary cooling of exhaust gases.
      1. NF68
        NF68 12 August 2020 16: 18 New
        0
        Quote: irontom
        at Messer there was a monitoring station operating through a fluid coupling with a constant power take-off. such an monitoring station has the disadvantage of wasting a lot of power at low and high altitudes. So the Hans had to raise the altitude by injection of nitrous oxide.


        The Germans had to use a mixture of nitrous oxide GM-1 for fighters intended for action at high altitudes due to the fact that they were not able / due to a lack of heat-resistant materials / to produce a large number of turbochargers driven by engine exhaust gases, as well as due to the fact that that the leadership of the Luftwaffe at the beginning of the WWII interfered with work on two-stage mechanical superchargers with an altitude of 9-11,5 km. The fluid coupling has nothing to do with the scraping of the fluid coupling made it possible to avoid a power drop at heights between the 1st and the second engine altitude:

        1. irontom
          irontom 12 August 2020 21: 45 New
          0
          Let's just say in the States, despite the fact that they were ahead in the development of the TC, too, with heat resistance, not everything was in order. All the planned new fighters at the end of the 30s should have had a TK, for example, the experienced XP-39 was originally with a TK in the lower part of the fuselage, where the radiator was then fitted. But, the TC exhaust did not hold only the designer Lightnig bypassed this problem, for which the frame had to be made to ensure the normal operation of the TC. Germany did not lag behind, the Junkers Jumo 205 aircraft diesel engines popular in the 30s were pressurized by the TC, another thing is that the diesel exhaust is much lower in temperature. The main disadvantage of the TC with its support system (radiators, air ducts) is that it all turned out to be very cumbersome and heavy to fit into a compact fighter. Even the Americans did not go further than the P-38 and P-47, they managed the English Merlin / Packard.
          1. NF68
            NF68 13 August 2020 16: 26 New
            0
            Quote: irontom
            Let's just say in the States, despite the fact that they were ahead in the development of the TC, too, with heat resistance, not everything was in order. All the planned new fighters at the end of the 30s should have had a TK, for example, the experienced XP-39 was originally with a TK in the lower part of the fuselage, where the radiator was then fitted. But, the TC exhaust did not hold only the designer Lightnig bypassed this problem, for which the frame had to be made to ensure the normal operation of the TC. Germany did not lag behind, the Junkers Jumo 205 aircraft diesel engines popular in the 30s were pressurized by the TC, another thing is that the diesel exhaust is much lower in temperature. The main disadvantage of the TC with its support system (radiators, air ducts) is that it all turned out to be very cumbersome and heavy to fit into a compact fighter. Even the Americans did not go further than the P-38 and P-47, they managed the English Merlin / Packard.


            On account of the problems that the Americans have with the TC, I completely agree. But the Americans were doing better with heat-resistant materials than all other countries of the world combined, and the Germans were well aware of this.

            TC for diesel aircraft engines is easier to create, since the exhaust gas temperature is about 300 degrees C lower. Therefore, the Germans did not much toil with them. But attempts to create a fuel complex for gasoline aircraft engines turned out to be more difficult because the Germans had too few heat-resistant materials. As a result, towards the end of WWII, the Germans nevertheless developed and brought engines with a fuel complex, for example, the Jumo-213 T, Jumo-222 Turbo, but the matter did not come to their serial production. Daimler-Benz also had interesting developments, but they remained at the level of prototypes:

            http://alternathistory.com/razrabotki-aviadvigatelei-firmy-daimler-benz/

            In 1944, BMW produced 310 BMW-801 J-1s with TC and that's it. On the other hand, the Jumo company in the second half of the 1930s created a high-altitude version of the L-88 engine with a two-stage supercharger in which the first supercharger stage was located in front of the engine, and the second in the rear, as was later done and much more compact on the DB-628.



            http://alternathistory.com/vtoroj-v-obraznyj-dvenadtsatitsilindrovyj-aviatsionnyj-dvigatel-firmy-jumo-l88-germaniya/

            For such high-altitude blowers, a large amount of scarce materials was not needed and in production they were easier than TK, and they provided altitude approximately the same as TK. If the leadership of the Luftwaffe before the WWII and in the early years of WWII had not focused only on the creation of high-altitude engines with a TC, then the Germans could well have received quite efficient and not expensive high-altitude aircraft engines in large numbers back in the 1940-1941s.
  4. NF68
    NF68 11 August 2020 18: 56 New
    19
    [/ quote] The highlight of all "Merlins" are the magnificent superchargers developed by Stanley Hooker. The downside is the love of engines for high-octane gasoline. [/ quote]

    Novel. Is it so difficult to watch and understand that at first the Merlins also ran on gasoline with an octane rating of 87 units?

    Merlin III fitted with "universal" propeller shaft able to mount either de Havilland or Rotol propellers. [102] From late 1939, using 100-octane fuel and +12 psi boost (83 kPa gauge; or an absolute pressure of 184 kPa or 1.82 atm), the Merlin III developed 1,310 hp (977 kW) at 3,000 rpm at 9,000 ft (2,700 m ); [60] using 87-octane fuel the power ratings were the same as the Merlin II. Used in the Defiant, Hurricane Mk.I, Spitfire Mk.I fighters, and Battle light bomber. [101] First production Merlin III delivered 1 July 1938. [19]

    It's just that the British, thanks to the Americans, had the opportunity to receive high-quality aviation gasoline with an octane rating of 100 units during the WWII years already in 1940, and gasoline with an octane rating of 130 and 150 units was also available. It was thanks to this gasoline that the Merlins became what they became during the WWII for the BI Air Force and, to a lesser extent, for the United States.

    [quote] In total, 68 units of Jumo 248 were manufactured in 211 modifications.

    The engine from many contemporaries was quite advanced. Direct fuel injection in 1935 when the main majority used carburetors.

    A great help to the engine was its ability to use low-octane gasolines. For the Germans, who had problems with oil, this was of great help. Aviation practically did not use synthetic gasolines, because the lower the octane number, the better it was for producers. [/ quote

    MODERATORS.

    Please remove this nonsense from the "article" because approximately 92% of all German aviation gasoline was synthetic gasoline. The octane number of this gasoline was 64 units. With the help of various additives, the octane number could be increased to 87 / 95-97 units. That is what the Germans did by getting aviation gasoline. The author of the "article" about this as well as about many other things is not in the know.

    Während des Zweiten Weltkriegs gab es in Deutschland mehrere Flugbenzinsorten: so hatte B4-Treibstoff 87 ROZ, er entstand beispielsweise durch den Zusatz von bis zu 0,2% Tetraethylblei sowie von Anilin. Der klopffestere C3-Treibstoff hatte 100 ROZ, er konnte durch weitere Zumischung von “30% Kybol (Diethylbenzole und Propylbenzole (Benzene), 105 ROZ [19]) [20] oder Alkylaten“ [21] hergestellt werden, wiech sollen Additive Amine oder Toluidin zum Einsatz gekommen sein. [1

    ] [quote] The engine was ambiguous.

    On the one hand, I used low-octane B4 fuel (RON 87) perfectly, but gasoline with RON 100 could also be used. The engine was flexible in this regard. [/ quote]

    This engine was "flexible" and "ambiguous" like all other German piston aircraft engines of WWII. The Germans had scanty amounts of gasoline with an octane rating of 100 units. There was not even a large number of captured English / American ones with an RPM of 130 units, which clearly did not improve the mood of the Germans. 92% of all German aviation gasoline was synthetic gasoline B4 and C3. By the beginning of WWII, the Germans could not get synthetic aviation gasoline with an octane rating of more than 94 units. Then, with great difficulty, they managed to achieve an increase in the octane number to 97 units. And on this, the Germans' hopes for gasoline with a higher octane number stalled. So, at best, the C3 was bypassed with OCH-95-97 units.



    More detailed information on DB-605 Jumo-211:


    http://alternathistory.com/malyi-aviatsionnyi-dvigatel-mercedes-benz-db-605-germaniya/


    http://alternathistory.com/bolshoi-aviatsionnyi-dvigatel-jumo-211-germaniya/
  5. Free wind
    Free wind 11 August 2020 18: 56 New
    -2
    Interesting, very interesting. True, there are questions, in fact, what kind of tales are these, about octane numbers. The octane number is the percentage of isooctane (usually called octane) to the total volume of gasoline. In 100 liters of gasoline, there cannot be 130 liters of octane, the octane number is more than 100%, these are fairy tales. Raise with additives (tetraethyl lead). According to one of the measurement systems, it seems to have been raised to 117 percent, but again, isooctane cannot detonate, the hundredth gasoline cannot detonate, from the word at all, but 117, which means it cannot at all ????? ... How many bells and whistles in these engines. It seems the F-1 engines, these are the engines of garden motoblocks, against these machines.
    1. tolancop
      tolancop 12 August 2020 13: 17 New
      +4
      Take a textbook that mentions what the octane number of gasoline is. You will find a lot of interesting things. There is no isooctane in gasoline. The octane number is an indicator of the detonation properties of gasoline, which corresponds to the detonation properties of a liquid consisting of isooctane and isoheptane. I wrote it from memory, how I read it and understood it 40 years ago.
    2. NF68
      NF68 12 August 2020 16: 10 New
      +1
      Quote: Free Wind
      True, there are questions, in fact, what kind of tales are these, about octane numbers. The octane number is the percentage of isooctane (usually called octane) to the total volume of gasoline. In 100 liters of gasoline, there cannot be 130 liters of octane, the octane number is more than 100%, these are fairy tales.


      The octane number is: an indicator that characterizes the knock resistance of the fuel used in internal combustion engines with external mixture formation (usually gasoline, not used for characterizing diesel fuel and aviation kerosene [1]). Gasoline with a higher octane number can withstand a higher compression ratio in the engine cylinders without early autoignition (engine knocking, “knocking”) and therefore can be used in engines with higher power density and efficiency.

      Pure isoctane is taken as a standard against which the octane number of gasoline is determined.

      Octane numbers for hydrocarbons and fuels
      Substance OCHM OCHI
      Methane 110,0 107,5
      Propane 100,0 105,7
      n-butane 91,0 93,6
      Isobutane 99,0 101,1
      n-pentane 61,7 61,7
      Isopentane (2-methylbutane) 90,3 92,3
      Isohexane (2,2-dimethylbutane) 93,4 91,8
      2,2,3-trimethylbutane 101,0 105,0
      n-heptane 0 0
      Isooctane (2,2,4-trimethylpentane) 100 100
      1-pentene 77,1 90,9
      2-methyl-1-butene 81,9 101,3
      2-methyl-2-butene 84,7 97,3
      Methylcyclopentane 80,0 91,3
      Cyclohexane 77,2 83,0
      Benzene 111,6 113,0
      Toluene 102,1 115,7
      Direct distillation gasolines 41-56 43-58
      Thermally cracked gasolines 65-70 70-75
      Gasolines of catalytic cracking 75-89 80-94
      Gasolines of catalytic reforming 77-93 83-100
      Gasoline Н-80 [t 1] 76 [t 2] 84
      Gasoline AI-92 83,5 [t 2] 92
      Gasoline AI-95 85,0 [t 3] 95
      Polymer gasoline 85 100
      Alkylate 90 92
      Alkylbenzene 100 107
      Ethanol 100 105
      Kerosene 30
      Acetone> 100
      Methyl tert-butyl ether 100-101 117 [t 4] [t 3]
      The number indicates the arithmetic mean of the RMB and RON of the given type of gasoline.
      Estimated value; may vary slightly depending on the composition of specific gasoline samples.
      Standard according to STO 00044434-006-2005 with rev. 1-5.
      The octane number was determined when mixed with gasoline.
  6. Undecim
    Undecim 11 August 2020 20: 09 New
    12
    Dillemma! On the one hand, we can only welcome the creative efforts of the author to fill the content of the site with interesting information, moreover, on technical issues, the presentation is by no means simple.
    But on the other hand, the dense ignorance of the author in these very technical issues negates all "high aspirations".
    The question arises - is it really impossible to show an article to a technically competent person so as not to write a complete game such as the fact that the operation of an aircraft engine on low-octane gasoline is its advantage, but on high-octane gasoline it is a disadvantage? Or that a radial engine is a development of a rotary engine. Or about synthetic gasolines in Germany, which were not used in aviation.
    Moreover, with the current means of communication, information exchange is not a problem at all.
    1. Undecim
      Undecim 11 August 2020 20: 28 New
      +5
      I missed one more point - the author once again forgot to choose the criterion by which he suggests choosing the best engine. Or a series of criteria. After all, the same British in 1940 had a Napier Saber that produced 2400 hp, but a competitor went into production, giving out just over 1000 hp. - Merlin. And without this, it is not clear why the proposed engines are better than those absent in the list.
      1. NF68
        NF68 12 August 2020 16: 23 New
        -1
        Quote: Undecim
        I missed one more point - the author once again forgot to choose the criterion by which he suggests choosing the best engine. Or a series of criteria. After all, the same British in 1940 had a Napier Saber that produced 2400 hp, but a competitor went into production, giving out just over 1000 hp. - Merlin. And without this, it is not clear why the proposed engines are better than those absent in the list.


        The Napier Saber is the next generation of non-V-12 aircraft piston engines. The "article" also "compares" the most widespread at that time in the world V-12 aircraft piston engines.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 12 August 2020 18: 08 New
          +2
          In the article I did not find a word that compares "the most widespread at that time in the world V-12 aircraft piston engines." It is written - "water (!) Cooling".
          1. NF68
            NF68 13 August 2020 16: 07 New
            0
            Quote: Undecim
            In the article I did not find a word that compares "the most widespread at that time in the world V-12 aircraft piston engines." It is written - "water (!) Cooling".


            In the characteristics of all engines, without exception, it is indicated that these are V-12 engines. It is possible that next time Roman will give out on the mountain a "article" on other, 16/20/24-cylinder radial V / W-shaped or some other engines with a large number of cylinders.
    2. LastPS
      LastPS 11 August 2020 20: 38 New
      +2
      The question arises - is it really impossible to show an article to a technically competent person so as not to write a complete game such as the fact that the operation of an aircraft engine on low-octane gasoline is its advantage, but on high-octane gasoline it is a disadvantage?


      I agree, it's attracted here. Merlin and DB-605 could also consume it, most likely the early models were fed only low-octane.

      Or about synthetic gasolines in Germany, which were not used in aviation.


      And here you are wrong. 503 thousand tons of jet fuel in the first quarter of the 44th at the peak of production.

      1. Undecim
        Undecim 11 August 2020 21: 13 New
        +5
        It's not me who is wrong, but the author. Read carefully.
        1. LastPS
          LastPS 16 August 2020 08: 56 New
          +1
          I agree my mistake. Well, let there be a sign, it only confirms your words.
  7. Pavel57
    Pavel57 11 August 2020 20: 18 New
    -1
    AM-38 could show itself on fighters, but they were not allowed.
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 11 August 2020 21: 54 New
      +2
      Low-altitude fighter? He's not needed.
  8. Shiden
    Shiden 11 August 2020 21: 03 New
    10
    So I'm wondering why the author of the article kept silent about such a criterion as motor resource.
    1. Pavel57
      Pavel57 12 August 2020 00: 31 New
      +1
      The Allison's share in the supply to the USSR was significant. The P-39 fought well with him. But why the P-51A and especially the A-36 did not like it is still not clear.
      1. tolancop
        tolancop 12 August 2020 23: 36 New
        0
        Pavel57, you at least looked for literature about supplies. The USSR did not receive everything it wanted to receive. The supplies of some samples of equipment were refused. Sometimes because "it is not enough for ourselves ...", sometimes simply because of unwillingness to acquaint the USSR with certain technologies. For example, I have repeatedly met mentions that the USSR would like to receive the P-38, but .... they did not give it.
        1. Pavel57
          Pavel57 12 August 2020 23: 55 New
          0
          Quote: tolancop
          Pavel57, you at least looked for literature about supplies. The USSR did not receive everything it wanted to receive. The supplies of some samples of equipment were refused. Sometimes because "it is not enough for ourselves ...", sometimes simply because of unwillingness to acquaint the USSR with certain technologies. For example, I have repeatedly met mentions that the USSR would like to receive the P-38, but .... they did not give it.


          )))) P-51A was tested with us, this aircraft did not fall under the restrictions.
  9. dgonni
    dgonni 12 August 2020 00: 33 New
    +8
    The article is about nothing. The author apparently does not know that the humo in the 213E modification was installed on the TA-152. And cheerfully gave out 1750 horses without any mixtures and with them 2050.
    There is no evaluation criterion. What edge in this combination of Hispanic is not clear at the same time in the starting line. There were also modifications 12Y-51 with a power of 1100 hp.
    Well, the engines need to be looked at by the screw and altitude characteristics.
    The VK series were a lousy modification of suiza. Re-lightened for such a volume with small margins of both strength and performance of the oil and cooling systems. And on low-octane gasoline, he worked lousy with no one power and driving chips and also leaded candles. Auto at least read the memories of those who flew!
    The AM series must be considered in conjunction with 35/37 / 39-38 / 42; in fact, they differed only in the supercharger. The fact that Mikulin, having broken the pots with Polikarpov, did not bring the 37th in the 40th year is not very good. From 37m, even at low altitudes, a flashlight would give a thrush 109m in the E and F.
    As for me, it is very heavy and oversized for the power that was in the 41st year. Although he had an excellent boost margin. Unfortunately, Mikulin did not immediately do this.
    Although in the 44th year, the AM42 was released in 2000 hp. for IL-10.
    So if the author, when comparing, simulates the screw and altitude characteristics in the form of diagrams, then it will be possible to talk about something if it is the same as this opus. Better not.
    1. demiurg
      demiurg 12 August 2020 17: 11 New
      +2
      Roman will not be able to schedule. They are not on Wikipedia. And you don't have to ask about engine hours and other little things.
  10. Pavel57
    Pavel57 12 August 2020 09: 47 New
    0
    Quote: Aviator_
    Low-altitude fighter? He's not needed.

    The powerful low-altitude engine was fit not only for the Il-2 ... On the initiative of the Air Force in 1941, the AM-3 engine was installed on one of the production MiG-38s. The aircraft was tested at the LII NKAP since August 19, 1941. The second prototype of the MiG-3 aircraft with the AM-38 engine was built at the Mikoyan Design Bureau. It demonstrated unique high-speed characteristics at altitudes less than 4000 m. The take-off properties of the aircraft somewhat improved, but the maneuvering characteristics of the aircraft turned out to be low, although somewhat better compared to the serial aircraft. A small number of such aircraft with two synchronous ShVAK cannons in 1942 took part in the battles at Stalingrad.
  11. Dr. Frankenstucker
    Dr. Frankenstucker 12 August 2020 10: 30 New
    +3
    The list of aircraft that the Merlin flew into the sky is not only impressive. He is delightful. "Hurricane", "Spitfire", "Seafire", "Beaufighter"


    Beaufighter was lifted into the sky by Hercules, not Merlin. Quite air-cooled.
  12. Kostadinov
    Kostadinov 12 August 2020 10: 59 New
    0
    Only German, French and Italian aircraft engines consumed gasoline with a comparatively low RON 87.
  13. tolancop
    tolancop 12 August 2020 13: 49 New
    0
    "... As a result, the US aviation received a very reliable engine with a good resource and even an abundance of positive aspects. Naturally, all US fighters that were developed for liquid engines received the Allison V-1710 ..."
    Reading the memories of those who fought on the Airacobras (with the Allison V-1710 engine), I don’t remember any particular enthusiasm for the reliability and resource of the engine. But about the fact that they constantly monitored the condition of the oil - there were traces of shavings - immediately for replacement; crank breaks in flight are far from exceptional cases ... - I remember that. The disadvantages of Soviet motors were also mentioned: a tendency to overheat, oil emission, low spark plug resource ... But somehow without much negative. But some of the negative from Allisson was felt in people: give me high-octane gasoline, high-quality oil, give it, but the return .... so-so and an eye and an eye for it are needed. True, they drove him far from normal modes, but I think that this is normal in a combat situation. Incl. I got the impression that the Allison was not very suitable for a fighter. And if Allison would be good for a fighter, they would not replace it with Merlin on the Mustang ...
    Incl. most likely "Allison" was a so-so engine and it is unlikely that its mention in this material is justified.

    z.Y. 1. From "Requiem for the PQ-17 caravan" by V.S. Pikul:
    "Colonel of British aviation Isherwood, whose jacket was decorated with the Order of Lenin, had breakfast in the canteen of the air regiment stationed at the Vaengi airfield. Seeing Boris Safonov on the flight, Isherwood honestly admitted: - American kitty hawks have a lot of silver in their bearings. makes their motors better ... "
    Of course, this work is fictional, not documentary. But, I suppose, this phrase would hardly have appeared even in a work of fiction if there were no grounds for it.
    2. I. Shelest ("From wing to wing") mentions an accident over the Siberian taiga during the Kittyhawk ferry just due to engine failure. This is closer to documentary evidence, since the story of the pilot SEEING the occurrence of a malfunction is given. And, I think, it is unlikely that the case of engine failure during the haul was an isolated one.
    1. Pavel57
      Pavel57 12 August 2020 15: 13 New
      0
      Allison had a feature that the pilots neglected - an emergency restriction. This limitation was easily crossed, leading to failures.

      Although, on the other hand, the success of the P-39 is explained, among other things, by the ability to drive in an emergency mode, which reduced the resource, but given that it was 2-3 times more than that of domestic engines, it was not a pity to spend it, but an increase it gave essential characteristics.
      1. tolancop
        tolancop 12 August 2020 23: 22 New
        0
        Pavel57, I think that the pilots did not comply with the restrictions on the emergency mode, not because of a good life, but because the engine in normal mode did not reach the required characteristics. And somewhere I came across the answer of the pilot to the criticism of a foreign techie about non-observance of engine restrictions: "And who needs a shot down plane with a working engine?" Not literally, but the meaning is.
    2. Constanty
      Constanty 12 August 2020 16: 14 New
      0
      One factor you don't seem to be considering is the maintenance culture. With the proper mechanics and service, Allison V-1710 engines were durable and reliable.
      Another thing is that they were worse / weaker than Marlins or licensed Packards.
      Another issue is the fact that in 1944, during the fight against the V-1, the later Merlin Spitfire engines were even considered disposable - this was simply due to their oversized work leading to the destruction of the engine.
  14. demiurg
    demiurg 12 August 2020 17: 07 New
    -1
    Just return the cons for rating articles.
    Comparing engines 45 and 40-41 is not even the bottom.
    Let's compare the stars of 35 and 46. Nenuacho, they seem to fall under the definition.
    Well, thank you separately for the zero cost of the article. Look for Aviagra, though he has fresh ideas.
  15. 2112vda
    2112vda 12 August 2020 17: 31 New
    -1
    Large series of liquid-cooled aircraft engines, no matter which state produced them, is due to one objective reason, the large losses of aircraft with liquid engines. One bullet hole in the cylinder block is enough and the engine starts up, a few minutes and all the coolant flew away. Machine guns of normal caliber (7,62) were very effective when used on such engines. The Americans relied mainly on air vents, here Polikarpov N.N also preferred air vents, he was a minder by profession. Fluids in aviation were just a "fashionable trend" in those years. At the end of World War II, all the liquid workers were sent to "rest". It is now that effective managers have "combed" again, and so they are fiddling with automobile liquids wherever they go. They just do not want to understand that the operating conditions of aircraft and automobile engines are very different.
    1. irontom
      irontom 12 August 2020 21: 24 New
      +1
      Eco suffered you, the combat survivability of the aircraft is not strongly tied to the engine, the fighter has enough vulnerable spots, in the late 30s
      "fashionable trend"
      due to the high performance that liquid-cooled motors gave, and the time for high-power double stars has not yet come. Even later, liquid-cooled engines did not give up their positions.
      This is an example of the main mass fighters on which they fought the entire war. Why what, in the States they ate more than one dog on air-cooled engines, but what we see is the P-38, P-39, P-40, P-51 are the main horses of the army aviation that pulled the entire war on liquid.
      I will tell you one secret of the air-cooled PD, this is that a very large percentage of the temperature from the engine was taken by oil, which accordingly required a rather large air-oil radiator.
      It is now that effective managers have "combed" again, and so they are fiddling with automobile liquids wherever they go.

      The only problem with air cooling is that the temperature of the cylinder block is not stable, which is not good for modern re-fired engines.
      1. tolancop
        tolancop 12 August 2020 23: 29 New
        +1
        "Eco suffered you, the combat survivability of the aircraft is not strongly tied to the engine, ..." I believe that it was you who carried it ...
        The "trendy trend" is due to the high performance that liquid-cooled motors gave, and the time for high-power double stars has not yet come. Even later, liquid-cooled engines did not give up .... "
        Liquid-cooled engines had a smaller cross-sectional area, which had a positive effect on aerodynamics and made it possible to obtain higher speeds at the same power as the air blowers. It was written about this a long time ago.
        1. irontom
          irontom 13 August 2020 10: 19 New
          +1
          not only, liquid cooling discolors the cylinder heads with a more comfortable temperature balance, which is equally important. In my youth I had to work on the AN-2, and study in detail the ASh-62IR and ASh-82T, so what is a PD and what it is eaten with, I know very well how to overheat the engine, it is good if the candles of the upper cylinders coke, and given the the place of their native 91/115 flew in a car, quite a frequent occurrence, it shook so that the instrument indicators were not visible.
      2. 2112vda
        2112vda 13 August 2020 13: 22 New
        -1
        You will not reveal any secret to me! You exploited, to the best of your knowledge, air vents, but I had to "draw" and test them on stands and in the field. An air vent is not an ideal engine, but it is preferred for aviation if properly operated. What is dropsy, you will understand in winter at temperatures below 30 wherever in Yamal or Dikson.
        1. irontom
          irontom 13 August 2020 20: 22 New
          0
          By the way, antifreeze was invented during the First World War.
  16. 2112vda
    2112vda 13 August 2020 13: 03 New
    -1
    Quote: irontom
    the main horses of army aviation, which pulled the entire war on liquid

    In an alternate reality, these engines were probably the main engines in American aviation. Double-row stars appeared and were installed on aircraft even before the start of the "batch in Europe". The statistics are convincing, the losses of airplanes with air vents were lower, moreover, significantly, compared with dropsy. The Germans had an "expert" who was nicknamed a parachutist. The same Hartman was shot down, if my memory serves me, 10 times. Kozhedub brought the plane with a damaged engine to the airfield. In case of lumbago in the cooling jacket of dropsy, if the pilot manages to reach his airfield, the engine will go to "vykideshnik". The reason is simple, the block and heads will lead from overheating. Misalignment of the crankshaft and camshaft beds at the field airfield is not eliminated. At the air vent, when the cylinder is shot through, only the CPG and the connecting rod are replaced. Probably, the leadership of aviation in all countries was idiots, replacing all liquid pipes with air vents, immediately after the end of World War II. They choked on "dropsy's happiness" with a ladle. With us, only universalists want to slap some rare nude that will be: "both a reaper and a shvets and a gamer on a pipe."
  17. 2112vda
    2112vda 13 August 2020 13: 11 New
    -1
    Quote: tolancop
    Liquid-cooled engines had a smaller cross-sectional area, which had a positive effect on aerodynamics and made it possible to obtain higher speeds at the same power as the air blowers.

    This is not entirely true. The least aerodynamic drag, oddly enough for fans of "sharp-nosed" dropsies, had the P-47 "Thunderbolt" aircraft, in the common people "jug". The aircraft had a 2-row radial engine. You contact the aircraft designers, they will confirm this to you. It is easier to dissipate heat from a warmer cylinder air jacket than from a honeycomb or tunnel radiator. Although tunnel radiators provided some increase in traction.
    1. irontom
      irontom 13 August 2020 20: 25 New
      0
      If Thunder was so great why was he replaced with a Mustang?
      1. 2112vda
        2112vda 14 August 2020 09: 48 New
        -1
        What are you talking about? Alternative reality again? Dedicate please, who removed the P-47 from service during the Second World War? The aircraft fought well throughout the war as a versatile fighter-bomber.
        1. irontom
          irontom 14 August 2020 20: 03 New
          +1
          Mmda hard, you would have to remember why it was created, because of which the whole forest was fenced with a bulky cooling system for the TK, which did not give up for IB, and if my memory serves me right, I pulled one pancake of a turbocharger for 200 kg, on small ones all this the farm was busy with a low-altitude monitoring station. Plus, we add a very high wing loading, and the result is a fast, low-maneuverable heavy ram, suitable for ground targets. as soon as the Mustang with Packard / Merlin began to fly well, far and high, Thunder was retrained as a house manager / IB
  18. 2112vda
    2112vda 17 August 2020 07: 58 New
    0
    Quote: irontom
    Mustang with Packard / Merlin began to fly well and far and high, Thunder was retrained as a house manager / IB

    And then they sent to the scrap the high and far flying Mustangs with Packards. And after him and B-36 "Peacemaker" with its multi-row dropsies. In Vietnam, the A-1 Skyraders with air-cooled engines have already been used. Machine guns of 7,62, 12,7 and 14,5 mm caliber put an end to all dropsy. If the A-1 with damaged cylinders somehow got to the base, they had to jump from the Mustangs in Korea by parachute. The Korean War finally put an end to the "dropsy's suffering". Dropsy, the engine of land and water transport. In land transport, liquid cooling is an intermediate system between the engine and air. Only marine engines are liquid cooled. Why fence an additional system for an aircraft engine during operation of which high speeds of cooling air flow are provided. On land transport, it is clear, then intersections, traffic jams, on tractors, low speeds.
    1. irontom
      irontom 18 August 2020 19: 42 New
      0
      The cross on the use of PD was given by the turbojet engine and the theater. It's just that you chose the wrong car as a standard fighter with air-cooled PD, the same Corsair had no less impressive characteristics than the Thunder. And after the Second World War, speed records were set on it, by the way, the Mustangs were the opponents. A water-cooled example of the British deck ship "Seafire" Mk.XV.
      I do not deny that at the end of the war and in the post-war period, the excellent characteristics of high-power airborne engines and the simplicity of less powerful ones that conquered the civilian market. But for this, the engines went a very long way of development, the same M-71 eventually became an excellent ASh-73, not to mention the masterpiece of the domestic PD of the VD-4K structure.
      The air-cooled PD aircraft engine in the post-war period was the most advanced.
      But alas, in our time, a new time for dropsies has come. This is all due to the fact that aviation PD due to a narrow niche (small, training and sports aviation), as a result, almost did not develop, not only in our country but throughout the world. When PD on cars was constantly improved due to tough competitive and environmental requirements and now a paradox has turned out, PD for water cooling returned, but already as aviation diesel engines, for example, Diamond aircraft, I am well acquainted with the Diamond DA42, they even began to assemble it, but alas, the crisis and sanctions.
      PD is our time with water cooling the most advanced internal combustion engines, it is a fact.
  19. Andrey Bespalov
    Andrey Bespalov 17 August 2020 20: 32 New
    0
    Not a single word about one of the most important indicators - a resource. Or is it the same for all the described internal combustion engines?
  20. 2112vda
    2112vda 24 August 2020 13: 04 New
    0
    Quote: irontom
    PD is our time with water cooling the most advanced internal combustion engines, it is a fact

    Indeed, it is true! Marine diesels are fully liquid cooled. At the moment, marine diesel engines are the most advanced piston internal combustion engines.
  21. 2112vda
    2112vda 24 August 2020 13: 22 New
    0
    Quote: Andrey Bespalov
    Not a single word about one of the most important indicators - a resource. Or is it the same for all the described internal combustion engines?

    The resource depends on the modes in which the engine is operated. According to the available literature data, for example, the intensity of the cylinder liner wear in the "dropsy" and "air vent" is described by Mackerle. Mackerle notes that the wear rate of the upper area of ​​the cylinder liner is higher for a liquid-cooled engine than for an air-cooled engine. All this is due to the physicochemical nature of the corrosion of the cylinder surface under the action of condensing products of incomplete combustion of fuel and lubricating oil. Condensation occurs when the engine is cooled. The use of autoconversions for liquid-cooled engines is due to just one reason, the "outstanding" mental qualities of "effective managers" who do not have specialized education. There is a common desire to save on R&D. In the 30s of the last century, the past generation of economists "poked their heads" on this. Now the second act of the "Marlezon ballet", again rake races. Now in Russia there is a new attack, continuous "competencies" with helluva lot of "competent managers". Let our "experts" do what they want, even though they put "pedal drive" on planes, it is useless to explain anything to them.