B-17 ENGINES IN DEPTH! Genius Or Insanity?

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 มี.ค. 2024
  • Take an in depth look at the legendary "Memphis Belle" Engines and learn about the equipment and role in which all B-17s flew to their target. Learn about the bloody war in the skies above Europe in M.A.C. B-17 series.
    #history #aviation #eaa #airplane #b17 #b-17 #boeing #airforce #warbirds #bomber #ww2 #ww2games #germany #usa #usaf #planes #bombers #disney #disneyplus #apple #appletv #hbomax #documentary #war #engineering #enginesound #engines #radialengine
  • ยานยนต์และพาหนะ

ความคิดเห็น • 719

  • @prophetsnake
    @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +88

    Genius or insanity? Clickbait titles deserve to be ignored. Buh bye

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

      Great job ignoring it. Comments feed the system and there's thousands of likes and views here.

    • @prophetsnake
      @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Yeah, I'm sure you're making enough to keep you up to your arse in Airfix models.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Dude! Being a little Weasel is WHY She Cheated on you in the first place !!! That and your tiny junk

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

      @@ps5801 I love these guys! If he watched any of the rest of the channel he may learn our models all fly with people inside and shoot live ammo.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Hey Scottie, I’d tell you to check out that lo$ers ☝🏻“videos” but your probably out flying in the B-29 today OR the B-17 OR the B-24 OR the Mustang OR even that B-25 , OR perhaps you’re driving one of the Tanks down to Shoot it … besides his “Videos” are Smoldering GARBAGE Anyway - with VERY Few Views and even Fewer Likes!!! WHATEVER He suggests Do The Exact Opposite

  • @scottwins2
    @scottwins2 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +85

    I flew with my dad in one of these. He was an engineer in WW2 in them. He told me the engines were under powered for the job they had to do. MIss you dad, he left us at 97

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Incredible to have a memorable experience like that. If he was an engineer check out our top turret video in the series.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Beautiful Memories 🇺🇸 God Bless him 🙏

    • @prophetsnake
      @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Then your dad was wrong.

    • @HH-COactual
      @HH-COactual 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      ​@@prophetsnake A WW2 B-17 Veterans opinion counts for a lot, right or wrong. Here's a Prophet for you Prophet Snake, your opinion doesn't matter.

    • @prophetsnake
      @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@HH-COactual Then you are a liar. And guess one, one of us has flown an airplane powered by 1820s, and it wasn't you.

  • @claiborneeastjr4129
    @claiborneeastjr4129 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +189

    The nine-cylinder radial engine has two cam rings. One exhaust, one intake. Each ring has four lobes and rotates opposite the crankshaft's rotation. Also, each cam ring rotates at one-fourth engine RPM. I'm quite familiar with engine mechanics, but this arrangement still amazes me, and I don't fully understand how it works. But it does. The cam rings are partially visible in the cutout. Also they had roller lifters, which are very common today, but unusual for the 1930s and 1940s. Remarkable engineering, and achieved w/o computers, CAD-CAM, or CNC. Those engineers were geniuses. Up close and personal, nothing sounds quite as awesome as a big, radial engine. I got to ride in a B-17 about a decade ago, for $450, and it was worth every cent. I sat in the nose gunner's seat and "strafed" herds of cattle that we flew over in fields surrounding the airport. Quite an experience. No cattle were harmed!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

      On one hand it's UFO technology, when you look into it, it's amazingly simple to understand compared to today's engines. Thankyou for watching! Glad you got a 17 experience flight in!

    • @dukecraig2402
      @dukecraig2402 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      Roller lifters were only uncommon in automobile engine's back then, every motorcycle engine I've seen the inside of from the mid teens up had roller lifters even the flathead motorcycle engine's.
      The only reason I can think of why the automobile industry used flat tappet lifters so extensively is because with them you don't have to solve the rotation issue like you have to with roller lifters, it simplifies the design, aside from that I couldn't guess as to why they used flat tappets in their engine's when it seems like everyone else used roller tappets.

    • @claiborneeastjr4129
      @claiborneeastjr4129 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Good reasoning. Likely flat tappets were cheaper to manufacture, too.@@dukecraig2402

    • @PhrankTube
      @PhrankTube 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      Each cam ring operates at 1/8 engine RPM . . . . . not 1/4. Each cam ring does, indeed, rotate opposite the crankshaft's rotation. You're right . . . . these 1820s were a work of genius!

    • @claiborneeastjr4129
      @claiborneeastjr4129 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Thanks for that correction.@@PhrankTube

  • @user-vq8vr3uw6n
    @user-vq8vr3uw6n 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +63

    The piston engine planes from WW2 are some of the most incredible engineering in a time of only pencil to paper and slide rules, no computers just pure genius, I love them

    • @westerncivilization
      @westerncivilization 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      all accomplished without what modern society calls "diversity". it is amazing what our people can accomplish when left alone.

    • @mikes9759
      @mikes9759 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Absolutely! And the time constraints on top of it!!

    • @mikes9759
      @mikes9759 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      ​@westerncivilization And sadly we gave a lot of things away!!

    • @87mini
      @87mini หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@westerncivilization That's a pretty silly statement. Do you mean made by white people?

    • @87mini
      @87mini หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@mikes9759 Britain gave a lot to us, too. But if you agree with him, I don't expect you to think past your comfort level...

  • @redr1150r
    @redr1150r 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +63

    I was in the Navy for 20 years, 1970-1990 and worked on 3 aircraft that used the R-1820. The T-28, Grumman S-2 and the Grumman C-1. Always a reliable piece equipment.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      I had no idea the engine was in service that long. Very impressive.

    • @bobharrison7693
      @bobharrison7693 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Yup. Although I was a jet guy, I was lucky enough to fly all 3 of those birds. Great engine.

    • @redr1150r
      @redr1150r 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      @@bobharrison7693 I also worked on a EC-121 Lockheed Constellation in my first squadron. I also worked on the F-4, A-3, A-4, H-2 helicopter, A-6 and the F-4. I carried 5 aircraft NECs. The first squadron I was in, VAQ-33, had 4 different aircraft types. I was also on the Forrestal (VA-85), and Nimitz (AIMD). I worked on the F-14 at the Depot in Norfolk and just retired from the Coast Guard Depot in Elizabeth City, N.C. on Dec. 31st.. I'm 72 and it's all I've ever done. I was also raised on Naval Air Stations until I joined the Navy.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Thank you for your Service 🇺🇸
      a Fascinating time in Aviation

    • @basiltaylor8910
      @basiltaylor8910 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      You forgot the Grumman HU-16 Albatross Rescue Amphibian, burning 115\145 grade avgas its twin late model R-1820 Cyclone 9,s had a pony count of 1525 for take off, not bad for a single row radial partly designed by Ex Armstrong Siddeley Engineer S,D Heron in the late 1920,s .

  • @stevesmolik24
    @stevesmolik24 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +76

    As a retired aerospace senior quality engineer, it’s mind-boggling that these engine systems were designed with brain-power, math books, and slide rulers!
    When looking at the cut-away display engine, the complexity of the gears, cylinder firing sequence, fuel injection, compressed air, and oil distribution systems were all made by manual manufacturing equipment. And interchangeable from different manufacturing companies. Absolutely impressive. 🇺🇸

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      You are absolutely right, unbelievable some of the things we come up with.

    • @johncox2865
      @johncox2865 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      Today, we celebrate the prospect of losing the ability to do such things.
      How? We are inviting Artificial Intelligence into our lives.

    • @clivelee4279
      @clivelee4279 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Take a look at a cut away of a Bristol sleeve valve radial if you like complicated .

    • @ericsmith1562
      @ericsmith1562 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Truth!

    • @rcdogmanduh4440
      @rcdogmanduh4440 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      They were made by Machinists. lol look that one up, not green button pushers! What an incredible trade!

  • @Turboy65
    @Turboy65 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +53

    Radial engines are a fantastic combination of sheer genius and utter insanity.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      Someone who finally understands my well thought out title! Welcome to the channel my friend.

    • @prophetsnake
      @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Another idiot, in other words

    • @331SVTCobra
      @331SVTCobra 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany I don't see the insanity though. Everything in the engine made sense. It was a smart evolution of the ICE, optimized for higher altitude.
      Gamers and armchair generals don't appreciate the value of America's compression technology. Our aircraft could operate at 30,000 feet while the Germans struggled to be relevant at 20,000 feet. Germany's lack of supercharging meant they had to have huge displacement engines, at a cost of range.
      Thanks to the automobile manufacturers' understanding of materials, critical engine components were made from specific alloys, tricks like sodium-filled valves to combat predetonation, and of course the materials to build 20,000rpm blowers and knowing the appropriate boost settings all played a critical role in dominating the air.
      The B-17 airframe is so classic. It's fun to daydream about a civilian B-17 that is powered by two turboprops. That would be the ultimate Rich Person's toy.

    • @jean-mariejm7404
      @jean-mariejm7404 8 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Two turboprop DC3 do exist. Great plane

  • @chrisweber5399
    @chrisweber5399 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    Several years back, I worked on the ramp when the Collins Foundation was visiting during one of their B-17 and B-24 tours. Both planes started up together and did their engine warm-ups. During the warm-up, you could hear the difference in the B-24's R-1830s and B-17's R-1820s sound. The Wright engines sounded smoother running, versus the Pratt engines which had more of a tick to them. Great engines both, which you could count on in bringing you home.

  • @ralphcarroll5090
    @ralphcarroll5090 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +43

    My father was a ball turret gunner in B-17s in North Africa during WWII. When I was a young kid, he was always telling me that the superchargers and turbochargers on the B-17 engines increased their Volumetric Efficiency(VE). I never knew what that really meant until I took a class in thermodynamics in college.
    Note: From an online Brian Nutter Tech Article ------ At sea level, the air is more dense. This means that there are more air molecules inside the cylinder. In the mountains, the opposite is true. The same engine would operate at a higher VE at sea level than in the mountains. You can improve VE by making it easier for air to flow. This is the idea behind aftermarket intake manifolds, cold air kits, porting and polishing cylinder heads, and headers. Pumping more air is also the idea behind superchargers, turbos, and nitrous. These power adders force more air into the cylinder. When the fuel and ignition systems are properly tuned, this can raise VE over 100 percent and make tons of power. (From "On All Cylinders" Tech Article 05/11/2017 by Brian Nutter

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      First rate description! Thankyou for the information. Stay tuned with us, a huge Ball Turret video comes in 2 weeks. It will be the best one on the internet.

    • @jamesnoggle2661
      @jamesnoggle2661 หลายเดือนก่อน

      great description. That thinner air was much easier to fly through. All the trade-offs; burning the fuel to get up there, saving fuel by being there, less accuracy in bombing, which led to development of better bomb sights, then almost gliding back to base.

  • @rongreen8485
    @rongreen8485 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +20

    Grangeville Idaho is home to Aero Motor and they rebuild these engines. I have family over there and I stumbled across this place and was amazed. They gave me a tour and they rebuild everything, heads, crankshafts, all the major and minor assemblies. The dyno run is cool.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Very cool! Didn't know there was a place in Idaho for that. I would imagine it's a rare skill set to maintain.

  • @ohger1
    @ohger1 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    I'm not sure which Pratt it was, but many years ago I read an article about the recollections of a WWII German engineer. He said they knew they were in trouble when they dissected a downed P&W engine. They couldn't believe the case halves were so well machined that they didn't need a gasket between them, and worse, that these were being built in high production quantities.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      American industry in High Gear right there.

    • @prophetsnake
      @prophetsnake 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Then he was lying. The Germans were building licensed copies of Pratt and Whitney engines before the war.

  • @88SC
    @88SC 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +31

    He mentioned Sam Heron, who was a genius whose contribution to aircraft engine development came at a critical time in history. His employment of sodium as a heat transfer medium was paramount in the development of other industries as well. Respect.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Yes absolutely. Jeff was the right man for the job on this topic!

    • @Snaproll47518
      @Snaproll47518 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Sodium, having a low melting point, would slosh around inside the valve to improve heat transfer.

    • @basiltaylor8910
      @basiltaylor8910 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Wow every day is a school day, Sam worked for Armstrong Siddeley Motors of Coventry Warwickshire UK, for he designed the Jaguar first half way reliable twin row radial in the early 1920,s.

    • @peterclark6290
      @peterclark6290 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Should be called Heron valves.

    • @basiltaylor8910
      @basiltaylor8910 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@peterclark6290 I think you are right, with out Sam,s breakthrough, we could not have won the Battle of Britain,. Rollers of Derby used sodium cooled exhaust valves on the Merlin and Griffon, enabling high power ratings with improved reliability.

  • @michaelalbert8474
    @michaelalbert8474 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +24

    The courage and determination of the air crew is definitely worthy of praise but the ground crews and logistics that kept these planes in the air was nothing short of remarkable. Everyone understood that they had a job to do and lives depended on their getting it right.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Very true. Agreed!

    • @user-do8ul2zi4v
      @user-do8ul2zi4v 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      My dad was an aircraft powerplant mechanic during WW2 based in India. They would do the maintenance and overhauls of the engines. One thing that my brother reminded of was that once an engine was ready to go back into service, that engine, using a test stand, was run at full throttle for 24 hours before it could be put into an aircraft.

    • @michaelalbert8474
      @michaelalbert8474 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@user-do8ul2zi4v
      Better to break on the stand. 24 hours seems like a lot. They earned their title of “greatest generation”.

    • @jean-mariejm7404
      @jean-mariejm7404 8 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Very true. On the other hand the Germans had engines manufactured by forced workers and prisoners, with lost of sabotaged key elements. Also courageous resistant people.

  • @Roybwatchin
    @Roybwatchin 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I took a ride on the movie version of the Memphis Belle back in 2013 in Wichita, KS. I went with my 83 yr old dad, it was a great time. They flew us for about 45 minutes all around Wichita including flying over the old Boeing factory and our local McConnel Airforce Base. It was exciting because the gunner doors were open and you could literally lean out of the airplane while taking pics and videos. Also, the top gunner's bubble was just a hole that you could stick your head out of as well. An experience that I will never forget. Sadly, my dad passed away only one month later, but, he had a blast on the flight and couldn't quit smiling.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you got to experience a 17 ride! With you dad makes it better. Check out our video on Bomber Camp, Lots more happening in a B-17 then just the ride!

  • @richarderickson8840
    @richarderickson8840 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    The aircraft I worked on in the Navy had 1820-9 radial engines Grumman S-2 Anti Submarine Warfare. This was in early 70s I was fortunate to have a "Turn card" so I could start engines to insure Hydraulic leaks and issues were properly repaired. I loved starting those round motors. Still my favorite engine type to hear run.

  • @stettan1
    @stettan1 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    My stepfather was an aero engineer and I remember how we looked at a cutaway of a radial, and I exclaimed that it looked insanely complicated and that it must be expensive as hell! But he said no, what is really difficult is making the mould for a V12 block. It requires very experienced workers and that is a major obstacle in ramping up production war-time. All steps in the manufacturing of a radial is a lot simpler. We looked around and found a quite reliable source that stated a price for a Merlin about twice that of an R2800.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Very interesting perspective. What could that say about the British using their V blocks in medium and heavy bombers even though they had radial engines as well? Would their design be more complicated and more expensive then the US counterparts?

  • @drtidrow
    @drtidrow 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

    One of the big advantages of turbochargers is the ability to vary the amount of boost they produce. In an airplane, this helps to keep engine power constant as they climb, even though the ambient air gets thinner. With mechanical superchargers, there's a single altitude where the supercharger delivers maximum boost. Turbos can deliver constant manifold pressure over a wide range of altitudes, varying the speed of the turbine (and thus boost) by varying how much exhaust was sent through the turbine or bypassed through a wastegate.

    • @danquigg8311
      @danquigg8311 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Isn't there a 'waste gate' or a 'bleed gate' between the 'charger and the engine to allow the correct boost to the engine & either bleed or waste the excess compressed air?

    • @drtidrow
      @drtidrow 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@danquigg8311 You're probably thinking of a blow-off valve like that found on cars, but that's mainly for cases when the throttle slams and leaves the boost air nowhere to go. Aircraft engines generally operate at mostly or wide-open throttle, and don't have times where the throttle slams closed like when you shift a car's transmission, the throttles generally stay at a particular setting for long periods of time. Wouldn't surprise me, though, if there was a blow-off valve in the intake somewhere to deal with transients.

  • @mindeloman
    @mindeloman 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    When we talk about the bombing campaign in Europe, we often think of the brave crews that risked their lives but we rarely discuss the gorund crews keeping these planes in the air. These old radials were effective and reliable but under war time conditions rewuired a lit of maintenance. Just the 20 hour checks alone were involved. I can't remember the exact interval but around 200 hours, they need top overhauls. They really pushed as much horsepower they could get out of them. My grandad was A&P mechanic on the B-24 but went to school on the B-29. There was a course he took to learn how to do an overhaul blindfolded. This was incase they were in bombing blackout conditions and still had to get the planes repaired. He had a lot of good stories to tell.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Great information. Welcome to the channel! Ground crew of course need time in the spotlight. Hopefully we can cover them in depth. Also the guys back him working tireless hours with coke bottle lens glasses and a drafting board to make ideas become reality. I have full B-17 plans. 21000 technical drawings in there.

  • @daletesson4630
    @daletesson4630 3 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    I am so glad to see the Memphis Belle restored to her original self. When I was a kid in Memphis, the Belle sat on a concrete pedestal in front of the National Guard Armory located on East Parkway at Central Avenue. There she sat, rusting and deteriorating for years before being rescued for preservation.

  • @scotty2307
    @scotty2307 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    What is really amazing about all of these engines, they were designed, and blueprints were all done by hand. The manufacturing process was done by hand. Sheet metal work, casting, forging, machining, all done on manual machine tools. No CAD. Yet you could take any part off the assembly line and fit it to any engine. There was some parts matching, either in dimensions, or in weight, but they did not have to custom machine a part to fit an engine. That is an amazing accomplishment for the time.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Agreed! Glad you enjoyed the video.

    • @scotty2307
      @scotty2307 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I have a friend that owns both a Harvard T-6, and a T-28B. He has quipped on a few occasions that a radial engine is the best means of turning money into amazing sound.

  • @feedingravens
    @feedingravens 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    On the Wright R-3350 Duplex-Cyclone engines they used exhaust turbines NOT as superchargers.
    These engines had 3 turbines in the exhaust system(s) that each fed 150 kW onto the crankshaft of the engine.
    That makes sense when fuel efficiency is more important than performance at height.

    • @philgiglio7922
      @philgiglio7922 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      These were the engines used in the Constellation and the Super Connie.
      Also I think the A1 Skyraider... the warbird I wish I owned

  • @Caseytify
    @Caseytify 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    That engine was one of the secret weapons of the 8th AF. Bombers returned home with entire cylinders shot away, and the engine still turning. It's a major factor in the legendary status of the B-17.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Absolutely. Agreed.... the insanity of believing it would work and the genius in making it a reality.

    • @GazzaLDN
      @GazzaLDN หลายเดือนก่อน

      Got any references for that on 4 engine bombers? Surely the pilot would shut down a damaged & overheating through oil loss engine and fly home on 3 or two engines, rather than risk a fire and catastrophic wing failure.

  • @donallen7990
    @donallen7990 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I was a recip engine mechanic in the Air Force back in 62-66.
    I worked on the R-2000, R-1300, R-4360 and sometimes the R-3350 PRT.
    Love sound of those big radials.

  • @GuidosDad
    @GuidosDad 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

    The Depth of Mr Duford’s knowledge is astounding - he was Absolutely the Right man for that job!

  • @randall1959
    @randall1959 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    So many moving parts. Truly incredible

  • @GereDJ2
    @GereDJ2 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Cutaway: I was surprised at how thin the cylinder walls were. Exhaust driven Turbo and superchargers do actually take a littler engine power to run because of the exhaust back-pressure.

    • @YouNameItGaming
      @YouNameItGaming หลายเดือนก่อน

      Exactly! The turbine wheel, and the plumbing leading to it (diameter/density changes, bends etcetera) all creates resistance against the piston trying to push that exhaust out, but people seem to forget that as you're forcing more air (and flowing more fuel) to produce much more power than it costs. It creates a bit of a deadly circle with turbo-superchargers (and modern-day turbocharging) as the more air/fuel you force into the cylinders, the more exhaust gases need to come out, and therefore more back-pressure

    • @GereDJ2
      @GereDJ2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@YouNameItGaming I always thought it was really neat how Boeing tucked the landing gear inside the rear of the engine nacelle. Seemed to work well even with a bit of the tire showing. Amazing how the B-17 was state-of-the-art at its important place-in-time. And, one of the only things the Damn Ruskys didn't copy.

  • @pete1342
    @pete1342 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I saw the Sentimental Journey B17 at an airshow in the mid '80s. A couple of interesting things I remember about the engines. 1 was tagged Wright Aeronautical, 2 were General Motors, and 1 Studebaker. The center hub of the turbocharger exhaust bucket wheels were branded Allis Chalmers.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Amazing you remember those details! There's Passion in the subject right there.

    • @rolandsolomon7728
      @rolandsolomon7728 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I flew on the Sentimental Journey in July of 2013 in the nose. Navigator and bombardier seat. What an experience! And I checked that one off of my bucket list. 😊

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Isn’t it WONDERFUL ? We are Blessed to have done It

    • @philgiglio7922
      @philgiglio7922 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      ALL such flights are now no longer allowed because of a recent B17 crash that took multiple lives.
      IIRC it was pilot error
      The FAS is not allowing these pay to fly flights any longer

    • @rolandsolomon7728
      @rolandsolomon7728 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@philgiglio7922 That's why I flew on one a long time ago. I saw the writing on the wall even back then thinking that insurance companies were going to stop allowing it.

  • @steels96
    @steels96 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    I want to say thank you all for your work, friends. I sent the link to my friend, his grandfather, who served at the Poltava airfield. He was glad to hear and see this plane and the “brave Americans” again. Thanks again. Best wishes.
    Danny.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Thanks for watching mate! Plenty more coming! Its B-17 season currently however tanks will make a big appearance again soon.

  • @jimduffy1967
    @jimduffy1967 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    The radial engine was fantastic in its design and an amazing piece of engineering,turbo supercharger is amazing.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you enjoyed the video, check out the rest of the B-17 Series.

  • @ThePaulv12
    @ThePaulv12 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    In a constant speed prop, full power is at full fine pitch where it effectively is just a fixed pitch prop. You use this for takeoff and landing in the event of a go around.
    Its great advantage is that it can go to feather position in the case of an engine failure.
    Another advantage of it is the blade shape doesn't need to be as compromised as a fixed pitch where every shape is a compromise.
    For those that don't know, when in variable pitch mode, the prop RPM is controlled by propeller pitch lever and tacho, the throttle controls manifold pressure. The prop governor infinitely varies the propeller blade pitch (between the coarse and fine stops) to maintain the selected RPM.
    Say you set 2100rpm and 35" manifold pressure, then the manifold IN HG power setting + RPM + indicated airspeed cause the propeller pitch to vary infinitely to maintain that RPM no matter what - the pitch in this instance would be fairly coarse than if you say changed the manifold pressure to 24" with the same RPM where it would 'fine off' a bit.
    Usually there is a power setting chart that tells the pilots the optimum combo of manifold pressure & RPM for a given weight and altitude that factors for cruise speed and fuel consumption.
    When the prop pitch control is the full fine position then the throttle acts as it would in a fixed blade aircraft, or similar to a car throttle where more throttle = more RPM usually.
    Also re turbochargers, he's dead wrong about it not costing HP. It is a direct engine engine pumping loss. If you're using engine exhaust to pump pressure then you're using power. Work is being done. It is true that the power loss vs a mechanical supercharger is less. Also Superchargers are at a disadvantage on their own, since each revolution delivers a known volume of air. As elevation increases the air can't fill the supercharger so it's effect drops off since it's a positive displacement pump.
    A turbocharger is free spooling so can provide boost - however it also begins to suffer the effects of altitude gain - as do jet engines. It is a fact of life the higher you go the less power you can make but the fuel efficiency increases due to the fact that you also pick up a lot of airspeed for free. 150 knots indicated airspeed is probably closer to 220 ground speed in still air at say 25,000ft. That's 70 knots of free speed meaning less time to destination therefore less fuel burn.

    • @chrisstaples182
      @chrisstaples182 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      As someone who has thousands of hours in radial engine airplanes and an AME, I find many flaws in your statement on how these engines work.

  • @waynemanning3262
    @waynemanning3262 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I’ve got many thousands of hours behind a radial engine, a PW 985. They never let me down in almost 40 years behind them!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Hell yea! Love radials. We see them in the tank world as well.

  • @ronyoung3623
    @ronyoung3623 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Amazing how fast technology changed in a very period of time. The developments during WWI and before II you see so many major developments

  • @jmurphy1973
    @jmurphy1973 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

    1:40 Some Mopar guys are really confused about seeing a hemispherical chamber on an aircraft engine...

    • @dougthompson1598
      @dougthompson1598 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Hemispherical combustion chambers go WAY back, at least to 1901 for car engines.

  • @dennislear3336
    @dennislear3336 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The radial engine that blows my mind is the British sleeve radial, Centaurus, no overhead valves, talk about mechanical motion

  • @shoominati23
    @shoominati23 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    As they say "If God intended engines to be in-line, Pratt & Whitney would have built one"

    • @user-xd1gt9if2v
      @user-xd1gt9if2v 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thats hillarious lmao

  • @richardpayne5101
    @richardpayne5101 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Turbochargers are increase their efficiency with higher altitudes since the pressure drop across the turbine is greater as the atmospheric pressure drops. Great system!

  • @167curly
    @167curly 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I remember the scene in the movie "Memphis Belle" in a raid when a crew member spills a flask of tomato soup and thinks he's bleeding to death.

  • @davidscott9572
    @davidscott9572 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    My father was a waist gunner on a B17 became a flight engineer after the war sat on a wing on a C47 while he changed an exhaust manifold then we taxied down the runway to test the repair. He served in WW II Korea and Vietnam the greatest generation

  • @user-kf7nz6pz8l
    @user-kf7nz6pz8l หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Fying in one of them on a bombing run must have been scary as hell at 40 below in a non-pressurized plane. The crew must have felt very vulnerable with 109s flying around at about 100 mph faster and flak popping up everywhere. Makes me glad I wasn't born yet.

  • @salcurcio2791
    @salcurcio2791 9 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Navy ADR 2 in the early 70s and loved working on these radial engines. 1800s and 2800s.

  • @louiszierlein5814
    @louiszierlein5814 5 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    My Father was a mechanic on these planes in WWII in the USAAF. There were a lot of farm boys out there that knew their sh.t. He increased horsepower and fuel consumption simply by adjusting the mag timing outside of what the books said.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  5 วันที่ผ่านมา

      Very cool! Glad you found our video. Check out the rest of our B-17 series for other in field modifications they did.

  • @xvdd1
    @xvdd1 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Samual Heron was born and educated in England attending Goldsmiths College and Durham University.
    "Heron worked at the Royal Aircraft Factory. From 1915 to 1916 he worked with Professor A.H. Gibson on the first systematic research into the design of air-cooled engine cylinders. They concluded that (1) aluminium should be used for efficient conduction (2) the cylinder head should be in one piece because conduction through metal-to-metal interfaces could not be guaranteed (3) the cylinder head should provide the shortest escape path for heat at the hottest parts across the greatest cross section".

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Very interesting.

    • @88SC
      @88SC 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      And he wrote a whole book explaining these developments and others. History of the Aircraft Piston Engines: A Brief Outline. Published in 1961. A must read for motorheads. It’s not cheap if you can find a copy.

  • @adoreslaurel
    @adoreslaurel หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I was amazed when I found out that it was only a single bank radial.

  • @calvinnickel9995
    @calvinnickel9995 2 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    One of the biggest advantages of the turbo supercharger was its ability to maintain the right amount of boost no matter what altitude (though it would gradually reduce once the waste gate was fully closed).
    A single-stage supercharger was “ground boosted” meaning that it produced way too much boost at low altitudes.. so it was reduced with the throttle. The problem was that the engine had to work hard to produce full boost all of the time.
    A two speed supercharger had the problem of cutting in and out at certain altitudes. Fly a bit too low and the low speed would cut in, reducing horsepower.
    The Luftwaffe did solve this by having a hydraulic drive for the superchargers that always ran at the correct speed for the conditions.. as well as having direct injection which allowed for much higher boost levels without detonation.
    One thing you must remember too about the turbocharger is TINSTAAFL. It indeed costs engine power to operate it.

  • @tramlink8544
    @tramlink8544 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    they were vastly outdated by 1943, but due to the electrical systems being intertwined with the engines it would have cost too much to refit them with newer engines, which is why the G model remained with them while other bombers gained engine upgrades

    • @bobharrison7693
      @bobharrison7693 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Out dated? The R-1820 was used up into the 1980s on the Navy C-1.

    • @tramlink8544
      @tramlink8544 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      youre comparing a non direct combat aircraft that hunts submarines with no risk of air to air action with a direct combat heavy bomber that saw action against enemy fighters. the engine was outdated for the use on heavy bombers
      the RAF and USAAF continuously throughout the war updated the powerplants on all their bombers, even the B29 had two engine updates, yet the B-17 was stuck with an engine first designed in 1930s when there were other radial options that could have aided the B-17 but couldnt be implemented because of bad aircraft designing by boeing on the part of electrical systems@@bobharrison7693

  • @1fandik
    @1fandik 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Speed of technological development at that time is astounding. 1930s...Imagine airplanes just 15-20 years before that..

  • @Snaproll47518
    @Snaproll47518 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Radial engines were clearly engineering genius from that era. The low melting point of sodium allowed for better heat dissipation as it sloshed around the internal chamber of the exhaust valve. Not mentioned in the engine description and of interest: all radial engines have odd numbers of cylinders to facilitate the every other cylinder firing order, which even applies to multi-bank engines like the R-2800, R-3350, R-4360. The crankshaft travels in a concentric path around the propeller drive gearing, There is a master cylinder with a fixed connecting rod, while the remaining cylinders have articulating connecting rods.

  • @DC.409
    @DC.409 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    The issue was the wright was an older engine design but very reliable engine by the time of the war. It couldn’t be easily upgraded to the Pratt and Whitney double wasp more powerful engine, because of all the electric attachments which were essential for the B17. Ironically the Boeing B-50 Superfortress revision of the Boeing B-29 Superfortress, addressed this similar issue by fitting the more powerful Pratt & Whitney R-4360 radial engines post war.
    MAP had a strategy of power egg or pod, so each major aircraft could be powered by an alternative engine whilst maintaining the specification. This can be argued it was unnecessary over engineering and waste of resources, but it allowed errors to be addressed. Consequently you had the Tempest II Bristol Engined and Tempest V Napier Engined chosen for production, but Tempest I, III and IV design being rejected but ultimately leading to the Bristol engined Sea Fury.
    The Handley Page Halifax had a similar issue originally with Merlin XX , but incorrectly positioned on the wing resulting in additional drag. This was corrected with the mark III with the installation of the Bristol Hercules with aerodynamic improvements. Handley Page had developed their own design for the power egg instead of using the typical, slimmer Rolls-Royce counterpart; despite generating increased drag, this was a mistake. Obviously the ultimate successful reengineering was the fitting of the Merlin 65 in the outstanding North American P51 airframe.

    • @bobharrison7693
      @bobharrison7693 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The R-1820 in the post war Navy E-1A (ne WF) Tracker was rated at 1500 hp.

  • @dennisyoung4631
    @dennisyoung4631 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    The “belch!” of oil smoke when a radial starts….

  • @jackmoorehead2036
    @jackmoorehead2036 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    My Dad was a B 24 Driver, he used to talk about them flying 4,000 feet higher and watching the B 17s slowly falling behind as they headed home. The B24s had R2250s.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      I Had dear friends who had flown both the 17 and the 24 - I loved how they’d bust eachothers ballz…
      the best wisecrack I recall was a 17 pilot who said the B-24 was the Box a B-17 came in 😁 I love them both / been fortunate enough to have flown in both

    • @PhrankTube
      @PhrankTube 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      The B-24 had Pratt & Whitney R-1830 twin row 14 cylinder radial engines.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      We have big plans to cover B-24 as well! "Diamond Lil and Strawberry Bitch." Let us know what you want to see from them.

    • @basiltaylor8910
      @basiltaylor8910 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Wrong the late model Flying Whale were fitted with turboed Pratt& Whittney R-1830 Twin Wasps, similar to those in the DC-3 C-47 Dakota 'Gooney Bird' and Bristol Beaufort.

    • @highwatercircutrider
      @highwatercircutrider 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      My grandmother was a ‘Rosy the Riveter’ at Willow Run B24 bomber plant near Detroit, Michigan. She used to tell of writing notes on chewing gum wrappers. She stuck them between the aircraft’s ribs and skin to encourage air crewmen later.

  • @GuidosDad
    @GuidosDad 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    Ain’t nothin like a ROUND Engine !!!

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 3 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Especially when it’s on a B-17 !

    • @montylc2001
      @montylc2001 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Proper term is "radial".

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      😆 thanks man! I restore old airplanes for a living - including a B-17 ( with 4 Round engines ) 🇺🇸

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It’s a term airplane guys use

    • @montylc2001
      @montylc2001 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@GuidosDad really. I'm an A&P mechanic.

  • @bobfeller604
    @bobfeller604 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    I read that the Belle was re-engined 9 times in the course of its service life.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      We have a future video coming out on the Belle and all its in field Mods and upgrades.

  • @geeeeeee3
    @geeeeeee3 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    all the engineering done with paper pencils and slide rulers. Incredible. Connecticut's Hamilton Standard. Excellent video

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thank you very much! Glad you enjoyed it. Please check out the rest of the series.

  • @kmbriggs2693
    @kmbriggs2693 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    The DWG # and high and low angle info on blades is really important. The hydrostatic prop is ground adjustable. Inside the hub are 2 stop rings . One for high angle and one for low angle . Have degree marks on them.

  • @gwcstudio
    @gwcstudio 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Powering the supercharger with exhaust gas probably made it more reliable, too. A perfect link between throttle and boost.

    • @bingosunnoon9341
      @bingosunnoon9341 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The supercharger was gear driven,

  • @Lord_of_The_World
    @Lord_of_The_World 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Gentleman really explained it well how these engines worked

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thankyou for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the video. Please check out the rest of our B-17 series.

  • @timothybruggeman9332
    @timothybruggeman9332 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    At 9:30 when he is talking about the turbocharger, what he says is not correct. A turbocharger DOES cost horsepower. You can't get something for nothing. The exhaust gases that are coming out of the engine have to do work to get the centrifugal compressor to compress the air going to the engine. The cost is, the pressure in the cylinder on the piston's exhaust stroke is higher (than if there was no turbocharger) because there is resistance of the hot exhaust gases going through the turbine impeller. You can't create free energy.

    • @petermuller161
      @petermuller161 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It’s a commonly held myth. Of course turbos cost power

    • @wilburfinnigan2142
      @wilburfinnigan2142 หลายเดือนก่อน

      timothy that pressure in the exhaust due to the turbocharger is called BACK PRESSURE and yes it does cost some horsepower but the turbo more than makes up for it actually increasing the HP .

    • @GazzaLDN
      @GazzaLDN หลายเดือนก่อน

      Don't think the fella interviewed explained why they used Turbo-charging at all well. Turbo-charging was one way to go, others went with two staged super chargers.

  • @peterjanc3210
    @peterjanc3210 23 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    Then sadly they are looking at the wrong videos,
    I am lucky to have worked around and flown piston props, radials and big Vs,
    Generations coming through now never will have that honour to experience, these videos are a contact point for them.
    Stay safe

  • @oldtugs
    @oldtugs 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Engine output power is proportional to the weight of fuel burned. The proportion of fuel mass (call it weight if you like) to air mass also controls power output. The ideal proportion (mixture) is 14.7:1 (pounds of air:pound of fuel) at which point all the fuel will be burned and release its maximum heating value. Heat is what makes propellers turn. Since air at high altitudes weighs less than the same volume at sea level, the amount of fuel the engine can burn is also less and produces less heat and power. The turbocharger corrects this problem by increasing the mass of air entering the cylinders so that more fuel can be burned to produce more power.

    • @philgiglio7922
      @philgiglio7922 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I find it interesting that the proper air fuel ratio is the same number as the weight of air pressure at ground level...14.7 psi

    • @oldtugs
      @oldtugs 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      It is an interesting coincidence but only the per square inch bit and don't forget that is 14.7psia absolute pressure. The ratio is the same in kilograms or tons or ounces. Reciprocating aircraft engines have adjustable mixture controls because an economy mixture is just over 15:1 and highest power is around 12.5:1. Different fuels have different ratios, natural gas for instance is around 10:1.

  • @scootergeorge7089
    @scootergeorge7089 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    In 1979-80 I got to work on A US-2B Tracker powered by the R-1820-82. That was with a Naval Air Reserve Unit. NARU

  • @ronmeidlinger249
    @ronmeidlinger249 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    My dad used to describe a radial starting sounding like some kicking over empty trash cans in the alley. Aviation Machinist Mate , First Class Joseph Meidlinger.

  • @garethbarry3825
    @garethbarry3825 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Excellent video but just one slight issue that i think was put across in a confusing manner. A variable pitch prop is far more efficient than a fixed prop, but can be a lot of work for the pilot. A constant speed prop autonatically varies the prop pitch to keep the engine rpm according to where the pilot sets the throttle. Essentially an automatic variable pitch prop.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Interesting feedback. Always learning here. Thankyou for watching.

  • @ForceOfChaos1776
    @ForceOfChaos1776 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Ahhh, the blue ox or Norton. Bombsight or whatever they called it sitting behind the engine is one of my favorite pieces of technology history been fascinated since I was a kid. The engine is borderline insanity, the amount we manufactured and the fact that the b-17 was initially developed in the mid 30s was incredibly interesting to me I was not aware of the fact of the matter. The early thermodynamic principals of the compressors or density accumulators are the reasons we have jets today
    Edit the pilots

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you enjoyed the video. We have plenty more coming on the subject.

  • @steve1978ger
    @steve1978ger 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The guy really loves to say "turbosupercharger", and I can't blame him

  • @mchume65
    @mchume65 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    The radial engine aircraft that I got to fly in were the T-6 Texan, P-2 Neptune, C-118, Stearman, 2 B-17s, and a B-25. One of the B-17s, "Sentimental Journey", had three Studebaker made engines at the time.

  • @Zupdood2
    @Zupdood2 17 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    That was a really good explanation of superchargers! I finally understood what they were really for; for squeezing the very thin air at high altitude. Thank you for the great explanation!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  17 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      Glad you enjoyed. Thankyou for the kind words. Plenty more on B-17

  • @zillsburyy1
    @zillsburyy1 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    they didnt catch fire like the 29

  • @fokkerd3red618
    @fokkerd3red618 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    It was genius how that Turbo Super Charger operated. It's amazingly what they accomplished back then with Slide rules and no computers.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Our creative title attempted to show that. Insanity believing only a few short years after first flight we could achieve a 30000 ft Bomber, Genius in making it a reality.

  • @edwardcarberry1095
    @edwardcarberry1095 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    As for the books I read some 50 years ago. They said that the turbo, produced about 450 Hp, the supercharger took 400 hp to run them so there was a net gain for using a Supercharger system for maintaining Hp up to altitude.

  • @GuidosDad
    @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    This is the Best episode Yet Scottie !!!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      What makes this one stand out above the rest?

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Round Engines turning gas into Noise !!! 😊-👍🏻

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 21 วันที่ผ่านมา

      U ok ???

  • @flyingfortressrc1794
    @flyingfortressrc1794 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Wow great video.
    Thanks Jeff for the explanations.

  • @chopper7352
    @chopper7352 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Great series on the B-17 / Memphis Belle. Cheers fm Oz

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Glad your enjoying the series mate! We need more Aussies on the channel. Scott has big plans for film work in Australia soon. "G For George!"

    • @chopper7352
      @chopper7352 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Cheers. It's been a few years since I last visited Canberra & the AWM. "G for George" is a great exhibit.
      I'm now based in Perth & the RAAF Museum here also has a beautifully preserved Lancaster, as well as many other WW2 aircraft....PBY Catalina & Spitfire to name just a few.
      Take it easy mate. Cav all the way !

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@chopper7352 You work with that Lancaster in Perth? How can i get hold of you?

    • @chopper7352
      @chopper7352 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany No mate, I don't work with it. I've just been a visitor to the "RAAF Association Bullcreek Museum" a few times over the last several years. I'm keen on all things Military History, be it Army, Airforce or Navy (especially WW1 & WW2). The museum does allow a few visitors at a time to go inside for a look & experience the various crew positions, but that is a higher tier $ ticket. Maybe for my next birthday.
      I do like the idea of maybe one day being a volunteer at either the Fre'o Army Museum (they've got a good number of AFV's) or the RAAF Museum, but that's approx 10 years away, unless I get lucky with Lotto / Powerball. 😂 Keep up the great work over there.
      Cheers

  • @totalyep
    @totalyep 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Turbo chargers cost horsepower too. He is wrong about that.

    • @badboyvr4
      @badboyvr4 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      You're wrong, even in motorsports engineers and mechanics consider turbos free horsepower, like he said, it's driven by the exhaust which is already there.. A supercharger costs you horsepower because it has to mechanically driven by the engine, like the belt driven supercharger in my 2010 Cadillac CTS-V car.

    • @totalyep
      @totalyep 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@badboyvr4 nope not true. The exhaust back pressure from the turbo makes the engine work harder to push out the exhaust. It takes a lot of energy to compress 1000 cfm of air to say 15psi. There is no free lunch in this world.

  • @nombreapellido9038
    @nombreapellido9038 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    What a beautiful bird.

  • @TigerDominic-uh1dv
    @TigerDominic-uh1dv 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I shoked At the Complexity of the Engines 😊

  • @richarddodds9326
    @richarddodds9326 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    My dad was flight engineer on B17 ww2, 3 bail outs and one of the few survivors

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      What an incredible story and link to have. Glad you have found your way to our series. Scott.

  • @nickkercheval2704
    @nickkercheval2704 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Great job explaining the engine design especially the turbo charger/super charger system

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thankyou for watching and for the kind words. Glad you enjoyed the video.

  • @finalchapter24k
    @finalchapter24k หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    @6:29 B17 engines are the best white noise ever!

  • @marvthedog1972
    @marvthedog1972 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    having ridden in two different B-17s, one being the Memphis Belle Movie plane shown in the first clips of this video, I have to say, they are worth the money to take a ride in.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Absolutely! We have done 909 and Ye Olde Pub. Check out our Bomber Camp video to see modern B-17s today dropping bombs and working guns.

  • @alfabethev2.074
    @alfabethev2.074 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Highly interesting! Tnx. alot!

  • @twirlygirly
    @twirlygirly หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    A turbo does rob power from the engine just like a supercharger, it's just taking it from a different place.
    If you're using engine exhaust to turn a fan, you're increasing the pressure the engine has to push exhaust out, thereby working against the piston stroke trying to push the exhaust out and slowing the engine down.

  • @jtchristiank1
    @jtchristiank1 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    The mayor of Memphis, elected in 1991, was responsible for letting this iconic B17, the Memphis Bell, leave its eponymous home city. What a loss and what a waste. As a kid of about 12, I played inside this bomber as it sat at the Memphis airport. It was restored and placed on Mud Island. I guess it wasn't worth keeping in its home city.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

      We do agree that perhaps the Belle may be in Memphis is some situation. However where she lies now really is the best case scenario for her. Preserved perfectly where the biggest volume of people will see her and know her story along with everything she represents. The city of Memphis Made every effort to the best restoration they could, they also showed continued support during its restoration in Dayton. The rest of our B-17 series highlights that part of her story. Thanks for watching.

    • @jtchristiank1
      @jtchristiank1 9 วันที่ผ่านมา

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany Unfortunately, I absolutely agree. At least it's being appreciated. Thanks.

  • @tonyking9235
    @tonyking9235 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    ITS ALL ABOUT AIR DENSITY

  • @christiancruz4533
    @christiancruz4533 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Great episode. One of the Best Ever!!!❤

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you enjoyed it! What made this one the best?! We try to improve each episode.

    • @GuidosDad
      @GuidosDad 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ENGINES! they bring the Airplane to life / keep it from being Static

    • @christiancruz4533
      @christiancruz4533 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany the fact that you went deep to make an episode solely about the engines specs, theres something about radial engines specially WW2 aircraft engines that for some reason we men love!

    • @HH-COactual
      @HH-COactual 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you can appreciate our work. Hopefully you find the rest of the series enjoyable. Scott.

  • @edzhead22
    @edzhead22 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    My dad worked on these as a corporal in the army air corps back in WW2...called out wrong engine sounds he heard in any war movie we watched...

  • @1798iscomingback
    @1798iscomingback 25 วันที่ผ่านมา

    The reason for a double compression system is because as elevation increases, air gets thinner so a supercharge will lose efficiency while the turbocharger will spin faster and keep pumping BUT the turbochager can't get enough pressure w/o becoming too big but the supercharger can....
    Even today this system is used, see Archates engines and their tank engine developed in partnership with Cummins

  • @thatsthewayitgoes9
    @thatsthewayitgoes9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Exhaust driven turbochargers do take power to turn. Excellent video and so informative. Just wanted to correct a minor point. Very good video. Wow what a fantastic era. Pretty much the height of I.C.E. technology. And besides the technology, the unbelievable manufacturing accomplishments have never been completely acknowledged. A good book about it is: Freedom’s Forge. Thank you for this great video you’ve made here

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  หลายเดือนก่อน

      Thankyou for watching and remaining professional with your corrections. We appreciate the support of the channel. Glad you enjoyed the series. Plenty more to come.

  • @SeattlePioneer
    @SeattlePioneer 10 วันที่ผ่านมา +1

    A couple of days ago I walked by a B17 bomber ----and a B29 bomber right next to it. Not far away was an SR71 aircraft, the fastest in the world. Nearby was a reconstructed 1903 Wright Flyer.
    These were among many other aircraft.
    Where was I?

  • @RD2564
    @RD2564 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Density of air, which is 20% oxygen, decreases with altitude. This means the engine gets less oxygen at altitude, leading to less power because it is the fuel/oxygen chemical reaction that makes the power. By compressing the air, we are re-densifying the oxygen making it possible to generate as much power at altitude as can be made at sea level. That's how it works.

  • @Mike44460
    @Mike44460 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Extremely interesting, thanks.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Glad you enjoyed it! Be sure to check out the whole B-17 series. Plenty more coming.

  • @ancliuin2459
    @ancliuin2459 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Very fine explanation by this gentleman, and really makes me want to visit the museum. Thanks!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Thanks for watching! Please check out the rest of the B-17 series to see more of the Belle.

  • @marcmears3398
    @marcmears3398 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    My father was an aircraft mechanic during ww2. He inspected those engines for sabotage before they were sent to Europe.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Very cool. Please check out the rest of the series.

    • @marcmears3398
      @marcmears3398 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      When my brothers, sisters and I where kids my father would take us to Pease in Portsmouth NH when it was a military air base. It was a blast, we got a free tour of the base and even got inside the cockpit of some very large military planes. @@MilitaryArmamentsCompany

  • @kkuenzel56
    @kkuenzel56 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Is that the original Memphis Belle? The one that used to be on display at Mud Island in the Mississippi River in Memphis? I remember seeing that plane back in the early 70s. Then a couple of years ago, while visiting my son in England, we went to the Imperial War Museum in Duxford and saw a B-17 all painted up in the Memphis Belle livery. It started up and took off with paying passengers. What a thrill that must have been.

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      She sure is! There are 3 "Memphis Belles" out there. This one being the real deal and the legend. Then there were 2 painted up for the 1990 Memphis Belle film. Nose art is slightly different. You saw one of those in UK, also known as "Sally B". The other is "the movie Memphis Belle." Currently with Palm Springs Air Museum in California.

  • @timmccreery6597
    @timmccreery6597 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    The "tour guide", or whatever he is, did not explain why supercharging was important, he stated that it was important. Because high altitudes meant lower oxygen levels supercharging was needed to force more oxygen into the combustion chamber. This same type system, crank drive supercharger and turbo supercharger, was used in the P-47, giving it unparalleled high altitude performance.

  • @danielduffy4134
    @danielduffy4134 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Amazing video, thank you!!!!!

    • @MilitaryArmamentsCompany
      @MilitaryArmamentsCompany  2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Glad you liked it! Check out the rest of the B-17 series. Thankyou for the kind words.

  • @ttip9411
    @ttip9411 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Yamaha used sodium filled valves on some of their dirt bikes starting in the late 90s,....and I thought it was some brand new technology at the time. 😂

  • @carlosfabianmaciel9643
    @carlosfabianmaciel9643 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Sencillamente IMPRESIONATE!!!

  • @ericvogel1126
    @ericvogel1126 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Well done and accurate information.

  • @tgorski52
    @tgorski52 2 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    The turbo adds back pressure on the exhaust cycle so....not free. But the waste gate allows for greater flexibility.

    • @franksizzllemann5628
      @franksizzllemann5628 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      But turbo adds front pressure - just being argumentative

    • @tgorski52
      @tgorski52 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@franksizzllemann5628More air means more fuel means more power.

    • @dougthompson1598
      @dougthompson1598 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Gale Banks has a great video exploring this, and a well-matched turbocharger is remarkably less restrictive than most of us gear-heads have thought. Not exactly free, but close.
      By contrast a mechanically driven supercharger imposes a constant resistance to crankshaft rotation

  • @clintwilde1048
    @clintwilde1048 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

    'Air Forces' lab? I think Pratt and Whitney might have a comment about that. The cylinder fins were created by cutting the fins in the solid aluminum casting with gang saws, and a steel cylinder sleeve was inserted for the piston, and the Air Forces lab had nothing to do with it, just pure free enterprise innovation and invention with zero government intervention. Something we need today in the area of automobiles instead of cars by edict.