Westland Whirlwind revisited (1 Viewer)

[tomo pauk]

FWIW - the manual for the Whirlwind, dated June 1940. The max boost was limited to +9 psi when 100 oct fuel was used, from take off upwards. So no +12 psi, as with Merlin III/XII. link

 

[nuuumannn]

The men at the time were trying to make the best decisions they could with the information they had at the time. Unfortunately they were getting some of their information from some rather overconfident salesmen and at times were comparing planes trying to enter squadron service with planes that would not be available for a year or more.

A good summation of the Air Ministry's attitude toward the Whirlwind, also accurate about the state of Westland's approach, to be honest. Dennis Edkins, Petter's personal assistant summed up the aeroplane as thus; "Although it had great potential, there were three things against it: its engines never came up to expectations, the works management's inability to understand the amount of work needed to get an aircraft from development into production, and the embodiment of too many technical innovations."

 

[tomo pauk]

The Whirlwind was not an ideal aircraft, none of aircraft is/was. However - the technical innovations worked, the time between specification and production was not that bad (5 years), the engines worked for years despite alleged as troublesome. Wonder how the Westland management regarded the whole Whirlwind program when AM ordered 200 fighters (and cut down further), while the Botha went to 580 produced, the Lysander went to almost 1800 pcs, the Defiant to more than 1000; even the Roc (I know it was the RN bird) was produced in more examples. Small initial order = less of more 'mechanized' tooling acquired = slow pace of production = greater price per aircraft, with less income for the manufacturer.

 

[Edgar Brooks]

I wonder how Vickers felt about being told that Spitfire production would cease at the end of 1940, after which Supermarine were to build Beaufighters, and it was early 1940 before the authorities changed their collective minds, and gave them a continuation order for 450, later increased to 900.

 

[tomo pauk]

Would you be so kind to shed some light about the chronological orders for the Spitfire in the 'early years'? Is it evident, by the original reports, why Vickers will produce the Beaufighter instead?

 

[Edgar Brooks]

I haven't found why there was such a leaning towards the Beaufighter, and it didn't last long into the war; as time goes on, interest gradually turns back to continuing Spitfire production, with extra orders finally being placed.
The backtracking started 17-11-39; an order for a further 500 was proposed 8-12-40, and 450 agreed 11-1-40. 22-3-40 it was increased to 900.

 

[tomo pauk]

Many thanks.

 

[tomo pauk]

Looking at how the AM was ordering a host of 2-engined fighters (prior the war: Whirlwind, Beaufighter; later the Lightning and Welkin, even later the Hornet, Meteor; FB versions of the Mossie thrown for a good measure) - if they thought two engines will do a better job than one, they went ahead with it. The Gloster almost managed.

Darn shame Peter/Westland did not design the Whirlwind as a bigger aircraft around Merlins, than so small around Peregrines.

 

[Elmas]

Probably the leaning towards twins in general and the Beau in particular was due to the fact that, in 1939, AM was expecting over the British sky ordes of He 177, to deal with four cannons were rightly considered necessary. When AM Ministry understood that He 177 was very dangerous, but only to the German general aircraft production, the necessity for huge numbers of four cannnons fighters decreased dramatically.

 

[tomo pauk]

I'm not sure that He 177 was the perceived target when Beau was considered, rather a substantial force of He 111s?
The Beaufighter offered an increase of firing time through the observer changing empty drums, very much like the Bf 110. The secondary battery of '303s was also there. It was calculated that speed would be in order of 370 mph. But even with 320-340 mph it would be a formidable bomber destroyer, and role of Fighter Command was all about that before France fell. Even during the BoB the bombers were primary targets.

 

[nuuumannn]

the technical innovations worked, the time between specification and production was not that bad (5 years)

Problem is, Westland had promised so much within a certain time frame and could not deliver; The work force was not capable of doing so. Five years is okay, but first got to fix the numerous problems with the airframe.

Also, the technical advances didn't all work; interconnecting the radiator shutters with the flaps was not the smartest idea in a fighter; max power and you have to drop your flaps every time, or risk overheating the engine? And on the Whirlwind they were relatively large. Also, ducting exhaust tubing through the fuel tanks!? When Harald Penrose complained to Petter about this feature, Petter stated something along the lines of "you pilots have got to accept some risks..." It nearly cost Penrose his life, when flying the prototype, the starboard aileron suddenly flipped up and refused to move, causing the aircraft to roll uncontrollably; the exhaust shroud had failed and the excessive heat had melted the aileron push rod. After this, the Air Ministry insisted on more conventional system of exhaust. Another problem was the 10 ft long leading edge slats, which opened with such violence that during trials they ripped from the wing leading edges. In one case, this caused a fatal (for the pilot and aircraft) structural failure of the wing.

The problem also with Peregrines was that Rolls was not placing as much priority on their manufacture, so they came off the production line at a longer rate between engines than Merlins. There were also delays in getting the Hobson downdraught carburettors delivered.

I do suspect that some of you have a rose tinted view of what the Whirlwind was like; it was an extremely troublesome aircraft riddled with technical faults that took enormous amounts of time to rectify, and along the way cost lives. It was pretty, though.

 

[Elmas]

Of course, as repeatedly and rigthly said in this post, AM did not have all the informations we have today, so, what if the Germans were able to shift the production numbers from He 111 to He 177? Fortunately they weren't, but the Intelligence informations gathered in 1939 probably were not too much reassuring.

And cannons in 1939 had a lot of trouble working in freezing temperatures, so they had to be collocated in a place were an heating was possible and an operator was needed to fix jams and change drums.

Also the recoil of cannons was considered too powerful by Air Technical Staffs for thin monoplane wings, as the analytical calculus of stressed skin wings was still in it's infancy and the ultimate limits of strenght were not yet clearly understood by aeronautical engineers and, rigthly, underestimated, so thick wings of Tornado an Typhoon.

How things went, we all now know.

 

[Shortround6]

I do suspect that some of you have a rose tinted view of what the Whirlwind was like; it was an extremely troublesome aircraft riddled with technical faults that took enormous amounts of time to rectify, and along the way cost lives. It was pretty, though.

Trouble is, using the trusty retrospectoscope, we can also see that the the plane picked to replace the Whirlwind (and the Spitfire and the Hurricane), the Hawker Typhoon was also "an extremely troublesome aircraft riddled with technical faults that took enormous amounts of time to rectify, and along the way cost lives." It also wasn't quite as pretty as the Whirlwind.

Petter was, apparently, not an easy man to work with and absolutely hated anybody messing with his designs. Some people claim one of the reasons the Folland Gnat failed to become the NATO light fighter vs the Fiat G 91 was that Petter refused to put bulged landing gear doors on the Gnat to accommodate larger tires to meet the ground pressure requirement.

The rose tinted view also comes from the fact that it stayed in combat service for several years unlike some other masterpieces like the Botha and even the Lysander. Lysander faded real quick as soon as any real aerial opposition showed up and the famed spy dropping duties were carried out by a single squadron that was NOT fully equipped with Lysanders.

We can also image what the FW 190 reputation would be if it had stayed closer to it's prototype beginnings.

 

[stona]

But eventually over 3,300 Hawker Typhoons were produced, and it's a good job we had it. It was operated by about 30 RAF squadrons, 3 Canadian and 2 Kiwi squadrons.

Just over 100 Whirlwinds were produced and it only ever equipped two squadrons, generally with a poor serviceability rate. It is in fact irrelevant in the context of WW2 aircraft production, nothing more than a footnote.

Cheers

Steve

 

[Elmas]

To be a little bit "autistic" seems to be a common trait between top airplane designers.
Mario Castoldi of MC 72, 200, 202, 205 etc. is said to have been an extremely amiable person when talking about his favourite hobby, rice and ricefields: but when talking airplanes he was a drake spitting flames......

 

[Shortround6]

The 114 Whirlwinds were produced in order to use up materials already ordered and partiality formed into finished goods (spars, ribs, landing gear parts, etc). No plane, no matter how good,(and the Whirlwind, as built, was not a wonder plane) that was built in such small numbers is going to be more than footnote.

The Typhoon was similarly kept because they also had too much invested in it to cancel the whole thing outright. Hawker had been instructed to proceed with 1000 production aircraft before the 2nd prototype flew. It may have equipped 35 squadrons, the question is wither it should have.
It took 1 1/2 to years from first production aircraft to getting decent reliability and safety out of the Typhoon, The Sabre engine fell from being an engine of choice for many projects to sustaining just one (or 1 1/2 the Tempest being a follow up?) and that was by taking production away from the original company and giving it to another company. The Sabre having more than it's share of operational problems for quite some time.

 

[nuuumannn]

I have to agree with Steve, SR. Comparing the Fw 190 and Whirlwind is folly; one was a well thought out design with much potential, whereas the other was overcooked and too clever by half. The issues with the '190 surrounded engine cooling; it didn't suffer from anywhere near the number of defects as the Whirlygig. Also, regarding hindsight, the Air Ministry were not altogether keen on Westland getting a production order from early on for good reason. It suffered numerous technical delays, and, yes, so did the Typhoon, but I bet the bods in the Ministry were pretty much ready to can it as well, if it weren't for the likes of Beamont and Freeman.

The rose tinted view also comes from the fact that it stayed in combat service for several years unlike some other masterpieces like the Botha and even the Lysander. Lysander faded real quick as soon as any real aerial opposition showed up and the famed spy dropping duties were carried out by a single squadron that was NOT fully equipped with Lysanders.

Botha? It was considered entirely unsuited for service. Lysander? Aren't you forgetting that it was in operational service from 1938 until November 1945, albeit in small numbers? Much longer than the Whirly. Oh, go on, mention the Defiant

The Typhoon was similarly kept because they also had too much invested in it to cancel the whole thing outright. Hawker had been instructed to proceed with 1000 production aircraft before the 2nd prototype flew. It may have equipped 35 squadrons, the question is wither it should have. It took 1 1/2 to years from first production aircraft to getting decent reliability and safety out of the Typhoon, The Sabre engine fell from being an engine of choice for many projects to sustaining just one (or 1 1/2 the Tempest being a follow up?) and that was by taking production away from the original company and giving it to another company. The Sabre having more than it's share of operational problems for quite some time.

This is all very true, but when the Typhoon was going through its motions (so to speak) there was a war on. There wasn't when the Whirlwind's problems first reared their heads.

 

[nuuumannn]

To be a little bit "autistic" seems to be a common trait between top airplane designers.

 

[Shortround6]

I have to agree with Steve, SR. Comparing the Fw 190 and Whirlwind is folly; one was a well thought out design with much potential, whereas the other was overcooked and too clever by half. The issues with the '190 surrounded engine cooling; it didn't suffer from anywhere near the number of defects as the Whirlygig.

Really???
First two 190 prototypes used a totally different engine than the later planes. After the engine change and with some additions of requirement weight rose by about 1400lbs and handling deteriorated. Two incomplete air frames were used as test rigs.
after the 5th airframe was rebuilt with a much modified wing, the next few dozen aircraft had a mis-mash of larger wing, beefed up landing gear, larger horizontal tail surfaces and finally on the A-2 model a larger vertical fin (first talked about much earlier).
Please see, Modeller's Guide to Focke-Wulf Fw 190 Variants - Radial Engine Versions - Part I

The initial FW 190 may have been too clever by half itself. The Germans used up more prototype FW 190s trying to sort it out than the British issued Whirlwinds to the first squadron to go into service.

Botha? It was considered entirely unsuited for service.

And yet they built over 500 of them. And they were "used", briefly as trainers and then as that catch all for planes that failed to live up to their promised combat potential. target tug!

Lysander? Aren't you forgetting that it was in operational service from 1938 until November 1945, albeit in small numbers? Much longer than the Whirly.

I would hope it was in service longer as a communications hack or some such. They only built about 1780 of them, only about 15 times as many as the Whirlwind.

And then we have all the Variants of the Lysander.
The TT MK I (MK I Lysander converted to target tug).
The TT MK II (MK II Lysander converted to target tug).
The TT MK III (MK I, II and III Lysander converted to target tugs).
The TT MK IIIA (100 Lysanders built as target tugs).
Lets not forget that 350 of the MK III Lysanders were delivered after July of 1940 at which point they were known to be a total failure in their intended role. But some sort of aircraft was better than no aircraft.

Oh, go on, mention the Defiant

OK

At least it could perform some sort of combat function (eyeball night fighter) in late 1940 and 1941.

This is all very true, but when the Typhoon was going through its motions (so to speak) there was a war on. There wasn't when the Whirlwind's problems first reared their heads.

True but then some of the Whirlwinds problems (like the stupid exhaust) had been sorted out before it got to squadron service.

as for the cooling flap problem, I don't think I have ever seen a good explanation of this.

There was a flap on the TOP of the wing that could open up. I don't know if it wasn't big enough. If it operated by linkage to the main flaps? If the main flaps disturbed the airflow in certain positions or what?

As far as the leading edge slats go, a number of designers used them when they shouldn't have at the time.

Granted Handley Page was the patent holder and wanted to promote them but some planes just didn't need them, like the first 50 Halifax four engine bombers. On the Whirlwinds they were fastened shut and made no difference to the handling of the airplane.

edit, BTW, first Mosquito prototype had leading edge slats.

 

[stona]

The Typhoon was similarly kept because they also had too much invested in it to cancel the whole thing outright. Hawker had been instructed to proceed with 1000 production aircraft before the 2nd prototype flew. It may have equipped 35 squadrons, the question is wither it should have.

Unless the British can come up with a better fighter bomber to spear head the RAF's Tactical Air Forces, notably 2nd TAF in NW Europe, then the answer to the question whether it should have equipped 35 squadrons with well over 3,000 produced is a no brainer.
It might have failed to live up to original expectations but fate and the changing role of air power in support of ground forces offered a role in which it could excel. The Typhoon was one of the best fighter bombers of the war.

Removing, or locking, the slats of the Whirlwind might not have made much difference to the handling of the Whirlwind, which was hardly agile, but it did nothing for the already high landing speed.
There would have been sound aerodynamic reasons for their inclusion. No designer adds high lift devices to his wings if he thinks they are unnecessary, the Whirlwinds just didn't work properly and wiring them shut was a compromise expedient, not the last time one such would be used either.

Cheers

Steve