Jump to content

Talk:Rolls-Royce R/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

That Bibliography...

What a mess! Some of the sources listed have unknown authors and unknown publishing dates, so whether they can be considered as Wikipedia material is doubtful. This "With thanks to Peter Grieve at MerlinV12.com" is probably seen as spam?Minorhistorian (talk) 01:46, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I think all that was pasted in from another website, there is now a coding problem with the external links header, can't work out how to fix it.Nimbus (talk) 16:31, 24 September 2008 (UTC)
Should be almost fixed now, the original article had been pasted in from a dying website, the owner/creator contacted me by e-mail about it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:36, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The image Image:Rolls-Royce R In Supermarine S 6B.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

  • That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
  • That this article is linked to from the image description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --20:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Need to slot a link to this article in somewhere, High Speed Flight RAF, more info on the R and some references at the bottom that I have not looked at yet. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:19, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Minor wording problem at the foot of the table, implies that DC sank with K4, can't think how to clarify it. He 'sank' with Blue Bird K7. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:50, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Difficult with no refs cited for this table! Will look into it in due course--Red Sunset 23:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
One of the books in 'Further reading' should be on the way soon, will help. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:18, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Addressed the misleading statement, and hopefully it's less ambiguous now! A good source won't go wrong; the 'Eves' and the 'Holter' would be my choice. BTW, was there an important race today – something or other to do with a world championship? ;-) --Red Sunset 20:48, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
I think so, something about it on the BBC news ;-} Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:16, 18 October 2009 (UTC)
Book is on its way, good old FleaBay! Need to look into cooling, the S6's don't appear to have radiators (probably evaporative cooling through the wings) and I read about ice being used for one of the cars, more questions than answers as always! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:27, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
S5 & S6 had surface radiators (NOT evaporative!) on the floats and, I think, a small one ahead of the cockpit. The S6B is also reported (Rod Banks) to have simply had inadequate cooling and to have flown the race on the temperature gauge and barely finished it even then.
What's the K4 question? I have most of the canon books for K3 & K4. Andy Dingley (talk) 09:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
It was just a minor wording problem, now fixed thanks. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
The Holter book has arrived (missed the postal strike!), will be able to fill in lots of blanks with that, very interesting book at first glance. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:50, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

1931 competition

Would like to know why the other teams did not compete exactly, apart from that line needing a cite. Was it just the Brits flying? Seems to be better coverage here now than the Schneider Trophy article which does not tell us much. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:15, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

It states here that "... it was left to the British to 'defend' the Trophy against no opposition." So it appears that it was only the Brits flying – a hollow victory it seems! :-( Must take another look at the relevant wording. --Red Sunset 22:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Good gen there, I have worked out that the Macchi M.C.72 Italian entrant suffered technical problems, I feel compelled to write an article on its engine, the Fiat AS.6, two engines bolted together in tandem, 50 litre capacity for slightly more power than the 'R'. It suffered from 'fatal backfires' according to Gunston. Another name that keeps popping up is 'Rod Banks', he was the man that developed the special fuels which was really where most of the 'R's' power came from, must look into him. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:18, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Just had a look at the Italian aircraft article [1] which has some text and a specification section which is something to go on. At the moment there are no comparable engines in the see also section. Ciao! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:29, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
I knew that I had seen a photo of it on commons (----->>), a bit grainy but useable, the lego bricks are coming together. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:39, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
The 11-feet-long AS.6 would make an interesting article. Amazing what you can do with Lego! ;-) --Red Sunset 23:01, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
I've found 'Rod' Banks, I would have called him 'sir'! Francis Rodwell Banks, he needs linking all over the place. I have pasted the Italian text into my sandbox, removed the wikilinks and then ran it through 'Babelfish',[2] A friend of our acquaintance would be pleased with the result! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:07, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
Done the Fiat AS.6 now, even managed to mentioned Rod! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 10:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Crikey – you don't mess around do you! A couple of good articles there; I'm amazed at the list of honours that Banks accumulated in his lifetime! The translation of the Italian article was illuminating – apparently the AS.6 can 'turn trees' no less!!! ;-) Nevertheless, I reckon our mutual acquaintance's friend would be very happy. I'd like to see some mention of the physical size of the engine though (a bit of a monster), but I'm not sure the link I mentioned above would be up to scrutiny. --Red Sunset 18:08, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I had my 'got to get it done' head on!! Yes, does need some reference to the size, hopefully I will find decent specs for the AS.6 somewhere, from the aircraft photo the rear engine is over the wing and the poor old pilot is stuck just in front of the tail!! Been to the de Havilland Aircraft Heritage Centre today, they have got a lot of Merlins there. Need to read the Holter book properly later but I can see that citing should not be a problem now except for the table perhaps. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:37, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
All good stuff. We can get 'cited (groan!) about the refs in the near future then! :-P --Red Sunset 19:49, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Just added some specs, 14 gallons of fuel per minute plus 14 gallons of castor oil per hour!! Would like to try some of that fuel as well, we need to emphasise in the article that most of the power came from this and the high boost pressure. I found the price of £5,800 then lost the page, need to use some old-fashioned book marks. Still not sure where the table info is coming from, can cite most of it with Holter. This one is turning into quite a story with many roads. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:31, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
My colon key is getting quite shiny now! I had a car like that once, but we won't go there (neither did the car)!! It shouldn't be too hard to write that stuff in when the relevant page/s turn up, and I reckon a mention of where construction/development/testing took place wouldn't hurt. Yeah, it seems to be opening up nicely for potential promotion. BTW, it just struck me the image looks like snow-sled equipped for drag racing!!! ;-) --Red Sunset 20:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Sorry about the minor slips, probably a bit too tired to be editing. Yep, a 3,000 hp snow sled!! Derby is where it was built/tested, there is more on that in Holter's book (with photos). They had a Kestrel driving a fan to simulate 300 mph wind on the air intake, my line of work! How long is this Rticle now? Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:02, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
It's only 27 kb so we are ok yet, seems longer due to the table. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:11, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
(Fifteen colons!) Great, that's exactly the sort of background detail needed! The table does pad it out rather, but it's probably the best way of chronicling the engines' histories. --Red Sunset 21:19, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I will make a special colon award for you soon! There is much more technical nitty, gritty available from Rubbra and Lumsden at the risk of boring readers to death but it did seem to work in the Merlin article, probably needs it as although the speed record use is a large and important story it is probably unbalancing things. Best bet is to add anything relevant and trim it later if needed. Of all the engine articles (about 950 now) this one is quite unique in how it is turning out. What happens if we keep indenting here, would like to find out?!! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:21, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Just spotted the clarification on the AS.6 driveshafts, well done! I was really struggling to understand the translation and now I understand how it works, very cunning or as the Russian Meerkat on the telly advert would say, "Simples"!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:55, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't believe that he has his own article but here it is: Aleksandr Orlov (meerkat), bonkers!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:00, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
That's not weird. When we have whole categories dedicated to fictional mongooses and fictional hippopotamuses it gets a bit that way, but just look at the parent category tree for the hippos for some real fine wikiweird.Andy Dingley (talk) 23:18, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
Well it makes fighting for notable aircraft AfDs all the more harder when this stuff exists. Can I ask here Andy if you have actually retired? You seem to be watching and responding to the aero engine talk pages? Not worried, just a bit confused, you can tell me about it on my talk page if you like or even e-mail me, I saw what prompted it, cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC)
I have expanded the development text with, hopefully, some interesting and relevant info, it will surely need looking over for typos and some colonoscopy!. I started to add references to the table but noted that the dates disagree with the Holter book, I don't know where this info originally came from. I don't want to lose the information but some might have to go if I can't cite it. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 17:59, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Certainly getting there, mayor not specified just local mayor, Holter uses upper case though. Alt text added, next task is to do something with the table. Off to 'Bedfordshire', work tomorrow. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Phew, it's getting cramped here! Yep, looking more complete by the minute, and nothing superfluous that I can see.:-) A question for clarity though: is the 13 tons 'pressure' mentioned the total force exerted on the piston rather than a force per unit area? BTW, I think I've found where the info in the table came from, but it might just be a mirror site! --Red Sunset 22:04, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I give in! (undent) Book just says 13 tons pressure with no explanation I can work out the MEP but that would be OR, I think he has gone further and multiplied this by the piston area (his own OR to derive this figure for effect). WP:RS says that we can add this figure even if it is not right, will look at it again as I have my doubts over some of the figures and there are some apparent errors in the book. The 14 gallons a minute turns out to be a more plausible 3 1/2 gallons a minute, backed up by actual consumption against time during flight tests. The 'Wellworthy' pistons seem to have no connection at all to America but they are described as such in the book. As a reminder to myself I've got to do a 'variants' summary, the six engines built in 1931 are different in quite a few ways (just been reading about it). The flight testing bit and cylinder fixing was 1929 and not 1931, will change that in a minute (then go back to bed!). You can indent all the way until one letter width remains BTW, all it does is spread your post a mile down the page, (yep, I tried it!) Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:23, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

That link BTW was an exact mirror of an earlier version of this article sadly. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
I wondered if that might happen as it just occurred to me that not everyone uses a wide-screen format like I do! Those fuel consumption figures do seem more realistic, but what about oil consumption? Re the piston fixing; it makes more sense to me that would have taken place in 1931 immediately prior to the actual contest date as the work was so urgent it had to be carried out overnight.?? Do you have any dates? On the piston pressure statement, I think putting that in quotation marks will indicate that's exactly what it is; a quote! Maybe add an explanatory footnote to the effect that the source is unclear as to its exact meaning? I've intentionally not strayed into the table until the content can be verified and is unlikely to be removed. Your new source is a positive goldmine and I'm really getting into this one!!! :-) BTW, I went back to the link and re-read it after posting my note – as you say, just an old version of the page alas! --Red Sunset 12:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
It's definitely 1929 for the flight testing although no specific dates are given, the aircraft with the metal on the plugs was N248 (one of two S.6s), these were delivered to Calshot in August according to our article, the competition was held in September (again no precise dates at the moment), there is a bit more to the story; after a pre-race qualification flight it started to sink due to leaky floats, a rule was that it had to float for six hours (strange rule?!) and the crew were not allowed to touch it during that time, Mitchell was informed and said that it would be alright, after this they found the metal on the plugs. Might be worth listing the R-powered Supermarine seaplanes as there were only four of them and it will help me:
  • Supermarine S.6 x 2 N247 and N248 (early R engine, serial numbers between R1 and R15, built in 1929) 1929 competition.
  • Supermarine S.6A x 2 N247 and N248 modified S.6 airframes for 1931 competition.
  • Supermarine S.6B S1595 and S1596 (New aircraft type with later redesigned, more powerful, R engine (sodium exhaust valves and new lower crankcase, serial numbers R21, 23, 25, 27 and 31, built in 1931 for that year's comp).
The oil consumption sounds right, on first tests it used 112 gallons per hour (burnt or dumped out of breathers), they worked hard on improvements to get it down (piston rings and new breather system). 14 gallons per hour is stated twice, on the winning 1931 Trophy flight the figures of 110 gallons of fuel and 11.5 gallons of oil used are given for the 38 minutes to complete the seven laps, I make that 1.8 gallons of fuel per minute (not flat out all the time) and 15.7 gallons of oil per hour from a bit of OR!! There is another twin R powered boat (not mentioned yet), Miss England III. Doh! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:25, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
My apologies; I'd been staring too long at the details and completely dismissed the fact that the R debuted in the 1929 competition – Oops with a capital 'O'! On a more positive note; that's great, that nails the oil consumption figures, and a few nice details on early testing to add in as well! On the other hand, the table is evidently lacking since there is no mention of Miss England III in it, so what else might be absent?! Don't you just love it when every turn of the stone reveals more wrigglers to deal with!!! ;-) --Red Sunset 22:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
That's why I did the little summary list of S.6s, I was getting confused myself. Once the text is accurate the table should be easier to fix, I am very tempted to bin it into another daughter article or loose the table format and add it as prose. I am wondering about the use of main article tags, they should be added to the other vehicles but it could become a list of main article tags, dunno?! Amazing that just 19 engines can produce almost as many wiki words as 160,000 plus Merlins, it's a story worth telling properly though. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
The peak gas pressure felt by the piston is MUCH higher than the imep. A peak pressure of 1000 psi gives a gnat's crotchet less than 13 tons force . . . 31.49.237.80 (talk) 13:27, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Image

This image was originally in the infobox, it is tagged as non-free but I think that it is actually public domain because of its source (U.S Govt), would be nice to use it in the article. Will look at fixing the license. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Best of luck with that one – I get into such a mess with photos and tagging, and yet it's supposed to be straightforward!! --Red Sunset 23:00, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Fairly straightforward, I can upload it straight to Commons, the image has been doctored to remove 'N.A.C.A Paris office', what we know as NASA today. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I've got hold of the Eves book now from a library (very good coverage of the R and the Fiat AS engines), added cites to the table and corrected the odd date (still more cites to go). Tried not to duplicate page numbers, worth checking though. There is one ref 'Holter277' causing me grief, the book only goes up to page 179! Getting in a bit of a tangle with it all! Added Miss England III now and a picture showing both boats (bonus!). One man is missing, Leo Villa, he was the Campbell's chief engine mechanic, need to squeeze him in somewhere. Pub quiz tonight, hope they have questions on the R!! Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:20, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Terrific additions all round – feel happier dabbling in the table now the content has been verified! The rest will be untangled eventually. You've earned the evening off, but don't expect anything sensible in the quiz like questions on the 'R', more likely on something called 'football'!?? Best of luck! --Red Sunset 19:45, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thankfully no football questions tonight!! One on Concorde though that I should have known (last year in service). Another few days should get this article to a point where it is virtually complete and factually accurate. Need to expand the fuels (various different blends used), getting into the 40kb range now which is about right. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

If we can't use the non-free image then we could move the S.6B photo to replace it and put this image (------->) in its place as it has Messrs Orlebar and Stainforth standing next to each other, fiendishly clever?! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:58, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Damned cunning I'd say! Also looking forward to fuel development in due course. Eyes R dry now, so back tomorrow! Cheers --Red Sunset 23:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
Another image that can be doctoRed: File:Renault 190HP conrods fig5.jpg to illustRate the aRticulated con Rods, it might be hard work but nobody said that we can't have fun doing it! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
By 'eck, it's just taken me half an hour to read through today's edits! :-) The article's got everything now – even the King has joined in – no-one could possibly say this is your average dull and dry technical piece! That articulated con rod pick has got to go in – helps the non-tecnically-minded to understand the concept. All great stuff, but now it's my turn ...! ;-) --Red Sunset 19:17, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Aha!! Yes, just about done adding any more and shuffling things, it's virtually all there now. Have some fun with my words! Can not find anything on the two 'space' engines, might have to rephrase them as I can't cite them, will keep looking. Will have a go at producing a smaller version of the conrod piccie. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 19:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Rticulated rod done and inserted but not necessarily in the right place! Been reading Wikipedia:Non-free content again. The S.6B image could be borderline as we have other free images of the S.6 and R but not a clear shot of both together with the cowlings off like this one. It can be quickly removed if needed but I would argue for its inclusion. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:07, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I've juggled the images around a bit – mostly right, left, right apart from where it looked untidy in the "World speed record" section. I moved the 'disputed' image to the World speed record summary bit where it filled some of the whitespace – not quite so prominent there, but it's a shame as it is a good shot of an installed R! We can play around with this for as long as it takes though. --Red Sunset 22:18, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Looking good, I wondered where it went! Had to move the supercharger image to the right as it was displacing the section header below. Can not find anything on R33 and R35, have changed the wording and removed the cite tags. Almost there, another run through for typos and consistency then we should get it peer reviewed. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:31, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes it is looking good. What's weird though is that even on my wide-screen where the text is stretched across the page, the supercharger image didn't disrupt the following header, but the 'non-free' originally did – strange! There's a good chance they'll get moved some more before it's all settled. Sounds about right – a fresh perspective is what's needed now – hope it doesn't get called "boring" as did the 777 at FAC recently though! --Red Sunset 22:54, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
I am on a widescreen laptop (that might be squashing things vertically), I usually check it on the family PC which has a different resolution, I suppose if all article images where on the right then all they can possibly displace is the little 'edit' tab. I like to see them alternate left and right if it can be achieved. I have seen the layout change after an edit that did not add or remove anything which is a bit 'wikiwacky'!! Occurs to me that there are a couple of other books that I have not looked in yet, not expecting to find anything new but you never know. Need to ref the 'Filching' engine, I have found a photo of it on someone's website clearly showing the serial number painted on its stand, the museum does not seem to have a website, could be another bike ride to Sussex for more photos! Have you seen the YouTube link at the bottom, the soundtrack seems to be original, sounds just like a Merlin (I think it has the same firing order), I also suspect that the narrator is a Scotsman, "Squadrrron Leaderrr Orrrlebarrr"! Magic! As for the 777 I popped in on the A class review, way too 'number heavy' IMO, this article has a lot of numbers but the human story more than offsets it, I didn't realise at all where this would lead, I just thought it was a fascinating obscure engine worth writing about, then King George V gets involved! Nearly there I think, cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:19, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
Reminder note: One of the cars was cooled by dry ice alone, must have been Thunderbolt, will look at that and add it. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:27, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Yep, that's a good idea to check on different resolutions – should have tried that myself! :-( Never mind. Anyway, it goes without saying that I don't have the slightest problem with the pics going back to their earlier positions if that is generally better. :-) They may need shuffling in any case if you get the Filching pics – you're certainly going to great lengths in the interest of this article with yet another bike ride! (You'll have to send in an expenses claim form!!!) Joking apart; terrific effort and achievements throughout! Och aye; likely to be the same firing order comin' frae the same stable, and the YouTube narrator is nae Englishman ye ken! (Should have put some of that in italics!) But at the end of the day, this is a great topic with lots of side issues that maintain interest, and I have become quite engrossed in it. --Red Sunset 19:40, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Well, I have to admit that I do have the firing order, it's on the data plate of R27! Thought I would take a picture of it! The reason for the Griffon having a raspier sound is that it has a different firing order apparently, can't say that I appreciated that sound much at three in the morning at RAF Lossiemouth in the 80s!! Must look at the Griffon article soon and discover why the order is different for one thing. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:12, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note – Sqn Ldr Orlebar, narrator and commander of the High Speed Flight happens to come from a rather well-to-do family that has its roots in Bedfordshire! Unless the Scottish border has moved significantly south without us realising it, I think he might just possibly be English – got to get my ears checked!!! --Red Sunset 22:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

(Undent)Is he the narrator? Think it is a chap from Pathe News or similar. Saw that they were from Beds. Added a tiny bit from Gunston, I did re-read Rubbra's book, the use of articulated rods caused all sorts of other problems because of the geometry, different strokes for each rod, different torque on the crank from each cylinder bank, pistons arriving at top dead centre at different times and they had to use longer cylinder liners on one side to stop the bottom piston ring popping out! This was one feature they regarded as a bodge and it was not copied over to the Merlin although they did use them in the Goshawk. Not sure whether to add this in or not, probably too much for the poor reader's heads I think! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:47, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't mind me – confused.com taken over after a hectic and stressful day!!! The Description section isn't particularly long, and I reckon the mention of these issues would make it more complete – all part of the story! --Red Sunset 23:26, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thunderbolt cooling

  • 1937 - Large octagonal grille and radiator.
  • 1938 - Small oval grille and radiator
  • 1939 - enclosed bullet nose and ice (water ice, not dry ice) cooling, as per Golden Arrow (and others) some years earlier. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

I have taken the liberty of submitting this article for peer review as it is essentially complete, review page is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Peer review/Rolls-Royce R. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 16:31, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Good show! :-) --Red Sunset 19:44, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Some new eyes on it won't hurt. Certainly interested in what others have to say and I sincerely hope that there is no more citing to do! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:04, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
To be consistent with the Merlin article (and probably the majority of Brit supercharged aero engine articles) the boost pressures need to be abbreviated as 'lb'. Although it is technically 'psi' it was always written as just 'lb' or 'pounds boost' with the older engines. I meant to add a note in the Merlin article, will formulate one and add it here and at the Merlin. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:34, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
OK, but pound is a unit of force, and psi is a pressure unit. Saying pounds for pressure is just shorthand. -Fnlayson (talk) 00:39, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
True, what I am saying though is that this is how the British reference sources use it and I think that this is specifically explained in one or more engine books that I have because of the apparent anomaly. The note that I am hoping to add would also cite this. A comparison would be inches of mercury where you would see just 'X inches of boost', one is a pressure unit and the second is a distance unit. I like to use units as they are originally written and not use something that is not there, explaining to the reader the reason why if it appears strange or even completely wrong. A very odd thing happens on Discovery Wings type documentaries with the narrator saying things like 'the Foo Fighter cruised at 3,000 metres' when referring to an allied WWII type, they metricate all the numbers which sounds very strange to me, presumably done for a 'modern' audience (I was taught both systems which comes in very useful at times, the UK is still half and half!). Another anomaly with British piston engines is the use of metric capacity figures seen in the lead of articles, quite correct but difficult to explain! I think this tradition goes back a long, long way when some Brit engines were derived from French engines and had exact metric capacities but as far as I can see nobody ever wrote it down (which causes us problems when someone quite rightly asks the wrong question!). Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:50, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Do we like Science Museum (London) or the London Science Museum? Looks a tad awkward as it is to me. I believe that they just call themselves the 'Science Museum'. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I reckon London Science Museum is a more natural form that would be used in conversation for instance. We do have to include "London" though to be precise. Re boost – I'd use lb and add an explanatory footnote. --Red Sunset 23:10, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
True, they actually call themselves 'sciencemuseum', no caps, no space, academics eh?!! We have an international audience and it seems to be wiki practise to refine the location, will change it to London Science Museum by the magic of piping. The boost thing is silly, with all these old engines I try to maintain the atmosphere of the period, not to mention accuracy, even using my hi-tech but poor quality colour digital photos seems wrong!! With any luck there will be no more of my words to fix, might add the blurb about the Rticulated rods to expand the section, then the picture can go to the left. A piccie of Sqn LdRRR ORRlebaRRR and crew also needs to go in. As Bagpuss's mice used to say 'we will mend it', simples. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:46, 4 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree with maintaining the 'feel' of the period as much as possible – it does enhance the article in my view! With the recent modifications (pics, expansions, prose etc.) I'm happy with the article, but there is still a small niggle in my mind about how we can better incorporate Leo Villa. I've written a slightly revised version of the section, re-titled "Campbell engine care and maintenance" (open to better suggestions) here for consideration. Cheers. --Red Sunset 00:10, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
I've pasted that version in because it is much better (as usual)!! Probably best to leave the main article link out as I notice that his article is effectively only one line. Might be selling him a bit short as he was responsible for the whole car or boat and from the references no other mechanics seem to be involved, or at least they are not named. I think the section is in the right place and believe that he should have a section, so it looks like the section header wording is what needs to be tuned. We have the current 'Leo Villa', and your suggested 'Campbell engine care and maintenance'. Alternatives could be 'The work of Leo Villa' or 'Leo Villa, engine mechanic'. I have had another thought that I will try now, we loose his header completely and change 'Blue Bird K4' to 'Blue Bird K4 and the work of Leo Villa', this puts him above the summary list which should really end the whole speed record section. We can easily revert if that does not look right either. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 02:44, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Done that now, very teeny unavoidable timeline problem perhaps as he started in 1922, the second half of his text relates to K4 so it is probably the best place for him. This has also taken him out of the TOC. I have added some info on the ignition system, mainly to wrap the image better but it is also informative with any luck. I can't see much more to add or do to the article now. I sense the 'shutters coming down' on this one. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 03:43, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Had another look at the 13 tons bit, from a quoted Mean effective pressure figure and the area of a single piston I am getting nearer 3.5 tons total force, we have included the figure from a 'reliable source' but also added a note that we don't know how the author has derived it, so I think that we are covered. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 04:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
That's an elegant solution to the Villa conundrum – great header, and with the additional mention of the ignition system I agree that we're just about done for the time being. On to FAC I'd say. Cheers. --Red Sunset 18:47, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

(Undent) Seems to work, still some polishing possible, every time I look through I see something else that could be tweaked. There is a sniff of R engine remains from Thunderbolt in the Museum of Transport and Technology in Auckland from our own article, went searching but found nothing, might ask a 'Kiwi' to check it. I did find an official RR pdf with images, have added that to the EL section, the image is almost identical to one in Holter's book captioned 'lowering on to the test bed', man on the right is one Mr George Parkin (Head of Production Engine Test, retired in 1960), other two not identified but they look very oily to me, flat caps and all!! Could not find this through the RR website, not Wikipedian friendly! Next page to that image in the Holter book is one of an S.6 being refuelled (through filters) in 1929 with Cyril Lovesey leaning on a float tank, it says that he was the head RR man at Calshot. Something that I meant to mention is that it was no coincidence that many RR engineers were in Calshot and available to repair the damaged engine, they were sent there by Hives 'just in case', could be added as a footnote. Hives also held the record for the fastest time between Derby and Calshot in the Phantom (speed given). I have something like 700 book pages to look at with R passages scattered here and there, great fun trying to find all the snippets again. Must come a point where no more should be added. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I think we probably both know at least one 'Kiwi' who might oblige. Thinking of the pic; did Fred Dibnah have a brother? ;-) I don't think it would be out-of-place to mention that Lovesay was the head RR man at Calshot, and I certainly think that we should include the fact that Hives sent the RR engineers as an 'insurance policy', but in the main text rather than a footnote – the way it's worded at the moment it appears they just happened to be there when the problems arose, so that does need changing. Is there no end to this story?! --Red Sunset 19:36, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Good old Fred, he was a proper engineer, yep, still some tiny tweakettes. I'll have to find the passage again but Hives sent the people there to watch the trials but he knew why he had actually sent them, if that makes sense, an insurance policy like you say. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:06, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I agree, Fred was a proper engineer in the true sense of the word, but strangely enough someone commented on his talk page that he shouldn't be called an engineer because he didn't possess recognised qualifications!!! Some people simply don't understand! Spotted a thought-provoking comment on the 777 FAC review page - use an image to reduce the whitespace formed under the infobox by the long ToC - I don't think there are any guidelines that discourage this in the lead section, and it would balance the first image which is on the left side of the design and development section, so is it worth looking into here? --Red Sunset 20:12, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Aye, and Chuck Yeager wasn't initially a qualified test pilot either!! Don't know about another image next to the TOC, was possibly going to limit it again (like the Merlin). I don't see it done even with very long TOCs although I do see images stuck under the infobox in other articles that were not apparently thought about where they could go (I'm talking like Yoda tonight!!). There is a 'hide' option with the TOC (is that a new thing on WP?), that could cause problems as well. I did upload some more photos to Commons but I think that we have the best ones here already. The first image is the infobox one really, the second one is the con rods, on the left to balance. Might print this all out to see how it looks on paper. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:31, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Just had a look at the top sections, part of the problem is my habit of cropping the engine photos to just show the engine but in this case it has 'letter boxed' it some (I still have the original uncropped version), if the image was portrait format instead of landscape we would have a much longer image (see Wright R-760). I tried to get a similar angle to this one File:RRKestrelXVI.JPG but I would have needed some steps and the way the engines are displayed in the Science Museum is not very good, almost as if they are in storage, the light is terrible as well, very dim in the hall with backlight from the full length window. I have got another photo of the Hendon R but it is parked under a Beaufighter wing and has a long white information board in front of it. Also checked that the infobox is as full as it can be, which I think it is (we could put all the applications in but that's probably too much). Could also put the portrait right side view in there but it's not the whole engine per WP:AETF image guidelines (that I wrote!!). Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:01, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Hiding the TOC is a new one on me as well! Fair enough though, it was just a thought. :-) --Red Sunset 21:28, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
I noticed it a couple of days ago, perhaps the function was recently added? Either that or I have been blind for a couple of years!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 21:58, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
There is this template: {{TOChidden}} but it seems to be default now (actually looking at it that forces a collapsed TOC), there is also a check box in My preferences --> Appearance, that allows the reader to auto hide the TOC. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

PDF

The PDF version looks very good if I may say so, nice to see it without the wikilinks, amazing how much easier it is to read!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 22:49, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Almost looks professional! ;-) --Red Sunset 23:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Cooling - Better flow? Must be thinking of water! A recent edit in the Griffon section caused me to correct and cite an inaccuracy in the wording, I am a sinner for not checking all the available references 200%!! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:52, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Review closed

The peer review has now been closed and archived. Time to move this monster engine and article to the upper echelons I think! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 02:50, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thunderbolt power or torque

I was wondering if the combined torque of the two engines caused clutch failure, rather than power? Secondly, were the speeds shown the averages reached by Thunderbolt or were they the maximum speeds? 22:18, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

It's not specified in the references, academic really as 3,000 plus horsepower or whatever that equates to in torque would need a fairly well built clutch to contain, hardly surprising that it failed initially. There is more detail available on these vehicles but these summary sections are supposed to be concentrating on the R's use in them, with a nod to their insane drivers. Note for RS: The Liberty L-12 is more commonly known as the Liberty engine (redirect) in engine references, someone decided to name the article after its official mil designation. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:21, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks Minor – better wording; and I've 'fixed' the Liberty engine Nimbus, cheers. Just as well that someone know's what they're talking about! --Red Sunset 18:27, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
It's down to our engine article naming system, at least the redirect is there for people to find it. Much more tweaking to do? Not worried, no deadline. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
The one 'troublesome' image can probably be covered by this: Template:PD-UK, I make it 78 years old at a minimum and the author is unknown. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 23:02, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
One small fly in the ointment, Lumsden says 20 engines produced, Aaaaarghhhhh! He is generally good but I have seen slips and he is not giving serial numbers. There is little chance of me getting any info from RR, it's not allowed anyway (I could try though). Noting that we don't cite his number. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 01:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Shouldn't be any argument if the PD template sticks – fingers crossed! Re number produced: 19 is cited from a reliable source, and in the absence of any mention of (presumably) R41 in any sources, I would stick to that. Having said that, in what context does Lumsden mention 20 – could he have simply generalised the total, or does he provide some evidence to support his claim? --Red Sunset 18:39, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
No, I think the PD template should be ok. I've put Lumsden's book back in the shelf, he only devotes one page to the R, and just mentions 20 engines in passing, probably rounded it up. Some engine types he gives totals produced, others not. I think that I saw this number before I first saw the WP article and wondered about the difference. I did read somewhere that the clockwise R (R17) was possibly renumbered R18, this could cause confusion (if we don't have enough already!!!) and might account for the 'extra' engine. The mists of time are responsible! Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:59, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

A Flight article which may be useful

An article on the development of the 1931 engines starts here continues with this and so on...some interesting detail on testing, magnetos and sparkplugs etc...Minorhistorian (talk) 02:36, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much, I think I had seen that before but lost it in the sea of references, have added it to 'External links' section. Interesting to note that British Thomson-Houston made the magnetos, we have a pair of BTH mags on our Tiger Moth's Gipsy Major engine and they are still going strong today (good job that they are as well!). Interesting photos of the test cells, does look a bit oily in there. Cheers Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 12:05, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

FAC nomination

I have taken another liberty and now nominated this article for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rolls-Royce R/archive1. With the reference material that I have to hand I can't really add any more without straying into conjecture. Time for other eyes to look at it I think. Cheers. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 00:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You may be interested in this link Fifelfoo (talk) 23:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Great link, I have some of those books and very good they are too but most of them are out of print now which is a great shame.

I am removing and pasting in the 'Further reading' section in here to work on identifying them, noting that these books were added by the 'text dumper' for want of a better phrase and it has been troublesome (I previously removed other books from this section).

Further reading
  • Harvey-Bailey, Alec. Rolls Royce – Hives' Turbulent Barons Historical Series (20). [?Paulerspury, Northamptonshire, UK]: The Sir Henry Royce Memorial Foundation, 1993. No ISBN.
  • Kirk, Peter. Aero engines exhibited & stored in the United Kingdom & Ireland: Part 1. [?United Kingdom]: The Rolls Royce Heritage Trust, 2003.
  • Phillips-Birt, D. Famous Speedboats of the World. [?New York City, USA]: St. Martin's Press, 1959.
  • "Royal Aeronautical Research Committee Reports & Memoranda 1575 – British High Speed Aircraft for the 1931 Schneider Trophy Contest"
  • "Supermarine Schneider Seaplanes". Aeroplane magazine, October 2001.
  • Villa, Leo and Desmond, Kevin. The World Water Speed Record
  • Winchester, Clarence. Wonders of World Engineering. [?London, UK]: The Amalgamated Press Ltd, 1937.
Books out of print ought to be available by document supply service either through a local lending library system, an academic library system (if you have access), or through a National Library System. It costs though. Perhaps not as much as you think. Perhaps not as little as you'd hope. Through bibliographic identification I supplied information and formatting for a number of "Further Reading" links. Some are simply impossible "Royal Aeronautical Research..." appears to be archival. Fifelfoo (talk) 00:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rolls-Royce_R/Archive_1&oldid=1146636188"