1930s Fiat V24 Aero Engine

Randy V

Staff member
Lifetime Supporter
Thanks Randy...... well, Kind of;)
I thought "great, I can lern something new"...... only to realize "I know nothing about aviation" :eek:o_O

I’m a pilot, so a bit of an unfair advantage.
In a single engine plane with a standard propeller, you need to step on the right rudder pedal in order to keep the plane flying straight. Of course that rudder deflection causes aerodynamic drag - which will slow the plane down. I’m pretty sure that the two props on this seaplane being counter-rotating to each other will cancel most of the P-Torque - thereby removing the need to step on the rudder (so much)…
I do think that the rotation of the engine(s) alone will cause a torque reaction that will still need some control inputs to cancel.


Except that then when you would have to dictate that lead (dead weight) would have to be added to compensate for the forward CG of a higher displacement engine, it becomes a diminishing return.
Higher power density aircraft engines of later designs negate these problems.
If a larger displacement V-12 couldn't be designed to be lighter than that V-24, I'd look for better designers.
Well said Neil. My point is though that shifting the CG forward would necessitate dead weight added to the rear of the fuselage. I’m confident that with what they new at the time, they did an amazing job. It’s all speculation really but a good discussion of a design milestone.