Keith Willshaw wrote:
"Cub Driver" wrote in message
news
Why would they? Their aircraft engines rotated in the same direction as
the
American's, thus generating the same port-biased torque.
No, British aircraft engines turned the other way. Still do, I
believe.
They famously emasculated the Lightning by burdening it with two
left-turning engines.
The problem with the version of the P-38 supplied to the RAF
was the inferior supercharger supplied on the export version
not the fact that it had 2 engines turning the same way.
The supercharger supplied (actually just a low pressure
blower) was what was specified by the British, and what
was a standard feature on the Allison. The Allison was
intended to use a separate turbosupercharger for high
altitude work, but the British didn't feel that high
altitude performance was necessary at the time they
wrote the specification. In addition, turbosuperchargers
were not a high-volume production item, so including
them might have delayed deliver. By the time the aircraft
were delivered, however, the RAF had learned through
experience that high altitude performance was indeed
important.
The poor handling of the aircraft, however, was
indeed due to the fitting of same-direction rotating
engine and propeller combinations, which was done
to minimize the logistics tail, by using an engine
which was already in use by the RAF (in export
P-40s, IIRC). This engine also developed less
horsepower, even at sea level, than did the
V-1710F series engine used in all P-38s since
the XP.
A final possible reason for the British refusing
to accept the Lightning (and especially the
follow-on Lightning II, with turbosupercharging
and counter-rotating V-1710F engines) was due to
the method under which they were ordered. The
original order for these aircraft was prior
to lend-lease coming into being, and the British
would have had to pay cash for them, unlike
other aircraft ordered later. Given the
changed requirements making the Lightning I
less useful than expected, and the availability
of other aircraft under lend-lease, buying
the aircraft probably didn't seem a very
economical way to spend their treasure. The
Lightning II, if not for the cash requirement,
probably would have been very useful to the
British.
Mike