Ну его изначально построили с Мерлинами, а после войны когда Паккард вернулся к постройке машин, а Роллс-Ройсовские двигатели были значительно дороже то переделали под Аллисоны. Так что это уже после войны. А XP-40Q это еще в военное время.
Черт его знает, может это американский авиафольклор. Вот например что гугл показал прям с первого запроса. Это все с форумов:
The political crap over the Allison/Merlin swaps even went on into the Korean war. The F-82 "Twin Mustang" (more or less the siamesing of two P-51s sharing the same middle wing) originally had the same R-R Merlins as the single-engined fighter, but political pressure compelled the USAF to turn back the clock and refit the front-line plaes with Allisons, while the training models kept the Merlins. This resulted in the absurd and unique case of a training version of a fighter being faster and having a higher altitude capability than the one used in combat.
But it was a real surprise to many pilots flying the Twin Mustang that all of a sudden near the end of the war North American started fitting Allisons to the later marks of the Twin-Mustang again. Why take a step back was the question. The answer came from two sides: first of all, as I mentioned before General Motors who produced the Allison had a large stake in the shares of the Aircraft industry and was pushing at Congress that American made Engines should be fitted as standard. The second reason was that after the second world war ended Rolls Royce started charging a 6000 Dollars royalty fee on each Merlin that Packard made. In hindsight it's actually quite a little sum but for high command at GM it also was their way to get the Allison back into the air. However, development of a version of the Allison that could match the Merlin began to cost the company so much that the $6000 royalty fee looked like a dime in a bag in comparison. And Allison powered Twin Mustangs were plagued with operational problems as the complex synchronization of the Turbo superchargers persisted.
no subject
Date: 4 November 2014 09:02 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 08:43 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 08:45 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 08:56 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 09:00 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 11:18 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 18:36 (UTC)no subject
Date: 6 November 2014 18:14 (UTC)Вот например что гугл показал прям с первого запроса. Это все с форумов:
The political crap over the Allison/Merlin swaps even went on into the Korean war. The F-82 "Twin Mustang" (more or less the siamesing of two P-51s sharing the same middle wing) originally had the same R-R Merlins as the single-engined fighter, but political pressure compelled the USAF to turn back the clock and refit the front-line plaes with Allisons, while the training models kept the Merlins. This resulted in the absurd and unique case of a training version of a fighter being faster and having a higher altitude capability than the one used in combat.
But it was a real surprise to many pilots flying the Twin Mustang that all of a sudden near the end of the war North American started fitting Allisons to the later marks of the Twin-Mustang again. Why take a step back was the question.
The answer came from two sides: first of all, as I mentioned before General Motors who produced the Allison had a large stake in the shares of the Aircraft industry and was pushing at Congress that American made Engines should be fitted as standard.
The second reason was that after the second world war ended Rolls Royce started charging a 6000 Dollars royalty fee on each Merlin that Packard made. In hindsight it's actually quite a little sum but for high command at GM it also was their way to get the Allison back into the air.
However, development of a version of the Allison that could match the Merlin began to cost the company so much that the $6000 royalty fee looked like a dime in a bag in comparison. And Allison powered Twin Mustangs were plagued with operational problems as the complex synchronization of the Turbo superchargers persisted.
no subject
Date: 4 November 2014 09:51 (UTC)no subject
Date: 5 November 2014 08:44 (UTC)