• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

Well, this is unique.

Pretty sweet configuration for an NFO. The radar-equipped night fighter version had the RADAR operator in the starboard cockpit.
 
Always thought the P-82 was cool.
As a high time tail wheel pilot, it is dragging two fully castering tail wheels around that I can't wrap my head around.
 
wink said:
Always thought the P-82 was cool.
As a high time tail wheel pilot, it is dragging two fully castering tail wheels around that I can't wrap my head around.
Click to expand...
Why wouldn't they turn with the brake inputs?
 
Being able to turn is the problem; it's too easy. Tail wheel planes always made me nervous but luckily I never ground looped one. Not yet, at least.
 
Renegade One said:
Would the counter-rotating props do away with P-factor entirely?
Click to expand...
From the Wiki . . .
Wikipedia said:
The XP-82 was to be powered by two Packard-built Rolls-Royce V-1650 Merlin engines. Initially, the left engine was a V-1650-23 with an additional gear in the propeller reduction box to allow the left propeller to turn opposite to the right propeller, which was driven by the more conventional V-1650-25. In this arrangement both propellers would turn upward as they approached the center wing, which in theory would have allowed better single-engine control. This proved not to be the case when the aircraft refused to become airborne during its first flight attempt. After a month of work North American engineers finally discovered that rotating the propellers to meet in the center on their upward turn created sufficient drag to cancel out all lift from the center wing section, one quarter of the aircraft's total wing surface area. The engines and propellers were then exchanged, with their rotation meeting on the downward turn, and the problem was fully solved.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know, in actuality thrust counteracts drag, weight counteracts lift, blah blah blah blah blah. Still an interesting story about 1940s aeronautical engineering.
 
Last edited:
It is a weird visual for me. It should handle on the ground like any tail wheel plane.
 
Refused to become airborne? Talk about an exciting (attempted) first flight.
 
Tom Reilly spent something like 20 years working to get it flying. AOPA or EAA magazine (can’t remember which) has a good article on it from last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top