-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Wild looking P-38 there Victor. Like the wing on it.
Got a love of lots of propellers? Have to ask, counter rotating props on there, didn't know any Allisions ever had that on them, Anyone know if they ever did? With a twin and the props turning opposite ways there wouldn't be the torque effect so is there much point of counter rotating props then?
But it would be a great plane to see, all those props spinning all over the place. No birds would want to be flying anywhere near that racer
Sure would make a unique sound. -
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Nice looking airplane!!
Rudders look a bit small. Maybe the twin contra-props take care of this.Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Damm! That is one sweet looking drawing!
Now who do we sell it too to get her built, and racing around Reno!
Oh I can see it now.
2 Griffin engins, and lots of composit materials for the fuse and wings.
Me thinks she would be very fast!Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
http://www.library.unlv.edu/hughes/photos/01_1708.jpg Howard Hughes had contra props on his experimental X-11 which was sort of P-38 looking. Had radials though. The nose looks like the drawing by Victor. GComment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
I'm not a flyer so help me out here. I don't understand the contra-rotating prop principal. As I've been here on Hangartalk, my curiosity has been increased. Here are the questions I have.Originally posted by tdecibel
Are CRP's designed to overcome torque steer? This happens on boats with their single props? They will go in a circle if you release steering control and let the boat just do what it will.
Do CRP's generate more forward thrust for a plane with respect to the amount of horsepower and torque required to turn them?
On a twin engine example like the one discussed here, assuming equal thrust, would props on either side of the fuselage turning in opposite directions have roughly the same effect?
On CRP's doesn't the reversal of air flow direction between the front and rear propeller significantly reduce the effect of the front prop?
Just really curious.Scott Adie
www.osgfx.comComment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Here's the Griffon Lightning compared to an original P-38
Any super geeks out there care to figure up some performance numbers on the bird considering a weight reduction program and a pair of hopped up Griffons?Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Don't want to rain on the parade, but isn't the P-38 considered a high drag design 'cause of all the intersections?
Victor, your a/c looks great, but the tail feathers don't do it for me. Redesign the vertical tail and I'll send you .0000001 million dollars to help start the build.Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Propeller people...
It has been suggested that the CR props are not having an optimum prop blade profile (designed for the 4 engine planes transport planes and not or for racers???? ,,,, not sure which)
I am assuming that these old technology prop profiles are being used today on griffon race planes.
THE Q....
Is there any body doing computational dynamics efforts to mature the twin prop designs to take advantage of the griffon's power.
MO-powwr.... for less money.... sounds good to me!!!!
1) Chemical horse power (Mr. slacks cool ideal) a real huge NOS tank
2) Optimize the props
Seems like a path of least resistance and least $$$ for the MO-powwr deal.
BMarshComment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Counter-rotating props aren't always used to counter torque forces.
The TU-95 bear has them simply to get enough propeller out there in the airstream to handle the horsepower without having to resort to a huge diameter single prop.
I like the Super Lightning idea, but I think it could really benefit more from a smaller racing canopy and thinner wing airfoil.Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Hey Victor,
Any chance we can get a 3 side view of this thing?
A top view would look soooo cool with the wings you have on it
Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
I'm not a flyer/pilot also but from what I've read about them, one of the functions of CRP's is that they do eliminate the torque effect. And yes on a twin, props spinning the opposite way on each motor does the same.Originally posted by On Site Grafix
As many (most?) CRP's have been used on multi engine aircraft, I think the primary reason for there design is not to counter torque but either to reduce prop size or for efficiency. Like having 12" wide tires on a viper allows more torque to hit the road than tires half as wide on your average sedan. But with props there is problems building them to large (tips going supersonic, vibrations, size of landing gear needed to give adequate clearance, etc) so instead of making the props bigger, the solution is to add more props.
If your interested in finding out more check out these links
For those of you who like wikipedia there a number of pages about reno, air racing, history of various aircraft and motors and lots of other interesting information on there. Like I just looked up the weight of the R 4360, that's one heavy piece of metal. Some of you guys on here could even write up a few pages about various aspects of air racing and put it on there.
Comment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
The Hughes's ( XP-???) BIG brother to the P38 with twin CW props..... were they using 4360's ?
BMarshComment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
Hughes XF-11 and yes 4360s. GComment
-
Re: Unlimited P-38 - Super Lightning
BMarsh, I guess you were actually referring to the XP-73. It used Wright Tornado engines and was similiar to the P-38. GComment
Comment