Possible Alternate Jet engine pre-WWII

[sonofpegasus]

Just persuade György Jendrassik to come over from Hungary in 1936 and by all probability he and Power Jets will have a 1000hp plus turbo prop running by 1939!
Put one of those is a Spitfire and watch it go!!! Give one to Martin Baker instead of that horrible Sabre and maybe Valentine Baker survives with the MB3 becoming a great fighter.

 

[cloistered scholar]

It is possible that if the Coanda 1910 have been taken more seriously either jet engines or ducted fan might have been developed pre WWI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coandă-1910

My favorite idea is that it avoids incident and is studied by the French, who later adopted a similar configuration motor/engine instead of working on interruptor gears for airplane machine guns.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Just persuade György Jendrassik to come over from Hungary in 1936 and by all probability he and Power Jets will have a 1000hp plus turbo prop running by 1939!
Put one of those is a Spitfire and watch it go!!! Give one to Martin Baker instead of that horrible Sabre and maybe Valentine Baker survives with the MB3 becoming a great fighter.

An Earlier MB5 derived aircraft (that is designed for rapid modern construction and configured for faster maintenance with all of the latest tech) is one of my darlings of the WW2 aircraft what if's

 

[thaddeus]

The most likely pre WWII jet engine to fly is the pulse jet.

Pulsejet - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

got the book German Jet Engine and Turbine Development 1930-1945 by Kay, there were some interesting improvements tested on the pulse jets.

they found two pulse jets cancelled out some of the vibration problem, albeit they did not produce a doubling of the power/thrust (i.e. there was also some loss due to the tandem arrangement) but nonetheless there was an avenue to solve their worst problem.

also an extension of the exhaust found to solve power loss at higher altitudes.

think they would be quickly obsolete but it could provide Germany a crudely effective weapon for a time, a "pulse jet Stuka" as the manned versions were to carry 800-lb. bomb (but could never be made to work)

 

[El Pip]

that is the dream. I think it is more complicated than just throwing money at Whittle in 1930 though.

It's throwing money at someone else to develop Whittles idea that will get results. He was a great engineer but terrible at running a project or even a team.

 

[ArtosStark]

It is possible that if the Coanda 1910 have been taken more seriously either jet engines or ducted fan might have been developed pre WWI https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coandă-1910

I am fairly sure I have seen this discussed before somewhere. I don't remember the arguments but the conclusion was the despite superficial similarities the Coanda did not use a jet principle and would not have led to a jet engine in the 1910's. I will see if I can dig up the reference,

 

[Cryhavoc101]

It's throwing money at someone else to develop Whittles idea that will get results. He was a great engineer but terrible at running a project or even a team.

That was the issue - he was both the main brain and was running the project while struggling to keep the lights on

It was almost like it was a couple of boffins in a shed......ahhh boffins and sheds......um err anyways

Had his company been absorbed and or backed by the Royal Aircraft Research establishment in the mid 30s - Frank would not have had to worry about the other stuff and simply cracked on with the clever boffin stuff without having to make himself ill and hopped up on drugs etc

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

It's throwing money at someone else to develop Whittles idea that will get results. He was a great engineer but terrible at running a project or even a team.

Park him at RAF Halton with access to all its facilities, a decent budget and close supervision by someone close to Dowding.

 

[ArtosStark]

I am fairly sure I have seen this discussed before somewhere. I don't remember the arguments but the conclusion was the despite superficial similarities the Coanda did not use a jet principle and would not have led to a jet engine in the 1910's. I will see if I can dig up the reference,

Found it!

1910 Coanda 1 First Jet Aircraft

On page 21 of http://www.phys.ttu.edu/~cmyles/Phys5306/Talks/2004/Fluid%20Dynamics.ppt it states the following: "Coanda-1910 - a revolutionary aircraft in many ways. First and foremost, it is now being recognized as the first jet engine aircraft, making its first and only flight on 16 December...

www.secretprojects.co.uk

On rereading I was too harsh. The Coanda did use a jet principle, but whether it can be called a jet depends on your definition. Probably the best description in the discussion was that it was an afterburning ducted fan. Though you could probably get a way with calling it a motorjet. Coanda's contribution to aerodynamics was impressive and important, but I am not sure this was his best. It is pretty unsurprising that no one followed up his experiments with the Coanda 1910. As interesting as it is I am not sure there was anything practical there to follow up. Even if there had been the technology of the day was probably not up to the task.

 

[ArtosStark]

That was the issue - he was both the main brain and was running the project while struggling to keep the lights on

It was almost like it was a couple of boffins in a shed......ahhh boffins and sheds......um err anyways

Had his company been absorbed and or backed by the Royal Aircraft Research establishment in the mid 30s - Frank would not have had to worry about the other stuff and simply cracked on with the clever boffin stuff without having to make himself ill and hopped up on drugs etc

His ideas were very different. Before Power Jets was nationalized in OTL he was proposing that the government nationalize the entire British Aero Engine Industry into a single entity with himself in charge. He did not seem to lack for confidence.

 

[M79]

Oh certainly by the time they were flying the Gloster test aircraft the AM had sat up and finally taken interest in his work

What I am talking about is the earlier period when by contrast his work was not supported and in fact officially criticised resulting in the private backers not backing him as much as they had originally said

I am not suggesting Jet powered Spitfires in 1940..................god dammit who am I trying to kid here....yes.......I am suggesting Jet Powered Spitfires in 1940

View attachment 640713

(in nasal British accent) "Men, the only 'tube alloys' you need worry about are those required to make this damned bastard fly"!

 

[racevedo88]

I am fairly sure I have seen this discussed before somewhere. I don't remember the arguments but the conclusion was the despite superficial similarities the Coanda did not use a jet principle and would not have led to a jet engine in the 1910's. I will see if I can dig up the reference,

You are entirely correct. Which is why I said ”if taken more seriously” which could have led to the Development of the tech needed to at least have a workable ducted fan or possibly a jet. The problem is that no one took him seriously, and he didn’t help himself with some of the claims he made

 

[ArtosStark]

You are entirely correct. Which is why I said ”if taken more seriously” which could have led to the Development of the tech needed to at least have a workable ducted fan or possibly a jet. The problem is that no one took him seriously, and he didn’t help himself with some of the claims he made

Fair enough. Though considering it is debated wether he even ever got the thing off the ground (I am inclined to think not) it would be hard to generate interest in his design. In the 1910’s the number of people trying to create new and different flying machines is astounding. With many of them failing. It’s not surprising that one more didn’t garner much interest.