For single engine fighters and bombers, not for a twin engine fighter the size of the Whirlwind.
Cheers
Steve
Did The Prop Doom The Westland Whirlwind?
- Thread starter MIflyer
- Start date
Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
For single engine fighters and bombers, not for a twin engine fighter the size of the Whirlwind.
Cheers
Steve
Not least because it didn't have particularly long range. It was limited operationally to a 120 mile radius of operation, despite a theoretical range of 570 miles.
On 12th August 1941 twelve Whirlwinds escorted a Hurricane from their base at Warmwell to Debden and back, a distance of about 130 miles each way 'as the crow flies'. The fuel remaining in the tanks of all twelve Whirlwinds was dipped to determine a prudent radius of action and this was set at the aforementioned 120 miles.
Cheers
Steve
Last edited:
(Un)fortunately, there was no small twin-engined fighter size of the Whrilwind anywhere in Allied inventory, bar the RAF.
Yes, but with a couple of properly supercharged 1000 hp engines it would have been a more than decent aircraft in 1941/2. Four 20 mm cannon was still very heavy armament for the period.
Personally I don't think the RAF missed it, and the rationalisation of engine production was justified. It was never going to be a wonder weapon.
Cheers
Steve
RAF certainly didn't depended on the Whirlwind.
What I'd like to see on the Whirly II would've been a less convoluted intake (like the Gloster twin used), better exhausts and better carb (injection, not the float-type), cross-feed fuel system, 1000 HP or close to it was already there on 100 oct fuel. Good S/C would've been good, probably worth another 100 HP all around.
The Spitfire with same improvements, internal BP glass and consistent fit & finish would've been even better, though.
Shortround6
Major General
Not a wonder weapon but a useful one why they straightened out the Typhoon
Or junked it and built Griffon Spitfires
J.A.W.
Banned
Not a wonder weapon but a useful one why they straightened out the Typhoon
Or junked it and built Griffon Spitfires
Yeah, I laughed at that - as if a 'dainty' wee Spit could really do a 2nd TAF Typhoon's job..
Shortround6
Major General
I guess your right
Fake pictures right?
after all the Daily Mail says the Spitfire couldn't carry bombs or rockets
RAF Typhoon jet is painted with D-Day stripes to fly with Spitfire | Daily Mail Online
Fake pictures right?
after all the Daily Mail says the Spitfire couldn't carry bombs or rockets
RAF Typhoon jet is painted with D-Day stripes to fly with Spitfire | Daily Mail Online
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,022
- Jun 25, 2013
The Tempest would probably have been much more useful, especially early on, if its fuselage didn't break apart in flight. And the engine worked.
Back to the Whirlwind....
It was an aircraft that was barely more capable than contemporary single-engine fighters, like the Spitfire, was at least 50% more expensive to produce and support, and required an engine which had no other applications. Putting Merlins into the Whirlwind would required massive changes -- nearly double the fuel tankage, a larger wing, new landing gear, a new empennage -- and would be, in essence, a completely new aircraft.
Back to the Whirlwind....
It was an aircraft that was barely more capable than contemporary single-engine fighters, like the Spitfire, was at least 50% more expensive to produce and support, and required an engine which had no other applications. Putting Merlins into the Whirlwind would required massive changes -- nearly double the fuel tankage, a larger wing, new landing gear, a new empennage -- and would be, in essence, a completely new aircraft.
J.A.W.
Banned
Tempests didn't suffer from rear fuselage breakages, they were rated with an ultimate G factor of +14..
Spitfires were 'press-ganged' into TAF 'mud-moving' sure, but they could not match the Typhoon's capabilities.
This late `41 AFDU report - is the clincher as to why the RAF, really saw no future for the Whirlwind:
www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/typhoon/Typhoon_AFDU_Tactical_Trials.pdf
Edit: ( & for any P-39 'experts' - its the reason why the RAF didn't want them Bells, either)
Spitfires were 'press-ganged' into TAF 'mud-moving' sure, but they could not match the Typhoon's capabilities.
This late `41 AFDU report - is the clincher as to why the RAF, really saw no future for the Whirlwind:
www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/typhoon/Typhoon_AFDU_Tactical_Trials.pdf
Edit: ( & for any P-39 'experts' - its the reason why the RAF didn't want them Bells, either)
Last edited:
swampyankee
Chief Master Sergeant
- 4,022
- Jun 25, 2013
Sorry; confused the Typhoon and Tempest. The latter was a derivative of the former, which was the one which suffered from structural failures.
Incidentally, most aircraft are designed not to fall apart in flight. The Typhoon's structural problems are well-documented, and several were lost due to in-flight structural failure.
J.A.W.
Banned
So were Spitfires, & Mustangs.. & P-38's were slated for their like propensities by USAAF Materiel Command.
They are and the failures were due to issues with tailplane/elevator, which over stressed and fatigued the structure, rather than an inherent structural weakness of the fuselage (as in,say, the Bf 109 F).
Cheers
Steve
J.A.W.
Banned
AFAIR, the Typhoon ( along with the P-38) were, as some of the very fast-flown early war fighters,
manifesting evidence of localised high-Mach airflows causing stress/vibration by which metal-fatigue
weakened structures could fail catastrophically - when sufficent force was subsequently applied.
These issues were little understood at the time, along with Mach 'burble' & 'control lock'.
I recall reading R. Beamonts accounts of test-pilot flying, where his job involved doing violent
stick-movements in high speed dives, so that once back on the ground ( hopefully in one piece)
close examination of the Typhoon would reveal stress-marks in the metal!
These flight-tests were being done on new aircraft however, so nothing 'jumped out'.
The irritating high-speed buzzing vibration ( Beamont called it "general commotion") felt in the
Typhoon was attributed to its high revving Sabre mill, but when the Tempest with its 'high speed wing'
profile began flight-testing, the annoying vibes were notably absent, despite using the same Sabre
installation, & it was finally realised, that the phenomenom was a thick-wing/airflow caused matter.
Retro-fitting the Tempest's thinner tailplane & 4-blade prop also helped reduce the 'buzz',
but right up 'til they were retired, & despite all palliatives, Typhoons still could (& did,- if rarely)
suffer sudden departure of their tail empennage, with, usually - a fatal outcome.
manifesting evidence of localised high-Mach airflows causing stress/vibration by which metal-fatigue
weakened structures could fail catastrophically - when sufficent force was subsequently applied.
These issues were little understood at the time, along with Mach 'burble' & 'control lock'.
I recall reading R. Beamonts accounts of test-pilot flying, where his job involved doing violent
stick-movements in high speed dives, so that once back on the ground ( hopefully in one piece)
close examination of the Typhoon would reveal stress-marks in the metal!
These flight-tests were being done on new aircraft however, so nothing 'jumped out'.
The irritating high-speed buzzing vibration ( Beamont called it "general commotion") felt in the
Typhoon was attributed to its high revving Sabre mill, but when the Tempest with its 'high speed wing'
profile began flight-testing, the annoying vibes were notably absent, despite using the same Sabre
installation, & it was finally realised, that the phenomenom was a thick-wing/airflow caused matter.
Retro-fitting the Tempest's thinner tailplane & 4-blade prop also helped reduce the 'buzz',
but right up 'til they were retired, & despite all palliatives, Typhoons still could (& did,- if rarely)
suffer sudden departure of their tail empennage, with, usually - a fatal outcome.
Kevin J
Banned
Everyone here seems to have overlooked the Hispano-Suiza 12Y which had similar dimensions and weight, but more power. Of course, the problem would be that by the time the Whirlwind entered service with these, France would have signed an armistice with Germany, Spain was already a fascist state, Switzerland was neutral and the USSR had a non-aggression pact with Germany. In 1940 that leaves no alternate engine supplier without major mods to the air frame. So logically, you must push forwards with the Typhoon as there is no other option.
