Aircraft Engines | From Propellers To Turbojets, To Supersonic Passenger Jets | A Video Collection

DroneScapes
DroneScapes
2,958,850
0
Published 2023-11-05
A video collection about aircraft engine evolution.
Learn about WW2 engines, and the first turbojet engines, all the way to commercial supersonic jets, like the Tupolev Tu-144, and the Aerospatiale BAC joint venture, the magnificent Concorde

Join this channel to support it:
youtube.com/channel/UCTTqBgYdkmFogITlPDM0M4A/join
Click the link to watch more aircraft, heroes, and their stories, and missions: youtube.com/@Dronescapes

The story of how the Rolls Royce Merlin engine equipped the extraordinary P-51 Mustang and the evolution of the Focke-Wulf Fw 190's engine, all the way to the story of the first functioning centrifugal turbojet in April 1937, Frank Whittle's creation.

The Rolls-Royce Merlin is a British liquid-cooled V-12 piston aero engine of 27-litres (1,650 cu in) capacity. Rolls-Royce designed the engine and first ran it in 1933 as a private venture. Initially known as the PV-12, it was later called Merlin following the company convention of naming its four-stroke piston aero engines after birds of prey.

After several modifications, the first production variants of the PV-12 were completed in 1936. The first operational aircraft to enter service using the Merlin were the Fairey Battle, Hawker Hurricane, and Supermarine Spitfire. The Merlin remains most closely associated with the Spitfire and Hurricane, although the majority of the production run was for the four-engined Avro Lancaster heavy bomber. A series of rapidly-applied developments, brought about by wartime needs, markedly improved the engine's performance and durability. Starting at 1,000 horsepower (750 kW) for the first production models, most late-war versions produced just under 1,800 horsepower (1,300 kW), and the very latest version as used in the de Havilland Hornet over 2,000 horsepower (1,500 kW).

One of the most successful aircraft engines of the World War II era, some 50 versions of the Merlin were built by Rolls-Royce in Derby, Crewe, and Glasgow, as well as by Ford of Britain at their Trafford Park factory, near Manchester. A de-rated version was also the basis of the Rolls-Royce/Rover Meteor tank engine. Post-war, the Merlin was largely superseded by the Rolls-Royce Griffon for military use, with most Merlin variants being designed and built for airliners and military transport aircraft.

The Packard V-1650 was a version of the Merlin built in the United States. Production ceased in 1950 after a total of almost 150,000 engines had been delivered. Merlin engines remain in Royal Air Force service today with the Battle of Britain Memorial Flight, and power many restored aircraft in private ownership worldwide.
During his spare time on the squadron and at CFS Frank Whittle gave much thought to the application of the internal combustion turbine as a means to drive the aeroplane propeller. As others had before him, he soon discovered that the levels of component efficiency in any suitable gas turbine engine would be dauntingly difficult to achieve. And then, as he would say in later life, “the penny dropped” and he perceived the possibility of using the high velocity/high mass flow exhaust to obtain propulsion by reaction. In doing so, he was dismissing the altitude limitations of the internal combustion engine and the speed limitations of the propeller. A practical form of turbojet was borne. An entirely new horizon for aeronautics was about to materialize.
Whittle worked on the business of the design of an engine with a potential thrust sufficient to propel a small airplane at very high speeds and at very high altitudes. He settled on an arrangement that incorporated a two-stage centrifugal compressor and a two-stage (Curtis) turbine.

He showed his idea to the station commandant, Group Captain Baldwin, who, perceiving strategic importance and a need for secrecy, sent him to be interviewed by the engine division at the Air Ministry. They in turn, arranged for him to meet Dr A A Griffith at the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE). Griffith had started seriously considering gas turbines for propeller-driven aircraft as early as 1926. In a meeting of considerable consequence, Griffith rejected Whittle’s proposals and convinced the Ministry that the idea did not warrant any further attention. Unfortunately, Griffith had his own agenda. He would have known full well that he would be instructed to work on the turbojet should he admit any serious practicality. Despite this setback, Whittle went ahead and applied for a patent – granted in January 1930. However, as the President of the Air Council declared that there was no need for secrecy, it was published in 1931.

#aircraft #p51mustang #fw190
All Comments (21)
  • @DaVinci0963
    It's rather sad that two great men, Frank Whittle and Nicola Tesla, were betrayed by so many, including the governments they dedicated their patriotism to. God Bless these great men.
  • @GTGibbs
    I love this channel. I was taught so much about the various airframes of WWII. By a Tutor that I had for a few years around 1958-1961 ish. That early on knowledge turn into a passion throughout my life. That and my Stepfather was the owner of two C-47/DC-3’s and a Beachcraft twin that seated around 10? Passengers that took flights from Las Vegas to the Grand Canyon. Nevada Airlines. All of this past makes me very grateful for channels such as this.
  • @BillDeFalcoGFE
    The narrator incorrectly referred to the Grumman F4F as the Hellcat when in fact the F4F was the Wildcat. The much-improved version of the F4F Wildcat was the F6F Hellcat.
  • @AutonomousVII
    6:47 The little footsteps and odd random noises in these old black and white reels are hilarious.
  • @informationcollectionpost3257
    Enjoyed this video that took three days with roughly 3-1hr sessions to finish. My aunt's worked in the aviation industry both in jet engine blades and in aircraft manufacturing. I have worked briefly in the aviation field. Good to know the history behind it all.
  • @DaVinci0963
    I'm just glad this film saw the light of day and is now on YouTube. This is a video you SHOULD share with your friends.
  • @steveseamans9048
    About 1 hour in: man!! Those late 50’s mechanics had their work to do. Very interesting video. My neighbor is a modern mechanic. I have to talk about the differences. Love the channel!
  • @rabidlenny7221
    I’d add too, that during the talk of radials being more reliable because of a lack of need to maintain coolant flow (which is completely valid by the way) Kurt tank, the designer of the fw190 remarked that he thought the bf109 was a race horse. But since this was a war, he wanted to build a warhorse. What I’m referencing is this: essentially all aircraft at this time were controlled by hydraulics. (Except noticeably not the Japanese zero, which was only cables, meant it was out classed at higher speeds) and for whatever reason did not have self sealing fuel tanks. So even minor hits would be problematic. Anyways, building a warhorse. Flight control surfaces controlled electrically. Not hydraulically. If it’s hydraulic, and gets punctured, that’s a loss of control authority. Electric? You can have multiple lines running to the control surface. One gets punctured. No problem. Warhorse, not a racehorse.
  • @KCLIBURN-mj9qx
    It most certainly is fascinating how the evolution of a disaster happens and Petter explains it as only an experienced and professional can. I love hearing the breakdown and listing of all involved factors and how some of the systems work. For me it does seem mind boggling all the knowledge that the pilots have to maintain and keep on hand all the time whilst at the controls. While not a pilot myself I love aviation and the planes and have since my military days. Shows and docs like this give me a newfound respect and admiration for their knowledge and responsibility. Keep up the good work, Petter. Add me to your fan list!
  • @Chris_at_Home
    I love watching this stuff. I’ve been around aviation for years. I was an avionics technician on P-3s 50 years ago. Then I worked at P&WA a couple of years on the assembly floor putting together JT-8s and JT-9s. I wanted to work in electronics and moved to Alaska and had jobs for over 30 years where I was flown all over the state in many kinds of aircraft including helicopters. One of the customers of the engines I worked on at P&WA was Alaska Airlines and I flew on them a lot to hubs where I got on smaller aircraft. I worked for a contractor turning up satellite communications for the FAA all over the state including ZAN which is the control center for Alaska airspace for a couple of years. Also worked on the microwave communications for the pipeline for 15 years. Most of the sites were only helicopter accessible to mountain tops. I’ve been to quite a few of the military radar sites also. I got paid to do some pretty cool stuff. Now I’m 70.
  • @dickdowdell5813
    The US Navy was biased towards the radial engine primarily because of its reliability, ability to operate with battle damage that would have brought down a liquid-cooled inline engine, and its ease of maintenance. Those were critical attributes when operating from an aircraft carrier and over water. Radial engines also evolved superior power to weight ratios than inline engines. The Army Air Force was less concerned about those positive attributes and valued the reduced frontal area of inline engines and its potential impact on drag. Frontal area was more a perceived issue than a real one. Liquid cooling provides its own drag penalties and both the radial-engined Focke-Wulf 190 and the Vought F4U Corsair benefitted from NACA radial cowling drag research to become two of the fastest single-engined fighters of WWII.
  • @paxwallace8324
    The Jackals of Mediocrity always encircle and nip at the heels of the visionary.
  • @user-cv8eh5yq5e
    Simon, Please, credit where it is due… we’re not lagging that far behind!! Please keep up your brilliant work and sense of humour! Best wishes
  • @meikasroom851
    In truth, the P-51c models were the most prevalent through the war. The very model flown by the brave men of Tuskegee. It was faster than the D model only just, but carried only 4 guns so it had less weight. Not only that the visibility was lower due to sharing the same body as its earlier A-36 and o.g. P-51 bretheren. The P-47 was also a MAJOR player in the war, often being called "the plane that won the war". These are great videos, a lot of people put a major emphasis on the P51D models but until later in the war most units just didn't have them yet.
  • @Ed-ty1kr
    All hype of inline engines in this video, yet the best aircraft of WW2 and post war piston engines were all air cooled radial engines. Such as Mitsubishi A6M "zero", Gumman F6F Hellcat, Fock Wulf FW190, P-47 Thunderbolt, B-17 Flying fortress, B-25 Mitchell, B-26 Marauder, B-29 Superfortress, all the way into the Vietnam war era with Douglas A1 Skyraider, and B-36 "Peacemaker" with its 6 radials and 4 jets that led to the B-47 jet.
  • @michaelfrost4584
    What a fantastic deco, thank you, keep up your great work 😊
  • @M.W.777
    I swear...this is the 8th time I've seen this already, and it keeps getting better, everytime I see it! Props❤‍🔥❤‍🔥❤‍🔥