Westland Whirlwind revisited

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

There are some things the Whirlwind was never going to do (at least without lots of modification)

Like two seat night fighter.
Like looong range fighter. Lets face it, 75 sq ft of wing at 40lbs per sq/st of wing loading allows for the FW 187 or P-38 to run 3000lbs heavier at the same wing loading.
Same for stuffing Merlins in it. Upping each engine installation by 300-400lbs and adding larger fuel tanks makes for a very heavy fighter for a 250sq ft wing.

You want twin Merlins? Look at a short wing Welkin. But the Welkin still didn't use a thin section wing and had problems at altitude.

Stopping production of a 21 liter engine was the right thing to do, it was too limited in application, unfortunately whatever advantage this gave RR as a company was frittered away on a national scale by Napiers taking way too long to straighten out the Sabre and by Bristol Dumping Fedden and quite probably delaying the Centaurus. This left the Merlin, Griffon and Hercules as pretty much the default engines for any 'practical' designs for most of the war.
 
Dowding had no control over the Lysander which didn't feature in his command. However, his low opinion of Westland is at least partly based on his expressed view that the build quality of the Lysander was very poor.

Projects like the Welkin also fell outside his aegis. Dowding had no influence over development contracts issued by the Air Ministry, let alone private ventures, nor did he have any say in who built what. It's not how the British system worked.

He did make his opinions known about what sort of aircraft he wanted in his command and they carried some weight. That didn't stop him getting lumbered with a load of Defiants though.

Cheers

Steve
 
True, the Lysander was the Army aircraft, the FC was a part of the RAF.
The supposed low build quality of the Whirlwind is in collision with what was wanted from a future producer of Spitfires - if a production line cannot produce an own design as a quality product, why expect it will produce other people's design in a good quality?

Projects like the Welkin also fell outside his aegis. Dowding had no influence over development contracts issued by the Air Ministry, let alone private ventures, nor did he have any say in who built what. It's not how the British system worked.
Click to expand...

At any rate, Westland was not regarded, by all those that mattered, as an company incapable to came out with a proper fighter aircraft. Had it been introduced, the Welkin would come under FC's command.
 
The air ministry did not always pick the best proposal/paper airplane but often went with the one they thought had a reasonable chance of being produced in a timely fashion. Most companies of time ( and in many countries) actually had rather small design staffs and could only work on a few projects at a time. Or at the same stage. If one project is at the prototype stage and going well with production not far off then a 2nd project starting with drawings and a mock up (different parts of the design team and workshop involved ) is easy. Trying to run two simultaneous projects with each stage running in parallel (mocks ups finished the same month, etc) may mean delays in both projects.
Most British companies were taking around two years to got from initial proposal to prototype flight with production starting around a year later. Great proposal from a company already overloaded ( a lot of worry that the Supermarine, a flying boat builder, would have trouble mass producing fighter planes.) might get benched if the Ministry thought they could not deliver the airplanes, not that the airplane would fail to perform. Supermarine was also bidding on or proposing a number of other aircraft at the time. The Sea Otter, the Dumbo torpedo bomber (both designs flew but Dumbo not adopted) and several different fighter projects and a 4 engine bomber project (with different engines so there were two mock ups, both destroyed when the Supermarine works were bombed.)
 
Sometimes either the aircraft producers were too good salesmen, or the costumers (air ministries of the countries) tended to believe some of their promises too much, or both. Like Bell trumpeting 400 mph for the non-turbo armed P-39, while that was out of capability for turboed and unarmed XP 39. Or wanting the Lightning to do 400 mph without turbos, on engines to be discontinued, same rotation, bad exhaust intake system. Beaufighter was promised to make 370 mph, Typhoon 450 mph? - sure makes easier to cancel the Whirly and to skip the Gloster F.9/37.

The Gloster twin should be a better airframe for Merlins and as night-fighter than Whirly (without major modifications), being bigger.

Germans expected great things from He 177, Ju 288, Me 210/410, that did not pan out. Soviets have had problems with serial produced examples emulating performance figures of prototypes - fault of factories, rather than design bureaus? Guess Soviet designers were rather careful what to propose, consequences for failure were not comforting
 
aircraft performance i believe resulted in 2 famous sayings: "looked good on paper" and "back to the drawing board" ( repeat both several times in some cases )
 
If the whirlwind could have performed at altitude and been in service during the BoB it could have been significant. Just 50 whirlwinds in place of the big wing would have decimated bombers stripped of escorts. The fact is it wasn't, the Peregrine was never going to be more useful than the Merlin so it was ditched. A twin engine single seat A/C has limited uses. Making the Whirlwind a Merlin engined, two or more seated A/C is a completely new plane. I doubt if you could bodge a Whirlwind to be better than a Beaufighter and I am certain you could not get it to be better than a Mosquito, by the time the Whirlwind was going into service the Mosquito was already being ordered. A twin engined fighter can never manoeuvre like a single engined plane especially in roll rate and will always be more expensive and easier to hit.
 
I twin engine airplane does not have only limited uses. There are many example of twins with a good array of capabilities.

There is no reason why a Whirlwind could not be as good or better than a Mosuito ... but it would surely evolve into something other than the basic Whirlwind in the process. Designing a new wing that could handle the weight and HP of 2 Merlins would necessitate a fuselage "plug" to counterbalance the added forward weight together with a larger empenage to control the added weight of the larger aircraft. It might LOOK like a scaled-up Whirlwind, but the structure would have few common design pieces except maybe the canopy area.

There is nothing whatsoever "magic" about a Mosquito. They got it right with the right combination of power, airfoil, streamlining, etc.

There is nothing saying someone couldn't come up with another twin that was as good or better. The fact that nobody in the wartime UK did it doesn't preclude it from being possible. All it means is nobody got it done during WWII in time for the war. They were probably too busy making more Mosquitoes.

I'm pretty sure a Hornet would gave a Mosquito a run for it's money in most departments except those requiring a second crewman.

The P-38 was pretty close in most departments and superior in some. It surely shot down more enemy aircraft than the Mosquito did in any case. It wasn't exactly employed in the same roles, but that is a case of use, not capability.

For high speed recon, the Mitsubishi Ki-46 would give almsot any Allied twin a run for the money, and often did just that.

Had it been available sooner and in numbers, the Do.335 might well have fiven Allied fighters, evern late-war types, a real run for their money during a raid. The fact that it wasn't avilable sooner doesn't mean it wasn't possible. It means that's when it came along in the German priority list.
 
The Whirlwind is not in any way comparable to the Mosquito, other than having two Rolls-Royce V-12 engines and carrying 4 20mm cannon in some versions (some of which also had 4 x 0..303" mgs).

The Whirlwind was designed as a single seat fighter.
The Mosquito was designed as an unarmed bomber.

The Mosquito is larger and has room for bombs carried internally, even when fitted with the 4 20mm cannons.

The Mosquito was adapted as a photo reconnaissance aircraft. The Whirlwind coudl be adapted to do the same, but I doubt that it would have the range.
The Mosquito was adapted as a fighter, but it was not that good a day fighter. Then it was adapted as a night fighter - a role in which it excelled. I doubt the Whirlwind could have carried the necessary radar and equipment without serious detriment to its performance.
Both could do the fighter-bomber role.
I doubt the 57mm auto-cannon could have been fitted to the Whirlwind for anti-shipping strikes.

Neither was the Hornet in the same category as the Mosquito. It was a dedicated single seat fighter (until later NF Sea Hornets).
 
Wayne, I never SAID it was comparable. I really don't believe you are reading my posts beyond a sentence or two. You just start firing away. Go back and read it.

What I said was the Whirlwind could have been made into a good fighter, with Merlins ... or some other engine. All it would take is a new wing of suitable high speed airfoil/area and the fuselage plug and empenage, possibly of different airfoil and design, to handle it. Before you call foul on anything about changing the empenage, go look at the Spitire series and think about it. The empenage on something like an F.21 or other Griffon unit is nothing like a Spitfire Mk. V.

The Ta 152H was an Fw 190D with a ... NEW WING. Who says they could not have done it with the Whirlwind? We all know they didn't in real life, but because they didn't actually do something doesn't mean it can't be done.

I wasn't trying to dengrate the Mosquito; I was saying another plane could easily have performed as well, even a modified Whirlwind. It would take "fixing" the things that were wrong with the Whirlwind, sure. It was a task, buj not an impossible one. It would need a sponsor and the desire to get it done, neither of which seem to have been in hgih supply in the UK in 1940. Ergo, it wasn't ever accomplished or even started with anythiung like suitable funding. I habe NO IDEA whether or not Westlands ever tried to develop the Whirwind on their own, but I'd doubt it in the wartime UK given the fact that when you are being attacked with the intent to invade, long range planning comes in a poor second to immediate needs. Likely Westlands was doing whatever they were asked and paid to do rather than engaging in private development of a plane being dropped from production.

And I never said the Hornet was in the same category as the Mosquito and, in fact, didn't mention category at all. I said it performed as well, and it did. How could it help NOT performing as well? Basically the same layout with basically slightly more power, smaller airframe and just as streamlined if not better.
 
Last edited:
Sorry Greg, not just directed at you.

No doubt given time and effort the Whirlwind could have become a useful aircraft. Alas that time was not available, beyond the time it had already taken.

There are some roles where there could be some cross-over. But the Mosquito could never really compete as a day fighter (F.II was a day fighter, but many of them were built before they became the NF.II), and teh Whirlwind could never compete as a bomber.

Westlands did develop the Welkin - I'm not sure if that was from an official requirement. It was powered by Merlins, and was intended to be a high altitude interceptor. It didn't really work, and the threat disappeared in any case.
 
Actually, Wayne, I am reminded that Bell took the P-39 and scaled it up .. and came out with the P-63. Late model P-63's would give a P-51 all it wanted at any altitude while being just a tiny bit slower. The thing that killed the P-63 for the USA was the low stick force per g. It was easy to overstress it if you got athletic on the the stick.

If they can essentially scale up a P-39 and if they could make a Lancaster from a Manchester, then they probably COULD scale up a Whirlwind to use Merlins and change whatever needed to be changed to get faster. I'm just not really sure the result would be worth the effort .... but it MIGHT be a really good one. Hard to tell unless you actually DO it, and nobody did, as I well know.

It's another dreaded "what-if."

I am seriously reminded of the FMA I,Ae.30 Namcu. It REALLY looks like an all-metal de Havilland product and has absolutely great performance. It flew in 1950, but flew with decidely WWII technology. If they could do THAT, then the scaled up Whirlwind might have some possibilities if they did it right.

For those who haven't seen one, here is the world's one and only Namcu:



It had a top speed of 460 mph! ... and seriously looks very de Havilland-like to me, in all metal. Too bad the total population was one. It sported a pair of Merlin 604's.

Also, to me only, probably, it looks very Whirlwind-like. That's likely due to poor toilet training as a kid. But ... substitute 4 cannons for the pitot tube ... and what do you think?

Low wing, twin-engine, cruciform tail, single-seat, conventional gear ... it had all the characteristics and had the performance to boot, all on WWII technology ... albeit a bit after the war ended.
 
Last edited:
Shortround6 said:
I know the twin will need more accessories and instruments and that weights are only an indicator but there sure doesn't seem to be the great savings that was being made out.
Click to expand...
Rolls-Royce said that each Peregrine would cost two Merlins, and nobody has produced any evidence that they lied about it; powering four Spitfires in return for each cancelled Whirlwind actually seems quite reasonable. Remember, too, that Westland could only produce 2 Whirlwinds per week, and, between mid-July 1941 and October 1946, they produced 2158 Spitfires Seafires, which equates to 7.8 airframes per week.
The Welkin resulted from Specification F.4/40, so was a very early concept; it was "fiddled with," by the Ministry, to the tune of three more specifications, F7/41, I/P1(41,) and F.9/43, so it's hardly surprising it was late, especially as the last one still only called for a couple of prototypes, of which only one was built.
 
Last edited:
yulzari said:
Just a reminder that Westlands confirmed to the Air Ministry that they could fit Merlins to the Whirlwind and several other possible engines.
Click to expand...

Got any evidence for that?
Actually Westland went direct to fighter command with a suggestion for a Merlin powered variant. They did not approach the Air Ministry at all. They explained how they would fit a smaller diameter four blade propeller as the nacelles were too close to the fuselage for the normal three bladed propeller, but never how they would actually fit a Merlin. If they ever did drawings to show how they would completely redesign the nacelle and main landing gear on the Whirlwind to accommodate a Merlin they haven't survived. I don't believe they were ever made. Back channels were used in a rather desperate attempt to prevent the Air Ministry's axe falling.

Cheers

Steve
 
I think the key word there is variant as it leaves a lot open to modifications.

From Blackburn



18in "splice" in the wing center section to fit torpedo, the new engine, much larger fin and rudder to counter act new engine and prop and other mods. Took 3 1/2 years to enter squadron service after the Napier powered prototype first flew.

Granted it was rather low priority.

One might say that the Welkin was a heavily modified Whirlwind

Nobody has ever said if the "Merlin" Whirlwind was going to get larger wings, larger fuel tanks, a longer tail or larger one. All could be done. And some had to be done, Twin Merlins with 67 IMP gallons each????
Great performance but the endurance of a bottle rocket.
 
Going to chin radiators frees plenty of volume, both between the spars and in front of the front spar. Should double the fuel load.
Merlinized Whirly won't be any good without a bigger wing, or using the the 'splice' on the existing wing, as it was done with the Firebrand of P-47N. Will also increase volume available for fuel tanks. The Italian IMAM Ro.58 (two DB 601A, 2-seat, 5 cannons + rear gun) gained a bigger wing vs. the Ro.57 (two Fiat A.74RC, 1-seat, 2 HMGs); they probably wanted too much with the Ro.58, though.
Heavier more powerful powerplants will dictate bigger tail surfaces indeed, along with probable relocation of two, if not all 4 cannons to under belly.

Both changed layout of radiators, belly cannons and bigger wing partially offset the performance gain achieved by Merlins installed, but the resulting aircraft should be better than the Whirly. Even with bread'n'butter Merlin XII aboard, let alone with Merlin 45 or better.
 
Looks like a Tiger with 2 fans turning, has the glide ratio of a falling safe if they aren't, and will kill you in a heartbeat if only 1 fan is turning unless you handle it JUST RIGHT.

Kind of like a modern jet fighter, huh?

I doubt if it could turn much, but it would worry the hell out of a bomber stream unless they had fighter cover, assuming it had the range to GET to the bombers.

Probably not a good choice ...

So, Wayne, what do you think of the FMA Namcu a couple of pages back?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)

Similar threads

Westland Lysander
Replies
9
Views
1K
HP52
H
B
WW II airframe G limits
Replies
7
Views
3K
Barrett
B
S
Design and properties of the Spitfire Mk. 21+ wing
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
6K
Jabberwocky
J
Japanese torpedo bomber design
2
Replies
28
Views
3K
marathag
Japanese Design Philosophy
5 6 7
Replies
124
Views
10K
Shortround6
S
Menu
Log in
Register