tatest

The sounds would be different because of the 14:9 difference in how often the cylinders fire, and because of differences in exhaust collectors and stacks.My understanding of the Cyclone vs Twin Wasp selection is that the DC-3 was designed around the Cyclone, but the Twin Wasp version was selected for the C-47 to help manage a broader war materials procurement situation. In 1942, the Cyclone was already going into the B-17, SBC, SBD and the Lockheed Lodestar/Hudson family of aircraft being produced for Lend-Lease customers. The R-1830 Wasp was being used in the soon to be replace Grumman Wildcat (continuing production would be FM-2 from GM using the Cyclone) and the PBY which were lower production volume. While the R-1830 Twin Wasp would eventually go into large numbers of B-24s, mass production of that aircraft had not begun to reach the scale of B-17 production. The P&W Twin Wasp was, at that time, a more readily available engine.Douglas built 600 some DC-3 aircraft before the war, many with the Cyclone, but everything after 1942 started out as a military variant (C-47, C-53, C-117, R4D) with the Twin Wasp, some 10,000 all told, before production stopped. Most DC-3s in civil use after the war were born as C-47 et al.The license built Lisunov Li-2 in the USSR used a Cyclone-like engine, i.e. the M-62 developed from the M-25, an earlier license built Cyclone. The license built L2D in Japan used locally-built Kinsei engines developed from a much earlier license for the P&W Hornet, a single row engine larger than the Wasp but smaller than the Cyclone.