SimonBrown

From the archives, the closest but not exact match I have found so far is a similar 8-cylinder engine that kicked out somewhere between 750~800hp. It may well prove to be more powerful, but there's going to be quite a few factors affecting that. As we don't know what the manifold pressure was, or the exact fuel used, then its going to be somewhere between "a fair bit" to "did not expect that much" right now. Right now its believed to be an engine destined for a 21" torpedo. The working assumption is there was so much geared around the size and length of this weapon it had to fit right in. Two ways to increase efficiency of the air cylinders would be to a) use a higher pressure rating and b) used enriched gas or pure O2. Both would give you more bang for your buck (volume) and there are some papers that are dealing with the increased pressure route as quality and strength of steel for the cylinders improved. Right now, no hard data to support any theory. Its all just that - theory. And yes, things could get out of hand and run away before we get a chance to stop it. Not the first time I will have seen a diesel run away with itself, and having seen the somewhat destructive nature of the laws of physics applied am keen to avoid at all costs. Right now, we have nothing upstream of the inlet manifold. Starting and running are unknown, so pre-heating is possible - maybe even necessary thanks to the chilling effect as the incoming gas expands - but we have nothing to go on. The ignition is, I believe, just compression ignition and nothing special...but that remains a best guess based on no evidence to the contrary. Given that everything else has proved 'special' then nothing would surprise me to find it had glow plugs...or some such method. A tame racing engine workshop was not something I had thought of...but do have a contact in just that...good idea! Compressed air only is the first, tentative step planned. We can prove out the lubrication system at the same time. But I think we are some way off that.

Thats part of the unusual design. Here's the best photo I can get showing the arrangement: Above are two con rods connecting (in the loose sense) to a common big end. From the opposite side, two more con rods meet on the same big end. There is running around each end the big end two circular pieces of metal that form an undercut, and the con rods extend into this undercut. This undercut is what holds the con rod onto the big end. Does all that make sense? Thanks to its compact nature its difficult to photograph but I hope you get the idea... As promised, a view down the drive shaft: You can see right into the crankcase, with one of the con rods and one of those retaining metal disks visible. Beyond is - I think - the other bank's big end. There is no centre main bearing, everything runs on the two bearings that are in each end case. If none of this makes sense, just ask! Ah yes, the Meteorite...now that needs to go on the list of 'Next?' I think.

Yes and yes. All the exhaust gases vent through the driveshaft. Will take a photo later. Thanks John. Those special tools are invaluable and very appreciated indeed. Everything can indeed be remanufactured, but prefer not to. It just offends the soul to mangle something without purpose. I did wince when the brass split pins snapped... The Whitehead factory in Wyke used to test fire the torpedoes off the line 3 or 4 times before being fitted with a live warhead and delivery to the end customer apparently, and there is a torpedo range marked on old charts. Dummy warhead was fitted with lead substituting the bang. We have found several of those lost in Weymouth Bay. As to a full strip of the engine every time, I think this unlikely but not impossible. As a complete aside, my Weymouth friend will be disposing of some of the torpedo parts acquired over the years soon, to make space in the garage for classic 70's 2-stroke motorbike restoration. First up will be a 21" Mk 23 torpedo practice warhead - if anyone is interested, please drop me a PM. Running it remains the end goal and aspiration. There are a few technical issues to overcome - somehow - but everything remains possible. Agreed. Best policy and practice I think. I have certainly learned loads just by tinkering with it and that knowledge needs recording somewhere, to travel with the motor in future. Yes, in most "normal" radial engines there is master con rod. However, as we are finding out, nothing much is normal with this beast and there is no master con rod. All con rods are equal, of the same shape & design and sit on a common big end. I have been pondering what the next project should be - getting ahead of myself - but a petrol radial engine needing some TLC would be right up there in the "yes please" list. That or another 2-stoke diesel like a K60 perhaps? I did see an unusual V12 Rolls Royce 'barn find' appear on Ebay a few weeks ago - not a Merlin I think and possibly a civvy variant of a Meteor (did they do such a thing?) - but the listing has gone. That would be right up there on a list of things worthy of overhaul...I digress. You cannot imagine the memories that phrase triggered radiomike. "Centripetal force" took me right back to college!

Today was one step forward and one back. Here goes... First up, pot No 1 was pulled and I was greeted with this: On the face of it, a pile of rust. But a quick wipe of a rag and the piston came up looking like brand new. The rings were gummed up but will free off after a soak and a clean. The cylinder had some very light corrosion in the combustion chamber, but the bore was as good as the day it was made. Inside, we get a peek at the complexity and compact design. Int this shot we can see the inlet cam (bane of my life) at top and not one but two conrods meeting at the same big end. There are another two conrods joined to the opposite side of the big end. A single big end with four conrods... At the bottom of the image above is the lower skirt of one of the pistons. Here's another view looking down past the piston skirt, down the conrod and directly at the big end: This engine is like nothing else I have ever seen. There is no big end cap and four conrods connect to the same big end. Thinking about it, the fact its a 2-stroke - with a power stroke on each downward stroke of the piston - there is no requirement to really suck hard on the way down like its 4-stroke cousin. Its all pure power every time the piston descends...and when going up the bore the piston is always being forced by the big end to compress. The forces trying to hold the piston in the barrel as the crank pulls it downwards are minimal, so why have a big end cap? There is a very neat design that holds the conrod in place, but its too buried to photograph... So I turned my thoughts to the special bolt that had decided to shear its locking pin and not undo. The tub of cunning and guile was smeared over the problem and thus a solution found: The bit you can't see is jamming the special bolt in place. Which undone after a bit of fettling of the tool: And at that point the cam still refused to even budge a thou. It sat there looking at me...and I looked at it, wondering what to do next? I do not want to do any harm to this beast. Its too rare. So do I press on and find a way? If I remove the pistons can the conrods and crankshaft be removed as an assembly from the casing? Or should I realise its all smothered in oil, clean and looking just fine and not go any further? Something to ponder for a few days I think. The principle of do no harm applies to all patients, including torpedo motors.

With a borrowed engine hoist the drive side of the engine was now ready for stripping: First off, the centre cover, revealing a thrust bearing. Note the threaded securing ring: When originally tightened someone had used a drift and hammer to tighten it up. I was about to start knocking it loose with an alloy drift when I noticed this: A tiny hex socket grub screw used to lock the ring tight and pretty much guarantee it was not coming undone in a hurry. With the grub screw out of the way the locking ring came undone and the thrust bearing removed. The casing could then be slid off, revealing a second and larger diameter thrust bearing: And the internals of the engine, pretty much a mirror of the aux drive side: The two brass split pins were removed from the castellated nuts. One came undone no problem (its a captive head bolt I think) and the second...well that started to turn then the bolt itself started turning. From investigations on the other side, this bolt is a special - low profile round head with a small machined locking pip. It feels like the pip itself has sheared and nut and bolt rotate together. This is a right PITA. Rather than dwell on it I spent the rest of the morning making sure all of the 80 pan head bolts that hold the cylinders down were undone and ready for cylinder removal and removing the four odd numbered tappet rollers and inlet valves. The cams are proving to be a pain. I think its time to pull a few cylinders off and have a deeper look inside the bowls of the engine, to try and figure out how it went together, and comes apart. I must say its a frustrating beast to work on a times. But thats part of the joy, figuring out how such a compact engine can be stripped and reassembled without so much of a hint of workshop manual. That would be far too easy.

Sharing the knowledge is something very positive indeed, and yes I'm on your side with that. It all helps the world go around and make it a better place. Strictly - and I mean really, really strictly - sharing photos already on the web right now may well be breaching someone's rights, somewhere - for profit or not. In that respect the EU directive changes absolutely nothing. There are some caveats to that but in all honesty all it does is shift the responsibility from the user to the host/aggregator. Its an old cliche, but the EU have 'followed the money' and the social media/tech companies are reaping vast fortunes from content and are now asking them to figure out a way to either restrict what can and cannot be uploaded, or to distribute some of their vast profits back to the creator. This is actually nothing new - Youtube do this now with videos and the creator can choose to block, monetise or track/follow the video uploaded. The directive is making this kind of behaviour something all tech should comply with. Do I like it? Jury is out right now and like you can see risks. But the internet is still a very new place (relatively) and will continue to evolve as laws and legislation alter its behaviour. Its part of evolution I suppose.

Look what arrived in the post this morning: The tool worked a treat. Fitted snugly into the castellated threaded fastener and with a swift tap it unscrewed. A very, very big thank you to John for his generosity making up the tool. The idea of welding an old socket into the end was perfect for the breaker bar. And so the big reveal: Yup, not much I'm afraid. The cam refused to budge. Both castellated nuts were removed and the cam remained fixed and firm on the crankshaft. No amount of gentle persuasion would move it. Bit of a head scratching moment that yielded precisely zero progress I'm afraid, apart from knowing what does not work. So I think its time to pull the drive side casing off and have a look-see from that end. Its possible everything assembles into the engine from the other side, so thats where I'm heading next.

Of all the laws copyright can be very complex (differing rules/territories/legislation) and its very, very difficult to make generalisations, but here goes: Right now, linking almost certainly will not cause problems. Copying is a matter between the rights holder and whoever copies, not the forum itself. The new directive seeks to put a responsibility on the host of the content. It might mean 'links only' or it might mean copying is ok with some other form of checking. Who knows? Complex Here goes...Selling an original photo transfers the ownership of the physical object, but the rights to the image are distinct and separate. The rights are the really valuable bit as that allows you to publish, copy, sell and do as you wish with an image. Historical images may well be out of copyright, or not. It depends on many factors. Just when you think copyright is complex, try understanding historical rights - it will all depend on (for example) the year of creation, the year of death of the creator, if the creator was employed to create, who bought and paid for the film...etc etc etc... So selling an original object is fine. Selling the rights is an altogether different matter. Personally, I'm glad its Ebay's problem not mine. They have lawyers and deep pockets to understand and fund the solution. I think the youth with cope and maintain their supply of memes. Two possible reasons: Firstly, there is (in the UK) a copyright exception that allows parody without causing issues. It may (or may not) apply to images and the subsequent manipulation. I say may as I don't know if there is any case law where a judge has ruled on such an issue and even then it would depend on the circumstances of modification and use/purpose perhaps? Secondly, if there is a filter that stops youth slavishly copying an image then we may just be entering a golden age of creativity and new talent might just flourish. Why? Anything you create from scratch is yours and you can do what you like with it. The youth may well just refrain from copy/paste and start creating more new stuff. Anyone who creates something can choose to not only publish it, but tell the world to fill their boots and not only copy it but modify it too. Personally I do not appreciate it when someone copies my work without asking first (bloody rude) and I always assert something known as moral rights which means modifying the work is not permitted. Some of the stuff I shot over the years (Shipwrecks with loss of life, RN Clearance Divers at work) was intended as a record of the moment in time and thus I would not permit advertising or other uses. But equally, I can see other folk taking delight in seeing what others make from an original idea or creation... Finally, its worth remembering where the profit is. Every website demands new and fresh content - who would go back to a static page every day/hour if nothing changed? The addictive nature of Facebook means FOMO (fear of missing out) users come back to see another image of someones dinner or a dancing cat video. Its all very disposable stuff and the users of FB are churning out new content all for free and if the dross stopped the world would still turn. Except FB is a billion dollar company and derives huge quarterly revenues on the back of targeted advertising thanks to that fire hose of new stuff arriving every second. Not for profit? Not for the user, but the host is doing very nicely thank you. Agreed. Good and bad I suspect in equal measure perhaps. Remember, anything you create yourself will be just fine now and going forward.

Copyright is something I had a pretty deep knowledge of - and still do - up to and including taking those who chose to use my work without payment to the High Court if necessary, so I will add my thoughts here. Infringement of my underwater images drove me to the point of despising the creative process - dealing with rich multinational companies who used my work for nothing was tiresome and tedious, every time getting the same old "we don't pay' answer then threatening the High Court to see them realise things were serious...it would take weeks or months to get paid...I hated creating underwater images only to see them stolen so much I actually stopped creating. Which in part was a good thing as it stopped me doing the same-old-same-old and allowed photogrammetry to be discovered and flourish. I digress. The content aggregators - Google/Facebook etc - have always worked inside a US framework of copyright and something called 'fair dealing' or 'fair use'. If you want to get an idea about how some of these principles can be applied just look up an artist called Richard Prince - he is a controversial fella who will copy an image verbatim, write a few words under it and then sell the print for $$$$$ whilst paying the original photographer nothing. He can do this as he is claiming 'fair use' and to challenge it in a US court is expensive and risky. The european approach to copyright differs in so much that 'fair use' (by way of example) is minimalist and typically restricted to things like critical review. The US-based tech aggregators have had a very easy ride with other people's work. Pinterest is such an example with the business valued in billions, all built on people posting up images they find and like on the internet. I really do object to someone making money from the risk and cost laden world of underwater photography and not sharing so much as a penny...morally, its an uncomfortable place. Its also worth bearing in mind I will object to any of my images being used for racist, political, homophobic or other nasty causes or beliefs and I have been known to refuse permission at any price on this basis. This is an often overlooked principle and its an important one. I digress again. On this EU Directive I would say "don't panic". There is still no idea how it will be implemented and how it will work in practice. US tech won't like it. They can actually afford to fix the problem but not without hurting their bottom line and shareholder value. It also opens up an entire new market for a niche player to find a way to apply the law simply and cheaply. There are opportunities for creators to derive an income or refuse permission outright. At its peak infringement accounted for 80% of my turnover and without that income I would have been out of business, so for some it might work. The internet will continue to function and we can still share our projects, historical images and links elsewhere here for a very long time I think. I will add that I have not fully digested the implications, but right now thats where I am with this.

In typical torpedo fashion the document was a surprise. The tests were carried out on 18" engines and the limiting factor was not seizing up, but something else. The tests were done using alcohol - methylated sprit diluted with water - as a fuel, and the engine could run steadily at 190~200deg C with the limit being set as anything higher would start to melt the solder used in making the sweated joints found on this type of engine. Even at low temps 80~90 bhp was produced and the conclusion was that if higher melting point solder was used in construction then higher operating temperatures could be achieved. Later runs on a 21" engines saw 240 bhp and temperatures up to 600deg C. The conclusion was a 21" engine with a liberal oil supply could run at 400 deg C with reasonable mechanical durability. Fascinating document that must have cost a fortune to produce, but I won't be adopting its findings anytime soon. The Mk VIII engine they used was 4 cylinders and had a cast bronze crankcase and barrels - not really comparable to the 8-cylinder with its aluminium crankcase and steel cylinders.

Thank you John - its much appreciated. I have a rough idea what is coming next, but I suspect when that cam is pulled off its still going to be a 'Wow' moment. Hopefully progress it this week.

The steel blank and tube arrived in the post this week so it was time to start fabricating the second engine mount. The plate comes plasma cut to whatever size you need. First up, drill the mounting holes And with minimal fettling, it fitted over the studs a treat: Now I do realise a wooden welding bench is less than ideal... ...But with a few bricks and care the job was done and nothing burnt down. Are the welds pretty? No, they are not - still working on that - but its unlikely they are going to fail anytime soon. So, once the cam is off the engine can be turned around on its stand and the drive case removed. There was a little distortion in the plate after welding but it slipped back onto the crankcase. In the meantime another visit to the National Archives is planned. One of the documents is entitled "Torpedo engine operation without water cooling" which will no doubt simply tell me how long it can run before seizing. Don't worry, have no intentions of destroying this engine work of art...curiosity got the better of me, and it would be a shame for all that research go to waste.

Well I am glad its not just me then! Wait till you see the big end. I have peered into the crankcase and have never seen anything quite like this bad boy before. Single big end journal carrying four connecting rods none of which have end caps...Someone wanted a very compact design and the engineers delivered exactly that. Hopefully a new tool will arrive in the next week or so and I can get the cam off to reveal all.

Its a pleasure Andy. TBH I was a little surprised in the interest. I thought it was just me being curious.

Yesterday's foul weather meant other outdoor stuff could wait. So what better than to get a brew, put the radio on a progress the engine? The first inlet valve was removed from the cylinder head. It would be possible to do this with the cylinders in-situ but much easier on a bench. A quick bit of fettling on a section of aluminium tube and a valve spring compressor tool was sorted. The valves themselves are unusual. I shouldn't really be surprised any more but I was left wondering "Why do that?" while peering at a very fat but hollow valve stem. The conclusion reached the hollow bit was to reduce unsprung mass, but why such a large diameter stem? The original lapping marks are still on the valve and will need no work before reassembly. Each inlet housing had a oil pipe connected to it, and originally I thought these were for fuel injection. Now disassembled its apparent these oil pipes are for lubrication, with each of the 8 valves having its own oil feed. So...the air/fuel mixing must have occurred before reaching the inlet manifold. A dig into some of the documents from the National Archives for a MK VIII 21" torpedo reveals fuel consumption in the range of 60-70 oz/min at 200psi. So pressurised fuel was sprayed under pressure into the manifold. This part - the injector - is missing from the 8-cylinder example but they do quote the nozzle diameter of 0.04" so there is something to start with, as opposed to a blank sheet. Somewhere, out there, a pair MK VIII torpedo fuel injectors must exist? The bronze lump from the aux end - the finely machined barrel and its fine gearing - was originally thought to be some form of fuel injector. Clearly its not, but it is distributing lube oil around the engine. That goes some way to explain why I couldn't find any hint of timing marks on the gears! The next job was to make access to the remaining cylinder head bolts a little easier and remove all 16 1/4"BSF studs that hold the cylinder lubrication feed pipes. Most came undone with a pair of nuts nipped up and only a couple will need a stud extractor:

The engine has taken a back seat for a bit. Mainly while I progress a couple of underwater projects, one of which is scanning an entire 52 acre lake in 3D. I will share the model here, if only for the tenuous link that there is the hulk of an AFV432 sitting in 24m of water: Section of quarry with AFV432 But with that processed and out of the way it was time to crack on with the engine. First up, the tappet rollers from all even numbered cylinders were pulled out. This proved to be the easiest job of the day: Then it was time to get the cylinder bolts undone. After slimming down a ring spanner to wafer thin, the nuts were removed. Space was a premium: Now the it appears that the cylinder heads are held down with studs. Not so. Of the 12 fixings, 8 are pan head screws: And when viewed from inside the crank case: There is two visible in the above image, very close to the cylinders. Now, true to form several of them started to rotate with the nyloc nut. This proved to be a PITA and needed another special tool knocked up on the bench grinder and careful filing: Its a knackered 1/2" allen key I have had lying around in the toolbox for about 30 years. Kept for no good reason apart from "It will come in handy one day". And so it did. Not easy to access, but eventually they all yielded and bingo, the first cylinder slid off the crankcase: Now its pretty mucky inside, but in excellent condition with remnants of preserving oil oozing from every pore. The purpose of the oil pipes that were running into crankcase next to every cylinder is now understood; its injecting lubricant directly into the bore and presumably finding its way down to the big end. After initial success the predictable happened and the worlds thinnest ring spanner split when attempting the next cylinder. A crows foot spanner is on its way and progress should return. The gudgeon pin appeared to be held in place by a split pin, but on closer inspection there appears to be no gudgeon pin at all - not in the traditional sense at least - and after the split pin was removed closer inspection has left me wondering how this assembly goes together, and apart. I will post up some pictures soon.

The tool arrived in the post this morning. The inlet valve caps had been soaking in penetrating oil for a few days now, but of all the fasteners on the engine these gave me the most concern. They were as tight AF and were completely bespoke and unique. These really needed to come apart with as little grief as possible. The tool fitted a treat. No fettling required and no slack. An extension bar was needed, but 7 of the 8 made that satisfying crack as they undone. The last one needed a little heat, but soon gave up resistance. All 8 are now undone. Typically, all valves carry the '113' engine number and a single digit indicating what cylinder they relate to. The cap in the image above didn't come from No. 6 pot - its stamped '2' and just happened to be lying on the cylinder! A really big 'thank you' to John for his skill, time and effort making up and sending the tool. Much appreciated as the caps have remained unscathed or damaged in any way. Next step will be unbolting the cylinder heads. I think a 5/16 Whitworth crows foot spanner has been located.

The Whitworth thread gauge is a very, very close match certainly on the TPI and thread angle. Just a hint of daylight - pinprick no more - on the root of the thread.

I did offer up a 19 TPI thread gauge and it was close but there was daylight, whereas the 20 TPI was spot on. The Admiralty thread looks absolutely spot on. I'm going to measure the OD of all 6 of the plugs and see. I'm using a vernier calliper, not a mic, so it will be near enough I think. And having measured the sample, I think we have a match. All are within 4~6 thou of the stated OD - many thanks MachFuzee, its a thread I had never heard of before.

Dupe post!

It looks to be a parallel thread with a machined face on the underside of the small flange. Thanks for the suggestion - will have another look with that thread in mind. I tried a 1/4" BSP thread (had a fitting lying around) and whilst it wound in, it was like throwing a sausage up Cumberland High Street (slack) as they say. The 55 degree thread gauge fitted near perfect snugly on 18tpi, so maybe not NPT?

More time to tinker with the engine. A new tool arrived so the cylinder head plugs were tackled. 6 of the 8 cracked and undone. Two have not, refused to budge even with heat on them and the 1/4" square drive started to give. Looking at some of them, it looks like I'm not the first to have a go at undoing them. Above; the plug is out and on this cylinder the piston is about as close to TDC as it gets. There is very little clearance. Now in typical torpedo fashion the thread on the plugs is non-standard - or at least as far as I can tell: O.D. 0.545" 18 TPI And that matches nothing in my Zeus data charts... Anyone recognise it?

John - that is brilliant - thank you so much. There really is no rush on this one, the project reminding me of patience in this instant-gratification world.

The thread gauge arrived today. Its needed because some of the inlet manifold coupling threads suffered galling when removing them. Have a look at the image above - the first couple of threads have been damaged at some point in the past or during disassembly and need a bit of TLC before reassembly. Rather appropriately the thread gauge is dated 1952 and comes with the crows foot...nice to have a contemporary tool complete with its original cardboard box. Now the thread appears to be 1-5/8" (1.6250"), a rather fine 20 tpi and Whitworth form. The usual searches (Ebay and Google) reveal this thread exists, but tools are as rare as the proverbial rocking horse dung. Anyone have a die or die nut lurking in the tool box? Long shot I know...

A Whitworth crows foot spanner should be (or was...30+ years ago maybe) an off the shelf item, something like this: Bacho crows foot spanner If push comes to shove it looks like 15mm AF metric crows feet spanners are widely available, and with a little bit of fettling (5/16W spanner = 15.25mm across the flats) it could be a solution. Now...if you fancy a challenge then I will need a tool to get the inlet valve covers out of the cylinder head. When it comes to blanking plugs I have never seen anything like this bad boy before. Shown here in the lower left, the 8 pointed star shaped recess: Knowing I will need something come what may, and someone on here might just recognise it as an X plug from a YYY type of vehicle and the tool is off the shelf (I know, zero chance...but you never know) here's a dimensioned drawing of what is needed: Not being a toolmaker, I have not made any allowances for fit - the above measurements are of the recess itself and all dims in metric. There is a lot* of work in making up such a tool...if its a challenge needed... *thats a conservative estimation.