Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log in with Windows Live Log In with Steam Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Photo
- - - - -

What if the Soviet Union didn't get RR Derwent & Nene jet technology from the British post ww2


Best Answer Armand , 02 January 2017 - 11:19 PM

I Think the A of F is caught in the trouble wich I also have experienced: The headline isn't to edit.
In this case I imagine the lack of the word 'not' (possible as: didn't), wich would give more meaning :-/ Go to the full post


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 7 Months
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 02 January 2017 - 12:29 PM

By 1946, Soviet designers were finding it impossible to perfect the German-designed HeS-011 axial-flow jet engine, and new airframe designs from Mikoyan were threatening to outstrip development of the jet engines needed to power them. Soviet aviation minister Mikhail Khrunichev and aircraft designer Alexander Sergeyevich Yakovlev suggested to Joseph Stalin that the USSR buy advanced jet engines from the British. Stalin is said to have replied: "What fool will sell us his secrets?"[1] However, he gave his assent to the proposal and Artem Mikoyan, engine designer Vladimir Klimov, and others traveled to the United Kingdom to request the engines. To Stalin's amazement, the British Labour government and its pro-Soviet Minister of Trade, Sir Stafford Cripps, were perfectly willing to provide technical information and a license to manufacture the Rolls-Royce Nene centrifugal-flow jet engine, a move which even Russian sources have mocked. This engine was reverse-engineered and produced as the Soviet Klimov RD-45 jet engine, subsequently incorporated into the MiG-15.[1] (Rolls-Royce later attempted to claim £207 million in license fees, but without success.)[citation needed]

So what if the British government has said no? Even under Atlee, it's possible, let's say that word of a Soviet war atrocity got out just before the request was made and it would be politically impossible to accede.

Obviously it wouldn't stop the Soviets getting jets in the long run, but what about the short-term consequences?



#2 curmudgeon

curmudgeon

    Regular Member

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 6 Months and 9 Days
  • 25 topics

Posted 02 January 2017 - 09:57 PM

So what is your question?

 

The USSR (and the US) were faced with exactly the same problems trying to develop German axial flow designs as the Germans had faced. Essentially the compromises the Germans were forced into for supply reasons meant their designs were dead ends (but politically convenient to point to when claiming design antecedents - we are using seized enemy designs, not we are ripping off Metrovick).

 

Soviet espionage had certainly given them access to the metallurgy required to build axial flow engines once they had designed them ... and Soviet engine-building skills were well advanced. That they bought RR engines was a pragmatic decision. RR had already decided axial flow was the way to go, so centrifugal flow was regarded as obsolete (remembering that one of the earliest Meteors to fly (late 1943) had had Metrovick axial flow engines, but it was determined the technology wouldn't be field ready within the war time frame).

 

If you are promoting a conspiracy theory that the Soviets wouldn't have got jets but for the naivety of the Brits (and I hope you are not) then I would refer you to the development of Soviet atomic weapons, where espionage results were used to guide development, but that designers were kept at arms length so they developed indigenous capacity. Joe 1 was a Fatman design, inspired by espionage, but Joe 2 (RDS-2) was a novel, native, design, already under assembly when Joe 1 was detonated (Soviet testing was slow as they required a stockpile before showing their hand).


  • TheArtOfFlight likes this

#3 Armand

Armand

    About the same age as another old Fokker: The F-27

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,583 posts
  • Joined 3 Years, 6 Months and 8 Days
  • 107 topics
  • LocationAbout 20 nm east of BLL

Posted 02 January 2017 - 11:19 PM   Best Answer

I Think the A of F is caught in the trouble wich I also have experienced: The headline isn't to edit.
In this case I imagine the lack of the word 'not' (possible as: didn't), wich would give more meaning :-/

#4 TheArtOfFlight

TheArtOfFlight

    Advanced Member

  • Regulars
  • PipPipPip
  • 62 posts
  • Joined 7 Months
  • 5 topics
  • LocationUK

Posted 03 January 2017 - 11:42 AM

I Think the A of F is caught in the trouble wich I also have experienced: The headline isn't to edit.
In this case I imagine the lack of the word 'not' (possible as: didn't), wich would give more meaning :-/

You are quite correct it should have been "didnt" get. And yes my question is did the Russians & US simply want to quicken the process and receive a ready made/developed/out of the box jet engine. Or were there genuine advanced jet programs running already. I have read reports that say the RR Derwent & Nene engines were simply copied or built under license by Mig & General Electric. Some sources claim the Bell XP was a result of British jet technology but i was of the understanding the Bell XP was more of a rocket than a jet....



#5 Ricky

Ricky

    Moderator

  • Moderators
  • 2,969 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 5 Months and 9 Days
  • 138 topics

Posted 03 January 2017 - 03:31 PM

Title edited.

As far as i know (which isn't very far) the USSR had jet engines in development but (as with the Americans) gratefully used the reliable and proven British designs until their own matured.

#6 curmudgeon

curmudgeon

    Regular Member

  • Forum Guru
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,044 posts
  • Joined 14 Years, 6 Months and 9 Days
  • 25 topics

Posted 04 January 2017 - 12:30 PM

I think Ricky has hit it. It was all new. Only the Germans needed jet propulsion so they committed too early and also needed to compromise their designs (hardened steel rather than appropriate high temperature alloys). The US benefitted enormously from access to Brit technology (IP) and built several engines under licence until the mid 50s. But by the end of the 40s they were making their own qualitative advances (something to do with stators from memory). Somewhere there is a website on the intertwinings of jet engine development from about 1940 to the early 1960s ...






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users