gray eagle
SOH-CM-2025
Last edited:
-
There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.
If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.
Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.
The Staff of SOH
Planes That Never Flew - America's First Jet Fighter
- Thread starter gray eagle
- Start date
CWOJackson
Charter Member
Thanks for posting! Some very interesting concepts in there; some I knew about, some I didn't.
Skyhawk_310R
Charter Member
Holy cow! I work for Lockheed-Martin and I never knew about the L-133 jet nor the L-1000 axial flow jet engine! What a terrible blunder and lack of imagination by the USAAF to reject out of hand both of those pieces of aviation technology! In looking at the shape of the airfoils I have some doubts it could really have been supersonic, but I have no doubt it would have been superior to the P-80 Shooting Star and any other jet that actually flew during World War II! It might well have been equivalent to the F-86 Sabre. The L-133 could well have been pressed into service had the Luftwaffe forged ahead with their revolutionary Me-262 and had it in large numbers prior to the Normandy invasion.
Of the two items that were never fielded, I think the engine was the concept that just should have been put into production. I actually think it would have improved the performance of the P-80 to the point where it could have held its own, if not defeated, the MiG-15's in Korea. The P-80's prime problem was inadequate thrust-to-weight ratio and that axial flow engine would have solved that problem.
It is ironic that the prime Achilles Heel for the P-38 in the ETO was the turbosupercharger's bad performance due to the cold weather. In the warmer weather in the Pacific, the P-38 feasted. Yet, that turbosupercharger was designed by the same man who designed that leap ahead engine. With the superior quality control and metallurgical technology in the American aviation industry during the 1940's (and horribly compromised in Germany due to a myriad of factors war related) I have little doubt that engine could have been fielded in 1944 with superior performance of the Jumo axial flow jet engines and with vastly better reliability. Perhaps also, it could have overcome the design flaw of the Jumo engine that required the pilots to advance and retard throttles at a very slow rate or else suffer engine stall.
Thank you very much for linking that video. I thoroughly enjoyed watching it and found it very informative!
Ken
Of the two items that were never fielded, I think the engine was the concept that just should have been put into production. I actually think it would have improved the performance of the P-80 to the point where it could have held its own, if not defeated, the MiG-15's in Korea. The P-80's prime problem was inadequate thrust-to-weight ratio and that axial flow engine would have solved that problem.
It is ironic that the prime Achilles Heel for the P-38 in the ETO was the turbosupercharger's bad performance due to the cold weather. In the warmer weather in the Pacific, the P-38 feasted. Yet, that turbosupercharger was designed by the same man who designed that leap ahead engine. With the superior quality control and metallurgical technology in the American aviation industry during the 1940's (and horribly compromised in Germany due to a myriad of factors war related) I have little doubt that engine could have been fielded in 1944 with superior performance of the Jumo axial flow jet engines and with vastly better reliability. Perhaps also, it could have overcome the design flaw of the Jumo engine that required the pilots to advance and retard throttles at a very slow rate or else suffer engine stall.
Thank you very much for linking that video. I thoroughly enjoyed watching it and found it very informative!
Ken