We had a 9-cyl 300hp Lycoming on our Stearman when I was a kid. 1qt/hour of oil consumption was normal. About half got burned, the other half spread on the fuselage.
My first instinct was to say “Harvard” - and then I see that’s what we called the Texan.
I just checked my B-36 flight manual. Each P&W R4360 engine was equipped with a 200 gallon oil tank. Normally serviced only to 150 gallons. For worst-case 30 hour missions that comes in at around 5 gallons of oil per engine per hour.
Seems to me that the place and date are important here; if I was to see something like that flying over my house, I’d go check out the local flight museum’s web page and see what it was, as that’s the most likely source. If not them, then I’d see if the CAF has an air show going on anywhere nearby in the near future.
In my earlier working days I remember some who worked and flew on A/C powered by big radials and that the running joke was, when the plane arrived, was “Fill the oil, and check the fuel”.
A side note: there was an excellent documentary called “Spitfire Women” that chronicled the women pilots who ferried Spitfires from the factories to the aerodromes in Britain in WWII. Interesting to note that there were 20-some different versions of the plane, which had to be constantly modified for the larger engines needed to compete against the German aircraft.
Another side note: I saw a biplane over our neighborhood a couple of weeks ago. Very cool.
The Avenger doesn’t not look like a fighter either, pardon my English.
Like most WWII fighters it had a wingspan slightly longer than it’s length, and it does have squared off wings. Only 10 feet bigger than a Hellcat. The bomb bay wouldn’t be all that viable from the ground.
If we could calculate how many moving parts each airplane had, I’ll bet the B-36 would top the list. Especially the early ones that could sprout clusters of gun turrets when needed.
How big is that manual?
Hopefully the bomb bay would be viable from the ground, just not all that visible.
You’re probably right on the parts count.
It’s a 756 page PDF where each page is a scan of a paper manual. About 350MB. The scans aren’t great, a little fuzzy and a little skewed, so it’s tiring to read. No internal table of contents either. But the contents themselves are priceless.
If you (or anyone else) is into vintage aircraft and their associated manuals, Avialogs is a great source for such esoterica. It’s one guy’s labor of love and well worth the price of admission.