Hawai Airport Piston Engine indentification question ...

[DONOTREPLY]

Can someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?

http://y23stockpic.free.fr/200608-hawaii50/n20060827_074431.html
As photographed on Hawaii's Oahu Airport ...

Really interesting info:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_engine

[weasel]

On Feb 19, 1:28 pm, "DONOTREPLY" > wrote:
> Can someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
>
Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
away.

(wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')

Wes

[JP[_1_]]

"weasel" > wrote in
egroups.com...
> On Feb 19, 1:28 pm, "DONOTREPLY" > wrote:
>> Can someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
>>
> Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
> away.
>
> (wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')
>
> Wes


No, that is not a Wright Cyclone. The engine in the picture is a double
cylinder row type, but it's difficult to notice at first. Look the lower
cylinder at seven o'clock and you'll see the front cylinder row push rod
arrangement in front of the cylinder. Look the cylinder left side of it, at
8 o'clock and you'll see the push rod tubes behind the cylinder. That's the
rear cylinder row.

How about some version of Pratt & Whitney R-2800:

http://www.enginehistory.org/P&W/R-2800-32W.jpg

Just ignore the supercharger unit and look the front part of the engine.


JP

[guy]

On 19 Feb, 22:15, "weasel" > wrote:
> On Feb 19, 1:28 pm, "DONOTREPLY" > wrote:> Can someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
>
> Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
> away.
>
> (wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')
>
> Wes

definitely looks like a 9 cylinder cylinder single row radial....

if the OP thought the radial link was interesting look at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine

:-)

guy

[Morgans[_2_]]

"JP" > wrote

> No, that is not a Wright Cyclone. The engine in the picture is a double
> cylinder row type, but it's difficult to notice at first. Look the lower
> cylinder at seven o'clock and you'll see the front cylinder row push rod
> arrangement in front of the cylinder. Look the cylinder left side of it,
> at 8 o'clock and you'll see the push rod tubes behind the cylinder. That's
> the rear cylinder row.

I don't see it. I vote for single row.
--
Jim in NC

[JP[_1_]]

"Morgans" > wrote in
...
>
> "JP" > wrote
>
>> No, that is not a Wright Cyclone. The engine in the picture is a double
>> cylinder row type, but it's difficult to notice at first. Look the lower
>> cylinder at seven o'clock and you'll see the front cylinder row push rod
>> arrangement in front of the cylinder. Look the cylinder left side of it,
>> at 8 o'clock and you'll see the push rod tubes behind the cylinder.
>> That's the rear cylinder row.
>
> I don't see it. I vote for single row.
> --
> Jim in NC
>

The black push rod cover tubes are visible in the picture. A double-row.
http://y23stockpic.free.fr/200608-hawaii50/n20060827_074431.html


I happen to own a small spare part inventory for this engine type (also for
P&W R-1830 Twin Wasp). Trust me. It's the R-2800 Double Wasp.


JP

[Blueskies]

"DONOTREPLY" > wrote in message oups.com...
: Can someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
:
: http://y23stockpic.free.fr/200608-hawaii50/n20060827_074431.html
: As photographed on Hawaii's Oahu Airport ...
:
: Really interesting info:
: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radial_engine
:


what the heck is the deal with the rest of the pictures in that series?

[Flash]

Definitely a double-row unit. Just look carefully at the ignbition leads
where they come off the mainn. A pair to the front cylinder, then a pair to
the rear - - count them, and you'll go for an 18-cylinder setup (Oh yeah, I
relize we can't see ALL of them, but from top to bottom of one side - looks
abought right ?)

Flash


"guy" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> On 19 Feb, 22:15, "weasel" > wrote:
>> On Feb 19, 1:28 pm, "DONOTREPLY" > wrote:> Can
>> someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
>>
>> Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
>> away.
>>
>> (wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')
>>
>> Wes
>
> definitely looks like a 9 cylinder cylinder single row radial....
>
> if the OP thought the radial link was interesting look at
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine
>
> :-)
>
> guy
>

[Tim Ward[_1_]]

"Flash" > wrote in message
k.net...
> Definitely a double-row unit. Just look carefully at the ignbition leads
> where they come off the mainn. A pair to the front cylinder, then a pair
to
> the rear - - count them, and you'll go for an 18-cylinder setup (Oh yeah,
I
> relize we can't see ALL of them, but from top to bottom of one side -
looks
> abought right ?)
>
> Flash
>
>
> "guy" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> > On 19 Feb, 22:15, "weasel" > wrote:
> >> On Feb 19, 1:28 pm, "DONOTREPLY" > wrote:> Can
> >> someone identify this radial aeroplane piston engine?
> >>
> >> Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
> >> away.
> >>
> >> (wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')
> >>
> >> Wes
> >
> > definitely looks like a 9 cylinder cylinder single row radial....
> >
> > if the OP thought the radial link was interesting look at
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_engine
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > guy
> >
>
>
Also, somewhere in the general vicinity is a plaque that says it is an
R2800.
Or there was in April, 2006.

[weasel]

On Feb 19, 2:15 pm, "weasel"
> Looks like a 9-cylinder Wright R-1820 Cyclone (G?) rather severely cut-
> away.
>
> (wouldn't bet the farm on it tho')
>
> Wes

My bad-

Yes, it's an R-2800, Pratt&Whitney 18 cylinder radial.
(It would've been nice if the second row was visible!!)

Wes

[Morgans[_2_]]

"weasel" wrote

> My bad-
>
> Yes, it's an R-2800, Pratt&Whitney 18 cylinder radial.
> (It would've been nice if the second row was visible!!)

Indeed.

It looks like the view of the picture in question, with the angle given,
makes it difficult to get depth of the engine.

If it was a straight on view, the offset of a couple second row cylinders
could have been seen and made it easy to identify the engine.

If the view had been taken at a 90 degree angle from the shaft, then the
second row could have been identified from the offset of crank main throws.

It has always been my view that technical pictures should be taken with
straight views, like a 3 view drawing. It is much easier to take
measurements from a 3 view, if you are interested in taking measurements for
reproducing the object as a model, or whatever.
--
Jim in NC

Angles like the picture given are best left for artistic presentations, as
was probably intended.