Blackburn Shark quote

Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules

I can recall early Japanese bikes with frames you could feel flexing under you. Not to mention US bikes apparently made of cast iron by the weight and a remarkable aversion to going around corners. Russian motorcycle tyres were so, um, 'durable' that Czech ones were a vast improvement. Or the MZ motorcycles with superb engineering but shifting cores in the aluminium brake drums that either gave you 'retarding devices' instead of brakes or 'on/off' switch brakes. Excellent when fettled and with Avon tyres.
However, we digress.
Racing a Suzuki X7 against 3 other X7s I could not only feel the frame flexing I could see the others flexing too, it was a harmonic thing in the steering head.
 
I will say in my experience the Brits have a fantastic sense of humor! Hence my favorite, "The parts falling off this car are of the highest British manufacture"! I saw the last one at a Carlisle, PA Import & Kit Car show.

Great stuff and very true. My favourite quote about British stuff comes from a test pilot's report about a particular aircraft of which type I forget, possibly the Blackburn Botha, which it certainly could apply to. The pilot wrote "Access to the cockpit is difficult. It should have been made impossible..."

According to Bill Gunston, the funniest thing in Jackson's book is the engine starting procedure for the Blackburn T.B. See pages 95 and 97.

Oh the joy. A travesty of an aeroplane. The TB certainly earned the ridicule aimed at it. It was a long, hard road that Blackburn took to gain credibility...
 
So then, my speculation of:
I can only imagine that the procedure involved priming the engine, the call "switch on!", several muttered Hail Marys, the brave lad pulling the prop (who was volunteered for the job) and everyone running for their life when the engine sputters to life.
wasn't that far off, then. :lol:
 
The subsequent replacement of the Shark with the Swordfish is a puzzling one and, on analysis can only be put to a few deciding factors. The Shark outperformed the Swordfish and had other features that made it an eminently better choice, but of course, as SR points out, its Tiger engine lets it down.

A bit of background. In the Great War, Robert Blackburn built up his manufacturing empire in Yorkshire, building several factories to enable the construction of aeroplanes under licence and of his own design, including in an abandoned skating rink in Leeds - the Olympia Works at Roundhay Road. The TB is an indication that he had a bit of work to do. Nonetheless, in 1917 (maybe 1918?) he did approach the Admiralty with the lofty aspiration of wanting to be the principal supplier of its naval aircraft needs. Richard Fairey at this stage had similar aspirations, as the most prevalent supplier of aircraft to the Admiralty was at the time Short Brothers and Sopwith. Both Fairey and Blackburn were in competition with each other throughout the 20s and 30s, both being major suppliers of RAF FAA aircraft. Blackburn branched of into large flying boats for the RAF but on carriers specialised in torpedo aircraft, starting with being the major manufacturer of the Sopwith Cuckoo, the RAF's first torpedoplane, then supplied the FAA with the Dart, Baffin and Ripon. Fairey, meanwhile produced such ubiquitous types as the Fairey IIID, 'IIIF, Seal and Gordon general reconnaissance types, which were prevalent aboard warships as well as carriers, not to mention the Flycatcher fighter, which apparently was an excellent little machine for its day. The TSR (Torpedo Spotter Reconnaissance) spec that the Swordfish was built to, combining various roles into one airframe, as was the policy at the time, gave Fairey a march over Blackburn and its ironic to note that Blackburn eventually began manufacturing Swordfish under licence while Fairey was building Albacores, Fulmars, Fireflies and Barracudas.

There might have been some political bias involved in the decision to equip with Swordfish, aside from the fact that the Admiralty's aircraft decisions were made by the RAF at the time. The Swordfish had much going for it in the 1930s; it was strong, easy to maintain, reliable and could carry a lot of stores - hence its nickname "Stringbag". By WW2 though, it was obsolete. Eric Brown, not known for not having an opinion, commented on how he thought it terrible of the Admiralty to send young men off to war in such outdated equipment as the Swordfish and was rightly very critical of this, probably because he was one of those young men who would have had to go to war in outdated FAA aircraft, if it weren't for the timely decision to buy F4Fs from the USA.

This is the memorial stone erected at Manston airfield in Kent, from where Swordfish took off to attack the Scharnhorst and Gneisenau in 1942 and never returned.

30738110918_847fe73689_b.jpg
2307 Manston FAA Memorial
 
Pretty sure the Lycoming O-320 in our PA-28 was far more advanced in technology than any aircraft (civil or military) in 1909.

That being said, combat aircraft technology advanced well enough in the interwar years that the "interesting" situation experienced by the Blackburn rarely occurred post 1920's.
Except for radials, they slung oil everywhere...that seems to be a given.
They sling oil everywhere because that's how they mark their territory.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back