De Havilland DH103 Hornet.

Sid327 · Sep 11, 2019

I searched and couldn't find a thread in this part of the forum for this aircraft.
If there is could you please let me know and I will ask for this one to be added to it....

The pic source: the Internet.

Wurger · Sep 11, 2019

fahrens · Sep 12, 2019

Dash119 · Sep 12, 2019

A bit obscure, but this is one of my favorites of the era.

AMCKen · Sep 12, 2019

My favourite twin.

Sid327 · Sep 12, 2019

AMCKen said:
My favourite twin.

Do you know they are rebuilding one in NZ using parts from the wreckage of TT193 (that was in Canada)?

http://warbirdsnews.com/aircraft-re...sea-hornet-airworthy-restoration-project.html

Gnomey · Sep 12, 2019

Nice shots!

Skyediamonds · Sep 12, 2019

Always had trouble telling apart the DH Hornet from the Westland Whirlwind, apart from their tails.

buffnut453 · Sep 13, 2019

Skyediamonds said:
Always had trouble telling apart the DH Hornet from the Westland Whirlwind, apart from their tails.

It's easy....the Hornet is much prettier while the Whirlwind just looks slightly "off" (to me, at least).

Other opinions are available.

Skyediamonds · Sep 13, 2019

LoL... Saying "slightly" off is beyond me. That's like saying a Cessna-172 is prettier than a Cessna-182 b/c the -182 is slightly off due to its cowl flaps & thinner overall profile of the vertical fin. Or a Piper Tri Pacer is prettier than a Piper Colt b/c the Tri Pacer has two doors to seat four people whereas the Colt only seats two. Sorry for saying all this but the similarities between the above aircraft & the DH Hornet & Westland Whirlwind are just too close for me to make such a contrast. Maybe I'm missing something more?

mikemike · Sep 13, 2019

The Whirlwind has a longer nose than the Hornet, because they fitted four 20mm Hispanos in front of the cockpit. Consequently, the pilot sits almost over the trailing edge of the wing. In the Hornet, the cannon were underneath the cockpit, so the nose is shorter and the pilot sits much further forward. Besides, the Whirlwind's bubble canopy is almost (half-)egg-shaped, the one of the Hornet looks more streamlined.

Sid327 · Sep 13, 2019

The Whirlwind is a ''might have been''
It might look similar to some, ....as we all see things differently.
It was a good idea at the time but hampered by problems and under-powered.
Maybe it wasn't good enough to justify re-engining it with Merlins.
(The Whirlind must have been one of the first fighters with a teardrop canopy).
*pics found on the internet*

The two in comparison:-

buffnut453 · Sep 13, 2019

Skyediamonds said:
LoL... Saying "slightly" off is beyond me. That's like saying a Cessna-172 is prettier than a Cessna-182 b/c the -182 is slightly off due to its cowl flaps & thinner overall profile of the vertical fin. Or a Piper Tri Pacer is prettier than a Piper Colt b/c the Tri Pacer has two doors to seat four people whereas the Colt only seats two. Sorry for saying all this but the similarities between the above aircraft & the DH Hornet & Westland Whirlwind are just too close for me to make such a contrast. Maybe I'm missing something more?

It's the whole tail area of the Whirlwind. It just doesn't match the rest of the design. You have sleek, closely-cowled engines, a neat (if rather over-complicated) radiator installation, a decent bubble canopy, all of which are good-looking...and then they slap a tail on it that wouldn't be out of place on a Barracuda.

Mock all you like but, IMHO, the Hornet is the better-looking aircraft by a country mile (or any other long measure of distance you wish to select).

Capt. Vick · Sep 13, 2019

I don't know guys, I love them both.

Skyediamonds · Sep 14, 2019

Didn't either one have problems with powerplants other than being underpowered? I once read there were issues of overheating & reliability issues as well. Was it just one of them or did both have similar issues?

Sid327 · Sep 14, 2019

Skyediamonds said:
Didn't either one have problems with powerplants other than being underpowered? I once read there were issues of overheating & reliability issues as well. Was it just one of them or did both have similar issues?

Westland Whirlwind (fighter) - Wikipedia

de Havilland Hornet - Wikipedia

I read Eric Browns account about the DH103 Hornet and from memory it only required a few modifications for carrier work. No noted problems with the engines themselves. It needed a fin fillet to improve directional stability on one engine and the handed engines which initially were outward turning were changed to inward turning. ................One of the most over-powered aircraft available at the time.
The Whirlwind was not so lucky. The Peregrine engines were in short supply initially and it had a few problems with the installation. It's biggest problem was range. It was a good idea and an interesting plane, but RR quit development of the Peregrine to concentrate on the more promising Merlin.