Wing mirrors on cars

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Did he lie upside down painting ceilings or did he just tell others what to do? Working upside down deserves credit.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

My Golf Turbo diesel had a turbo which worked evenly from 2000 rpm upwards.

[TMS320]

"Pratt & Whitney R-2800 Double Wasp ... Variable-speed (in F8F-2, unified with throttle via AEC automatic engine control), single-stage single-speed centrifugal type supercharger"

There is a turbo variant - the type 73/77 - and out of over 15000 aircraft built only 700 are listed as using it.

The B-17 -

"Wright R-1820 Cyclone ... Nine-cylinder single-row supercharged air-cooled radial engine"

In the list of 40 or so variants, only two are turbocharged and these are not the most powerful.

However, when I look up the B-17 from another source, it is listed as having 1200hp engines, which happens to match the turbo versions.

Yes, I had agreed on that one. One comment is that "The P-38 was unusually quiet for a fighter, since the exhaust was muffled by the turbo-superchargers." This is a suggestion of something unusual.

That is not the confusion.

So this thread has prompted me to look deeper. It is a sign of maturity to inform or correct without making comments like that.

[soup]

Sistine chapel (the creation of Adam all that)? That was Michelangelo.

Do you even history bro?

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Doesn't interest me.

[soup]

Interests you enough to reply. Or do you just have 'reply Tourettes' ?

[James Wilkinson Sword]

Learn to quote context or f*ck off.

[soup]

Why ?

[James Wilkinson Sword]

So I know what you're referring to.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

So I know what you're referring to.

[soup]

I am referring to the "doesn't interest me"[1] nothing else; no wing mirrors, no tyres, no turbochargers

[1] And the fact that you were interested enough to reply to a post with "Doesn't interest me ".

[James Wilkinson Sword]

You quoted nothing before "doesn't interest me", so I couldn't see what didn't interest me. Learn to use a newsreader then come back.

[Vir Campestris]

Do the arithmetic. I did.

A 2-litre 4-stroke running at one atmosphere boost, 6000 RPM is a round

10kW.

I'm sure that's not the most you could get from its exhaust.

Andy

[Vir Campestris]

Unlike Boltar you have the references. I'd never heard of that.

And it gives us some useful numbers. They are able to recover 20% of the engine output from waste energy in the exhaust.

But there definitely are aircraft turbochargers in the modern sense. See my earlier reference.

Andy

[soup]

It really doesn't matter what (supposedly) doesn't interest you, merely that it interests you enough to post an (ironic) "Doesn't interest me" post.

[TMS320]

We know one beneficial effect of a turbo is noise reduction. Against the arguments about a turbo taking power away from the pistons it is necessary to wonder what effect the silencer box has on an engine. Rather than "waste" the energy in a silencer, it is bound to be better to extract it in mechanical form.

There doesn't seem to be any definitive information about what a silencer actually does but a quick scan suggests about 5% is taken off maximum power and that back pressure is actually beneficial/benign at lower outputs. Which suggests there is useful potential.

Yes, I realise now that I have looked deeper into aircraft specs.

[James Wilkinson Sword]

If you can't tell me what you're talking about and referring to, I can't be bothered with you. Learn the basics of newsgroups then come back to play with the adults.

[soup]

I am referring to you 'saying' "doesn't interest me", nothing else.

Similar to your "can't be bothered with you" and yet you continue to answer.

Oh and I am not replying to your "play with the adults" so have snipped that . Get the idea?

[boltar]

So lets see it then.

[boltar]

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between a turbine compressing intake air and a turbine directly driving the crank.