WesWorld

As previously mentioned, the US has developed the R-2800 and I've been planning on developing the P-47. However, it seems that a couple other players would like to develop the P-47. I've got an idea or two for a replacement, but I figured I'd toss out the idea that maybe the US would not field the P-43/P-47 series and let the Brazillians and the Mexicans have it,

A joint venture can be an answer.

I plan to use pictures of the YP-60E for some advanced SAE fighter in a few years. That plane will not be a copy and stats will differ. However, when you think of P-47 replacements the YP-60E seems an option so I thought I better let you know.

But again - I will just use a picture or two but give it a different name and stats. So this probably is not really a matter for you.

No, the YP-60E is not in my plans. In fact, the idea I have doesn't even use the R-2800....

XP-53?

I just added another project for TNCA, so the Mexican P-47 has been dropped. That said Mexico would be open to a joint-venture.

Brazil would also be open to a joint venture. I was actually thinking of having Sikorsky sell the P-35 design to Brazil, then in 1939 when the Brazilians are looking for a replacement, the U.S. could purchase the P-43 design for their own production if they want to, and sell the licence to build the aircraft to the Brazilians.

Quoted

Originally posted by Desertfox
XP-53?

I just added another project for TNCA, so the Mexican P-47 has been dropped. That said Mexico would be open to a joint-venture.

Nah, the XP-53 is, effectively, the P-42 that's already in the air.

I thought it was the XP-60A/D, but that makes sense the XP-53 was the one with the Continental engine.

So XP-69? P-75? Or something more exotic, XP-54? Which if you won't be using I would like to borrow for Australia.

I'm thinking of something that's kind of a cross between the XP-69 and the XP-47H: engine of the XP-69, but size and layout more like the XP-47H.

No, I'm not planning anything with the XP-54, so go ahead with it.

Quoted

Originally posted by HoOmAn
I plan to use pictures of the YP-60E for some advanced SAE fighter in a few years. That plane will not be a copy and stats will differ. However, when you think of P-47 replacements the YP-60E seems an option so I thought I better let you know.

But again - I will just use a picture or two but give it a different name and stats. So this probably is not really a matter for you.

Interesting, I had the same thoughts for a carrier based fighter from Spartan.

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
I'm thinking of something that's kind of a cross between the XP-69 and the XP-47H: engine of the XP-69, but size and layout more like the XP-47H.

The R-2160 is a painfully complicated engine. Developing and producing it would probably kill off the R-3350 as well. Really comes down to the question of whether the US wants a high altitude fighter then pick which engine. V-1710 and I-1430 both have the possibility of being turbocharged but probably not enough power for the size of the aircraft. That basically leaves the R-2800 or something more exotic like the R-2160 or IV-2220 which probably aren't very good choices.

Another engine possibility occurs: if the USAAC (soon to be the USAAF) has decided that the V-1710 has reached the end of it's usefulness (it's early, but possible with the use of the I-1430), Allison would be in need of a new engine, and fast. Allison has done some work in the past with Daimler-Benz, and Daimler-Benz has the DB-603A coming on-line right about now (Dornier's testing a version of the Do-217 with DB-603s while selling the plane with BMW-801s).

If Allison-ized, the DB-603 would be referred to in American engine parlance as the I-2720, so it's a LOT bigger than the V-1710, and has a fair amount more power (at the cost of higher weight, naturally), especially when you tune it for running on Standard Oil 100 octane fuel. Fit the I-2720 with a GE turbocharger and you'd have a turbo-supercharged high altitude in-line, without the hassles of the R-2160 (though it's a really cool engine) or the I-2220 (which is longer and heavier than the I-2720 anyway).

Historically Allison produced only a handful of V-1710s during the 1930s, production only really ramped up with WWII and large orders of the P-40. Problems weren't really evident because of the low usage and the turbocharged production unit hadn't actually flown. In WW there is a smattering of P-40s and P-38s but its still difficult to tell of potential problems, especially without any major wars breaking out. Given that the I-1430 magically works better then there isn't much (or any) advantage of having the V-1710 around. Basically most aircraft change over to the I-1430 (P-42 and P-49). It doesn't really stop the trend towards radial engines so really it looks like Allison is out of options without the V-1710. Personally I think that using the V-3420 to compete against the R-3350 and R-2800 is the better way to go.

It seems a bit early for the DB603 and very unlikely for the US to adopt it.

I can't help but feel that massive amounts of money is being wasted on producing lots of different engines. It may be cool to have lots of different designs but not really practical. Sticking with the Wright and P&W radial series and axing everything else makes more sense, rather than spending even more money than historically.

Given how many new non-historical engines Italy is able to create, I'm not sure the "too many engines" argument has a lot of value.

The V-3420, while it does offer a fair amount of power and (unlike most coupled engines) was relatively trouble free historically, is also as wide as most radials, kind of defeating one of the main reasons for using an inline engine

Keep in mind that the the DB-603 here in WW has replaced the DB-605 in DB's development cycle, and that it's been under development since 1934 (the first prototype reached the test stand in 1935, per the German Q3, 1935 news).

Quoted

Originally posted by Hrolf Hakonson
Given how many new non-historical engines Italy is able to create, I'm not sure the "too many engines" argument has a lot of value.

One in the mid 30s at the expense of lots of radial engines (Fiat A.74, A.82). Given the opposition last time the issue came up I've dropped it and gone back to historical engines instead, but still cut a lot of the other projects to free up resources.

Quoted

The V-3420, while it does offer a fair amount of power and (unlike most coupled engines) was relatively trouble free historically, is also as wide as most radials, kind of defeating one of the main reasons for using an inline engine

More power and better cooling than most similar sized radials. You'll still cut down on drag a fair bit with the liquid cooled radiator.

Given the many historical problems with the DB603, I still think it's a bit early, unless it's only running around 1500hp.