I was in Reno for the races when a P-51 flown by Mr. Levits came apart and killed him. I never found out what happened, would you know? It too had a Griffon with counter rotating props.
over 3000 hp. It broke down at my local airport with a massive oil leak on the way to reno 2 days ago. they did away with the green wings, just got the 38 on the left wing now and all polished
@majfunkmeister I can find out how much HP its got but I cannot make it public . Ive been threatend with the penalty of death if I leak any secret race info. However I can say this. The engine has been completely gone through. The supercharger was sent off to get refurbished. There were some safety items added. Ground run was good. Has a few test flights with ZERO discrepancies. She will likely go faster this year than ever before.
@chubsmagoo it holds about 100 gallons of fuel, and to take off, form up, race, cool down and land it'll use almost all of it. not sure what cruise gph is. wings have been clipped about 5 feet, give or take a few inches.
The Mustang could go damn near supersonic as it was (WW2 pilots putting their planes into powered dives found this out the hard way). I imagine you couldn't make them go much faster or they'd easily break the sound barrier.
@jesknow the advantage is that you get more thrust per engine than you would with a single screw, making better use of the hp the engine produces. the disadvantage is that it's heavy and complicated.
@jesknow Although it pains me to say this (I think Precious Metal is one THE most beautiful airplanes to grace the skies) the counter (contra) rotating prop was not such a great idea (for THIS application). I think the max Precious Metal has gone is around 440. By comparison; Dago Red has done about 540 (unofficial) and 520 (official) with a single. I know some guy said he liked it (don't want to step on toes here) but I think the beercan exhaust is CHEESY!
@purple748 dago red is hardly a mustang it is so heavily modified. Precious metal does not looke like too much has been done to the radiator, wings or canopy. Theoretically a contra rotating prop should have a slight advantage with respect to top speed... that is why the Tu-95 Bear has them. The Tu-95 can fly routinely at around 550mph
@jtully79 ...although I used to be an A&P, I'm not an engineer...BUT...I understand it to be more of an issue of practicality (vs outright performance). The Tu-95 puts out about 12,000hp (9000kw) per engine. I DO understand the principle of cleaning up vortexes behind the leading prop but I think the bigger issue was the idea that you would need a 25' prop! ..remember the Connie?
@purple748 The Red Baron was running at 500mph in 1979 with the same Griffon engine, or a variant thereof. I think it's possible, but keeping the engines in one piece is always a problem. I think the way to make them go faster is to improve the engine and that will take a whole lot of money and dedication. Billet heads, cranks, and custom induction.
@1bearcatf8f ruined my fucking ass. Ruined would be rotting away in some fucking museum. No museum is ever interested in keeping machines mechanically capable. They just treat them like fucking lawn ornimants. Aircraft are for flying, if you want something to just look at, get a fucking poster.
@Polybun Muesam peices arnt made to be airworthy dumbass,there not rotting away they keep them maintained,this so called P-51 here is ruined to the bone,its not even a real mustang anymore thanks to all the shit they did to it.
@1bearcatf8f It's something even better than being a "real P-51", it's an aircraft. She still retains her elegant lines, she still retains her roaring voice. She comes out of the hanger and announces to the world I am power and grace with growl and howl. Maybe you prefer to stare at a dead corpse. I'll take them living and breathing. Take a picture, it'll last longer.
@Polybun your wrong in ever aspect,its a ruined P-51,a P-51 with a roles royce griffion doesnt have the note of a merlin.you seriously need to get your facts right
@1bearcatf8f if you'd bothered to read the comment i posted you'd know that the fuselage of this airplane was never even accepted into military service, much less flew as a stock mustang. this airplane was built as you see it in the video. i have worked in museums, for private collectors, on racers and stock warbirds and i can tell you that an airplane that flies regularly, i.e. a racer (generally speaking) is much easier to maintain because it is doing what it was designed to do, fly.
@poptartpencil it's actually fairly simple pop, picture two prop shafts, one inside the other. now picture that before the shafts reach the props there are three gears, one being turned by the inner crankshaft. the second being turned by the previous one and the third attached dirctly to the outer shaft being spun by the second. this is essentially how counter rotating props work.
Well the reason for the contra rotationg props is because the griffon has so much more power that a prop big enough would hit the ground so the contra rotating is used to shorten the blade and use all allowable horsepower. Miss ashley 2 had a contrarotating prop and flew Gold race speeds at 82% power so im guessing it was working great until it came apart.
also, this mustang doesn't have anywhere near 4,000 hp. 2,700 was about as much as we ever used, the goal was never to win the gold but to go out and have fun.
however, angryace you are right that alot of hp would be hard on the blower, in fact we had one year out of the 4 or 5 we raced where we didn't have major issues with the engine. although i know that ron does (or atleast did) have a very special engine with very special components for just that reason.
Very cool. When did the contra-props start getting used? Were they a retrofit or were some stock 51's equipped with them? I bet its a lot easier to take off with them as I wouuld assume the torque effect would be balanced out with the counter-rotating props...
hi all, i'm a former crew member and thought i'd post to give you a little insight into the airplane.
first of all, this particualr mustang was never used in combat or even put into service, the center fuselage section was made especially for the movies and was later built up as the racer in the video. better than seeing it turned into razor blades wouldn't you say frownieface?
secondly, as with most warbirds, yes if you add power to quickly it could snap roll, hence why we don't.
@MayoDK nah, she cooled fine. we never got to a point in the program where the engine needed anything special to prepare for the races. the fastest lap ron ever turned in her was 410 mph.
@vendetta81 What is the advantage of counter-rotating props. R.I.P. Miss Ashley II, I was about 12 when I saw that race. Still never could get over that. There have been quite a few crashes recently too, it's hard to see that.
@ibbiggs think of it like this biggs, if you had twin engines you would have twice the thrust but also twice the weight right? having a counter rotating eliminates the weight of the second engine, and while you'll never get twice the thrust as with a twin (the rear set negates the forward set three times every revolution) it's still a marked improvement over single prop designs.
i was near the home pylon, didn't see it come apart but i remember it not flying right.
@AmericanAviator It's actually a pretty straightforward system (despite the visual shock and the accompanying idea of one excessively violent mechanical thing spinning in opposition to another). I...think...Don Whittington did the mod and that would have been back in the mid 70's. Forty years of service says a lot about reliability to me!
@purple748 that's cool. that's cool as hell. It looks like something straight out of fiction. Here's hoping Thom Richard takes the checkered flag when Reno reconvenes next year!
The Griffon @ 2239cid can produce huge power but settings above 3500hp tend to get real hard on the blower drive gears and lead to failure which normally takes out the oil pump as well...
Great to see people commenting but please source your intel from books not from other peoples opinions. rolls royces historical do a great line of technical books on their website. also read Graham white and Bill Gunston
the griffon is a far cleaner design than the merlin as many lessons had been learnt. last of the WWII production used five blade single rotation or contras, the tails had to be increased markedly to compensate for the destabilising effect the massive blade area had.
Griffons were made with both single rotation and contra prop. the contra prop installations were always problematic but their advantages kept people developing them. the version seen was the one from the shackleton which was a constant source of problems. the reason for contra props is two fold. one- delivering that much HP requires blade area and eventually you get too many blades or run out of ground clearance! getting two props helps. the other and lesser problem is the one of torque steer.
it has the counter rotating prop 'cause it has a RR Griffon engine....... all griffons come w the counter rotating prop gear case........probably got the engine frm a Shackleton . they had 4 of them....
Contra rotating props are two propellers one behind the other spinning in opposite directions, like on this mustang. Counter rotating props are found on a plane with two engines, such as a P-38 lightning. One engine drives a prop rotating clockwise, the other engine drives a counterclockwise spinning prop.
Ever since the birth of new technology that permits things like Youtube, we see a new generation of self made "experts" more apprpiatelly called computer worm wanabe, that post oppinions with out knowledge.
If a 4000 hp engine can "twist a Mustang into a spin" how come Tiger Destefani won the race in a Mustang with the standard prop? How about Rare Bear, September Fury ?
Althought the torque issue is real, the use of the contra prop is due to TANGENTIAL PROPELLER LOSS? check it out morons.
i looked it up, and you are correct, but really is it so nessiary to be a dick about somthing i didnt know, that you did.... now that i know what your talking about, i can take that into consideration...., contra rotating props, exuse me if i mixed that up with counter rotating props, but calling people morons, and wanabees, makes you... look just as stupid, if not more stupid than me, mostly since, im not trying to sound like an expert.
with the stock engine with too rapid of throttle application, the torque and power of the engine would twist the mustang into a spin, and in worse case sinaros at low speeds, go into a tail spin! emagine having 4,000hp which this plane has i think at the least 3,750hp, with a cut wingspan which at sacrafice for decreased drag, will decrease stability, the counter rotating props are i think for saifty reasons.
i thought i would add somthing, the one reason this airplane has the counter rotating props, is primarilly for control, the stock p51 mustang without the cut wingspan and stock rolls royce packard merlin v1650 v12, with just 1,695hp, some of the reno racers with them suped up make about 3,000hp and still dont have counter rotating props, and this doesent look like it has the standard 1650cubic inch v12, it looks like the griffon which was closer to 2,000cubic inches, thats about 4,000hp
is that a mustang, or a spitfire? im not sure, beacuse the scoop below the wings where the radiator is housed, the shape of the wings, and the horizontal and vertical stabolizer, scream mustang, but the engine cowling, and counter rotating props look like somthing off those really late spitfires.
exuse spelling, aspergers syndrom effects how well i spell, and spell check isnt working.
There used to be a red P51 with the counter rotating props in miami back in the early 80s.
This setup allows you to use smaller diameter props.....or thinner blades.......or put more of the engine's torque for the simple reason of having more surface area to deal with.
The downside is that you also have more drag since you are pushing more blade.
Ok, here's one for the experts: What's a "Mouse" engine? I assume it's a racing Merlin that's been lightened. Dwight Thorne and Dago Red feature in the story but what's the story?
the "mouse" engine was the type of merlin racing engine that dwight thorne (rip) built up. many have tried but none have made a merlin quite as high in MAP as reliably (still marginal at best).
No it wasn't. That was a new-build Allison-engine P-51A replica painted to resemble "Precious Metal" for a straight-to-video movie called "Thunder Over Reno." The accident was at Oshkosh a couple of years ago.
I think the aircraft you're talking about was another "Precious Metal", which used to be located at the Fargo, ND air museum. It can be distinguished from the one in this video by the absence of a contra-rotating propeller system, and an early P-51B canopy..
Other than that, it has the same paintjob and the amazing spirit of the P-51; a true plane that will never be forgotten.
Dago Red holds the course record at 507 mph, I was on the field watching when he did the qualifying run. Precious metal was in the hangar during those years, they pulled her out for a quick tease every now and then, but she didn't race for a while. Those two birds and white lightning are my absolute favorites.
partially correct, it does cut down a great deal on torque, known as "p factor". but it doesn't enhance maneuverability. the main purpose is to cut down the length of the prop to keep them from going supersonic.
'p factor' = asymmetric thrust in a climb (or descent), as a result of an upgoing propellor blade having a different angle of attack than a downgoing blade. Therefore contrarotating props will reduce 'p factor' as there will be some blades going up and some going down on both sides of the plane.
However 'p factor' is NOT the same as torque, which is a rotational force applied through the propellor-shaft by the engine.
Perhaps an engineer could correct me if I'm wrong (since I'm just a pilot myself), but my belief is that since torque is a vector quantity (ie direction matters), if both props swing in opposite directions at the same speed then the combined torque is completely cancelled, ie net torque = 0.
Performance - difficult question! As you alluded to, side effects are reduced. In addition, slip stream effect is reduced. However there is a weight & complexity penalty.
In addition, wouldn't there be a higher risk of equipment failure? In the past counter rotating props have caused major problems; Northrop's XB-36 and Hughe's XF-11. Both air craft had serious problems with the machinery that went along with the counter rotating props.
You are correct. The counter-rotation does cancel much of the 'left pull' of a giant single-prop, does give more surface area for the engine to drive and there are also efficiencies gained by the the direction of the air from the first prop as it flows to the 2nd prop. But, the air is a complete mess between the props as expected. In the end, it is one giant egg-beater with more blades, and can 'cut' through more stuff.
Amazing engineering. Just think about what goes into making all of this work
Back in 1988 I was working at a company in Salinas CA, building up a set of Mustang wings that ended up on Precious Metal for the Reno air races that year. Coming down the start chute for the final race, an engine or prop gov. failure caused him to MAYDAY and Bob Hoover told him to dump it in the dry lake bed since he couldnt make the runway (due to the drag). Seconds later there sat the wings we had worked so hard to finish. Belly landed and crumpled in the desert dirt. Ah.......Memories!
But that is quite slow for reno admittedly, and the Griffon is quite powerful, suits the aircraft well...strange, I was expecting something like 430 mph at least. Thank you for informing me!!! :-)
453 mph Precious Metal qualified at in 1988 and 442 mph in '81. All this info is in the race database on the Reno Air Race main website. The database is easy to search, try it out!
It's a Griffon from a Shackleton, a Griffon 57A I would say...veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery nice sounding aircraft...could go even faster by clipping another 3 feet from it's wings!!!
IF they approached PM the same as Randy Scoville did on the RB-51.Griffon 58 from a Shackleton using a Griffon 64 crankshaft because of the additional counter weights,Griffon 57 connecting rod and piston assemblies.Griffon 64 blower was grafted onto the 58 crankcase.Space restraints would not allow the use of the 64 carburettor,therefore the intake elbow from a Mk. XIX Spitfire was modified and turned 180*.Bendix PR-58 carb from a C series P&W R-2800 was mounted on top of the modified elbow.
It was not difficult to reflow the PR-58 for Griffon.Large scoop on top of the cowl supplied induction air. The camshafts were modded by grinding base circle thus yielding additional lift,the timing was left stock. The profile was modified to allow a gentler lift off the seat and a similarly gentler closing for both intake and exhaust valves.Propeller mods included removing 6 inches from the tip of each blade,re-twisting the blades and modified governor springs and bob weights for increased rpm.
I have my own trucking business. As far as Reno is concerned, I live about a days drive from there. The Budweiser hydroplanes are racing boats (unlimited) One or two of them were Griffon powered. Many of these boats used the Allison, and the Merlin. The big problem with boat racing is how the prop loads, and unloads the engine as it hits, and looses bite in the water. On the Griffon, the shaft driving the supercharger would snap when the engine was reloaded. This is what brought down the RB-51.
Awesome sound! Is this setup out of a Shackleton? When will this aircraft meet its full potential and race in the gold like the Red Barron? Perhaps set a new speed record...
Thats what the setup looks like, just to fit a p-51 frame. It would be great to see this plane in the gold, but the Red Barron was more modified, since it had the swept back wings, making it faster than Precious Metal. Although Precious Metal is still one unique and beautiful machine that is like the Red Barron's descendant, making a record a possibility!
I had not paid much attention to the diffences it the wings, haven't seen many pictures from a good angle for this. I wonder if the Red Baron had a set of Duane Egli's custom made wings? The era would be correct. I didn't look at the radiator housing to see if that was Duane's design either. I believe the contras were also used in a few late Spitfires, Seafires, as well as the Spiteful, and Searfang.
Yea, there's a video called "reno air race flyby" that shows the Red Barron in its later days as "Miss Ashley II", the video is in the related vids. There you can get a view of it, but it goes sorta low so its swept wings are harder to see.
The video; "Steve Hinton World Air Speed Record Attempt 1979-Red Baron"; shows a relatively stock wing, but clipped. The aircraft is being towed from the hangar on the record setting day. (film shot from the roof looking down) The P-51D was modified in 1966 and I believe the Griffon was installed in 1974 when it was named the Red Baron. The Baron was completely destroyed during the 1979 Reno air races. Perhaps the supercharger failure (common for Griffons)of the Baron holds back Precious Metal.
The video; "Steve Hinton World Air Speed Record Attempt 1979-Red Baron"; shows a relatively stock wing, but clipped. The aircraft is being towed from the hangar on the record setting day. (film shot from the roof looking down) The P-51D was modified in 1966 and I believe the Griffon was installed in 1974 when it was named the Red Baron. The Baron was completely destroyed during the 1979 Reno air races. Perhaps the supercharger failure (common for Griffons)of the Baron holds back Precious Metal.
Miss Ashley II and the RB-51 are not the same. The RB-51(Red Baron) was destroyed back in '79. The Miss Ashley II is using the Griffon engine with the contra's out of the Shackleton but the wings are the wings off of Vendetta, Learjet's I believe..
I didn't believe the RB-51 was rebuilt. The combination does seem to be an interesting way to go, with the Barons' speed record. I would explore some of the Budweiser hydroplane Griffon modifications if I was racing this setup. The oiling modification probably promotes better bearing lubrication, the supercharger shaft could drive another oil pump for the prop/gearbox, and the twin turbos could not snap off that pesky drive. The aircraft would look strange with headers on it though!
I would leave the headers exposed, as well as the turbos for cooling purposes. Where would one install the air to air aftercooler? Sorry if I bumped the ratings trigger, it is possable that I gave you a bad rating accidentally.
Sorry about the -1! Yes, that would be an issue. perhaps a small inlet up front behind the props. At speed, the airflow needed over a charge air cooler would not be a lot to get the job done, especially if the turbos were exposed enough to keep them "cool", say under 600 Degrees on the pyrometers. Turbos hidden by cowl would likely melt internally if kept from getting enough airflow. (they have been known to melt in semi trucks with similar boost settings)
Perhaps, but the Budweiser hydro team set up twin turbos on their Griffon powered boat. I was looking at the performance capability, a Griffon will ingest much more air than an Allison. The large turbo would have to be twice the size to achieve the needed boost. I would run two systems, one on each side to reduce plumbing issues. Smaller turbos respond faster, and are more practacal. Yes, it is likely a Griffon 58.
I haven't seen the Budweiser plane...maybe cause i'm an Aussie!!
You're right the 58 would suck alot more than the V-1710.
Small twins would be great ... glowing headers out in the breeze. Maybe the additional whoosh of the two huffers can outdo the drag issues with pure power.
I own and operate my own truck. Go all over North America. I even have what you would call "roo bars" (a moose stopper bumper) on the truck. Right now, I am in the Dallas, Tx. area. I would not have time, or be logistically available to work on one of these. I do fiddle around with old Muscle cars; have had or done interesting things to engines. Squeeze more power, lubricate better, etc. Those old engines were a wonder for their time, but real junk by today's standards.
I haven't seen the Budweiser plane...maybe cause i'm an Aussie!!
You're right the 58 would suck alot more than the V-1710.
Small twins would be great ... glowing headers out in the breeze. Maybe the additional whoosh of the two huffers can outdo the drag issues with pure power.
I am not sure what a screamer pipe is. I believe these fighter engines have lubrication issues. On the Ford 351 Cleveland, (automobile engine used in the Mustang Mach-I muscle car, etc) new oil galleys can be drilled , others being plugged, greatly improving lubrication. Metallurgy is also likely an issue. Perhaps some modifications would make the unlimiteds safer and more reliable. Perhaps someone important is reading these discussions.
They also want to name his rebuilt A model "Gerry's Dream." Having seen his A model at Flying Cloud in 06, it was truly a testament to his hard work and craftsmanship... It is quite amazing how he put that thing together from plans alone. He was an amazing man.
Correct, the plane that crashed at Oshkosh was not the true Precious Metal. Gerry Beck made a P-51A "Kit" plane and had it painted to resemble the paint scheme of this plane for a movie called Thunder Over Reno. The only likeness between the two is the neon green wings. Gerry Beck was an amazing man and it is sad that he is gone.
I was in the Atlanta airport when I saw the CNN photo of the Gerry Beck Oshkosh crash. I thought immediately that it was the PM plane not knowing about the Thunder Over Reno movie replica paint scheme. It is sad to see any pilot death and plane crash. RIP
Correct, this plane wasn't a kit, which is why I put it in quotations. Gerry actually had intentions of making a 1/1 scale kit from this plane though. There are plans for his A model to be restored, but only time will tell...
I believe Gerry's hard work has laid the foundation for a production run of P-51A models-which is what I think you are referring to as kits. Or, is this similar to the FlugWerk Fw190 "kits", which allow lower insurance through owner final-assembly? Gerry's loss was sad, but I'm glad that his aircraft will be rebuilt. I believe I've read that the A-model production will continue at his shop.
Yep, that is what I am referring to. He was talking to myself and some fellow CAF-MN guys at the Flying Cloud Airshow in 06 and he wanted to set it up so as a kit meaning that a certain percentage of the plane was prefabbed (I think it is 50% but don't quote me on that.) The rest would be shipped in pieces for the builder to put together. Basically what you were talking about with the Fw190s. His wife (post-Oshkosh) did say that they do plan on continuing this idea.
This plane is still flying. The plane involved in the accident at Oshkosh was a P-51A that sported a PM paint scheme for the movie Thunder Over Reno. Blue skys Gerry Beck.
This aircraft shared hangar space with my fathers airplane at Lakeland Linder airport.
LaymanAlec 1 month ago
I'm so sorry for your loss. He was a great pilot.
shortribs11 1 month ago
Hell Yeaaaaaahhh!!
flubug1 3 months ago
I was in Reno for the races when a P-51 flown by Mr. Levits came apart and killed him. I never found out what happened, would you know? It too had a Griffon with counter rotating props.
shortribs11 3 months ago
@shortribs11 That was my father, Gary Levitz. The entire tail section of aircraft disintegrated as he rounded a pylon.
rlevitz 1 month ago
over 3000 hp. It broke down at my local airport with a massive oil leak on the way to reno 2 days ago. they did away with the green wings, just got the 38 on the left wing now and all polished
Charlie37j 4 months ago
Crewed in 2002. Wish all the best to the team.
lunas777 4 months ago
how much hp?
majfunkmeister 6 months ago
@majfunkmeister about 2700 hp stock, who knows this year : )
vendetta81 5 months ago
@majfunkmeister I know how much hp but I cannot say. Ive been threatend with the penalty of death if I leak any info.
BlueWaterBoat 5 months ago
@majfunkmeister I can find out how much HP its got but I cannot make it public . Ive been threatend with the penalty of death if I leak any secret race info. However I can say this. The engine has been completely gone through. The supercharger was sent off to get refurbished. There were some safety items added. Ground run was good. Has a few test flights with ZERO discrepancies. She will likely go faster this year than ever before.
BlueWaterBoat 5 months ago
lol look at those exhaust caps XD
LeBartman 6 months ago
Whats the Gph on her at cruise and also at race pace? Also how much did you chop off the wings?
chubsmagoo 6 months ago
@chubsmagoo it holds about 100 gallons of fuel, and to take off, form up, race, cool down and land it'll use almost all of it. not sure what cruise gph is. wings have been clipped about 5 feet, give or take a few inches.
vendetta81 5 months ago
This must be the best sound in the world!
pilotjonny 7 months ago
The Mustang could go damn near supersonic as it was (WW2 pilots putting their planes into powered dives found this out the hard way). I imagine you couldn't make them go much faster or they'd easily break the sound barrier.
Threetails 8 months ago
Any advantages/disadvantages of the counter-rotators?
jesknow 10 months ago
@jesknow the advantage is that you get more thrust per engine than you would with a single screw, making better use of the hp the engine produces. the disadvantage is that it's heavy and complicated.
vendetta81 10 months ago
@jesknow Although it pains me to say this (I think Precious Metal is one THE most beautiful airplanes to grace the skies) the counter (contra) rotating prop was not such a great idea (for THIS application). I think the max Precious Metal has gone is around 440. By comparison; Dago Red has done about 540 (unofficial) and 520 (official) with a single. I know some guy said he liked it (don't want to step on toes here) but I think the beercan exhaust is CHEESY!
purple748 4 months ago
@purple748 Yeah, the sound of the contra props is sooooooooo nice! Dago Red, Strega, Voodoo, then Precious Metal are my favorites in order.
jesknow 4 months ago
@purple748 dago red is hardly a mustang it is so heavily modified. Precious metal does not looke like too much has been done to the radiator, wings or canopy. Theoretically a contra rotating prop should have a slight advantage with respect to top speed... that is why the Tu-95 Bear has them. The Tu-95 can fly routinely at around 550mph
jtully79 4 months ago
@jtully79 ...although I used to be an A&P, I'm not an engineer...BUT...I understand it to be more of an issue of practicality (vs outright performance). The Tu-95 puts out about 12,000hp (9000kw) per engine. I DO understand the principle of cleaning up vortexes behind the leading prop but I think the bigger issue was the idea that you would need a 25' prop! ..remember the Connie?
purple748 4 months ago
@purple748 The Red Baron was running at 500mph in 1979 with the same Griffon engine, or a variant thereof. I think it's possible, but keeping the engines in one piece is always a problem. I think the way to make them go faster is to improve the engine and that will take a whole lot of money and dedication. Billet heads, cranks, and custom induction.
rrhynes 4 months ago
So incredible, so amazing warbird - non wb plane !!! How many hp ???
JefSennaF9 10 months ago
@JefSennaF9 we limited our hp output to 2700
vendetta81 10 months ago
Damn that's got one horny sound to it.
Hell I'm a purist as bad as the next guy,but Holy Shit,that thing nearly gave me a hard on...WTF
sexysizesix 1 year ago
Barney Stinson would say Legen... wait for it dary!
cy2kill 1 year ago
The Merlin is great but this is the engine that airframe needed.
jtflyer 1 year ago
Doesnt have the sweet note as the Rolls Royce Merlin
1bearcatf8f 1 year ago
@1bearcatf8f not nearly as fast either. I would love to see what a merlin would do with counter rotating props.
Polybun 1 year ago
@Polybun doesnt matter this P-51 was ruined could have been one more fully restored fighter plane until they turned it into a racing plane.
1bearcatf8f 1 year ago
@1bearcatf8f ruined my fucking ass. Ruined would be rotting away in some fucking museum. No museum is ever interested in keeping machines mechanically capable. They just treat them like fucking lawn ornimants. Aircraft are for flying, if you want something to just look at, get a fucking poster.
Polybun 1 year ago
@Polybun Muesam peices arnt made to be airworthy dumbass,there not rotting away they keep them maintained,this so called P-51 here is ruined to the bone,its not even a real mustang anymore thanks to all the shit they did to it.
1bearcatf8f 1 year ago
@1bearcatf8f It's something even better than being a "real P-51", it's an aircraft. She still retains her elegant lines, she still retains her roaring voice. She comes out of the hanger and announces to the world I am power and grace with growl and howl. Maybe you prefer to stare at a dead corpse. I'll take them living and breathing. Take a picture, it'll last longer.
Polybun 1 year ago
@Polybun your wrong in ever aspect,its a ruined P-51,a P-51 with a roles royce griffion doesnt have the note of a merlin.you seriously need to get your facts right
1bearcatf8f 1 year ago
@1bearcatf8f Better than no note at all, which is what museum piece has. That's ok though, I get you, you prefer necrophilia.
Polybun 1 year ago
@Polybun atleast muesam peices are original necrophilia hahahahah sure whatever you say.
1bearcatf8f 1 year ago
@1bearcatf8f if you'd bothered to read the comment i posted you'd know that the fuselage of this airplane was never even accepted into military service, much less flew as a stock mustang. this airplane was built as you see it in the video. i have worked in museums, for private collectors, on racers and stock warbirds and i can tell you that an airplane that flies regularly, i.e. a racer (generally speaking) is much easier to maintain because it is doing what it was designed to do, fly.
vendetta81 10 months ago
That sound never gets old. :)
moplin1 1 year ago 4
you gotta love the counter rotating blade :)
RoboTekno 1 year ago
If I had a counter rotator P-51 racer I'd name it "shaft U twice". No? Ok, "screw U twice". ?
Chuckjagermeister 1 year ago
i wish i knew how those propellers work been trying to figure out for years
poptartpencil 1 year ago
@poptartpencil it's actually fairly simple pop, picture two prop shafts, one inside the other. now picture that before the shafts reach the props there are three gears, one being turned by the inner crankshaft. the second being turned by the previous one and the third attached dirctly to the outer shaft being spun by the second. this is essentially how counter rotating props work.
vendetta81 1 year ago
is that gonna be an A model???
devodrummer 1 year ago
Cool counter rotating blades. Thanks for sharing.
michaejlt 1 year ago
didnt this buy the farm @ oshkosh?>
oliverlebot 1 year ago
wow it must be so nice to fly that plane.. no left turning tendency due to the torque.
counter-rotating propellers cancels it out.
aerobatic500 1 year ago
The sound of the engine is absolutely fantastic, it must be orgasmic to fly this !
ratatouille78 1 year ago
Contra props started on the Avro Shackelton maritime bomber.
jaybee641 1 year ago
@jaybee641 actually, counter rotating props have been around since the late '20's
vendetta81 1 year ago
im lovin the dual prop!
M19GUNNER 1 year ago
I wonder how good that duel prop works, is it better than a conventional prop?
Drakedragon1315 2 years ago
Well the reason for the contra rotationg props is because the griffon has so much more power that a prop big enough would hit the ground so the contra rotating is used to shorten the blade and use all allowable horsepower. Miss ashley 2 had a contrarotating prop and flew Gold race speeds at 82% power so im guessing it was working great until it came apart.
amediastintas 1 year ago
ha ha Love the cans on the exhaust at the beggining
STRURM249 2 years ago
thanks for that ;)
dalidoudou 2 years ago
also, this mustang doesn't have anywhere near 4,000 hp. 2,700 was about as much as we ever used, the goal was never to win the gold but to go out and have fun.
however, angryace you are right that alot of hp would be hard on the blower, in fact we had one year out of the 4 or 5 we raced where we didn't have major issues with the engine. although i know that ron does (or atleast did) have a very special engine with very special components for just that reason.
vendetta81 2 years ago
Very cool. When did the contra-props start getting used? Were they a retrofit or were some stock 51's equipped with them? I bet its a lot easier to take off with them as I wouuld assume the torque effect would be balanced out with the counter-rotating props...
WakeUpDummies 2 years ago
hi all, i'm a former crew member and thought i'd post to give you a little insight into the airplane.
first of all, this particualr mustang was never used in combat or even put into service, the center fuselage section was made especially for the movies and was later built up as the racer in the video. better than seeing it turned into razor blades wouldn't you say frownieface?
secondly, as with most warbirds, yes if you add power to quickly it could snap roll, hence why we don't.
vendetta81 2 years ago 9
@vendetta81
Quite a few cooling problems with the Griffon engines, are there not?
How did you get around that? And do they tune the engines for the Reno?
MayoDK 1 year ago
@MayoDK nah, she cooled fine. we never got to a point in the program where the engine needed anything special to prepare for the races. the fastest lap ron ever turned in her was 410 mph.
vendetta81 1 year ago
@vendetta81 What is the advantage of counter-rotating props. R.I.P. Miss Ashley II, I was about 12 when I saw that race. Still never could get over that. There have been quite a few crashes recently too, it's hard to see that.
ibbiggs 1 year ago
@ibbiggs think of it like this biggs, if you had twin engines you would have twice the thrust but also twice the weight right? having a counter rotating eliminates the weight of the second engine, and while you'll never get twice the thrust as with a twin (the rear set negates the forward set three times every revolution) it's still a marked improvement over single prop designs.
i was near the home pylon, didn't see it come apart but i remember it not flying right.
vendetta81 1 year ago
@vendetta81 How you going to snap roll with contraprops where torque is near cero ?
canals22 1 year ago
@canals22 because the engine itself is still producing torque. it's less likely that it would but not something that anyone would like to prove.
vendetta81 1 year ago
@vendetta81 That is true... however I remember reading about Spitfire pilots saying they loved the contra prop for the absence of torque.
But, like you said, the Griffon is big, and may still try to "twist things around"
canals22 1 year ago
@vendetta81 it has contra rotating propellers... the torque is balanced in both directions... how could it snap roll?
jtully79 4 months ago
@vendetta81 How much of a pain in the rear is that counter-rotating assembly on Precious Metal?
AmericanAviator 4 months ago
@AmericanAviator It's actually a pretty straightforward system (despite the visual shock and the accompanying idea of one excessively violent mechanical thing spinning in opposition to another). I...think...Don Whittington did the mod and that would have been back in the mid 70's. Forty years of service says a lot about reliability to me!
purple748 4 months ago
@purple748 that's cool. that's cool as hell. It looks like something straight out of fiction. Here's hoping Thom Richard takes the checkered flag when Reno reconvenes next year!
AmericanAviator 4 months ago
@vendetta81 surely it shouldnt snap roll with the contrarotating props? was it a grffon engine?
bigvee93 1 month ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
perfect.. a ruined legendary plane... its a shame :/
FROWNIEFACE 2 years ago
didn't red barron have the speed record in the 70's before it crashed?. griffon powered counter rotating
rchoper21 2 years ago
sure did, hit 499 mph i believe, could of gone faster had the weather been more ideal.
erad5 2 years ago
dunno i know rarebear holds it now at over 520 mph.
amediastintas 1 year ago
I correct myself. Rarebear has the record at 528.3 MPH!
amediastintas 1 year ago
The Griffon @ 2239cid can produce huge power but settings above 3500hp tend to get real hard on the blower drive gears and lead to failure which normally takes out the oil pump as well...
RickGerald 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
theres a perfectly ruined p-51
1bearcatf8f 2 years ago
Nice header covers.
Chuckjagermeister 2 years ago
Great to see people commenting but please source your intel from books not from other peoples opinions. rolls royces historical do a great line of technical books on their website. also read Graham white and Bill Gunston
the griffon is a far cleaner design than the merlin as many lessons had been learnt. last of the WWII production used five blade single rotation or contras, the tails had to be increased markedly to compensate for the destabilising effect the massive blade area had.
SeafangXVI 2 years ago
Griffons were made with both single rotation and contra prop. the contra prop installations were always problematic but their advantages kept people developing them. the version seen was the one from the shackleton which was a constant source of problems. the reason for contra props is two fold. one- delivering that much HP requires blade area and eventually you get too many blades or run out of ground clearance! getting two props helps. the other and lesser problem is the one of torque steer.
SeafangXVI 2 years ago
and that was the primary reason it was placed on the spitfire? am i correct?
angryace13 2 years ago
it has the counter rotating prop 'cause it has a RR Griffon engine....... all griffons come w the counter rotating prop gear case........probably got the engine frm a Shackleton . they had 4 of them....
moosiah 2 years ago
... (sorry about the misspell, I had a few beers, is my b-day)
Furthermore, someone answer me this question :
What's the difference between "contra rotating props" and counter rotating props"
Hang with me, you will be an expert some day...
canals22 2 years ago
Contra rotating props are two propellers one behind the other spinning in opposite directions, like on this mustang. Counter rotating props are found on a plane with two engines, such as a P-38 lightning. One engine drives a prop rotating clockwise, the other engine drives a counterclockwise spinning prop.
n1ckb99 2 years ago
Comment removed
n1ckb99 2 years ago
Ever since the birth of new technology that permits things like Youtube, we see a new generation of self made "experts" more apprpiatelly called computer worm wanabe, that post oppinions with out knowledge.
If a 4000 hp engine can "twist a Mustang into a spin" how come Tiger Destefani won the race in a Mustang with the standard prop? How about Rare Bear, September Fury ?
Althought the torque issue is real, the use of the contra prop is due to TANGENTIAL PROPELLER LOSS? check it out morons.
canals22 2 years ago
i looked it up, and you are correct, but really is it so nessiary to be a dick about somthing i didnt know, that you did.... now that i know what your talking about, i can take that into consideration...., contra rotating props, exuse me if i mixed that up with counter rotating props, but calling people morons, and wanabees, makes you... look just as stupid, if not more stupid than me, mostly since, im not trying to sound like an expert.
angryace13 2 years ago
thats one hella modded p-51 nice but thats almost to the point of not being a p-51 with the small cockpit and duel props
nicksf1 2 years ago
with the stock engine with too rapid of throttle application, the torque and power of the engine would twist the mustang into a spin, and in worse case sinaros at low speeds, go into a tail spin! emagine having 4,000hp which this plane has i think at the least 3,750hp, with a cut wingspan which at sacrafice for decreased drag, will decrease stability, the counter rotating props are i think for saifty reasons.
angryace13 2 years ago
i thought i would add somthing, the one reason this airplane has the counter rotating props, is primarilly for control, the stock p51 mustang without the cut wingspan and stock rolls royce packard merlin v1650 v12, with just 1,695hp, some of the reno racers with them suped up make about 3,000hp and still dont have counter rotating props, and this doesent look like it has the standard 1650cubic inch v12, it looks like the griffon which was closer to 2,000cubic inches, thats about 4,000hp
angryace13 2 years ago
ooh how stupid it says it right in the movie description, sorry everyone my bad, its a p51
angryace13 2 years ago
is that a mustang, or a spitfire? im not sure, beacuse the scoop below the wings where the radiator is housed, the shape of the wings, and the horizontal and vertical stabolizer, scream mustang, but the engine cowling, and counter rotating props look like somthing off those really late spitfires.
exuse spelling, aspergers syndrom effects how well i spell, and spell check isnt working.
angryace13 2 years ago
i love the sound !!
xboxlivegstar66 2 years ago 2
wow, that is a amazing sound from a rolls royce griffion with contra-rotating props
kd431 2 years ago 9
Only one man alive can fly that bird. Ron Buccarelli. On the edge.
Hodaka90 2 years ago
i could fly that bird if i had his kinda money
Spayne007 2 years ago 2
love that griffon sound - v much like a radial
burghill1979 2 years ago
There used to be a red P51 with the counter rotating props in miami back in the early 80s.
This setup allows you to use smaller diameter props.....or thinner blades.......or put more of the engine's torque for the simple reason of having more surface area to deal with.
The downside is that you also have more drag since you are pushing more blade.
Icepacalapse 2 years ago
you speak of the red baron. that was one bad ass plane breaking the 500mph mark. precious metal is beautiful too.
r32adt3db 2 years ago
That's it.....it was the red baron.
It was almost like the wild west out there back then.
Got away with a lot of crazy flying.
Icepacalapse 2 years ago
here is a good video documentary on here of the red baron when they were going for the speed record. you should check it out.
r32adt3db 2 years ago
Beautiful sounding machine.
Stuee13 2 years ago
why the hell do they have to sound so gorgeous? It makes me want one!
beastinblack 3 years ago
Is that a Rolls Royce Griffon engine?
gameraccounts 3 years ago 3
You bet!
ak4570 3 years ago
@ak4570
Are you sure it's not the Merlin?
axion9 1 year ago
@ak4570 OH GOD that sounds beautiful!!!
dvdk87 9 months ago
Ok, here's one for the experts: What's a "Mouse" engine? I assume it's a racing Merlin that's been lightened. Dwight Thorne and Dago Red feature in the story but what's the story?
MGB1977Red 3 years ago
the "mouse" engine was the type of merlin racing engine that dwight thorne (rip) built up. many have tried but none have made a merlin quite as high in MAP as reliably (still marginal at best).
vendetta81 3 years ago
This plane was destroyed when it flipped onto its back during a landing.
devil952 3 years ago
No it wasn't. That was a new-build Allison-engine P-51A replica painted to resemble "Precious Metal" for a straight-to-video movie called "Thunder Over Reno." The accident was at Oshkosh a couple of years ago.
AceWalkerAstronaut 3 years ago
I think the aircraft you're talking about was another "Precious Metal", which used to be located at the Fargo, ND air museum. It can be distinguished from the one in this video by the absence of a contra-rotating propeller system, and an early P-51B canopy..
Other than that, it has the same paintjob and the amazing spirit of the P-51; a true plane that will never be forgotten.
Correct me if I'm wrong.
nuclear944 2 years ago
Dago Red holds the course record at 507 mph, I was on the field watching when he did the qualifying run. Precious metal was in the hangar during those years, they pulled her out for a quick tease every now and then, but she didn't race for a while. Those two birds and white lightning are my absolute favorites.
NevadaWrangler 3 years ago
OMG sounds like something out of Star Wars as it goes by. What an amazing machine
pisby1 3 years ago 3
Anybody knows how these double props function? I guess because of swirl the second one has less pitch or a lower rpm, correct?
liobeking 3 years ago
its helps stable the aircraft when landing/taking off with all that power and increase in maneuverability
dj8work 3 years ago
partially correct, it does cut down a great deal on torque, known as "p factor". but it doesn't enhance maneuverability. the main purpose is to cut down the length of the prop to keep them from going supersonic.
vendetta81 3 years ago
Hmmm ... nearly there!
'p factor' = asymmetric thrust in a climb (or descent), as a result of an upgoing propellor blade having a different angle of attack than a downgoing blade. Therefore contrarotating props will reduce 'p factor' as there will be some blades going up and some going down on both sides of the plane.
However 'p factor' is NOT the same as torque, which is a rotational force applied through the propellor-shaft by the engine.
Contra props reduce both effects, AND tip speed!
RealDocAndPilot 3 years ago
I was aware of p-factor being cut down, but not torque. Does that have a negative effect on performance?
Chopin742 3 years ago
Nice question vendetta81!
Perhaps an engineer could correct me if I'm wrong (since I'm just a pilot myself), but my belief is that since torque is a vector quantity (ie direction matters), if both props swing in opposite directions at the same speed then the combined torque is completely cancelled, ie net torque = 0.
Performance - difficult question! As you alluded to, side effects are reduced. In addition, slip stream effect is reduced. However there is a weight & complexity penalty.
RealDocAndPilot 2 years ago
Thank you very much=) , you sent it to me. I saw Vendetta's name, but realized you were answering my question.
Chopin742 2 years ago
In addition, wouldn't there be a higher risk of equipment failure? In the past counter rotating props have caused major problems; Northrop's XB-36 and Hughe's XF-11. Both air craft had serious problems with the machinery that went along with the counter rotating props.
243rem 2 years ago
I think you mean XB-35. The XB-36 never had contra props.
n1ckb99 2 years ago
You are correct. The counter-rotation does cancel much of the 'left pull' of a giant single-prop, does give more surface area for the engine to drive and there are also efficiencies gained by the the direction of the air from the first prop as it flows to the 2nd prop. But, the air is a complete mess between the props as expected. In the end, it is one giant egg-beater with more blades, and can 'cut' through more stuff.
Amazing engineering. Just think about what goes into making all of this work
Maxwell2323 2 years ago
Oh sorry Chopin 742, I replied to your question thinking it was from Vendetta81.
Please read the reply with first line "Nice question Vendette81" and see if you have any other questions.
RealDocAndPilot 2 years ago
The second prop is on a reduction gear, but it cancels out any left turning tendencies due to torque.
atmosphotography 3 years ago 2
Incorrect. The rear prop is on an epicyclic gear to make it spin reverse of the crankshaft. Both props rotate at the same speed.
GGigabiteM 2 years ago
The pilot can do 500mph when he has altitude, full power, and pitches down.
wingsfan2520 3 years ago
Back in 1988 I was working at a company in Salinas CA, building up a set of Mustang wings that ended up on Precious Metal for the Reno air races that year. Coming down the start chute for the final race, an engine or prop gov. failure caused him to MAYDAY and Bob Hoover told him to dump it in the dry lake bed since he couldnt make the runway (due to the drag). Seconds later there sat the wings we had worked so hard to finish. Belly landed and crumpled in the desert dirt. Ah.......Memories!
glydrjocky 3 years ago 2
How many mph does it do? If anyone knows inform me please...
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
The best race speed I could find over the years was 407mph...410mph qualifying lap in 2007.
ak4570 3 years ago
But that is quite slow for reno admittedly, and the Griffon is quite powerful, suits the aircraft well...strange, I was expecting something like 430 mph at least. Thank you for informing me!!! :-)
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
453 mph Precious Metal qualified at in 1988 and 442 mph in '81. All this info is in the race database on the Reno Air Race main website. The database is easy to search, try it out!
FwAnd109 3 years ago
Take a look at the 08 speeds. 483mph = Strega
wingsfan2520 3 years ago
The pilot said he can do 500mph any time he wants to.
veteran7821 3 years ago
Yes, but then why did he do a maximum of only 410 mph over so many years?? :-)
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
Beats the heck outta me...ask the pilot.
veteran7821 3 years ago
Haha, right...:-)
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
when u over power the engine, the consequences are not realy good ;D
gustavonamme 3 years ago
I know that... usually you end up with a blown engine or something like that... :-)
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
It's a Griffon from a Shackleton, a Griffon 57A I would say...veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeery nice sounding aircraft...could go even faster by clipping another 3 feet from it's wings!!!
Irvine5312x6ma 3 years ago
IF they approached PM the same as Randy Scoville did on the RB-51.Griffon 58 from a Shackleton using a Griffon 64 crankshaft because of the additional counter weights,Griffon 57 connecting rod and piston assemblies.Griffon 64 blower was grafted onto the 58 crankcase.Space restraints would not allow the use of the 64 carburettor,therefore the intake elbow from a Mk. XIX Spitfire was modified and turned 180*.Bendix PR-58 carb from a C series P&W R-2800 was mounted on top of the modified elbow.
RickGerald 3 years ago
It was not difficult to reflow the PR-58 for Griffon.Large scoop on top of the cowl supplied induction air. The camshafts were modded by grinding base circle thus yielding additional lift,the timing was left stock. The profile was modified to allow a gentler lift off the seat and a similarly gentler closing for both intake and exhaust valves.Propeller mods included removing 6 inches from the tip of each blade,re-twisting the blades and modified governor springs and bob weights for increased rpm.
RickGerald 3 years ago
more to the point, with all this knowledge...i think you need a job on the race team!
juzzi07 3 years ago
I have my own trucking business. As far as Reno is concerned, I live about a days drive from there. The Budweiser hydroplanes are racing boats (unlimited) One or two of them were Griffon powered. Many of these boats used the Allison, and the Merlin. The big problem with boat racing is how the prop loads, and unloads the engine as it hits, and looses bite in the water. On the Griffon, the shaft driving the supercharger would snap when the engine was reloaded. This is what brought down the RB-51.
tz138 3 years ago
Awesome sound! Is this setup out of a Shackleton? When will this aircraft meet its full potential and race in the gold like the Red Barron? Perhaps set a new speed record...
tz138 3 years ago
Thats what the setup looks like, just to fit a p-51 frame. It would be great to see this plane in the gold, but the Red Barron was more modified, since it had the swept back wings, making it faster than Precious Metal. Although Precious Metal is still one unique and beautiful machine that is like the Red Barron's descendant, making a record a possibility!
erad5 3 years ago
I had not paid much attention to the diffences it the wings, haven't seen many pictures from a good angle for this. I wonder if the Red Baron had a set of Duane Egli's custom made wings? The era would be correct. I didn't look at the radiator housing to see if that was Duane's design either. I believe the contras were also used in a few late Spitfires, Seafires, as well as the Spiteful, and Searfang.
tz138 3 years ago
Yea, there's a video called "reno air race flyby" that shows the Red Barron in its later days as "Miss Ashley II", the video is in the related vids. There you can get a view of it, but it goes sorta low so its swept wings are harder to see.
erad5 3 years ago
The video; "Steve Hinton World Air Speed Record Attempt 1979-Red Baron"; shows a relatively stock wing, but clipped. The aircraft is being towed from the hangar on the record setting day. (film shot from the roof looking down) The P-51D was modified in 1966 and I believe the Griffon was installed in 1974 when it was named the Red Baron. The Baron was completely destroyed during the 1979 Reno air races. Perhaps the supercharger failure (common for Griffons)of the Baron holds back Precious Metal.
tz138 3 years ago
The video; "Steve Hinton World Air Speed Record Attempt 1979-Red Baron"; shows a relatively stock wing, but clipped. The aircraft is being towed from the hangar on the record setting day. (film shot from the roof looking down) The P-51D was modified in 1966 and I believe the Griffon was installed in 1974 when it was named the Red Baron. The Baron was completely destroyed during the 1979 Reno air races. Perhaps the supercharger failure (common for Griffons)of the Baron holds back Precious Metal.
tz138 3 years ago
Miss Ashley II and the RB-51 are not the same. The RB-51(Red Baron) was destroyed back in '79. The Miss Ashley II is using the Griffon engine with the contra's out of the Shackleton but the wings are the wings off of Vendetta, Learjet's I believe..
RickGerald 3 years ago
I didn't believe the RB-51 was rebuilt. The combination does seem to be an interesting way to go, with the Barons' speed record. I would explore some of the Budweiser hydroplane Griffon modifications if I was racing this setup. The oiling modification probably promotes better bearing lubrication, the supercharger shaft could drive another oil pump for the prop/gearbox, and the twin turbos could not snap off that pesky drive. The aircraft would look strange with headers on it though!
tz138 3 years ago
would be an interesting cowl set-up to say the least!
juzzi07 3 years ago
I would leave the headers exposed, as well as the turbos for cooling purposes. Where would one install the air to air aftercooler? Sorry if I bumped the ratings trigger, it is possable that I gave you a bad rating accidentally.
tz138 3 years ago
yes i copped a -1....
air to air aftercooler in chin radiator? Wing mounts? Then you have considerable drag to worry about.
juzzi07 3 years ago
Sorry about the -1! Yes, that would be an issue. perhaps a small inlet up front behind the props. At speed, the airflow needed over a charge air cooler would not be a lot to get the job done, especially if the turbos were exposed enough to keep them "cool", say under 600 Degrees on the pyrometers. Turbos hidden by cowl would likely melt internally if kept from getting enough airflow. (they have been known to melt in semi trucks with similar boost settings)
tz138 3 years ago
could a set-up be rigged with a large single-turbo ala P-38 Lightning to keep the clean lines of "Precious?"
I'm almost certain that's a Shack set-up also - Griffon 58 with contra-props - don't count me on that.
juzzi07 3 years ago
Perhaps, but the Budweiser hydro team set up twin turbos on their Griffon powered boat. I was looking at the performance capability, a Griffon will ingest much more air than an Allison. The large turbo would have to be twice the size to achieve the needed boost. I would run two systems, one on each side to reduce plumbing issues. Smaller turbos respond faster, and are more practacal. Yes, it is likely a Griffon 58.
tz138 3 years ago
I haven't seen the Budweiser plane...maybe cause i'm an Aussie!!
You're right the 58 would suck alot more than the V-1710.
Small twins would be great ... glowing headers out in the breeze. Maybe the additional whoosh of the two huffers can outdo the drag issues with pure power.
Imagine screamer pipes aswell?
juzzi07 3 years ago
I own and operate my own truck. Go all over North America. I even have what you would call "roo bars" (a moose stopper bumper) on the truck. Right now, I am in the Dallas, Tx. area. I would not have time, or be logistically available to work on one of these. I do fiddle around with old Muscle cars; have had or done interesting things to engines. Squeeze more power, lubricate better, etc. Those old engines were a wonder for their time, but real junk by today's standards.
tz138 3 years ago
I haven't seen the Budweiser plane...maybe cause i'm an Aussie!!
You're right the 58 would suck alot more than the V-1710.
Small twins would be great ... glowing headers out in the breeze. Maybe the additional whoosh of the two huffers can outdo the drag issues with pure power.
Imagine screamer pipes aswell?
juzzi07 3 years ago
I am not sure what a screamer pipe is. I believe these fighter engines have lubrication issues. On the Ford 351 Cleveland, (automobile engine used in the Mustang Mach-I muscle car, etc) new oil galleys can be drilled , others being plugged, greatly improving lubrication. Metallurgy is also likely an issue. Perhaps some modifications would make the unlimiteds safer and more reliable. Perhaps someone important is reading these discussions.
tz138 3 years ago
They also want to name his rebuilt A model "Gerry's Dream." Having seen his A model at Flying Cloud in 06, it was truly a testament to his hard work and craftsmanship... It is quite amazing how he put that thing together from plans alone. He was an amazing man.
Sprebound 3 years ago
wow!!!!!
MTFDarkEagle 4 years ago
Indeed, he was a great asset to the warbird community, an amazing man and he will definitely be missed.
Sprebound 4 years ago
Correct, the plane that crashed at Oshkosh was not the true Precious Metal. Gerry Beck made a P-51A "Kit" plane and had it painted to resemble the paint scheme of this plane for a movie called Thunder Over Reno. The only likeness between the two is the neon green wings. Gerry Beck was an amazing man and it is sad that he is gone.
Sprebound 4 years ago
I was in the Atlanta airport when I saw the CNN photo of the Gerry Beck Oshkosh crash. I thought immediately that it was the PM plane not knowing about the Thunder Over Reno movie replica paint scheme. It is sad to see any pilot death and plane crash. RIP
grimesinma 4 years ago
Except that it wasn't a "kit" plane. It was a P-51A made by Gerry from the original North American drawings.
FiveCentsPlease 4 years ago
Correct, this plane wasn't a kit, which is why I put it in quotations. Gerry actually had intentions of making a 1/1 scale kit from this plane though. There are plans for his A model to be restored, but only time will tell...
Sprebound 3 years ago
I believe Gerry's hard work has laid the foundation for a production run of P-51A models-which is what I think you are referring to as kits. Or, is this similar to the FlugWerk Fw190 "kits", which allow lower insurance through owner final-assembly? Gerry's loss was sad, but I'm glad that his aircraft will be rebuilt. I believe I've read that the A-model production will continue at his shop.
FiveCentsPlease 3 years ago
Yep, that is what I am referring to. He was talking to myself and some fellow CAF-MN guys at the Flying Cloud Airshow in 06 and he wanted to set it up so as a kit meaning that a certain percentage of the plane was prefabbed (I think it is 50% but don't quote me on that.) The rest would be shipped in pieces for the builder to put together. Basically what you were talking about with the Fw190s. His wife (post-Oshkosh) did say that they do plan on continuing this idea.
Sprebound 3 years ago
I believe that this is the plane that crashed at this year's Oshkosh Air Show.
grimesinma 4 years ago
Correction: The P-51 that crashed at Oshkosh was not this plane.
grimesinma 4 years ago
Rest In Peace. Wish you were still flying
iSelltohunters06 4 years ago
This plane is still flying. The plane involved in the accident at Oshkosh was a P-51A that sported a PM paint scheme for the movie Thunder Over Reno. Blue skys Gerry Beck.
ak4570 4 years ago
R.I.P
fholbe