Alternate Bristol Engine Development (Mercury & Pegasus)

The Bristol Phoenix of 1928 was a fuel injected desal version of the Pegasus, so Bristol at that time had expertise in both compression ignition and fuel injection, opportunity missed.
I am not sure whether these designs used direct injection of injection into the inlet air supply. I think that the former is more efficient if done correctly but the latter system is easier to get functioning.
 
The difference comes down to diameter mainly, and I thought perhaps it would be useful to have a much smaller diameter engine of comparable power/weight/displacement for smaller airframes.
@LoftonHenderson A smaller diameter is a good feature to have, however, history have proven it is not impossible to fit a tall 9cl radial equivalent in a small airframe:
Curtiss-Wright_CW-21_%28photo%29.jpg
(Curtiss CW-21)
North_American_P-64_%2815953227600%29.jpg
(NA P-64)
maxresdefault.jpg
(Curtiss H-75)
XP-50-1.jpg
(Grumman XP-50)

The aircrafts above, particularly the H-75 and XP-50, proves that a >55in diameter is not a death sentence to a small aircraft design. At the end of the day, its up to the imagination and ingenuity of the great aeronautical engineers of the period to design an aircraft on whatever engine is available.

In the wise words of Ed Heinnemann, simply take the the most powerful engine available and designed the aircraft around it. The fact of that a 1400-1700hp engine would be available in the form of the proposed Andromeda makes the Andromeda junior proposition rather weak.

Why settle on designing a plane which uses a more complicated engine with limited power knowing full well that future twin-row engines would be getting larger and heavier? Yes, you can make the frontal area smaller but by how much compared to the fully fledged Andromeda? It makes more sense to use an uncomplicated 9cl Pegasus/Draco to make a light fighter or simply use the bigger Andromeda itself on a similar frame (See Bloch MB.157 below which uses the 51in Gnome-Rhone 14R engine):

800px-ArtImage_M.B.157.png

(Though 441mph seems to be a fantasy figure, I would no doubt believe that the airframe above is capable of nudging about 370mph)

Thus in all honesty, I'll just drop the Andromeda Junior engine. In a wartime situation, it would no doubt be the first to be axed as it not as simple as the 9cl Pegasus/Draco and not as powerful and future proof as the 14cl Andromeda. Not only that, the fact that if you have a late R-1820 equivalent, you can make these other aircrafts into reality:
Sikorsky_S-58_landing_%28cropped%29.jpg
S-2A_VS-29_CVS-33.jpg
maxresdefault.jpg
A-U.S.-Navy-Curtiss-SC-1-Seahawk-with-wings-folded..jpeg

1280px-NX670AM_Douglas_SBD-5_Dauntless_Bu_No_28536_Planes_of_Fame_Air_Museum_%28centered%29.jpg
Piasecki_H-21_%28modified%29.jpg
 
Last edited:
I definitely follow your logic, I agree that an Andromeda Junior wouldn't make sense. Thanks for all those great examples. OTL French and Japanese 2-row radials based on the Jupiter design were between 49.5 and 52", so I wonder if when designing the Andromeda engineers could have found a way to reduce the diameter by 1/1.5" or so? Also I wonder if I'm overestimating the weight. OTL examples were between 1100 and 1380 lbs. I just did a rough weight per cylinder calculation for Mercury and multiplied by 14 for Andromeda, but is 1550 too high? Maybe closer to 1400 would be a better estimate.

So we have:
  • Mercury development -- 9-cylinder single-row, 14-cylinder two-row, 18-cylinder two-row air-cooled 4-vpc radial engines with fuel injection and ideally 2-stage superchargers + intercooler systems
  • Pegasus/Draco development -- 9-cylinder single-row, 9-cylinder "over-bored" single-row, 18-cylinder two-row air cooled 4-vpc radial engines also with fuel injection and ideally 2-stage superchargers + intercooler systems
  • There's been some talk about a 16-cylinder Hydra with a center main bearing to fix the vibration issues (did Hydra have 2- or 4-vpc by the way?)
  • Also an 18-cylinder Orion, though I don't have details on it and I'm not sure what its niche would be
That's all coming from ALT Bristol (Roy Fedden + Bristol team, also maybe Sam Heron goes to Canada in TTL) so they've certainly got their hands full. That leads me into wondering more broadly about what's "missing." There's no V-12/24 engine in this lineup, nor any inline engines, water-cooled engines...etc. Let's say for the sake of argument you have available:
  • Frank Halford and Harry Ricardo
  • The de Havilland Engines team (though isn't that mainly Halford and Ricardo?)
  • The Armstrong Siddeley team
  • The Napier team (though isn't that also just basically Halford and Ricardo?)
  • Fairey
  • Frank Whittle + the Orenda Engines team
What should those groups be doing, and how could they be combined efficiently? Would a poppet-valve Napier Sabre make sense? Further development of the Napier Lion? Air-cooled inline engines from DH? A Fairey Prince/Monarch? A/S Tiger as a backup if the Andromeda fails, or to fill that smaller displacement niche (comparable to the Japanese Kinsei)? Obviously we know what Whittle/Orenda is working on...
 
You can always go with Richard Fairey and the H24 monarch engine.
300px-FAAM_-_Fairey_P.24_Monarch_-_251007.jpg

51.08 ltrs and 2000+ hp. some sources state that on 100 octane and higher boost it could have made 3000hp .
Basically two flat twelves side by side with contra rotating propellers.
Each halve of the engine could be operated separately.

Think of the Manchester flying with two of these in 1940, or the Hawker Tornado with 4x 20mm cannon in the Battle of Britain.
 
You can always go with Richard Fairey and the H24 monarch engine.
300px-FAAM_-_Fairey_P.24_Monarch_-_251007.jpg

51.08 ltrs and 2000+ hp. some sources state that on 100 octane and higher boost it could have made 3000hp .
Basically two flat twelves side by side with contra rotating propellers.
Each halve of the engine could be operated separately.

Think of the Manchester flying with two of these in 1940, or the Hawker Tornado with 4x 20mm cannon in the Battle of Britain.
You have a strange obsession with that engine.
 
What should those groups be doing, and how could they be combined efficiently? .....Obviously we know what Whittle/Orenda is working on...
I mean as soon as we are allowed hindsight then why would you not just spend 80+% of your efforts on the future and get a working jet engine?
 
You can always go with Richard Fairey and the H24 monarch engine.
300px-FAAM_-_Fairey_P.24_Monarch_-_251007.jpg

51.08 ltrs and 2000+ hp. some sources state that on 100 octane and higher boost it could have made 3000hp .
Basically two flat twelves side by side with contra rotating propellers.
Each halve of the engine could be operated separately.

Think of the Manchester flying with two of these in 1940, or the Hawker Tornado with 4x 20mm cannon in the Battle of Britain.

Fairey Prince or P.24 Monarch make sense to pursue, especially since OTL Air Ministry antipathy towards Fairey building engines is no longer a factor, although not sure Fairey would have the capacity to develop it successfully on their own. Maybe a Fairey/DH/Napier partnership?

I know the USAAC was not impressed with the P.24, and reported in 1941:
  • 'Performance is not out-standing nor are there any features that appear unusually advantageous'
  • 'recommended no action be taken towards the development of this engine'
  • 'two or three years development still remained before it would be ready for production'
  • 'only 25 hours have been run at 2000 H.P. or more, which hardly justifies the ratings given'
  • 'such a relatively low critical altitude that the Rolls Royce Merlin engine, series 60, weighing 580 pounds less, delivers 160 more horsepower at 30,000 ft'
  • 'there are certain objectionable features to the basic design, modification of which would entail considerable deviation from the present basic design. Some of these features may require a complete change in construction and hence would require considerable redesign rather than further development only'
Clearly if functional it would be an absolute monster and great for larger fighters/bombers, but I'm not sure what changes and further development it would've needed to reach that point. OTL Fairey lacked the resources and support, but TTL Fairey might be able to make it happen with some help. Given it displaces less than the Twin Pegasus (ALT Centaurus) but offers more power, it should have a lot of potential if developed properly.
 
I mean as soon as we are allowed hindsight then why would you not just spend 80+% of your efforts on the future and get a working jet engine?

Oh I didn't mean to imply hindsight. I just mean Whittle was always going to work on jets, he devoted his life to it.

Maybe "what would they be doing" (given what ALT Bristol is already doing) and "how might they have combined/collaborated plausibly" is better wording
 
Let's say for the sake of argument you have available:
  • Frank Halford and Harry Ricardo
  • The de Havilland Engines team (though isn't that mainly Halford and Ricardo?)
  • The Armstrong Siddeley team
  • The Napier team (though isn't that also just basically Halford and Ricardo?)
  • Fairey
  • Frank Whittle + the Orenda Engines team
What should those groups be doing, and how could they be combined efficiently? Would a poppet-valve Napier Sabre make sense? Further development of the Napier Lion? Air-cooled inline engines from DH? A Fairey Prince/Monarch? A/S Tiger as a backup if the Andromeda fails, or to fill that smaller displacement niche (comparable to the Japanese Kinsei)? Obviously we know what Whittle/Orenda is working on...
The Air Ministry had 4 approved aero engine suppliers. Rolls-Royce, Bristol, Napier and Armstrong-Siddeley. So let’s start with them.

You have already put work into Bristol, and RR is likely still doing fine as OTL. So that leaves AS and Napier.

Armstrong-Siddeley could use a new boss as their critical limitation was John Siddeley. Siddeley was a great businessman, which is why despite being one of many junior partners, his name remained attached to the company right up to the 1970’s. However, he was also an autocrat and quite technically conservative and risk adverse. The company was run more like a general engineering firm that did some aero engines than an aero engine firm. Their chief designer, Major Greene, was often limited in the options he could pursue and R and D was underfunded.

On a technical level, this means that AS has basically been coasting on derivatives of the RAF 8 engine that Greene and Heron had brought over from the Royal Aircraft Factory. They need to be able to develop, or at least use, more up to date components. And they need to stop trying to get by on relatively low costs adaptations of earlier designs while relying on lighter weight to increase performance. Specifically, the AS Tiger needs a third bearing and updated fittings. This would at least give you a backup for Bristol’s new engines.

Napier probably needs to be bought by someone. Their leadership is unwilling to spend and risk adverse. This has left both R and D and production in a terrible state. They really haven’t had much going for them since Arthur Rowledge left for RR. IOTL, it was English Electric’s purchase of Napier that revitalized the company. Moving that up would help. Callum Douglas had a post related to a poppet valved Sabre a while back which (IIRC) concluded it was probably doable though it would have larger dimensions than OTL. Alternatively if RR or someone similar bought them out they would probably be confined to non-aero work. This could be useful if it results in something like an earlier Deltic.

Then you have the non-Aero Ring companies. Fairey, De Haviland, Wolseley, Blackburn and the emerging jet enthusiasts.

Fairey, as mentioned, has some potential. They have a talented designer in Captain Forsyth and the Prince and the Monarch could be very useful additions. Unfortunately that is all they have. They have no engine production facilities and a tiny group dedicated to engine design. And unless someone else is willing to put in money or a significant order, that is all they will have as Richard Fairey will not risk any more of his own money than necessary. To get them off the ground there should ideally be financial support in getting off the ground plus a substantial order secured. Preferably in the early 30’s. This is not an easy sell for a service in a nation of tightening budgets during the depression who already has 4 engine manufacturers to go to and an ambivalence toward Richard Fairey.

Wolseley is the personal possession of Lord Nuffield. They tried to get in on the shadow scheme for engines. He objected to the cost-plus auditing requirements that came with being an Air Ministry Contractor. Since this was effectively his private possession this would have involved auditing at least some of his own personal finances. So perhaps not surprising he balked. He then withdrew Wolseley from Engine manufacture and stayed out of the air shadow scheme until Air Minister Swinton had moved on, before taking over Crowley for production of Tiger Moths and Castle Bromwich for Spitfires. I am honestly not sure of the best way to untangle that particular mess or even if it is desirable to do so. Nuffield’s later contributions to the war effort were not exactly problem free.

De Havilands engine production is generally small engines to match their focus on smaller aircraft in this period. Though they have taken a turn into larger designs to power their attempts at commercial aircraft. On the whole, this production is probably better left as a commercial enterprise. It does ok there and gives you some extra capacity come war time. It is also a great place to send jet orders as a back up to Whittle later on, since Halford (who preferred to work with De Haviland over Napier) is the kind of guy who would take to that kind of work with gusto.

Similarly Blackburn is basically small engines only. Mostly without military application. Though they may end up in some trainers.

Whittle at Power Labs could probably use some more support. However, Whittle was often his own worst enemy. His relationship with Rover was less a problem because River wasn’t up to it, and more due to his lack of trust in almost anyone with his engines. Rover did make valuable contributions to the design of the Jet engine. But distrust and feuding between them and Whittle caused many issues and kept a lot of regular testing from going on. Whittle did trust Rolls Royce quite implicitly. So putting Whittle with them earlier is likely to help speed things along.

In addition, Metropolitan Vickers is working on axial turbines based on AA Griffith’s ideas. I am not as familiar with their development but they could definitely use more support. They certainly had a more workmanlike and less dramatic development than Power Jets.

Orenda doesn’t actually exist yet. They came out of experience gained by the Canadian National Research Council with British jet development that spun off into a private company after the war.
 
OTL French and Japanese 2-row radials based on the Jupiter design were between 49.5 and 52", so I wonder if when designing the Andromeda engineers could have found a way to reduce the diameter by 1/1.5" or so? Also I wonder if I'm overestimating the weight. OTL examples were between 1100 and 1380 lbs. I just did a rough weight per cylinder calculation for Mercury and multiplied by 14 for Andromeda, but is 1550 too high? Maybe closer to 1400 would be a better estimate.
First question, yes it is possible but I believe 51-52 inch is more than enough to make it a viable option for most fighters. 2nd question, no you are not overestimating it. The post-war 14R has a dry weight of 1800lbs, I think the Andromeda would be an incredible engine if it could deliver similar power for 250lbs less. Going for 1400lbs means ditching center bearing which is a big no no especially if you are aiming for high power application.

There's been some talk about a 16-cylinder Hydra with a center main bearing to fix the vibration issues (did Hydra have 2- or 4-vpc by the way?)
2-vpc as built but the Hydra is unique as you can think of it as a two row of 4 V-twin engine being joined together thus allowing it to have a overhead cam. This unusual design meant that redesigning it as a 4-vpc is actually not as difficult as they would when it comes to standard radial engine layout. The tricky bit comes to cooling as the 1st row of cylinder would be blocking the airflow for the 2nd row of cylinder.

Also an 18-cylinder Orion, though I don't have details on it and I'm not sure what its niche would be
I honestly would rather see Bristol focusing their effort in making a straight-flow Bristol Proteus instead of the Orion. If they manage to entice a certain Stanley Hooker to join them instead of RR to design their 2 stage supercharging system, they could have developed the Bristol equivalent of RR Derwent & Nene before jumping into the world of turbojet with the mighty Olympus. Imagine a reliable Olympus engine ready to be use in 1950 in the E.E. Canberra, Avro Vulcan, and Hawker P.1100 Super Hunter while Bristol Britannia with their reliable Proteus engine roaming the sky..... God what a timeline would that be.

What should those groups be doing, and how could they be combined efficiently? Would a poppet-valve Napier Sabre make sense? Further development of the Napier Lion? Air-cooled inline engines from DH? A Fairey Prince/Monarch? A/S Tiger as a backup if the Andromeda fails, or to fill that smaller displacement niche (comparable to the Japanese Kinsei)? Obviously we know what Whittle/Orenda is working on...
My personal opinions on the above:
- Poppet-valve Napier Sabre would make sense, its a very compact engine thus making it a good alternative for the chunky 18cyl Mercury & 18cyl Pegasus/Draco, though supercharger and start-up system (shotgun shell💀) need some redesigning. My only concern lies in Napier management and facilities being too archaic for mass-production. They need someone to sort it out like OTL with English Electric.
- Napier Lion would better served as a tank engine at this point. Get Frank Perkins and Charles Chapman to convert said engine into a high-power diesel engine. The navy would love any high power diesel engine and if you can convince the army in using diesel engine for their tanks, all the better (reference: https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/sir-john-valentine-carden-survives.496447/).
- Ngl, DH air-cooled engines always intrigued me. Very good engines for trainers and very light aircrafts but I don't see them getting used for heavy aircraft applications especially with Bristol leading the way for radial developments.
- Ah yes, the Monarch.... The true love of a certain Pegasus's son. As seen in his TL, the engine suffers from some weird design choices which meant that the airflow going into the combustion chamber is less than ideal which would also effect on how much boost the supercharger installed could actually provide. Sort that out and you have a liquid-cooled equivalent of the 18cyl Pegasus/Draco to compete in powering the largest of bombers. Though, my money would still be on the Draco/Pegasus winning more contracts, air-cooling for the win.
- A/S Tiger requires an extensive redesign if they want to compete with ITTL Bristol engines. Much work to be done and I have no idea if its going to be worth the effort.
- Whittle/Orenda... Hmmmm, I wonder what they're working on. Magic toasters 🤣?
 
Last edited:
I hope I am not obsessed with the the Monarch engine!
It just happens to be an orphan design from 1937, that if given full AM support could well have been a very useful 'Big' engine early in the WW2 until replaced by something better.
A rather useful starting point in any ATL having a historical object with unrealised potential.
Yes it had basic limitations and some flaws, so did some of WW2's great engine, do not forget the early ramp head Merlin engine had serious problems that were cured by development.

When tested in the USA in 1942 the engine was nearly four years old without any real technical support, Just think of what had been achieved in four years on those engine designs in service use over the same period.

Yes, in terms of British aviation ATL's in the period just before WW2 I am at least intrigued by this engine and other under developed opportunities.
Guilty as charged.
 
The Air Ministry had 4 approved aero engine suppliers. Rolls-Royce, Bristol, Napier and Armstrong-Siddeley. So let’s start with them.

You have already put work into Bristol, and RR is likely still doing fine as OTL. So that leaves AS and Napier.

Armstrong-Siddeley could use a new boss as their critical limitation was John Siddeley. Siddeley was a great businessman, which is why despite being one of many junior partners, his name remained attached to the company right up to the 1970’s. However, he was also an autocrat and quite technically conservative and risk adverse. The company was run more like a general engineering firm that did some aero engines than an aero engine firm. Their chief designer, Major Greene, was often limited in the options he could pursue and R and D was underfunded.

On a technical level, this means that AS has basically been coasting on derivatives of the RAF 8 engine that Greene and Heron had brought over from the Royal Aircraft Factory. They need to be able to develop, or at least use, more up to date components. And they need to stop trying to get by on relatively low costs adaptations of earlier designs while relying on lighter weight to increase performance. Specifically, the AS Tiger needs a third bearing and updated fittings. This would at least give you a backup for Bristol’s new engines.

Napier probably needs to be bought by someone. Their leadership is unwilling to spend and risk adverse. This has left both R and D and production in a terrible state. They really haven’t had much going for them since Arthur Rowledge left for RR. IOTL, it was English Electric’s purchase of Napier that revitalized the company. Moving that up would help. Callum Douglas had a post related to a poppet valved Sabre a while back which (IIRC) concluded it was probably doable though it would have larger dimensions than OTL. Alternatively if RR or someone similar bought them out they would probably be confined to non-aero work. This could be useful if it results in something like an earlier Deltic.

Then you have the non-Aero Ring companies. Fairey, De Haviland, Wolseley, Blackburn and the emerging jet enthusiasts.

Fairey, as mentioned, has some potential. They have a talented designer in Captain Forsyth and the Prince and the Monarch could be very useful additions. Unfortunately that is all they have. They have no engine production facilities and a tiny group dedicated to engine design. And unless someone else is willing to put in money or a significant order, that is all they will have as Richard Fairey will not risk any more of his own money than necessary. To get them off the ground there should ideally be financial support in getting off the ground plus a substantial order secured. Preferably in the early 30’s. This is not an easy sell for a service in a nation of tightening budgets during the depression who already has 4 engine manufacturers to go to and an ambivalence toward Richard Fairey.

Wolseley is the personal possession of Lord Nuffield. They tried to get in on the shadow scheme for engines. He objected to the cost-plus auditing requirements that came with being an Air Ministry Contractor. Since this was effectively his private possession this would have involved auditing at least some of his own personal finances. So perhaps not surprising he balked. He then withdrew Wolseley from Engine manufacture and stayed out of the air shadow scheme until Air Minister Swinton had moved on, before taking over Crowley for production of Tiger Moths and Castle Bromwich for Spitfires. I am honestly not sure of the best way to untangle that particular mess or even if it is desirable to do so. Nuffield’s later contributions to the war effort were not exactly problem free.

De Havilands engine production is generally small engines to match their focus on smaller aircraft in this period. Though they have taken a turn into larger designs to power their attempts at commercial aircraft. On the whole, this production is probably better left as a commercial enterprise. It does ok there and gives you some extra capacity come war time. It is also a great place to send jet orders as a back up to Whittle later on, since Halford (who preferred to work with De Haviland over Napier) is the kind of guy who would take to that kind of work with gusto.

Similarly Blackburn is basically small engines only. Mostly without military application. Though they may end up in some trainers.

Whittle at Power Labs could probably use some more support. However, Whittle was often his own worst enemy. His relationship with Rover was less a problem because River wasn’t up to it, and more due to his lack of trust in almost anyone with his engines. Rover did make valuable contributions to the design of the Jet engine. But distrust and feuding between them and Whittle caused many issues and kept a lot of regular testing from going on. Whittle did trust Rolls Royce quite implicitly. So putting Whittle with them earlier is likely to help speed things along.

In addition, Metropolitan Vickers is working on axial turbines based on AA Griffith’s ideas. I am not as familiar with their development but they could definitely use more support. They certainly had a more workmanlike and less dramatic development than Power Jets.

Orenda doesn’t actually exist yet. They came out of experience gained by the Canadian National Research Council with British jet development that spun off into a private company after the war.

Wow this is a really impressive, concise breakdown of the interwar UK aero engine sector!

Armstrong-Siddeley could use a new boss as their critical limitation was John Siddeley. Siddeley was a great businessman, which is why despite being one of many junior partners, his name remained attached to the company right up to the 1970’s. However, he was also an autocrat and quite technically conservative and risk adverse. The company was run more like a general engineering firm that did some aero engines than an aero engine firm. Their chief designer, Major Green, was often limited in the options he could pursue and R and D was underfunded. On a technical level, this means that AS has basically been coasting on derivatives of the RAF 8 engine that Greene and Heron had brought over from the Royal Aircraft Factory. They need to be able to develop, or at least use, more up to date components. And they need to stop trying to get by on relatively low costs adaptations of earlier designs while relying on lighter weight to increase performance. Specifically, the AS Tiger needs a third bearing and updated fittings. This would at least give you a backup for Bristol’s new engines.

For AS, getting rid of Siddeley or making him less involved so the engine department can "run free" doesn't seem very likely given what we know about him. I guess that makes AS something of a dead-end in any TL.

Fairey, as mentioned, has some potential. They have a talented designer in Captain Forsyth and the Prince and the Monarch could be very useful additions. Unfortunately that is all they have. They have no engine production facilities and a tiny group dedicated to engine design. And unless someone else is willing to put in money or a significant order, that is all they will have as Richard Fairey will not risk any more of his own money than necessary. To get them off the ground there should ideally be financial support in getting off the ground plus a substantial order secured. Preferably in the early 30’s. This is not an easy sell for a service in a nation of tightening budgets during the depression who already has 4 engine manufacturers to go to and an ambivalence toward Richard Fairey.

If Napier gets bought out by Vickers and ends up focuses on non-aero engines (Lion tank engine, earlier Deltic...etc.), then Napier aero engine designers would probably end up at other firms with better structures and R&D funding. That leaves DH for Halford, which as you said, he preferred anyway. He designed the Napier Sabre from what I understand. Sabre and Fairey Monarch are both H-block 24-cylinder liquid cooled engines. If DH and Fairey teamed up could we see a poppet-valved Sabre/Monarch hybrid developed that takes good aspects from each design and ends up functional sooner thanks to avoiding sleeve-valves and having more manpower/resources devoted to it?
 
I wonder how this will affect Polish aviation with access to more powerful engines earlier. Especially since they are forced to use Bristol engines for domestic purposes.
1694108280183.png
 
First question, yes it is possible but I believe 51-52 inch is more than enough to make it a viable option for most fighters. 2nd question, no you are not overestimating it. The post-war 14R has a dry weight of 1800lbs, I think the Andromeda would be an incredible engine if it could deliver similar power for 250lbs less. Going for 1400lbs means ditching center bearing which is a big no no especially if you are aiming for high power application.

2-vpc as built but the Hydra is unique as you can think of it as a two row of 4 V-twin engine being joined together thus allowing it to have a overhead cam. This unusual design meant that redesigning it as a 4-vpc is actually not as difficult as they would when it comes to standard radial engine layout. The tricky bit comes to cooling as the 1st row of cylinder would be blocking the airflow for the 2nd row of cylinder.

Ah interesting, that's great info thank you! Hopefully if Bristol has figured out 2-row aircooling from the Andromeda, Twin Mercury, and Twin Draco/Pegasus they'd be able to apply those lessons to a 4-vpc Hydra. Any guess as to what HP a developed Hydra could put out? Would be very useful to have given how little it displaces.

My personal opinions on the above:
- Poppet-valve Napier Sabre would make sense, its a very compact engine thus making it a good alternative for the chunky 18cyl Mercury & 18cyl Pegasus/Draco, though supercharger and start-up system (shotgun shell💀) need some redesigning. My only concern in Napier management and facilities being too archaic for mass-production. They need someone to sort it out like OTL with English Electric.
- Napier Lion would better served as a tank engine at this point. Get Frank Perkins and Charles Chapman to convert said engine into a high-power diesel engine. The navy would love any high power diesel engine and if you can convince the army in using diesel engine for their tanks, all the better (reference: https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/sir-john-valentine-carden-survives.496447/).

I was thinking about it and maybe Napier getting acquired by a large EE-esque company that directs them away from aero engines is for the best. If they get bought by Canadian Vickers they can focus on turning the Lion into a diesel tank and marine engine (awesome idea!) and as mentioned above maybe get a Deltic-type engine deployed earlier.

- Ngl, DH air-cooled engines always intrigued me. Very good engines for trainers and very light aircrafts but I don't see them getting used for heavy aircraft applications especially with Bristol leading the way for radial developments.
- Ah yes, the Monarch.... The true love of a certain Pegasus's son. As seen in his TL, the engine suffers from some weird design choices which meant that the airflow going into the combustion chamber is less than ideal which would also effect on how much boost the supercharger installed could actually provide. Sort that out and you have a liquid-cooled equivalent of the 18cyl Pegasus/Draco to compete in powering the largest of bombers. Though, my money would still be on the Draco/Pegasus winning more contracts, air-cooling for the win.

If Napier is out of the picture and, for the sake of argument, DH takes on most of their engine team -- do the Monarch and Sabre fill a similar niche? Could Fairey and an expanded DH with Halford working together make a better liquid-cooled poppet H-24 sooner? I know the Monarch was wayyyy bigger than the Sabre but if Sabre is poppet it's getting bigger regardless (going off Callum Douglas' post) perhaps they could meet in the middle.

- A/S Tiger requires an extensive redesign if they want to compete with ITTL Bristol engines. Much work to be done and I have no idea if its going to be worth the effort.
- Whittle/Orenda... Hmmmm, I wonder what they're working on. Magic toasters 🤣?

I'm not sure AS has it in them even in TTL, given Siddeley... probably a dead end. But Whittle with more support could hopefully make some very special "toasters" a bit sooner even

I honestly would rather see Bristol focusing their effort in making a straight-flow Bristol Proteus instead of the Orion. If they manage to entice a certain Stanley Hooker join them instead of RR to design their 2 stage supercharging system, they could have developed the Bristol equivalent of RR Derwent & Nene before jumping into the world of turbojet with the mighty Olympus. Imagine a reliable Olympus engine ready to be use in 1950 in the E.E. Canberra, Avro Vulcan, and Hawker P.1100 Super Hunter while Bristol Britannia with their reliable Proteus engine roaming the sky..... God what a timeline would that be.

Funnily enough I was actually talking about the other 18-cylinder Orion, a Centaurus development:
(Edit: actually I might have been talking about the turbo-supercharged Jupiter development...idk anymore.)
A projected enlarged capacity version of the Centaurus was designed by Sir Roy Fedden; cylinders were produced for this engine, but it was never built. Known as the Bristol Orion, a name used previously for a variant of the Jupiter engine and later re-used for a turboprop, this development was also a two-row, 18 cylinder sleeve valve engine, with the displacement increased to 4,142 cu in (67.9 L)} (6.25 in × 7.5 in (159 mm × 191 mm)), nearly as large as the American Pratt & Whitney R-4360 Wasp Major four-row, 28-cylinder radial, the largest displacement aviation radial engine ever placed in quantity production.
There's very little info on it but in TTL I guess it would be a "super" Pegasus/Draco?

However I appreciate the cut to the open space, I'd been hoping to get to jets in this thread as well! Assuming TTL Bristol and Hooker joining them, what do you think the Bristol Derwent/Nene would look like? And what would it take to have Olympus ready to deploy in 1950? Maybe the Bristol and Orenda teams working together?
 
Last edited:
It just happens to be an orphan design from 1937, that if given full AM support could well have been a very useful 'Big' engine early in the WW2 until replaced by something better.
A rather useful starting point in any ATL having a historical object with unrealised potential.
Yes it had basic limitations and some flaws, so did some of WW2's great engine, do not forget the early ramp head Merlin engine had serious problems that were cured by development.

When tested in the USA in 1942 the engine was nearly four years old without any real technical support, Just think of what had been achieved in four years on those engine designs in service use over the same period.

Ah I didn't realize they US was testing a 5-year old engine that hadn't been developed in that time, that's very helpful context. Given what they designed it's not hard to imagine what it could've become with proper support and development. What did you think about Fairey + Napier + DH working on an H-24 together? It would at least give Fairey the team and resources that they lacked OTL (but Sabre and Monarch may just be too different to mesh, and this is where my lack of engine knowledge shows)
 
What did you think about Fairey + Napier + DH working on an H-24 together? It would at least give Fairey the team and resources that they lacked OTL (but Sabre and Monarch may just be too different to mesh, and this is where my lack of engine knowledge shows)
Sabre and Monarch are fundamentally different. Napier (Halford) had decided the best way to power was high RPM and all his H-block engines ran at, for the time, very high RPM; Sabre was doing 4,000RPM or more flat out. Monarch is far more conventional and just used a larger displacement, where Sabre was 37L odd, Monarch was 51L. Despite this size it never got close to matching the power output of Sabre, it was big but not clever.

DH, while very good at installations and fitting probably don't add much on the engine side at this point. All their experience is on far smaller air-cooled engines. Overall I can't really see this combination working as none of theses companies have a big, modern development works with all the testing equipment required and you have two strong willed designers pushing very different visions of what a high powered engine should look like.

One company that has been missed off is Alvis, OTL they spent a fortune on a new factory to get into aero-engines but then unfortunately licenced the French Gnome-Rhone 14K/N engine. As government policy was British engines only, and as the Air Ministry assessed the 14K/N as OK but nothing special, Alvis got nowhere and had to resort to doing contract work to support the other engine factories. But if instead of looking at France they had instead brought Napier, well then Frank Halford would have the tools and equipment to match his ambition. Sadly for Monarch fans I can't see Richard Fairey accepting any takeover offer, whereas Napier is listed so Alvis can just buy them.
 
The Air Ministry had 4 approved aero engine suppliers. Rolls-Royce, Bristol, Napier and Armstrong-Siddeley. So let’s start with them.
I'm pretty sure De Havilland was an approved aero engine supplier.

They certainly sold enough engines to RAF projects that they would have to be. It wasn't just because they were building the air frames.

That said your general conclusion that they worked away in their particular niche and were successful enough and they should be left alone to do that is probably right.

They supplied a decent volume of engines for use in trainers, transports and various light aircraft roles.
 
Sabre and Monarch are fundamentally different. Napier (Halford) had decided the best way to power was high RPM and all his H-block engines ran at, for the time, very high RPM; Sabre was doing 4,000RPM or more flat out. Monarch is far more conventional and just used a larger displacement, where Sabre was 37L odd, Monarch was 51L. Despite this size it never got close to matching the power output of Sabre, it was big but not clever.

DH, while very good at installations and fitting probably don't add much on the engine side at this point. All their experience is on far smaller air-cooled engines. Overall I can't really see this combination working as none of theses companies have a big, modern development works with all the testing equipment required and you have two strong willed designers pushing very different visions of what a high powered engine should look like.

One company that has been missed off is Alvis, OTL they spent a fortune on a new factory to get into aero-engines but then unfortunately licenced the French Gnome-Rhone 14K/N engine. As government policy was British engines only, and as the Air Ministry assessed the 14K/N as OK but nothing special, Alvis got nowhere and had to resort to doing contract work to support the other engine factories. But if instead of looking at France they had instead brought Napier, well then Frank Halford would have the tools and equipment to match his ambition. Sadly for Monarch fans I can't see Richard Fairey accepting any takeover offer, whereas Napier is listed so Alvis can just buy them.
Alvis buying Napier feels like a match made in heaven, the sort of thing that's so obvious you wonder why it never happened. From a cursory Google it looks like Alvis wanted a sure thing and figured a proven design for a biggish radial was it; if you have the Air Ministry develop its case of Not Invented Here two years earlier I wonder if Alvis would take a bit more of a punt on Halford and Napier?
 
Alvis buying Napier feels like a match made in heaven, the sort of thing that's so obvious you wonder why it never happened. From a cursory Google it looks like Alvis wanted a sure thing and figured a proven design for a biggish radial was it; if you have the Air Ministry develop its case of Not Invented Here two years earlier I wonder if Alvis would take a bit more of a punt on Halford and Napier?
Halford wasn't an employee of Napier. He worked on a invoice basis as a consultant. He was in and out of De Haviland too. He wasn't really tied into long term contracts. If the company stopped following the way he wanted to go he could move on very easily.

Napier had more than aeroengines going on. Alvis probably didn't want to buy the entire company.
 
if you have the Air Ministry develop its case of Not Invented Here two years earlier I wonder if Alvis would take a bit more of a punt on Halford and Napier?
It was government policy to only go for British designed and produced engines since at least the 1920s for all sorts of reasons, not least because aero-engines were a big export market and it's harder to convince foreign buyers to buy British engines when the British government isn't doing so.

Why Napier thought that the rules didn't apply to them, I've no idea.
Napier had more than aeroengines going on. Alvis probably didn't want to buy the entire company.
Did they? They'd stopped making cars by 1925, there was three wheeled 'mechanical horse' in 1933 but they flogged that to Scammell and disbanded the team. It's entirely possible I've missed something, but by the early 1930s I thought they were areo-engines only.

I did wonder about Alvis just hiring Halford directly, as you say he is a contractor and the promise of bigger budget and proper equipment might tempt him away . However the advantage of buying Napier is that Alvis would inherit their place on the 'Approved List' of engines suppliers, or at least get a chance to argue that to the Air Ministry rather than being trapped outside the Ring as they were in OTL.
 
Top