Packard Merlin V-1650. The engine was licensed in order to expand production of the Rolls-Royce Merlin for British use. The received wisdom, at least in America, usually runs along the lines of: If Rolls-Royce birthed a stupendous engine, Packard brought American mass-manufacturing know-how to the equation, perfecting the design and mechanizing production. The V-1650 liquid-cooled engine was the U.S. version of the famous British Rolls-Royce "Merlin" engine which powered the "Spitfire" and "Hurricane" fighters during the Battle of Britain in 1940. There are many variations on this basic storyline, more than a few of which are contradictory. Remember, Packard, and for that matter, Ford of Britain, were able to jump more or less into mass production of the Merlin, while Rolls-Royce took the engine from a blank sheet of paper to eventual mass production at its three facilities.Owing to variations in development programs, the varied aircraft they powered and the different mission profiles they fulfilled, it is difficult to compare Packard and British-built Merlins directly to determine if one was in fact "better." There was great need for the The first American model was a version of the Mark XX, designated the V-1650-1 by the American military and the Packard Merlin 28 by the British. "'On the contrary,' he replied, 'the tolerances are far too wide for us.

This content is imported from YouTube. Both built their global reputations as top-level luxury automakers on the strengths of their engineering expertise and high production standards. You may be able to find more information on their web site. The engine also filled a gap in the U.S. at a time when similarly-powered American-made engines were not available. The standard engine for the P-51D Mustang was the liquid-cooled, l2-cylinder, Packard-built, Rolls-Royce Merlin V-1650-3 or -7 developing 1,400 hp at take-off.

“It took the war to prove that the aircraft engine is not that complicated micro-micro-inch construction problem peacetime talk has made. Rolls-Royce did even better at 82,117 (32,377 at Derby, 26,065 at Crewe and 23,675 at Glasgow), and Ford of Britain ultimately built 30,428 at its Manchester facility. Rolls-Royce did not manage its incredible overall production numbers—again, greater than those achieved by Packard, albeit at multiple plants—by adhering to its prewar manufacturing methods: It did so by mechanizing. (Note: These numbers vary slightly depending on the source.)

Most recently, I was told very matter-of-factly (and by a Brit, if that makes any difference) that Rolls built a more precisely fitted, finely tuned engine that had slightly higher performance potential for a given unit. Packard, by contrast, built one that was ultimately easier to construct consistently and overhaul at specified intervals—and that one of the ways Packard accomplished this was by building Merlins with There’s an appealing counterintuitiveness to the notion that a (marginally) sloppier engine makes for a more effective fighter plane powerplant; it’s a bit like that chestnut about On the other hand, I've also read that Packard's cutting-edge manufacturing methods made for Merlins with tighter, more consistent tolerances. A conveyor belt brings the engine to the parts which always fit for by American methods all parts are made so precisely that they are always interchangeable.” Packard's assembly line was undeniably cutting-edge. Ultimately, workers on both sides of the Atlantic were able to build an engine for the ages, flown to victory in all of the major theaters of combat.

And sometimes, the occasion calls for a Timex. But that's only because the company employed tradesmen who could fit the parts. This is a little misleading: The Merlin II service manual, released May 1938 (Did Rolls-Royce simply forget to include this vital information when it handed Ford, and then Packard, stacks of documentation two years later? If the part doesn’t fit, it is machined until it does meet required specifications.

Der Rolls-Royce Merlin ist ein 12-Zylinder-Flugmotor von Rolls-Royce in V-Bauweise, der vielen wichtigen britischen und US-amerikanischen Flugzeugmustern des Zweiten Weltkriegs als Antrieb diente.

Simple!Following the attack on Pearl Harbor in December 1941, and the United States' declaration of war on the Axis powers, civilian automobile production quickly ceased; by early 1942, Packard was free to focus all of its effort on military engine production. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io

But it can be made with the same ease, relatively cheaply, and on a similar assembly line.” Later: “The secret of the this low-cost, high-production manufacturing is the assembly line. Rolls-Royce designed the engine and first ran it in 1933 as a private venture. This commenting section is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page. "Neal also notes that "the British did not specify tolerances and fits, and Packard had to take parts from an existing engine and make measurements to determine these specifications as best as they could, using engineering judgement where necessary."