updates for Armstrong Siddley Terrier engines ......

[airman]

http://books.google.it/books?id=1RheQNq72R0C&pg=PA362&lpg=PA362&dq=Armstrong+Siddeley+Terrier+engines.&source=bl&ots=7KE7HE2MAb&sig=s3YDPbtirynqtPtYAD7GJ7cDUkU&hl=it&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result#PPA362,M1

Thanks to books of Google !
;D

nb: only a previews of book !

They speak of 1500 hp as power of output !

 

[Apophenia]

They speak of 1500 hp as power of output !

airman,

That 1500 hp rating is for the Deerhound not the Terrier. As these engines were contemporaries, it's highly unlikely that their ratings were the same.

In the absense of details other than potential applications (ie: heavy bomber for Deerhound, turret fighter for Terrier), we can probably assume that the relative size of these engines' namesakes is important. That's not to say that the Terrier would necessarily be half the size of the Deerhound, but that the former was simply smaller.

Since both engines were three-row radials, I'd postulate that either the Terrier featured a reduce number of cylinder banks with corresponding reduced output or the Terrier was a reduced scale version of the Deerhound (ie: using the same 3 row, 7 bank layout).

 

[joncarrfarrelly]

Terrier is generally listed as a two-row, 14-cylinder engine so... maybe it is basically a Deerhound minus a row?
The canceled Wolfhound was a 28-cylinder engine (4 rows of 7 cylinders) of the same vintage as the Deerhound.
(The Wolfhound name was later reused for an unbuilt 24 cylinder engine).

This is conjecture on my part, but maybe we have a family using the same basic structural components arranged in 7-cylinder units:
2 rows - 14 cylinders = Terrier
3 rows - 21 cylinders = Deerhound
4 rows - 28 cylinders = Wolfhound

?????????

Jon

 

[Apophenia]

Terrier is generally listed as a two-row, 14-cylinder engine so... maybe it is basically a Deerhound minus a row?

Thanks Jon. That certainly makes sense. The 3-view drawings of the Armstrong Whitworth F.9/35 submission (published in Air International and BSP) do seem to show only two rows.

It seems that the quoted "Armstrong Siddeley Motors" book and "Shorts Aircraft Since 1900" (which mentions an AW Ensign replacement design "with four Armstrong Siddeley Terrier three-row radial engines". pg. 341) are in error.

 

[airman]

Terrier is generally listed as a two-row, 14-cylinder engine so... maybe it is basically a Deerhound minus a row?

Thanks Jon. That certainly makes sense. The 3-view drawings of the Armstrong Whitworth F.9/35 submission (published in Air International and BSP) do seem to show only two rows.

It seems that the quoted "Armstrong Siddeley Motors" book and "Shorts Aircraft Since 1900" (which mentions an AW Ensign replacement design "with four Armstrong Siddeley Terrier three-row radial engines". pg. 341) are in error.

So Tiger IX of 850 Hp of AW27 Ensign was with 14-cylinders : Armstrong Siddley Tiger , i can only imagine that Armstrong Siddley Tiger was a modified Armstrong Siddley Terrier engine or no ?

 

[Apophenia]

... Tiger was a modified Armstrong Siddley Terrier engine or no ?

The Tiger was an earlier development (1931/32) than the Terrier. And the Tiger was an evolution of the even earlier ( '20s vintage) Armstrong Siddley Jaguar.

The Tiger had the same twin-row, 14-cylinder layout as the Jaguar but bored out and with a longer stroker (5.5 inches x 6 inches versus 5 inches x 5.5 inches).

The military version of the Tiger IX was used on the Whitley Mk I.

 

[JFC Fuller]

I was digging around for Deerhound information online today and came across the attached photos. The Whitley installation looks very clean- although that could just be because of the bare metal finish. I also came across this great site: http://www.designchambers.com/wolfhound/ListDeerhoundPictures.htm#Pics (the wider site is also interesting)

Wolfhound was apparently 24 rather than 28 cylinders and the Mk III 41 litre Deerhound should have produced 1,800hp at first.

 

[tartle]

If you search this board you will find stuff on the Wolfhound.
In nov 1965 I had the pleasure of having lunch with Lt-Col L F R Fell who was the chief engineer at A-S and was responsible for the development of Deerhound and Wolfhound engines... he joined from RR after development had commenced and had a hand in their redesign as Deerhound testing revealed problems. He allowed me to look through his old files.... I've just looked in one of my tea chests and would you believe it...there is some information on the Terrier. I'll scan the A-S docs when I have time.
In the meantime, you might recall how big a Wolfhound is and how small a Terrier will be next to it ... so it is with engines.
The Terrier is in fact a much smaller design which exploits the Meredith (RAE) and NACA work in connection with engine cooling drag reduction.It is a 14-cyl radial with a single stage 2 speed supercharger.... T/O bhp is 466 at full boost (+3.5 lb per sq in) and 550 hp on medium boost at full rpm Rated alt is 12,000 ft on full giving 450 hp and on medium supercharge gear 470 hp at a rated alt of 5,000 ft.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Thanks Tartle. That's interesting as Stewart S. Tresilian was apparently also ex RR and became chief designer at AW.

Your tea chests are a national treasure!

 

[tartle]

Great assets as tea chests allow the wholesale hoarding of paperwork!!
Tresilian worked on car design and became a friend of W O Bentley after his bankrupt firm was swallowed by RR. He had a hard time of it at A-S as the management structure and quality was based on autocratic control. He moved on to BRM after end of WW2 and designed a 2.5 litre 4 cylinder racing engine.... and was also involved in the famous V-16 engine. Tresilian liked more cylinders which explained why BRM were quick to embrace over square concepts.

 

[tartle]

So here is my 'teabag'.
The drawing on 003 is labelled F9/35 which is useful!
Cooling problems with the Terrier is likely to have been the reason for the cancellation of prototype aircraft during its construction.

 

[tartle]

Ah yes the Wolfhound was the middle size engine in a series of three... the largest being the Mastiff!!
The Deerhound 21-cylinder engine has 3 rows of seven cylinders,
the Wolfhound is a 28-cylinder engine has 4 rows of seven
the Mastiff is a 36-cylinder engine with 4 rows of nine cylinders. giving 4,000 hp
I have very faint diagrams that will have to be restored or redrawn before I can reproduce them but they are shown in various wing installations, some in twin coupled form. There is an intriguing diagram for a Hawker nose tractor installation of the Wolfhound.... could this be a version of the P. 1016 Tempest III?
The Mastiff was designed to give up to 4,000 hp from a bore 140 mm x stroke 170 mm; overall dia 52.5 in.
Only the Deerhound was built as far as I can determine.
.........tbc

 

[JFC Fuller]

This website claims there were two Wolfhounds, one pre-Tresilian and one post-Tresilian:

Tresilian's last piston aero-engine design for Armstrong Siddeley - only on paper, though some single cylinder work may have been done - was called the Wolfhound. Design work commenced in 1941. It was an advanced 6 x 4 24 cylinder radial engine of some 2600 to 2800 hp output designed from the beginning in power plant form. The name was adopted from a discarded pre-Tresilian era 28 cylinder 7 x 4 proposal.

Apparently the details on the latter come from a single sheet at the PRO, I am trying to get in touch with the website author in the hope of finding a reference so I can view the document myself.

 

[LowObservable]

Does the cooling arrangement have any relationship in principle to the Exe/Pennine?

 

[tartle]

Good question... the Exe worked so well and the Deerhund so badly! I had a similar thought a few hours ago..thought transference?... and have started looking at what drawings/photos are available.. will start sharing asap... in the meantime if there are any materials others have found... flag it up... 'together we are better".

 

[LowObservable]

While we're at it, wouldn't the Merkava 1-3 tank engine count as "pressure air cooled"?


http://www2.l-3com.com/cps/cps/1500_hp.htm

 

[airman]

Thanks tartle for specifications of Armstrong Siddley Terrier .
450-470 Hp , well probably if Armstrong Siddley F.9/35 was produced like prototype surely performance could be been worst than in project .

 

[JFC Fuller]

I have achieved some relatively happy hunting today and have managed to dig-up the following. In the first picture I posted in reply No.6 you can see the rear of an aircraft with the serial number K.4299, this was the Armstrong Whitworth prototype to P.27/32 (won by the Fairey Battle), the AW.29. The aircraft sustained considerable damage when it was forced to land with one of the main undercarriage wheels retracted. However, AW got a contract (subcontracted to AS motors) to repair the aircraft and modify it to fly with a Deerhound II using the forward flow cooling configuration. However, it was then found that the forward flow cooling configuration was unsuitable (one assumes overheating) so work was suspended. In the meantime Whitley K.7243 flew with the reverse flow cooling configuration utilising the under cowling air intake as seen in the pictures, this was apparently successful and it was decided to transfer this cowling to the AW.29 so that Whitley K.7243 could be fitted with a new installation using wing duct cooling.

This of course never happened, in part because AW were so overloaded with other work that K.4299 ended up being stored outside. But also the scope of required changes to the airframe and its limitations as a test-bed, compounded by a lack of Deerhound IIs, made the exercise not worthwhile. Then Whitley K.7243 crashed on take-off (nothing to do with the Deerhound) on the 6th March 1940 so it never got its wing duct cooling.

Apparently work on the Deerhound II was stopped after the crash of K.7243 but was restarted after in 1940 which is when the Deerhound III emerged only for that to be abandoned after the bombing of the ASM facilities on the 8th April 1941.

 

[tartle]

JFC... useful stuff there...I have a collection of nearly two dozen photos of the Deerhound engines...so I will go through them using a fairly close scrute and see how many versions there are. Certainly, at first glance, the cooling seems less sophisticated than the Pennine.

 

[tartle]

Whilst I am occupied on other stuff.. I thought this page from my AS tea chest might intrigue you..
it is a twin Terrier installation in what I do not know!

 

[JFC Fuller]

Tartle,

As ever, thank you that. That drawing is driving me nuts as I am sure I have seen a configuration almost identical to that just with Sabre's and I just can not recall what it was in. The various large bomber designs seem the most likely candidate.

 

[tartle]

JFC...you've reminded me of a thought I had earlier which faded away... wasn't there a great deal of scheming around 75 t0n and 100 ton bombloads to carry Barnes Wallis's big bombs? So Bristol, Vickers, Avro etc all came up with multi-engine aircraft around '42-43.
Now, if I had thought to search our own board... Bristol.

 

[JFC Fuller]

A whole range of companies studied 75-100 ton bombers, Handley page, Vickers, Bristol, and Avro. The whole exercise seems to have been a thought experiment rather than a serious programme.

I originally thought last night that this configuration could have been for that programme but the power output does not seem high enough. Could this just have been a generic configuration drawn up by AS engineers as part of study?

For instance, in Kew there is an RAE report about various possible configurations for cowlings and air intake layouts for the RR Exe, could this be something similar?

 

[tartle]

JFC,
The drawing for twin Deerhound was probably earlier (by a couple of years) than those projects so could be a generic installation as you suggest.
As I wrote previously some drawings need to be retraced as Xerox technology of 40-odd years ago wasn't upto capturing the detail.. but as a taster another in the series gives more power, 8000bhp; this is a twin Mastiff layout!You may just see the layout. I'll re-post when redrawn.

 

[tartle]

Stewart S. Tresilian (the S. is for Stewart- such a good engineer they named him twice!) was assistant to Rowledge and worked on R ngine, doing a great deal of the calcs for the engine. Keen on putting up revs for 1931 version and then 'sprint'. But he was a car man at heart and was attached to Elliott to do that... but also did torsional vib studies on the early Merlin to identify a solution to its problems in that area. His CV is here.
When he came back to Derby in 1945 he set up a 'private' design office and schemed an X-16 configuration engine building on ...hound experience, incorporating Crecy to give a 2,500 hp engine to compete with the Tweed turboprop.
He went on to leave RR and did a BRM engine.

 

[WJPearce]

Hello tartle,

What book is that scan out of, and does it have more on the Tresilian X-16 engine?

Thank you,

 

[tartle]

Hi WJP,
The scan is from the RRHT HS21-Crecy book. There are three pages about the engine..see below.

 

[WJPearce]

Thank you for the quick reply. I have that book, but the layout looked different in the X-16 drawing. It was because it was one of the fold-out pages and I did not realize (or recognize) it. Oops.

Awesome book by the way, and thank you for the additional scans!

Regards,

 

[tartle]

Easily done! When I stumbled onto one of the foldouts I went to index where the illustrations are listed and identified as foldouts... found others I did not discover while reading the book!
By the way ..I like your second website.. makes me envious of the positive attitude to certification compared with us.

 

[Nick Sumner]

There is an intriguing diagram for a Hawker nose tractor installation of the Wolfhound.... could this be a version of the P. 1016 Tempest III?

Hi tartle,

Not to be a nag-bag, but any chance you could scan and post this one?

 

[J.A.W.]

Derek N. James in 'Hawker an aircraft album' (1972) : lists "P.1016 Typhoon (Griffon) 1942 ".

 

[J.A.W.]

D.N. James also lists these Hawker projects..

"P. 1017 Single-seat fighter 1942
P. 1018 Light fighter (Sabre IV) 1942 Basis for Fury
P. 1019 Light fighter (Griffon 61) 1942 Basis for Fury
P. 1020 Light fighter (Centaurus IV) 1942 Basis for Fury"

Could the (un-nominated power-plant) P.1017 be the proposed Wolfhound machine?

 

[tartle]

Nick,
I shall be away from the tea chests for a few days... but will do then!

 

[alertken]

Mason's Putnam has no Wolfhound, does not mention PW 2800 (Butler/Air Arsenal), has Wright R-3350 and Fairey P.24 as unnumbered and has P.1016 and P.1017 as Griffon. Just to confuse us all.

 

[Nick Sumner]

Nick,
I shall be away from the tea chests for a few days... but will do then!

Can I be a nag-bag again?

 

[tartle]

Nick,
Still on my to-do list but doing the final edits on a book or two is consuming nearly as much brain space as writing them in the first place. Keep reminding me though!

 

[Nick Sumner]

Nick,
Still on my to-do list but doing the final edits on a book or two is consuming nearly as much brain space as writing them in the first place. Keep reminding me though!

I will! ;D

 

[Nick Sumner]

Bump!

 

[Nick Sumner]

Bump!

And when is your book due out?