Re: Modern day propeller fighter - hypothetical

"John Bailey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 2 Dec 2003 20:05:13 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nev) wrote:
>
> >Some of the latest developments in propeller aircraft has
fascinated
> >me. It also brought up an interesting hypothetical question; mostly
> >when reading about modern day warbird replicas.
> >
> >1. Mission: Air superiority/dominance during WWII. Land based. It
> >should be able to clear the skies of any and all opposition at all
> >ranges and altitudes.
> >
> >2. Must be a propeller aircraft.
>
> Take one Kuznetsov NK-12MV turboprop giving 14,795 shp as used in
the
> Tupolev 95 Bear. With four engines the Bear gave: 575 mph (925 km/h)
> Ceiling: 39,370 ft (12000 m) For a single engine fighter, it should
be
> able to cruise climbing straight up.  An even more mind boggling
> configuration would be two NK-12MV's in a twin boom design, a la the
> P-38.
>
> The real value of this design would be using the TU-95's transonic
> counter-rotating propellers, which probably provide an upper limit
on
> speed.
>

Those sorts of performances I think were achievable with piston
engines.

The Luft46 web site lists a few German pusher prop aircraft that were
projected as replacements for then current Lufwaffe aircraft.
Achieving as much as 584 mph on an ordinary 1750HP Jumo 213 V12 piston
engine seems to have been accepted.

This scimitar prop aircraft is one of the fastest at 584mph.
http://www.luft46.com/dornier/dop252.html

The advantage would be fuel efficiency and the lack of refractory
alloys needed for the engine.  The cost of making high octane fuel is
exorbitant compared to make Jet fuel.

I recall seeing GE tested scimitar shaped pusher prop engines, I think
it was on a 727.