Merlin's for Peregrines

Thank you for the clarification.

I would comment that that perhaps "Individuals can lie" might be a bit strong although possible. Individuals can also be mistaken or reach wrong conclusions due to inaccurate information.

Individuals can also be stupid...don't forget that 'cos I is one!

futuredogfight said:

Reliability issues

Click to expand...

Once the initial gribbles with joint failures and vibrations were sorted out, and the pilots made aware of how to properly operate the Whirlwind's linked radiator shutter and flaps set-up, there were very few reliability problems with the Peregrine.

I do wonder where this idea that the Peregrine was "unreliable" first started. There's zero evidence to support it - although it would be true to say that the installation of the engine in the Whirlwind was pretty unsound in terms of cooling (and induction efficiency). As others have noted the Whirlwind used 100 octane fuel throughout its operational career, but was only cleared for short-term, "through the gate" use of 9lbs boost (as indeed was the early Merlin). One of the three aircraft issued to 25 Squadron for operational trials in the summer of 1940 was even modified by Rolls-Royce for 12lbs boost – which in earlier bench testing had given over 1,000hp.

As to why the aircraft wasn't designed around the Merlin to start with, it's probably worth bearing in mind that in early 1936 (when the Whirlwind was designed) the Merlin was not showing great promise. The engine in its original form failed its service type test on more than one occasion and didn't pass it until after it had been more or less completely redesigned as the Merlin II. Fortunately at the time the Fairey Battle was the only aircraft production programme that depended on it. It's also interesting that none of the six all-new designs for the requirement that led to the Whirlwind specified the Merlin. The single engined proposals were all Hercules or Vulture powered and the twins used either Kestrel derivatives (Westland and Supermarine) or the Aquila (Bristol). There seems to be agreement among the various designers that, irrespective of the format of the aeroplane, around 1300-1600 total horsepower were needed to meet the requirement. So, one Merlin (then seen as a 1,000hp engine) was not enough and two were too much – in the sense that they would lead to an unnecessarily large and expensive aircraft.

In reality it matters very little what engine the aircraft was fitted with: The Whirlwind would still have been cancelled in October 1939 since the desire to simplify the Rolls-Royce engine programme was very much a secondary factor in that cancellation.

Niall