P 51 with a jet engine

Johnbr

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
6 May 2007
Messages
752
Reaction score
282
Does anybody have more info on it.
 

Attachments

  • P-51 with jet  engine.jpg
    P-51 with jet engine.jpg
    47.3 KB · Views: 463
Here's a display model from the North American factory model shop in Los Angeles, ca. mid-1940s. Flush NACA intakes were used for both the jet engine and the heat exchanger (instead of the bottom scoop).
 

Attachments

  • NAA P-51D Jet Composite sml.jpg
    NAA P-51D Jet Composite sml.jpg
    71.1 KB · Views: 453
circle-5 said:
Here's a display model from the North American factory model shop in Los Angeles, ca. mid-1940s. Flush NACA intakes were used for both the jet engine and the heat exchanger (instead of the bottom scoop).
Do you have a larger image? -SP
 
XB-70 Guy said:
circle-5 said:
Here's a display model from the North American factory model shop in Los Angeles, ca. mid-1940s. Flush NACA intakes were used for both the jet engine and the heat exchanger (instead of the bottom scoop).
Do you have a larger image? -SP

Steve, I will gladly send this to you via PM.
 
See here: http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2397.0

Regards,

Greg
 
circle-5 said:
XB-70 Guy said:
circle-5 said:
Here's a display model from the North American factory model shop in Los Angeles, ca. mid-1940s. Flush NACA intakes were used for both the jet engine and the heat exchanger (instead of the bottom scoop).
Do you have a larger image? -SP

Steve, I will gladly send this to you via PM.
Please do at stevepace43@gmail.com. Thanks so much!
 
Another pic:
 

Attachments

  • Forward_sweep_Mustang.jpg
    Forward_sweep_Mustang.jpg
    154.6 KB · Views: 426
From what I can surmise from NAA's C&P documents, the FSW jet-powered Mustang might have been proposed as NA-129, NA-131 or NA-136. -SP
 

Attachments

  • C&P page 8.jpg
    C&P page 8.jpg
    487.8 KB · Views: 429
Stargazer2006 said:
Another pic:
With serial number 44-73623 it falls into the NA-122 P-51D category. In fact, that serial number was assigned to a NA-122 P-51D airplane. -SP
 
Anyone have a high res of this image? -SP
 

Attachments

  • UlitimateMustang.jpg
    UlitimateMustang.jpg
    50.9 KB · Views: 469
This is the best I have:
 

Attachments

  • North American XP-51H fsw.jpg
    North American XP-51H fsw.jpg
    47.3 KB · Views: 109
I suspect that this belongs in the "what-if" forum. A few things make me suspicious:
- it doesn't look like a 60-year-old model or a 60-year-old photo.
- The forward-swept wing of this design suggests the influence of late-1945 German data, yet in 1944 the FJ-1/P-86 was in the works with a new fuselage mated to a P-51-derived wing and tail. When swept wings came into style, why would NAA even think about stepping backwards to a P-51-inspired fuselage rather than pasting them onto a fuselage derived from the FJ-1/P-86, the eventual route to the F-86? I could imagine NAA doodling around with this approach, but the pretty model and stand suggest a serious proposal to the AAF, which seems unlikely.
- The fuselage looks sort of P-51ish, but couldn't have had significant commonality with the Mustang, either aerodynamically or in manufacture. The cosmetic similarity to the P-51 suggests artistry rather than engineering.
- The fuselage seems too slender to accommodate any jet engine available to American engineers in 1945/46. Yakovlev fit Jumo-derived jets into (or under) a Yak-9 fuselage, but those were axial flow engines with a slimmer cross-section than the centrifugal flow engines used in the West during that period. This objection would be withdrawn if the jet turned out to be a turbocharger - the exhaust nozzle visible on the model seems atypical of jet engine installations of the period and more suited to the Variable Discharge Turbine as planned for the B-54.
- The wing trailing edge surfaces, on the drawing and model, are normal to the trailing edge, not aligned with the wing chord. This doesn't seem like a good arrangement and I question whether NAA's Drafting Dept. or model shop would depict it.
 
taildragger said:
- The fuselage seems too slender to accommodate any jet engine available to American engineers in 1945/46. Yakovlev fit Jumo-derived jets into (or under) a Yak-9 fuselage, but those were axial flow engines with a slimmer cross-section than the centrifugal flow engines used in the West during that period. This objection would be withdrawn if the jet turned out to be a turbocharger - the nozzle visible on the model seems atypical of jet engine installations of the period.

I think this was not problem with the early Westinghouse jet engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_FH_Phantom
 
Zizi6785 said:
taildragger said:
- The fuselage seems too slender to accommodate any jet engine available to American engineers in 1945/46. Yakovlev fit Jumo-derived jets into (or under) a Yak-9 fuselage, but those were axial flow engines with a slimmer cross-section than the centrifugal flow engines used in the West during that period. This objection would be withdrawn if the jet turned out to be a turbocharger - the nozzle visible on the model seems atypical of jet engine installations of the period.

I think this was not problem with the early Westinghouse jet engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_FH_Phantom

It wasn't. Westinghouse jet engines(J-30, -34, and the ill-fated J-40 & -46) had axial compressors. So did the GE J-35(actually, I can't remember right now a non-British or non-British engine-derived jet that had a centrifugal compressor). I think a P-51 with a jet engine would have the same J-30 engine the Ryan FR-1 Fireball and the McDonnell FH-1 Phantom had.
 
Tailspin Turtle said:
The P-51 with a jet engine was called the FJ-1 Fury.
I disagree. NA-140, the XP-86, was a swept-wing version of the USN XFJ-1 (NA-134) for the USAF. It was in no way similar to a Mustang. -SP
 
According to the books I've read NA-140 was originally straight-wing but later evolved to swept-wing configuration.
 
pometablava said:
According to the books I've read NA-140 was originally straight-wing but later evolved to swept-wing configuration.
That's correct. The USN chose to keep straight wings while the USAF elected to change to swept wings. This document might help. -SP
 

Attachments

  • North American Aviation, Inc..doc
    63 KB · Views: 90
Zizi6785 said:
taildragger said:
- The fuselage seems too slender to accommodate any jet engine available to American engineers in 1945/46. Yakovlev fit Jumo-derived jets into (or under) a Yak-9 fuselage, but those were axial flow engines with a slimmer cross-section than the centrifugal flow engines used in the West during that period. This objection would be withdrawn if the jet turned out to be a turbocharger - the nozzle visible on the model seems atypical of jet engine installations of the period.

I think this was not problem with the early Westinghouse jet engine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell_FH_Phantom

Okay, I hadn't considered the early American axial flow jets, but the fuselage of the model and drawings is very slender in the area where an engine bay would have to be located - the FH-1 wingroot and FR-1 fuselages appear to offer much more volume. Maybe a smaller engine (or a turbocharger) was planned, but I still question whether an engine in the class of those powering the FH-1 would fit.
 
circle-5 said:
Here's a display model from the North American factory model shop in Los Angeles, ca. mid-1940s. Flush NACA intakes were used for both the jet engine and the heat exchanger (instead of the bottom scoop).

If this is a jet engine why does it have exhaust stacks?
 
This photo of what is a wind tunnel model of the straight winged XP-86 (top pic) would suggest it was not related to the XFJ-1 but more like what is in the bottom photo.

The wing of this is from a P-51H as it is built all in one like a P-51 wing and carries through under the fuselage. The FJ-1 wings were separate and attached to the fuselage much like British manufacturing practice of the time. Also to access the engine the whole rear fuselage is pulled away, access/removal to the FJ-1 engine was through a hatch in the top of the fuselage.
 

Attachments

  • XP86Sized.jpg
    XP86Sized.jpg
    68.7 KB · Views: 337
  • XP-86.jpg
    XP-86.jpg
    16.8 KB · Views: 330
There is a whole series of photos on the sdas archives of the same model, but listed as the FJ-1 although the photo says 140 in the corner. A shame none of them are high enough resolution to read the left block of text.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4561362345/in/photostream/

There is also this naca document that I've posted before elsewhere which may very well be for this early fury. The 3-view looks similar and NAA later tried out the submerged duct in pretty much the same location on the YF-93.

hdl.handle.net/2060/20050061115
 

Attachments

  • submerged.png
    submerged.png
    80.8 KB · Views: 103
  • 4561362253_b4eabe410e_o.jpg
    4561362253_b4eabe410e_o.jpg
    54.5 KB · Views: 54
  • 4561992424_abcc1b94a4_o.jpg
    4561992424_abcc1b94a4_o.jpg
    50.2 KB · Views: 43
  • 4561992458_4dfae0eb78_o.jpg
    4561992458_4dfae0eb78_o.jpg
    48.6 KB · Views: 40
  • 4561362311_70da92feb0_o.jpg
    4561362311_70da92feb0_o.jpg
    40.3 KB · Views: 38
  • 4561362333_8d84c3dea0_o.jpg
    4561362333_8d84c3dea0_o.jpg
    41.1 KB · Views: 38
  • 4561362345_4b49ece822_o.jpg
    4561362345_4b49ece822_o.jpg
    41.7 KB · Views: 212
  • 4561362273_af931ac541_o.jpg
    4561362273_af931ac541_o.jpg
    31.3 KB · Views: 230
sienar said:
There is a whole series of photos on the sdas archives of the same model, but listed as the FJ-1 although the photo says 140 in the corner. A shame none of them are high enough resolution to read the left block of text.

https://www.flickr.com/photos/sdasmarchives/4561362345/in/photostream/

There is also this naca document that I've posted before elsewhere which may very well be for this early fury. The 3-view looks similar and NAA later tried out the submerged duct in pretty much the same location on the YF-93.

hdl.handle.net/2060/20050061115

That looks more like the XP-86 than the "tubby" FJ-1 proposed.
 

Attachments

  • Figure 5.jpg
    Figure 5.jpg
    417.9 KB · Views: 146
Yes it does, but note the wing folding indicated on the NACA 3-view

Although its far from certain that it represents a real design, let alone something related to the fury/86, but it looks very close to the model.
 
kitnut617 said:
This photo of what is a wind tunnel model of the straight winged XP-86 (top pic) would suggest it was not related to the XFJ-1 but more like what is in the bottom photo.

The wing of this is from a P-51H as it is built all in one like a P-51 wing and carries through under the fuselage. The FJ-1 wings were separate and attached to the fuselage much like British manufacturing practice of the time. Also to access the engine the whole rear fuselage is pulled away, access/removal to the FJ-1 engine was through a hatch in the top of the fuselage.

Hi
 

Attachments

  • img413.jpg
    img413.jpg
    130.8 KB · Views: 91

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom