# Westland Whirlwind



## Colin1 (May 6, 2009)

Not a long piece 
and not great quality but the only known footage of the Westland Whirlwind


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pngPa9xgiWo_

It seems to go straight into the next vid which is irritating


----------



## Matt308 (May 6, 2009)

I've said this before, but when flying it looks like a Pucara.


----------



## Colin1 (May 10, 2009)

You know Matt
you do have a point, there are striking similarities from some of the principal angles. Not to scale with each other - not with my photoshop skills, anyway


----------



## Freebird (May 10, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> Not a long piece
> and not great quality but the only known footage of the Westland Whirlwind



Yes what a tragedy, about 1 min flying time is all that remains.


----------



## Graeme (May 10, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> You know Matt
> you do have a point, there are striking similarities from some of the principal angles. Not to scale with each other - not with my photoshop skills, anyway



Nice work Colin!  At least you can combine two images into one, I haven't been able to achieve that yet.
I don't see a big similarity between them, especially with the side profiles. Here's some front views which I think are more "Westland Like" than the Pucara.


----------



## Colin1 (May 10, 2009)

Graeme said:


> Nice work Colin!  At least you can combine two images into one, I haven't been able to achieve that yet.
> I don't see a big similarity between them, especially with the side profiles. Here's some front views which I think are more "Westland Like" than the Pucara


Actually, I can't combine them, not in Photoshop anyway  
that's where Windows Paint came in, soooo much easier to do the pairing, then drag it into the 'shop application and size it up for the forum

I don't think the side views are particularly similar either but wings/engine positioning and tailplanes do have alot of similarities esp in flight. I though the comparison would be interesting across such a generational gap as that which exists between these two.
Another contender in a what-if would have been the Grumman XF5F (same period) but I couldn't find much spec data on it.


----------



## Matt308 (May 10, 2009)

I remain convinced of the similarity.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uhUQ-zIQmQ_

Surely they are not the same airframe. But you have to admit that the underpowered airplanes have similar flight characteristics, similar profiles and similar planar outlines.

The exact same? No. But friggin' close? Absolutely.


----------



## Airframes (May 11, 2009)

Cripes! I agree Matt, I'd never even thought about it, let alone noticed, until now.


----------



## Freebird (May 11, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> I remain convinced of the similarity.
> 
> But you have to admit that the underpowered airplanes have similar flight characteristics, similar profiles and similar planar outlines.
> 
> The exact same? No. But friggin' close? Absolutely.



Are you saying the Whirlwind was underpowered?


----------



## Colin1 (May 11, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> I remain convinced of the similarity.
> 
> Sure they are not the same airframe. But you have to admit that the underpowered airplanes have similar flight characteristics, similar profiles and similar planar outlines


I still think so too
to the extent that in a furball, one might get mistaken for the other in the same way the Typhoon could be for an early Fw190 or a frame-canopy Mustang could for a Bf109 - again, not the same airframe in either case but enough similarity to make you look twice if the shot presented itself.
On the basis of Matt's video and Graeme's sales-speak in the other related thread, I need to revise my view of the two going one-on-one in some circumstances; a Whirlwind that is comfortable with a Bf109 low down against a Pucara with exceptional agility low down? If the Pucara has got rid of his underslung ordnance and his fuel load-out reflects a short-range mission (ie where the normal take-off weights of the two a/c are similar), it could be anyone's fight.


----------



## Graeme (May 11, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> I remain convinced of the similarity.
> 
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4uhUQ-zIQmQ_




Good clip Matt. (Didn't Charles Bronson devote a thread to the Pucara somewhere in the forum?)
It's a bloody cameleon in that clip. Depending on the angle, how far from the monitor you are and with eyes squinted, I see a lot of "similar" looking machines.

Beech Super King Air
Beech 1900
Embraer EMB-121 Xingu
Messerschmitt Me 410 cockpit
Whirlwind
Welkin 
And with the tail obliterated, even a Sud Aviation SE-117.
















Just adds up to a unique looking machine...


----------



## Graeme (May 11, 2009)

Colin1 said:


> Another contender in a what-if would have been the Grumman XF5F (same period) but I couldn't find much spec data on it.



Worthy of a new thread Colin!  The Army Version (XP-50) has a performance very similar to the Whirlwind...







​


----------



## Colin1 (May 11, 2009)

Graeme said:


> Worthy of a new thread Colin!  The Army Version (XP-50) has a performance very similar to the Whirlwind...


OK
that looks so damned similar to the Grumman XF5F because it was just the Army version of it?


----------



## Colin1 (May 11, 2009)

Graeme said:


> ...Depending on the angle, how far from the monitor you are and with eyes squinted, I see a lot of "similar" looking machines.


I saw Elvis, the face of Jesus Christ and a dolphin


----------



## Colin1 (May 11, 2009)

Graeme said:


>


in these photos, you can see the problem with recognition, esp in a furball where you've got alot of other stuff going on too; in shot 1 he's in your crosshairs but isn't going to stay there forever and in shot 2 he's about to nail your wingman if he's one of the bad guys.
I don't think the Typhoon/early Focke-wulf or frame-canopy Mustang/Bf109 looked anything like each other side by side on the apron but in a furball where you've got split-seconds to decide, you can see (in all three instances) the two combatants morphing into each other


----------



## Jeffro (May 11, 2009)

I'm glad your aircraft recognition skills where never needed, apart from 2 engines and a high tail thats about it.

IMHO, the Whirlwind is the most beautiful WW2 aircraft and the Pucara an average looking COIN from the '70's.

Add to your XP-50/XF5F thread, the Gloster 2E from prewar.


----------



## Matt308 (May 11, 2009)

Well then it's settled. Jeffro on his third post has made a "definitive". Welcome to the forum.


----------



## Colin1 (May 12, 2009)

Matt308 said:


> Well then it's settled. Jeffro on his third post has made a "definitive"...


----------



## renrich (May 12, 2009)

Interesting that music from "The Last of the Mohicans" is used in the background.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 12, 2009)

> Good clip Matt. (Didn't Charles Bronson devote a thread to the Pucara somewhere in the forum?)
> It's a bloody cameleon in that clip. Depending on the angle, how far from the monitor you are and with eyes squinted, I see a lot of "similar" looking machines.




I have 2 actually:

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/modern/fma-ia-58-pucara-coin-aircraft-1599.html

http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/multilingual-corner/fma-ia-58-pucara-coin-1576.html

The thing with british footage WW2 is as bit frustrating, for example there is a lot of german guncam and more of USAAF, but very few of british fighters.


----------



## Colin1 (May 12, 2009)

CharlesBronson said:


> The thing with British footage WW2 is as bit frustrating, for example there is a lot of German guncam and more of USAAF, but very few of British fighters.


One researcher
was doing a piece on British gunnery in WWII and asked permission to see archival records of camera footage; once the archivists realised that he was trying to reveal what lousy shots the British were, he was denied access. I'm not suggesting that that's the reason why you can't find any camera footage, there's probably a host of other, more practical reasons - maybe most of it was destroyed or although by now de-classified, it's just that nobody's bothered to make it readily available.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 12, 2009)

> One researcher
> was doing a piece on British gunnery in WWII and asked permission to see archival records of camera footage; once the archivists realised that he was trying to reveal what lousy shots the British were, he was denied access. I'm not suggesting that that's the reason why you can't find any camera footage, there's probably a host of other, more practical reasons - maybe most of it was destroyed or although by now de-classified, it's just that nobody's bothered to make it readily available.



Shame on the british, poor propagandist they are . To contrary the germans have all the good shoots publizised in the "Deutsche Wochenschau" and others newsreel, piece of cake to adquire that. The same goes for the USAAF and US NAVY, the american armada even had color guncam footage.


----------



## vikingBerserker (May 12, 2009)

Perhaps the British did not equip all fighters with gun cameras?????????

I think the Whirlwind is a beautiful plane, up until you get to the tail, then it looks tad odd IMO.


----------



## CharlesBronson (May 12, 2009)

Well, I dont know about every british Fighter but Spitfires had guncam installed as standar equipment since 1941.


----------



## CharlesBronson (Jul 18, 2010)

Video of Whirlwinds loading up, some of the bombs are written in spanish so is likely there was an argentine pilot in that squadron.


----------



## gwalch (Jul 24, 2010)

Top work CharlesBronson.. thanks for uploading that video.. gotta love this aircraft.


----------



## Glider (Jul 24, 2010)

I always thought that if you looked them head on they reminded me of a Meteor.


----------



## sunny91 (Jul 24, 2010)

Thanks for sharing


----------



## vikingBerserker (Jul 24, 2010)

Glider said:


> I always thought that if you looked them head on they reminded me of a Meteor.



Dead on, it does.


----------



## Shortround6 (Jul 25, 2010)

Thanks for sharing.


----------

