I suppose it depends if you're going for separate blocks, or a monolithic block. The latter would certainly be more complex.Why would developing a flat engine crankcase would be easier than a V ?
I suppose it depends if you're going for separate blocks, or a monolithic block. The latter would certainly be more complex.Why would developing a flat engine crankcase would be easier than a V ?
I'm going to go diesel nerd on y'all right now, because I'm qualified to do it. The CAV rotary pump is a fascinating piece of engineering, but it isn't going to show up any earlier in this timeline - unless you can butterfly Vernon Roosa, a technician and inventor in New York City, into working on diesel generator sets a few years earlier. The CAV pump from the video is a license-built version of the "Roosa Master" pump introduced in 1947. The U.S. version found application on Hercules diesel engines, and were manufactured by the Harford Screw Machine Company - a company founded in 1871 by Christopher Spencer, who developed the Spencer repeating rifle prior to the US Civil War.ill admit its about 5 years after but you are getting jump im design work so possible an improvement?
this is about all i know about Perkins
The Lion could stand up to the pounding endured by high speed rescue launches without falling apart,Did I understand correctly that Perkins is currently producing a small diesel engine? Could it be used in a stretched Lloyd carrier? The Lion is similar to the Liberty in that the cylinders are bolted onto the block? I thought that the Liberty had a tendency to shake itself apart if subjected to a lot of vibration.
My Dad worked there from the Mid 1970's until he retired in the mid 90's.More security by confusion/obscurity!
Very interesting solution to the engine crisis, I’m annoyed that I didn’t think to suggest Perkins given that I’ve driven past their factory more times than I’d care to mention.
neeto didn't know that we had a tractor that used one of the Hercules engines from the 50sI'm going to go diesel nerd on y'all right now, because I'm qualified to do it. The CAV rotary pump is a fascinating piece of engineering, but it isn't going to show up any earlier in this timeline - unless you can butterfly Vernon Roosa, a technician and inventor in New York City, into working on diesel generator sets a few years earlier. The CAV pump from the video is a license-built version of the "Roosa Master" pump introduced in 1947. The U.S. version found application on Hercules diesel engines, and were manufactured by the Harford Screw Machine Company - a company founded in 1871 by Christopher Spencer, who developed the Spencer repeating rifle prior to the US Civil War.
At this time, the "H" series of Cummins engines were coming onto the market in the US. 6 cylinder, 14L displacement, about 165hp @ 1800 rpm.
Are you sure - I had pulled that up previously and the way I read it it was the gun carriage that was the basis of the prototypes not the gun itself?I'm afraid that I've been guilty of what Catholics call the sin of presumption.
So, Carden's original back of the envelope mentions using "our M/C gun". Which I presumed to be Machine Cannon, therefore the 2-pdr pompom. The tank sold to the Latvians with Vickers own 2-pdr in the turret which I've adapted onto the Carden A11 was also presumed by me to be the pompom.
Now though, having looked at the Osprey book British Anti-tank Artillery 1939, Vickers own 2pdr was an alternative design to the Woolwich 2pdr which eventually was put into production. Vickers own gun had orders of only 44, then the improved Woolwich design replaced it for an order of 812. So the Latvian tanks will have been given the failed to be ordered Vickers 2pdr, which makes sense as it would otherwise be the latest British army gear sold to a foreign buyer.
I think I can still handwavium the pompom as I still can't find what M/C stands for. Medium Calibre?
Anyway, just though I'd confess my sin.
Allan.
View attachment 602077
I wouldn't worry about that entirely reasonable assumption on the Vickers 2pd gun.
I think almost all of us were in agreement that it was a good idea to fit a Pom pom in the Matilda 1 and that level of consensus in a WW2 technical discussion is a rare thing on this forum
Clearly, the next logical step is fitting the Quad Pom-Pom to a tank.
That's my question. I really don't know.Could M/C be for Machine Cannon?