Hawker Henley

[johnbr]

Aviation photographs of Photographer: Joe Barr Collection :

 

[Wurger]

 

[johnbr]

Hawker Henley MKI - First prototype K5115.
Originally powered by a Rolls-Royce Merlin engine. It made its first flight from Brooklands on 10th March 1937.
Photo shows it being used as an engine testbed having been fitted with a Rolls-Royce Vulture, 24-cylinder engine in 1939.Hawker Henley K5115 was the irst Vulture trials aircraft and L3302 was the second which lew early in 1939. Both had short and eventful lying careers, the latter ending up on a beach at Borth in Wales on 3 June 1940"
Barry Dening Rayner | Facebook

 

[fubar57]

Ugly beast

 

[pbehn]

Ugly beast

It looked much better before the crash.

 

[Gnomey]

Nice shots!

 

[Zipper730]

Here's something I remember hearing: The Henley had a level-bombing capability as conceived (if not flown). The rear-gunner evidently was also a bomb-aimer, and could sort of crawl underneath the pilot's seat (at least that's what I've heard, and this arrangement was used on the TBD) and operate a bombsight: It seems like it'd be a major problem as, during level-bombing runs, you have no gunner that can do anything, and the plane has to fly nice and straight.

Seems like a good way to get shot.

I'm curious if this requirement had to do with any of the following

• The RAF didn't consider a dive bomber to be a bomber (even a light one) unless it could also level-bomb)
• The RAF didn't trust relying totally on dive-bombers (a lot of the proponents of them weren't in the RAF anymore, and/or lacked the voice and the will to push for them), and decided that level bombing should be included to provide more versatility

Airframes , P pbehn , Wurger

 

[pbehn]

Here's something I remember hearing: The Henley had a level-bombing capability as conceived (if not flown). The rear-gunner evidently was also a bomb-aimer, and could sort of crawl underneath the pilot's seat (at least that's what I've heard, and this arrangement was used on the TBD) and operate a bombsight: It seems like it'd be a major problem as, during level-bombing runs, you have no gunner that can do anything, and the plane has to fly nice and straight.

Seems like a good way to get shot.

I'm curious if this requirement had to do with any of the following

• The RAF didn't consider a dive bomber to be a bomber (even a light one) unless it could also level-bomb)
• The RAF didn't trust relying totally on dive-bombers (a lot of the proponents of them weren't in the RAF anymore, and/or lacked the voice and the will to push for them), and decided that level bombing should be included to provide more versatility

Airframes , P pbehn , Wurger

Wiki says this about the Henley, a proper dive bomber like the Ju 87 is a specialised aircraft. In my opinion the Henley was just a waste of Merlins, like the Battle.

By this time the Air Ministry had, however, decided that it no longer required a light bomber (probably because it was felt that this role was adequately filled by the Fairey Battle). Accordingly, the Henley, which in line with RAF policy had not been fitted with dive brakes; bomb crutches; or specialised bomb sights and thus limited to attack angles of no greater than 70° (and consequently far less accurate than specialised German dive bombers of the same period, notably the Ju 87 Stuka, fitted with all of the foregoing and a semi-automatic bomb release and dive termination system and thus capable of near-vertical dives of pin-point accuracy) was relegated to target-towing duty.

 

[Capt. Vick]

I like it...

 

[don4331]

Here's something I remember hearing: The Henley had a level-bombing capability as conceived (if not flown). The rear-gunner evidently was also a bomb-aimer, and could sort of crawl underneath the pilot's seat (at least that's what I've heard, and this arrangement was used on the TBD) and operate a bombsight: It seems like it'd be a major problem as, during level-bombing runs, you have no gunner that can do anything, and the plane has to fly nice and straight.

Seems like a good way to get shot.

The few moments that the plane is flying "nice and straight" on the bomb run, is also when it is most likely to be under fire from AAA.

Enemy fighters tend to avoid those areas, just in case the gunners on the ground aren't being too particular with what they are shooting down.

By the time, the bomber is out to the Flak zone, bomb-aimer would would have resumed his position as rear gunner.

I look at the Henley with Vulture (and 4-20mm wing guns - the outer panels were same as the Hurricane) as the two seat fighter/recon plane the FAA needed. With Merlin, the Henley cruised same as top speed as Fulmar II; with >50% more power, it would be a top of the class.

 

[fastmongrel]

Whichever committee designed the Henley canopy should have stuck to designing greenhouses.