...
WI Messerschmitt had installed the motorkanon and propeller ABOVE the crankshaft?
How far would the thrust line be above the original?
How much would that shorten MLG legs?
How much would that reduce landing accidents?
If anyone will install the prop above the crankshaft on the DB 601/605 engines, that would've been the Daimler Benz. Had that happened, we'd have Bf 109s without front vision to speak about.
Shortening landing gears on Bf 109s means that they wheels also more closely together now, that will play havoc with ground handling, especially - it was the non-vertical stance of wheels that was to blame for the tricky ground handling of the 109s, as well as non-vertical stance of the U/C legs
That XP-77 profile explains the unique canopy shape. Rumour has it that Bell’s XP-77 suffered poor airflow over its tail feathers because the canopy’s rear half was sloped too steeply.
WI Bell installed a more gently-sloped aft canopy?
How much would that improve airflow over the tail?
I don't know about all of that.
What I know was that V-770 was a lousy engine before 1945-something, while even post-war was not regarded well. The British, German, Czech or Italian air-cooled Vee engines were far, far better.
Perhaps I was not clear enough in explaining when I suggested ROTATING a single-row, Wright/Continental R-1820, radial engine 30 degrees about its crankshaft. The crankshaft would still be pointed straight ahead, but rotation would center a gap - between cylinders - top dead center.
Then an offset PSRU raises the thrust line (er propeller hub) above the crankcase, allowing installation of a Motorkanon through the - raised - propeller hub.
The PSRU would still be bolted to the crankcase, though there might be an extra - engine mount strut - running straight back to the firewall.
That would've been off-set reduction gear. It was done, eg. on the Pobjoj Niagara engines, that were making 10% power the Cyclone 9 did. For the prop gun installation, it would've needed rotating engine so the cannon barrel clears the top cylinder. Obviously, Wright will need to make the reduction gear in such a fashion 1st. It will also mean that USA is actually manufacturing cannons for aircraft in said 1938 year. Perhaps too many techological novelties for an emergency fighter?
We might install a cooling fan, but it would be behind the engine, pulling air towards cowling flaps. Cowling flaps would only be on the sides of the fuselage - like FW109 or Sea Fury.
I like the idea of cooling fan. Quirk being that it is an another thing engine manufacturer needs to design and produce - all well for a fighter that will enter service in 4-5 years, but for an emergency fighter?