Westland Whirlwind Fighter

[Bus429]

Why was the Westland Whirlwind a failure?

Was is because the engines (RR Peregrines)were unreliable? The aircraft certainly looked right.

[henry crun]

I think you have answered your own question Bus.

The Peregine was very unreliable and did not produce the power that RR said it would.. .RR decided to ditch it in favour of developing the Merlin and thus left the Whirlwind without an engine.

Great pity because, like you, I think it looked good. What a pity they didn't try putting the Merlin in it.

[Tom the Tenor]

I was admiring both the Whirlwind and the Wessex at Duxford in the last few weeks. There is a litte stairs where you can climb up to the level of the Whirlwind cockpit and look in at the skipper's instruments and yoke - the original minimalist instrumentation. The Royal Navy Wessex looks fab too and very neat with the rotors all stowed away as if on deck. One query: why is there an Irish harp painted on the right side of the Wessex?

[henry crun]

Tom, I havn't been to Duxford for some time but I suspect you are referring to a different Whirlwind.

The one that Bus was asking about is the circa 1938 design of a single seat twin engined fighter for the RAF.

[Bus429]

Henry,. .I've always liked the look of the Whirlwind. There is a picture of one in this month's Aeroplane. The caption said it was only operated by two squadrons.. .Another asthetic winner has to be the Beaufighter, followed by the Northrop P61 (Black Widow).

[Caslance]

True, but don't forget the De Havilland Hornet. A classic example of form following function.

I was always fond of the A-26 Invader, myself, a very "muscular" and purposeful-looking beastie, especially the "up-gunned" version that flew in the Korean War. <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

[DOC.400]

OK, while we're on 'sexy' twins, the Tigercat (hope I've got the right 'cat') gets my vote. OFMC have one at Duxford.

[Wunper]

Bus429

Check out Harald Penrose's Autobiography "Adventure with Fate" ISBN 0906393361 Whirlwind development testing is covered in Chapter 7. He hints that Merlins would have tranformed the aeroplane thereby extending their operational life.

Wunper <img src="cool.gif" border="0">

[Mycroft]

The Westland P9 Whirlwind was designed to F.37/35, a requirement for a single seat fighter with 4 20mm cannon, 320+mph at 15,000'. It first flew in 11 October 1938 showed superior performance to a Spitfire I, however Peregrine production was reduced to allow production of more Merlins (ironically as the Peregrine was used in case the newer Merlin had production problems). Unfortunately its main role was seen as a night fighter, but by the time production models were ready (May 1940) the Blenheim had proved the effectiveness of airbourne radar - impossible in a single seater. The first two production a/c (after 2 prototypes) were tested by No 25 Squadron, 263 being the first operational squadron, however delays in Peregrine production meant they only had 8 by October 1940. They operated from Exeter and St Eval on offensive fighter and convoy escort, being joined by No 137 Squadron from September 1941. The Whirlwind was then converted to a Fighter-Bomber and could carry 2 500 or 250 lb bombs. It was very successful in offensive sweeps over France, but only 114 production a/c were produced by January 1942. Both squadrons were re-equipped in 1943 (137 in June, 263 in December). There was a subsequent development (the Welkin) with Merlin engines, pressurised cabin and long span wings as a high altitude interceptor but this never entered service due to engine problems and a low dive speed - plus the fact that German high altitude bombers did not see service.

[LowNSlow]

Running the engine exhausts through the fuel tanks to keep them within the wing to decrease drag was also a really sharp idea <img src="eek.gif" border="0">

However, if memory serves me right, the man who did this was also responsible for the EE Canberra & Lightning. So he's forgiven then :)

[LowNSlow]

It was Petter that designed the Whirlwind, Canberra and Lightning wasn't it? Well not designed every bit, but you know what I mean. (Attempts to head off pedants at the pass) :)

[pulse1]

Not to mention the Gnat of course

[BEagle]

Fitting the Whirlwind with Merlins would undoubtedly have 'transformed' it - the Peregrine was blessed with but 885 hp (when working), but even the Mk II Spitfire's Merlin XII produced 1150 hp. And therein lay the rub; when the nation needed as many fighters as it could get, the Whirlwind would have needed to be twice as good as anything else to merit twice as many precious Merlins. Which it wasn't. Shame though.

[ 11 February 2002: Message edited by: BEagle ]</p>

[CoodaShooda]

I have a vague recollection of reading an autobiography where the author was sent by Beaverbrook (?) to test fly the Whirlwind and report on its performance. He found it a good aircraft but thought it did not proceed due to the cost of production v that of the single engine fighters. Can anyone remember who the author would have been?

[BEagle]

When I were a lad, I lived near RAF Merryfield - upon which Westlands had a works hangar. They did various things there such as work on the vectored thrust Meteor and work on USAF Sabres - but I definitely remeber being told that 'there was a Whirlwind behind the hangar'...that would have been in the early '50s, but it was not a helicopter. Was it really there - or was it a Welkin or something else? I don't think that it was a Wyvern although there were plenty of those around the aerodrome and at Yeovilton.

[Who has control?]

So what is the rationale behind a 'twin-single' like the Whirlwind?

. .Compare to a 'single-single', the weight must go up (extra engine). .The fuel capacity must double to maintain parity of range/endurance with the single-single - which means more weight.. .The speed will increase but not double so there is only a slight advantage there.. .Airframe will not double in size or weight, but must increase to cope with extra engine, fuel, stronger undercarriage. . .Payload capacity will probably increase.. .Extra engine will mean single-engine redundancy.

I can't think of any other 'twin-single' except the P-38 and I don't know effective it was compared to the P-51 & P-47, in terms of kill ratio, as they were used in similar combat environments.

[BEXIL160]

Err..the ultimate twin/single would surely be the P-82 Twin Mustang, or maybe not :)

rgds BEX

[LowNSlow]

Who has control 4 x 20mm cannon in the snout must have been an incentive. Don't forget, the original design was started when designers were struggling to get .303" machine guns in the wings of the Spitfire.

As a general statement, I would imagine that the larger airframe would allow more than double the fuel capacity of a comparably engined single engined fighter (if you get my drift). However, very few twin fighters could live with a single even if they did have the range to get them to the fight! Me110 springs to mind here.

The P-38's were effective in the Far East but they cherry picked their targets, swooping down from altitude, a quick burst then run using their superior speed. In the European theatre where the Fw190's could catch them, they weren't very successful as fighters. Great fighter-bombers though.

[Blacksheep]

Bus, forget that twin-engined failure, pop round my place when you have a spare minute and have a look at my wallpaper, featuring the very successful RRSED Gnome powered VVIP transporter - the Westland Whirlwind HCC10. She was ugly, slow and could vibrate the teeth out of your head but we all loved the decrepit old beast. I've no idea which commie b*stard came up with the Whirly as an ideal VVIP carrier, but unbelievably thats how they saw out their days. Our Northolt machines had seen active service in Malaya with 103 and 110, XS763 is preserved in the USA although she's in a sorry state with a crap camoflage scheme that no operational Whirly ever wore. I'd buy her back and do her up properly if I had the cash. Anyone willing to donate a few dollars?

They don't make 'em like that any more. Sob, sob...

**********************************. .Through difficulties to the cinema

[Iron City]

The original P-38 design was to meet an Army Air Corps requirement fora point defense fighter to defend cities and other potential targets from bombers. The criteria was time to climb to intercept and putting enough weight of metal of guns in the right place to shoot down a bomber. As it was not thought many would be needed (maybe a couple hundred at most) the YP-38 was designed to be essentially hand built. The YP was flown from Burbank to set a cross country speed record (which it did) but landed on a golf course in New York and was totaled (pilot walked away). The Air Corps said "great" upped the order quantity to a whole whole bunch and set Lockheed production back a year or two.

[Mycroft]

Just found my piston engine book and the Peregrine was a direct descendent (incorporating Merlin developments) of the RR Kestrel, probably the best engine of the late 20s and 30s. Only 301 Peregrines were made, the components of 1000+ more going to produce the Vulture, essentially 2 Kestrels/Peregrines joined to a single shaft, and like the similar DB610 an expensive failure - remember the Avro Manchester.. .The Whirlwind had similar speed to contemporary single engined fighters and had about double the range.. .At the end of the war similar a/c were entering service on both sides of the atlantic in the form of the deHavilland Hornet and Grumman Tigercat, both being amongst the fastest piston engined a/c and with greater range than the early jets. Both had only short service careers and both ended up as twin seat night fighters, the radar op being buried in the fuselage.. .The twin mustang (P80/F80) was never a single seater, both fuselages having occupants. Originally the second seat was for a relief pilot, allowing extremely long patrols, but later fitted with radar, the operator then occupying the second seat.. .Of course both the Meteor and Me262 were single seater twins, mainly due to the relatively poor performance and reliability of the early jet engines.

[Niaga Dessip]

Mycroft:

I have just seen this thread and I was fascinated by what you have to say. It largely ties in with what I remember hearing from my father who flew in 137 Squadron. Sadly he died in 1963, but I still remember a lot of his tales, and I have his log books.

He was stationed at Matlaske, Norfolk, a satellite of Coltishall. The aircraft had a high takeoff and landing speed and quite a tall undercarriage. With the narrow runway at Matlaske and the ploughed land either side there were several accidents with planes leaving the runway and tipping up on their nose. This necessitated the rescue of the pilot dangling from this shoulder straps.

In recent years I have spoken to local residents a couple of miles away who remember them disappearing from view as they neared the runway and then reappearing briefly as they bounced up on landing.

He might have been wrong of course, but the old man was under the impression that had war not broken out when it did, putting Merlin production under pressure, the Whirlwind might have also been equipped with that engine.

It goes without saying that I would love to talk with anyone who as links with my father's old squadron

Cheers. ND

[solotk]

If any of you follow the discussions on the WIX board, http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org/vafrefugees/wix1msgboard.mv , then you will know about our plan, to build a Westland Whirlwind from scratch. The replica, will be built in aluminium throughout, as opposed to magnesium, as per the original. The intention, is to build an EXTREMELY faithful replica, that will eventually taxi under it's own power, until such time, as it is placed on permanent display. To this end, we need your help. We have already been offered the A+P's for this aircraft, but we still need as many bits and drawings, as can physically be found. We need the powerplants, and any pieces of airframe, that might still be extant in the UK and elsewhere. We need crash locations or ditching locations for further investigation, or any information that can be offered. The projected time , at this moment, from "plans down" to first taxi, is 3 years. If you can help, please reply via this forum, or contact me, Tony King at [email protected]

Many thanks

Tony:)

[tony draper]

I have a set of volumes titled AIRCRAFT OF THE FIGHTING POWERS
dated 1939 to 1945.
One of them has plans and photographs for the WESTLAND WELKIN.
Now the sad bit, I know one of the volumes had the same on the WHiIRLWIND, I remeber looking at them.
I mentioned these books on another aviation website and a punter expressed a great interest, so Drapes being a generous cove packed up and sent him one volume,to somewhere in France no less, never heard another peep, so I had no idea if he had recieved same or it had gone adrift, so I hung on to the other four volumes.
You guessed it the volume that has vanished is the one with the details of the WHIRLWIND.
The 1945 edition does have as I said details of the WHELKIN.
ps, If your organisation is interested these books contain as far as I can see drawings plans photographsand details of every aircraft of the second world war period, they will only finish up in a skip when Drapes pops his cloggs so if you drop me a line you may certainly have them .

[I have control]

I have a vague recollection of hearing of some Whirlwind engines (Merlins?) in Canada. I am really scouring my memory banks here, it may have been on Barnstormers.

Good luck with a monster of a project. If the original was built of magnesium I guess you will need some luck finding original parts. Still it never ceases to amaze me what kind of thing shows up.

[Jhieminga]

The Wirlwind's engines were Rolls-Royce Peregrines. I guess finding those will be a huge problem, if not an improbability. Even RR lost interest in developing the engine during the war and this was one of the main reasons that the Wirlwind didn't reach it's true potential.

It's a great looking aircraft! I will definitively be watching out for it if you can get it built!

[solotk]

Thanks Drapes,
Yes, definite interest, shame about the Whirlwind Volume, but a fabulous series of books :) Can you e-mail me off forum, to hammer out the details?

The plan is to skin the aircraft in aluminium, as magnesium, is a little bit impractical, from a durability and cost point of view !

It is a pretty amazing aircraft. what it could have done with merlins, is anyones guess, but I imagine, very much a single seat mossie...

Thanks to all who are contributing, keep racking the brain cells, we need everything, photos, info etc, nothing too small, and nothing refused!

Best regards
Tony

[I have control]

Oops sorry I think I was getting confused with the DH Hornet. Disregard last message.

[tony draper]

Email on the way Mr S

[Pom Pax]

Have looked at a photo and line drawing I was struck by the similarity of the fin and tail plane to the Meteor. Was there someone involved common to both a/c during the design stage?

[LowNSlow]

solotk, good luck with the project. On the basis it will be a taxiable replica, why bother with engine authenticity?

I know of one guy who built an extremeley accurate Hurricane replica and powered it with a car engine (a Jag V12). This gave the right number of cylinders, the right sound and enough grunt to fast taxi the aeroplane.

The Jag V12 would fit in the slim nacelles of the Whirlwind better than anything I can think of cos the Peregrines were quite a lot smaller than a Merlin. The Jag engines (£500 each from the local scrapyard) would be a lot cheaper than Merlins (£15-£20k) too :D

[solotk]

Very very good point Low. I seem to remember Clive Du Cros used Jag motive power for K5054, and that was a flyer. Anyone have any idea what sort of performance he was getting , with a Jag block in front?

Tony

[Archimedes]

Tony,
you may find some info in the Public Record office. the following being the files I'm aware of (although I've not got round to looking at them yet!):

AVIA 15/317
(AIRCRAFT: Design and Development: Fighters and Fighter-Bombers (Code 6/3): Proposals for development of Westland Whirlwind fighter 1940)

AIR 2/2821
(AIRCRAFT: Fighter (Code B, 5/6): Whirlwind single-engined single seater day and night fighter: specification F37/35
1935-1944 )

AIR 16/326
(Westland P9 Whirlwind aircraft )
1939 Sept.-1942 Sept.

AVIA 46/122
(Westland Whirlwind )

AVIA 15/2360
(AIRCRAFT: Design and Development: Fighters and Fighter-Bombers (Code 6/3): Consideration of design for production of Westland fighter to specification F37/35
1938-1939 )

The PRO catalogue doesn't tell you what's in the files, so it may have useful things like drawings, or a series of letters that are of no practical benefit but which might be of interest.

Also, there is a book (that you've probably either got or seen, but in case not) Victor Bingham, Whirlwind: The Westland Whirlwhind Fighter (Airlife, 1987) ISBN: 1 85310 004 8. This has appendices giving things like wing area, dihedral, etc, etc.

Hope that this may be of some help; good luck!

[Genghis the Engineer]

Obvious question, if you're going to all that effort, why on earth not commit a little more and fly it?

G

[solotk]

Because the difference between the replica, and the flyer, is about 400k Genghis:)

Such bothersome things as certification , suitable powerplants etc, as the peregrines were not produced in any great quantity , and are extinct.

We did think about building a full scale replica from wood, powered by Orendas or falconer V-12's, but a member of the syndicate pointed out, if we were going to build a wooden flyer, we may as well build a DH103 Hornet from scratch!
Which is also being considered, as the plans are available, and using modern techinques, producing the 2 halves of the fuselage is inexpensive, and a piece of p**s)

Tony :D

[Mycroft]

Solotk - I seem to remember that when I went to the Mosquito museum they had the concrete former for the Hornet fuselage and I think there was a Merlin for sale recently which was a hornet specific mark

[LowNSlow]

Clive Du Cros' heavily modified Jag engine put out around 400hp. Even in standard form they put out around 250-300hp. More than sufficient for fast taxiing I would have thought :D

If you were prepared to sacrifice performance and internal originality but maintain the external form couldn't it be built via a PFA Permit with a couple of Rover V8 engines? There must be more bodies who would give time/money to a flying replica than a to a static one even one as worthy as this.

The Rover V8 was used in a Chipmunk once. It looked lovely. Mmm maybe I'll start a thread about that.

[solotk]

Mycroft,
Thanks for the heads up on the Hornet mould at the MAM, I'll call them directly. I believe there are also a full set of plans in existence for this aircraft, now, if someone has the A+P's?

Tony :D

[Dr Jekyll]

If you want to build a new Hornet, don't worry about original merlins, put in a couple of Griffons with contra props and liven up the Reno air races.

[brain fade]

Build a replica Whirlwind? Crikey!!:D

[VnV2178B]

BF,

you may like to explain the 'Crikey' reference for our younger readers ...

VnV

(not that I am implying you - or I - am that old)

[brain fade]

Don't quote me but I believe its a reference to the Whirlwinds cracking low altitude performance. For sure it was known as the 'crikey' in service. Presumably as you rattled along at strafing level with your 4 20mm's blazing away at our continental cousins, with the peregrines roaring away a matter of a few feet either side of your head and trees and bullets passing nearby that 'Crikey!!' might be an appropriate utterance?
Anyone else got an explanation? It was certainly quite an aircraft.:)

[VnV2178B]

I have - somewhere - a wartime picture of a Whirlwind (a rather tatty looking example ) with a caption mentioning is 'Crikey' nickname. My comment was meant to show that at least one other ppruner recognised the allusion:)

I always did like the design, such a pity that the engines were never given the development they needed. I recall they were half a Vulture and we all know how good they were in the Avro Manchester :rolleyes:

Edited after a check on the above: the Perigrine was an update on the Kestrel. according to the Gunson big book of aircraft engines, so why it wasn't so successful is strange. the Vulture was two Perigrine blocks mounted together to produce an X engine. Whichever way it was neither did the business.

VnV...

[Mycroft]

The real problem with the Peregrine was the development of the Merlin, which rapidly took over all the facilities at Derby and other RR plants, and as the Whirlwind was the only Peregrine-engined production a/c it was decided to cease production in 1942 after production of 301. With a the exception of a couple of development prototypes all Vulture production (538 in all) was used for the Manchester. The Vulture at 1,800 hp was comparable to the slightly later Griffin II but was much bulkier and had teething problems with the coolant system (it was treated as two seperate systems for the the cylinder blocks, but as the sytems were interconnected there could be cavitation problems).

[solotk]

As you can guess, the powerplants are our biggest headache.
We can't find any Peregrines or Vultures for that matter, unless there's one in a collection we haven't heard about.

At the moment, we are looking at the Falconer V-12 , which appears to have a close punch to weight ratio.

But, any leads on Peregrines will be much appreciated

Tony

[Niaga Dessip]

Another interesting thing about their performance was their relatively high take off/landing speed. My father flew them in 137 Squadron. He told me of the difficulty of keeping them on the narrow runway at Matlaske, Norfolk after landing, and on more than one occasion a pilot was left dangling from his shoulder harness having run off into soft ground and tipping up on his nose, otherwise unharmed. I have also spoken to a local farmer who recalled seeing aircraft from his nearby farm dropping out of site on landing only to reappear above the hedges as they bounced down the runway!

My old man is, alas, no longer with us but his and his squadron's story is told at the small museum at RAF Coltishall.

Good luck to all with this project. It was such a good looking plane in spite of, or because of, its CRICKEY factor.

Cheers.
Niaga Dessip;)

[Chris Royle]

Dear all,
During the Winter months at West London Aero Club, White Waltham, we run monthly talks. Last night's talk was about the Westland Whirlwind. We were privileged to hear from Alec Torrance, who flew these aircraft in WWII, and from Jim Munro, whose father had also flown this aircraft.
Jim has gathered a lot of information on the aircraft (from which it appears that the a/c did not deserve the poor reputation that it received), but is keen to hear more. Some Pathe news film has recently emerged, filmed at Warmwell (Dorset I believe). Jim is keen to receive any more information, particularly about any more film, and the fate of the one example that went to the USA for evaluation.
All contributions gratefully received,
Best wishes,
Chris Royle
:ok:

[treadigraph]

Was it the Whirlwind that routed the exhaust through a fuel tank? I hope soemone can convince me that one was erroneous... please....

[BEagle]

In the 1950s, I was told that there was a Westland Whirlwind fighter 'behind the hangar' at Westland's Merryfield facility. I find this hard to believe as this was at least 10 years after the end of WWII. Perhaps it was one of the stored Welkins?

There were still gems to be found in those days - I once discovered a hangar full of Belgian registered CF-100s before being chased off by a security jobsworth!

The tunnels used for the vectored thrust Meteor trials were another interesting discovery.

[chevvron]

Beagle; Interested in your remark about tunnels; tell us more.

[Atcham Tower]

[QUOTE=BEagle]In the 1950s, I was told that there was a Westland Whirlwind fighter 'behind the hangar' at Westland's Merryfield facility. I find this hard to believe as this was at least 10 years after the end of WWII. Perhaps it was one of the stored Welkins?

In August 1960, we had a conducted tour of Merryfield by a bored naval rating who had sole charge of the place. Sadly, we did not find the rumoured Welkin and we looked behind the hangar. However, on a farm near the main entrance there was a float (possibly two, my memory is vague) from something like a Supermarine S.6b. Never seen anything written about this.

[BEagle]

In 1952, Meteor RA490 was modified by Westlands for a jet deflection system to be installed. This used 2 modified Nene 101 engines in specially extended nacelles. The jet efflux could either be deflected rearwards or downwards through ducts in the lower nacelles under the wing. Between 1953 and 1954 it was under test by Westlands; it was then transferred to the RAE before ending its days being used for firefighting purposes in 1957.

With deflection, the Meteor could fly at 70KIAS. One wonders how the pilots felt about engine failure in such a flight regime as this was long before the days of the rocket ejector seat!

The tunnels at Merryfield were 2 parallel concrete ducts of about 4 ft diameter (large enough for small boys to explore!). At one end they were fitted with 90 deg metal ducts facing upwards, I can't remember how the far end was terminated. I imagine the Meteor would be parked with the nacelle ducts over the tunnel entrances for engine ground runs.

The location was in a hardstanding opposite the GCA access off the easterly section of the taxiway to the north of RW26. There were access tracks to the taxiway from the Westlands site, but the hardstandings and tracks have all now been removed as the Westlands site is now a self-contained gypsy site.

I don't recall the floats you mention though, Atcham Tower. We didn't have anything like that at the farm by the entrance, but the Navy (and later, RAF) personnel living at Woodhouse Farm might have had something like that, perhaps?

[shack]

It was definitly a Welkin that was behind Westlands hangar.

[BEagle]

Well that's exactly what I thought it must have been! The Welkins were put into store after WWII, I wonder where the others went....

May I ask how you know? And when was it there?

[shack]

I was a QFI at Merryfield 1952 until it closed as an AFS, from memory in 1954, when you were running around Ilton and district in grubby short pants.

Alongside the Welkin was a Hamilcar, which at one stage in its life had been the powered version, plus the tunnels of which you speak and often a Wyvern which H.Penrose had been or was going to test.

Bon chance mon brave.

[Conan the Librarian]

Only piece I have ever read of the Whirlwind in combat, was in one of the late Roland Beamont's books (Phoenix into ashes, maybe?) It told of a mission to France with his Typhoons and I think, the Whirlwinds of 263 Sqn. Only a fw pages, but for the Whirlwind tyro, it might be interesting.


Conan

Conan my dear chap, please do not resurrect old threads when there one on the same subject already running. Ta!

[BEagle]

Ah yes, of course. We've PPRuNed before!

I remember the Wyverns - particularly the noise they made! Not as bad as the later Sabres which Westlands would test 7 days a week.

I'm glad you've confirmed the tunnels existed as no-one would believe me! Did you ever see the deflected-jet Meteor? It was probably there in 1953-54 when you were QFI-ing and I hadn't even started nuresry school!

I understand that 208 AFS became 10 FTS and then 9 FTS in 1954, before disbanding in Feb 1955. I was just too young to remember that period, but vaguely remember the Bassingbourn Canberras which were at Merryfield until late 1956 before the FAA arrived.

I was amazed to learn that the Welkin had a wingspan of 70 ft! Must be close to a record for a single seat fighter.

[chevvron]

I think RAE may have built their own set of tunnels. They consisted of a pair of ducts entering the ground at about a 30 deg angle then exiting about 50ft further along situated roughly at the northern end of The Diamonds where the access road to the new control tower enters the apron (ie just east of Y9 Bldg). They were covered in undergrowth in RAE days and were only exposed when DERA's Experimental Flying Wing departed and the ground was partially cleared. It was obvious they were for some sort of jet engines, but I could never figure out what aircraft due to the angle of entry into the ground; the distance between the two would have been about Meteor engine - engine width and I seem to remember they had a curving metal shield on the bottom to prevent soil erosion.

[BEagle]

Those curving metal shields were also features of the Merryfield tunnels.

[shack]

Sorry BEagle but I do not remember the Meteor, old age you know.

The Welkin certainly was a large aircraft, I assume that there were hopes that it was going to perform well at high level.

As for the Wyvern, I agree that it was noisy except on several occasions when it was everybody out of the circuit, Mr P has another flame out!!

[Brian Abraham]

Welkin (Janes All The Worlds) a high altitude fighter designed to combat possible stratospheric raids by the Luftwaffe over England at heights beyond the range of existing fighters. The entire emphasis was on attaining the highest possible ceiling, maximum possible speed and carry four 20mm cannon. Aircraft seriously handicapped by compressibility problems exacerbated by its long but thick wings. Production ended with 101 airframes, of which final 26 delivered less engines, and all but a handful going to MUs for ultimate disposal. Did not see operational service. Two models of a two seat version were built.

(Allied Aircraft Piston Engines by Graham White) The Peregrine was a promising engine by WWII standards based on the Kestrel (same bore, stroke, capacity) and was often described as a “Merlinized Kestrel” because of Merlin features incorporated into its design. Even with a high specific power of 885 HP it was inadequate for the demands of WWII combat. Numerous problems during its brief service life earned it the unflattering nickname “Pesky Peregrine”. Overheating seemed to be the main problem due to the nature of the installation in the Whirlwind. In certain flap configurations the airflow through the leading edge radiators (similar to Mosquito) was reduced. Innovations abounded in the Whirlwind such as leading edge radiators, bubble canopy and T tail. (Beags – I have faint recollection that it also had fuel tank inerting via the exhaust, the exhaust itself being dumped via the typical Merlin shrouded system.)

The Vulture was a totally new design, although often described as a doubled up Kestrel or Peregrine due to all three having the same bore and stroke.

(Bill Gunston) As WWII became increasingly likely the Royal Air Force determined that it was deficient in a powerfully armed aircraft that could undertake long-range escort duties and night-fighter operations. A requirement (F.37/35) not all that different from the German's Messerschmitt Bf-110. From a specification drawn up in 1937 came the Westland Whirlwind, a heavily armed escort fighter. It had some teething problems related to the Rolls Royce Peregrine engine (an unhappy outgrowth of the reliable Kestrel) and the fact that it's landing speed was 80 mph, which meant that it could not use the standard (short) grass field of a British aerodrome. The type was a stable and pleasant aircraft to fly and had a formidable amount of firepower for the time (four 20-mm cannons). It showed some promise in combat, however, like its German counterpart it was not agile enough to successfully combat enemy fighters. The speed quickly garnered it the nick-name Crikey, meaning "my god!" or more accurately "Christ's keys".

After some deliberation the RAF purchased only 112 and equipped only two squadrons, No.s 137 and 263, with the aircraft. After initial use as an escort fighter, it was relegated to convoy patrols and eventually as a "Whirlybomber" flying low-level "rhubarbs" with bombs and cannons against targets of opportunity in France. It was phased out of use in 1942 as better aircraft (primarily the Typhoon and Beaufighter) were being put into service that would outperform it at a lower cost. The Typhoon could carry the same armament with a single engine, and the Beaufighter was even more powerfully armed and used Bristol radial engines that were in greater supply. Also, Rolls Royce dropped the Peregine engine to focus on producing the Merlin.

[JW411]

One of my old friends, the late Gp Capt John Wray DFC, flew Whirlwinds on 137 Squadron and had many super photographs of them in his album. He told me of ground attack missions in France mounted from Manston and reckoned that the aircraft was an excellent GA aircraft and a good gun platform.

He reckoned that the unavailability of RR Peregrines was the problem since the government had decided to concentrate on the mass production of RR Merlins and Bristol Hercules engines.

[Conan the Librarian]

Conan my dear chap, please do not resurrect old threads when there one on the same subject already running. Ta!

Pardon my ignorance, but I don't have the faintest idea what you are referring to... I am sure that you will assist me in seeing the error of my ways :}


Conan

[JW411]

Chris Royle:

You are a lucky chap! I have just got my latest issue of "Aeroplane Monthly" and it is chock-full of Westland Whirlwinds.

I note that Dr Alfred Price talked to Sqn Ldr John Wray DFC and confirms what John always told me about how good a platform the Whirlwind was.

John retired as Gp Capt John Wray and later earned a CBE as a result of his activity in the Conservative Party Central Office.

Can anyone tell me why it is that my latest issue of Aeroplane Monthly is marked "May, 2006" and it isn't even April yet!

[treadigraph]

JW411, can't tell you why, but it has irritated me for a long time. Pilot's Christmas Quiz was in the January issue, available in late November...

[Chris Royle]

Dear contributors to this thread,
Just a short note to say thanks to you all.
I have passed all information on to Jim Munro, whose father flew Whirlwinds.
I also e mailed Niaga Dessip, who contributed to the 2002 Westland Whirlwind thread, but so far, I have not received a reply. Does anyone know if he's still around?
Best wishes,
Chris Royle:ok:

[Mr BlueSky]

And the fate of the one example that went to the USA for evaluation.
All contributions gratefully received,
Best wishes,
Chris Royle
:ok:

Chris, Hope this helps.

I think you need to ask Peter Twiss (The 1000mph Man) the question about the Whirlwind in the USA.
The extract below is from an email between myself and another Whirlwind fan from 2003
I lost contact with him shortly after this.


I was at the Shoreham aerojumble rummaging as one does, when I saw a signall books signed by peter twiss today,
So I loitered whilst this elderly gent signed a book, yep peter twiss !!!
So plucking up courage, are you peter twiss
Yes came the reply,
I wonder do you recall being at a pilots conference in Florida in '44 ?
yes, I was in America for some time, I flew a seafire and some other types at a conference.
Do you recall a whirlwind ?
Yes, lovely aeroplane to fly, twin engined , there is a story to that,
I had to pick up the a/c , can't remember where , and fly it down to the gulf of Mexico somewhere, It had short range, so there was a need to refuel on the way, I took off and shortly afterwards the compass needle fell off , so there I was in a undistinquishable environment, with no compass, but it was a lovely day , so I put the nose down and shortly found a railway line and followed it and eventually came to an airfield where I landed and borrowed a compass, and continued the flight.
( I think he said ) I later flew it to Grumman's, it was strange this little a/c in amongst all the large Grumman a/c,
The a/c was eventually laid up and the engines removed and placed in the station commanders boat !!! ( forgot the name he told me ), don't know what happened to the shell probably dumped.
I said do you recall the dates ?
Not without looking at my logbook !!!!!!!,
Can I write to you , and he gave me his address.
So end of a eventful day !!
I will be writing the letter this weekend.
Hopefully he will have the dates and descriptions of the flights in his logbook !! I will ask him about the paint scheme.

[My Dad's Little Boy]

Westlands flew a Whirlwind as a hack for a little while shortly after the war. It was registered G-AGOI and it was painted light blue with white lettering, IIRC.

[ZH875]

Westlands flew a Whirlwind as a hack for a little while shortly after the war. It was registered G-AGOI and it was painted light blue with white lettering, IIRC.http://www.caa.co.uk/application.aspx?categoryid=60&pagetype=65&applicationid=1&mode=detailnosummary&fullregmark=G-AGOI

[My Dad's Little Boy]

The real problem with the Peregrine was the development of the Merlin, which rapidly took over all the facilities at Derby and other RR plants, and as the Whirlwind was the only Peregrine-engined production a/c it was decided to cease production in 1942 after production of 301. With a the exception of a couple of development prototypes all Vulture production (538 in all) was used for the Manchester. The Vulture at 1,800 hp was comparable to the slightly later Griffin II but was much bulkier and had teething problems with the coolant system (it was treated as two seperate systems for the the cylinder blocks, but as the sytems were interconnected there could be cavitation problems).

Am I correct in thinking that the Vulture was two Peregrine engines mounted bottom to bottom hence the two separate cooling systems?

[MReyn24050]

My Dad's Little Boy
See the following link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Peregrine

[My Dad's Little Boy]

Thanks for that.:ok:

[Tim Inder]

There's a feature on the Whirlwind in this month's 'Aeroplane' mag.
It also explains the 'crikey' nickname as being taken from an advert for err, something car-related of the time (senile at 30 , OMG. I only read it yesterday!)

[treadigraph]

You wait until you get to the grand old age of 42 - you don't even remember that there is an article on the Whirlwind in this month's AM, let alone what it says! :} Not till you reminded me anyway...

[Mr BlueSky]

Have any of the Whirly buffs out there seen or have in their possession the following files and if they do, can they tell me weather they would contain information/drawings that would be useful to build an accurate 3D CG Flying Model.

I already have the complete AP1709A Vol's and the Roll-Royce ‘Peregrine’ AP from R-R Derby. :ok:

This is some of the information I need:
Performance charts & tables (speed, climb, maneuver etc) for 87 Octane and 100 Octane fuel & with bombloads.
Whirlybomber payload data. What sort of bombs etc.
Cockpit Blueprints and Photo’s, Instruments used etc. (Important must have... ;) )
Aircraft Production Drawings… (Another must have... ;) )

If you have/know of any file that contain some of the above, could you let me know their source and file number/ref so I might obtain them.

If you already have some of the data I need and would be willing to let me have scanned copies I would be willing to pay for them within reason.

Thank you for any help. :ok:

Here you go:
Ministry of Aircraft Production and predecessor and successors: Registered Files AVIA 15/317 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=3181201)AIRCRAFT: Design and Development: Fighters and Fighter-Bombers (Code 6/3): Proposals for development of Westland Whirlwind fighter . AIRCRAFT: Design and Development: Fighters and Fighter-Bombers (Code 6/3): Proposals for development of Westland WhirlwindDate: 1940.

Ministry of Defence and predecessors: Air Publications and Reports AIR 10/2643 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=4135639)The Whirlwind I Aeroplane: Two Peregrine I Engines . The Whirlwind I Aeroplane: Two Peregrine I Engines Ministry of Defence and predecessors: Air Publications and Reports The National Archives, KewDate: 1940.

Ministry of Supply: Establishment, Registered Files (Series 1) AVIA 46/122 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=580406)Westland Whirlwind . Westland Whirlwind Ministry of Supply: Establishment, Registered Files (Series 1) The National Archives, KewDate range: 1935 - 1943.

(This I have already ordered ;) )

Air Ministry and successors: Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment: Reports and Notes AVIA 18/691 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=5007594)Whirlwind aircraft: performance and handling trials . Whirlwind aircraft: performance and handling trials Air Ministry and successors: Aeroplane and Armament Experimental Establishment: Reports and Notes The National Archives, KewDate range: 1940 - 1942.

(Not sure of exactly what Photo’s it contains? :confused: )

Ministry of Information and Central Office of Information: Publications Division: Photographs INF 14/8 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=1977786)Whirlwind . Whirlwind Ministry of Information and Central Office of Information: Publications Division: Photographs The National Archives, KewDate range: 1939 - 1979.

Air Ministry: Fighter Command: Registered Files AIR 16/326 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=466590)Westland P9 Whirlwind aircraft . Westland P9 Whirlwind aircraft Air Ministry: Fighter Command: Registered Files The National Archives, KewDate range: 1939 - 1942.

Air Ministry and Ministry of Defence: Registered Files AIR 2/2821 (http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/catalogue/displaycataloguedetails.asp?CATLN=6&CATID=3373295)AIRCRAFT: Fighter (Code B, 5/6): Whirlwind single-engined single seater day and night fighter: specification F37/35 . AIRCRAFT: Fighter (Code B, 5/6): Whirlwind single-engined single seater day and night fighter: specification F37/35 Air Ministry andDate range: 1935 - 1944.

[Mr BlueSky]

Oh Dear, oh dear... :(

[treadigraph]

Blimey, give them a chance Mr Bluesky! (Hello, Mr Blue, we're so glad to be with you, look around see what you do...! Sorry, I used to share a school dorm with an ELO fan - I have an aversion to ELO, he finds Pink Floyd irritating, what can I say... Tim, is that you?!! :E

[Mr BlueSky]

Blimey, give them a chance Mr Bluesky! (Hello, Mr Blue, we're so glad to be with you, look around see what you do...! Sorry, I used to share a school dorm with an ELO fan - I have an aversion to ELO, he finds Pink Floyd irritating, what can I say... Tim, is that you?!! :E

Nope, it's not 'Tim' := and MrBlueSky is the only ELO song that I ever liked...:ok: Give me Pink Floyd any day. ALTHOUGH... :ok: I was quite taken by Genesis and their 'A Trick of the Tail' Album... :D Then there was ELP and not forgetting Cat Stevens... :sad: Those were the days... ;)

Nope, shout, shout and shout again... ;) That's the only way to get things done... :ok:

[Mr BlueSky]

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear... :uhoh: :sad: :{

[Mr BlueSky]

A small group of us are trying to get as much information as we can to make an accurate (Photo realistic) 3D model of the Whirlwind cockpit. At present we’ve positively identified around 70% of the cockpits gauges, switches & controls, but because of the poor quality of existing photographic material some are proving difficult…

The two pictures below are the only images of the 40v Voltmeter used in the Whirlwind, we need to identify exactly what the type, make and AM Serial was... A clear photo/drawing of same would also be nice. c

Can anyone help us please…

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/th_VoltMeter-40v-01.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/VoltMeter-40v-01.jpg)

In this Pilot's Note's Image the Voltmeter is to the right.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/th_VoltMeter-40v.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/VoltMeter-40v.jpg)

Regards

Mr BlueSky

[forget]

I'm sure you know that the voltmeter will not have been unique to Whirlwinds. Take a look around e-bay, find one that looks exactly like your photograph - and bingo. Here's something very close, 5U/1693, from Spitfire/Lancaster and many others no doubt.

PS. You'll notice the small variations below - but same Part Number. From this - I'd say you could safely use either in the fair assumption that only one AM Spec existed for 40V meters and that Whirlwinds, somewhere, could have been fitted with any variation.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/volts.jpg

..... and another.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/volt2.jpg

[Mr BlueSky]

Forget, :ok:

I agree with you about Westlands probably used whatever they could get their hands on, but I still would like to find the actual one they used in the both the early Whirlys up to P6983 and P6984 aircraft:)

I'm worried if I stray from what we knowwas used, there will be someone that will whinge about it not being correct... := ;)

bral.

Hmmm the wHIRLY Parts AP, thats a bit of a sore point with me... I had a copy from the RAF Museum but lent it to someone who was also making a Whirly cockpit for him to scan. But he moved away and would not answer any of my emails that I sent! :ugh: Silly of me I know. Trouble was I barely looked through it at the time, so don't really know much about exactly what was in it... D'oh!

I think it cost £120 for both the parts and the repair AP's, but that was about 4-5 years ago now, so I would expect it to be a bit more now... Will have to get in touch with them again to find out...

[Mr BlueSky]

It looks more like this:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/th_Voltmeter.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Voltmeter.jpg)

[Double Zero]

----------------------

[forget]

I agree with you about Westland probably used whatever they could get their hands on …

Not quite the point I was making. The original Air Ministry/Ministry of Aircraft Production Type Spec will have included all required instruments, one of which was a Meter, Electrical, 40 Volt DC, Aircraft for the Use Of. Another Spec will have covered the Meters themselves, which will have been farmed out to various manufactures resulting in slight cosmetic differences. This spec required the ident numbers 5U/1693. Westland would have ordered under 5U/1693 so, in my opinion, you’re fireproof using either of the above.

… but I still would like to find the actual one they used in both the early Whirlys up to P6983 and P6984 aircraft.

That’s the point, I don’t think there is an ‘actual one’. Anything with 5U/1693 on the face will have met the aircraft spec.

Anyway, let’s see some current progress photographs. And what happened to Double Zero’s post. Seems he has the info you need.

PS. Another variation on the same part number.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b270/cumpas/volta.jpg

[Mr BlueSky]

Forget.
Here are a few of the instrument detailing I’ve already done, showing the position, use and if possible colour photographs… ;)

These are just the named instruments, theres still all the rest of the gubbings that go to make everything work… :ugh:


http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/th_Remote-Contactor.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/Remote-Contactor.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/th_Item-111-Automatic-Recognit.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/Item-111-Automatic-Recognit.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/th_Items-2--5-Mixture--Throt.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/Items-2--5-Mixture--Throt.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/th_Item-71--Type-P6-Compass-02.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/Item-71--Type-P6-Compass-02.jpg)

This is one I could do with some help with, can’t find a quality colour photo of a Type P6 anyone got one?

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/th_Item-23-Boost-Gauge-Mk-IIIG.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/BoB%20Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Front%20View/Item-23-Boost-Gauge-Mk-IIIG.jpg)

Sorry, at the moment I’ve not got the authority to post any of the WIP shots… We’re keeping it under wraps until the model is released, which is still sometime in the summer...:=

[Mr BlueSky]

Are the layouts of these standard, meaning would the layouts of say a Hurricane Merlin data plate be the same as one for a Whirlwind Peregrine?

Once again theres only the one photo of the Whirlwinds data plate... :ugh: I've enlarged it by 200% and enhanced it see here both a positive/negative image.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/th_Rolls-Royce-Engine-Plate.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Rolls-Royce-Engine-Plate.jpg)

Can anyone tell me are these standard data plates issued by Roll-Royce?

I've already tried R-R Derby and they say they haven't any information for the plates used in the Whirlwind... :(

[Mr BlueSky]

So how would you use it, pull the handle out from stop on the quadrant (Would the handle be spring loaded to automatically locate it the quadrant stops?) and then turn it anti-clockwise to open it to the desired position, although I can only see four locking positions on the quadrant. Also you can open it from the outside by pushing it, so that would mean it would not lock automatically, so not spring loaded then? Would the mechanism be ratchet driven or steel cable, best estimate as to how many turns to open it?
Help please gentlemen… :o
Items: 67. Hood operating handle 68. Hood - Handle locking quadrant
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/th_Items-67--68-Hood-Operatin.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Items-67--68-Hood-Operatin.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/th_Starboard-Side-of-Cockpit-F.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/Starboard-Side-of-Cockpit-F.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/th_Starboard-Side-of-Cockpit-LowRes.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/Starboard-Side-of-Cockpit-LowRes.jpg)
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/th_a02787.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v187/Secudus/Whirlwind%20P9%20Project/Whirlwind%20Cockpit%20Drawings%20Photos/a02787.jpg)

[sycamore]

I would imagine that the external button will release the cranking handle from it`s locked spot,allowing the canopy to be pushed open from outside. From inside ,the crank is turned in either direction,until it is open as far as you want ,and then released to `spring` into the nearest hole. It would be best if it was chain operated rather than cables ,which can stretch,either due temperature changes,or forceful cranking,but as it`s a WHL product,possibly cord.....See a Jet Provost 3/4 for something similar.

[Vitesse]

Possibly rack and pinion?

Would mean a rack extending well forward of the handle location. Looks as though there is a cover which could hide a rack.

I note the access panel sign to the left of the inset type - Not the easiest of places to work, surely.

[Double Zero]

Noting your address, I presume you are or have tried the museum near Weston ?

Hard to believe they wouldn't have the answer.

There is a decrepit Whirlwind at Tangmere, ask for someone from the engineering workshop ( Keith is chief ) 01243 790 090.

Beware they do have a winter close-down, but people are still busy there sorting displays etc, so you may get a decent reply.

[BEagle]

The question relates to a twin engined fighter, not some old helicopter.

[Double Zero]

Ahh,

THAT Whirlwind ! Hope you can understand my confusion, though I should have taken more notice of the cockpit photo's.

I think Eric 'Winkle' Brown test flew it, may be worth trying to contact him ?

A check of his book/s first would be an idea just in case it's mentioned, I'll have a scan through ' Wings On My Sleeve '.

The only person I knew who dealt with them is no longer with us, but being ( just ) effectively post-war, there must be a lot of people out there with the knowledge; maybe worth posting on the Military Aircrew forum too, with the explanatation someone's dad may have worked on / flew them ?

[BEagle]

As you know, Peter Twiss, of Fairey Delta 2 fame, flew Whirlwind P6994 in the USA briefly - before its engines were 'acquired' by some naval officer at Pensacola to use in a speedboat.

By all accounts the Whirlwind was in rather a sorry state when Peter Twiss flew it.

Ask around at Lasham Gliding Centre - they may be able to put you in touch with him.

Or get in touch with Chris Royle at White Waltham; they had an evening talk about the Whirlwind several years ago, but might still have some contacts.

[Double Zero]

Have checked Winkle Brown's ' Wings On My Sleeve ' - no mention of the Whirlwind.

In my bible, ' Test Pilots - The History of British Test Flying 1903-1984 ' by Don Middleton, it is mentioned that Harald Penrose did a lot of the development flying.

I hope I am right in thinking he is still with us and about to give a talk or two (forget where ) ?

No mention of the canopy mechanism of course, but one interesting feature was that the exhausts led through the fuel tanks !

Pilots and senior design staff made it clear what they thought of this but were overriden, and sure enough one day an exhaust melted through a fuel tank, without igniting it...

It did however burn through an aileron rod, leaving H.P. to fly back with full opposite aileron on & just rudder for turns - he made it OK, but I doubt being vindicated put him in much of a better mood !

[spekesoftly]

I hope I am right in thinking he is still with us and about to give a talk or two (forget where ) ?

Harald Penrose died well over ten years ago. Perhaps you are confusing him with Desmond Penrose?

[Double Zero]

OOPS !

Sorry about that, I thougt it was stretching the time frame a bit, but the name had caught my eye recently.

[Mr BlueSky]

Heres some low res footage of the Virtual model we've been putting together, these are only very early shots, when she was first imported into the sim, the FM needed some fine tuning...

We still need alot of material for the cockpit ,if anyone has some cockpit shots that they or their parents/Grand parents may have taken, we would be very interested to see some new material for our research...

Stu

YouTube - Whirlwind Flight01.mpg (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xW7dtCov3X4)

[oldpax]

excellent vid!!When will a wreck be found for restoration!Rumour has it there are two on Dartmoor somewhere!!(In a bog!)

[Mr BlueSky]

OldPax...

I thanks for the compliment... :ok:

But two Whirlys on Dartmoor you say, in a bog? Tell all please, cause its a new one on me...:O

[Chris Royle]

This via a friend who knows George and asked for information.
Hope it helps,
Chris
Royle

HOW TO OPEN THE WW HOOD

I am not a gentleman, but a clergyman (retired) ………

To the best of my knowledge it was ratchet driven, and I used it fully open for take-off, then closing it for flight and opening it fully for landing. I cannot ever remember requiring to lock it in certain positions; it was simply a case of fully open for take-off and landing, and you did this simply winding back and forth, and no spring loading; it needed little effort, and worked every time, hence no need for a jettison mechanism (but see below).

I first flew the WW in March 1943, aircraft P 7092, and straight away fell in love with this wonderful flying machine with no vices. Sadly, I had to fly the very last WW out of Warmwell back to where it was born – P 7099 – to Westlands, Yeovil, in January 1944. In between time I clocked 104 hours, and only after 103 hours did I experience any hood problems. On 23 September 1943, flying the C.O’s aircraft P 7113 (as he was on leave) flak destroyed the aircraft over Morlaix, Brittany. Capt. Marzin of the Maquis (French Resistance) looking through “banned” binoculars, thought two aircraft had collided, there was so much debris floating down, and out of one section of this debris there fell another piece, which opened out into a parachute.

Back to the largish debris “floating like a falling leaf”, Capt. Marzin remarked, it was the cockpit, where F/Sgt. George Wood was struggling to open the hood. I had previously flown Spitfires in 1942, and from the very first MKs. I and II you could jettison the hood if it malfunctioned. Not so the poor WW. Yet it was so far advanced in every other respect, with Fowler flaps, slats, and every other mod con that is taken for granted today in modern aircraft, and not found in WWII fighters except the WW.

It appears those responsible for the life of the WW in the RAF took an instant dislike: rejected the good results of those who flew the aircraft, and decided it was not fit for purpose – yet they hadn’t flown it themselves. Hence only 114 were produced, and no improvements were sanctioned, which included the important safety factor of being able to jettison the hood, and especially failing to see the benefit of more powerful engines, as with the Spitfire. The 100+ that went into service soon proved to the “authorities” they had made a grave misjudgement in giving this superb aircraft the thumbs down without engaging in a thorough examination.

October 1943, making several attacks on the blockade runner “Munsterland” in Cherbourg Harbour saw the sad demise of the WW – for those not shot down, the rest who managed to RTB, some crash-landed, and others after landing found their aircraft U/S. Speaks well for the aircraft that all these pilots survived unhurt. It soon reached the sorry stage there weren’t sufficient airworthy aircraft to make a raid, and so the Typhoon came and took over.

I am 88 in January, and my eyesight, even with a magnifying glass, is not good enough to refresh my mind of the cockpit setup in the pictures displayed. However, I believe that the reason why I was not able to open the hood was due to centrifugal force as I spun earthwards, pinning me down in my seat, and not having strength enough to wind back the hood. I eventually cried “Oh God, help me” – and He did – how, I don’t know to this day, but I do know it wasn’t thanks to those who were not prepared to improve and modify this excellent fighter aircraft.


George Wood
November 2009

[Chris Royle]

On behalf of a chum who is researching the Whirlwind history.
A Westland Whirlwind (the twin engined fighter, not the helicopter) serial number P6994 was shipped to the USA in 1942. The exact reason for sending the Whirlwind is unknown.
It is believed that the aircraft was flown by Peter Twiss whilst it was in the USA and that it was flown to Paxutent River for evaluation and was also flown to the Grumman plant. It is said that one or perhaps both of the RR Peregrine engines ended up as the motive power for a US Navy person's powerboat, indicating that the aircraft was dismantled or had met with an accident.
Anyone out there have any more information about any of this? Are there any Whirlwind artefacts over there in the US of A?
All information gratefully received.
Best wishes,
Chris Royle

[A A Gruntpuddock]

I googled P6994 Whirlwind and got a few hits, this seemed most interesting :-

Westland Whirlwind Shipped To The USA 1942 - Key Publishing Ltd Aviation Forums (http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?p=1500501)

[Chris Royle]

Thanks Gruntpuddock. Looks interesting,
Chris

[NeilCP]

Are there any bits of a whilwind knocking around.I know the aircraft is extinct but was wondering if there are anny bits of one in a museum anywhere......Neil

[Rory57]

Cosford has a Peregrine, used to be in the foyer. It would be nice to know if it had ever flown (in a Whirlwind, nothing else used Peregrines did they?)

[Mr BlueSky]

It would be nice to know if it had ever flown (in a Whirlwind, nothing else used Peregrines did they?)

Didn't know Cosford had one, is it one of Steve Vizards pair? One is or was at the R-R Museum Derby... If Cosford does have one it was from a Whirly, Westlands had the lot, apart from the ones used for the R-R Vulture's in the Manchester's and Gloster's F9/37 second prototype L8002... :ok:

Oh and one was use in Rolls-Royce's test aircraft He 70G flying with a Peregrine engine...

[Rory57]

It was not a Peregrine at Cosford but a Kestrel. Darn it, caught out by wishful thinking. Apologies to all.

[Giglamps]

Whirlwind enthusiasts may not have seen the following photo (have I done this right? Not v. technical) of 263 Sqdn at I would think Warmwell. Note Ranee the great dane front r. with my uncle who flew Whirlwinds from December 1941 until April 1943 when he got bored and crossed the airfield to join the Typhoons of 257 Sqdn. (He was also passed over for the command of his flight which probably rankled, but then he was older than the others - 27 - and short-sighted too). The photo includes Tommy Pugh and Geoff Warnes (also short-sighted, wore contact lenses).

http://i870.photobucket.com/albums/ab266/giglamps/StuartGroupWhirlwind.jpg?t=1271450073

There was no OTU for Whirlwinds, although 137 Sqdn had an Oxford for instruction in asymmetric flying. 263 Sqdn didn't for some time, and Jim Coyne - seen here front left - told me that as a newcomer you were just attached to an experienced pilot for a day or two and picked his brains. Then the flight commander would tell you to get a parachute and climb into a particular aircraft; he then simply stood on your wing for about 10 minutes going through the drill and asking a lot of questions, and then you were on your own. Coyne said his first take-off was a bit of a hairy do.
As an aircraft he said it was the rattliest aircraft in the RAF, and would rattle its paint off, but he looked on it as v reliable. V stable also, and an excellent gun platform; the 60 rounds per cannon gave you about 10 seconds, with a lot of semi AP and every fifth round an incendiary.
John Wray, CO of 137 Sqdn, thought that the Whirlwind was very easy to fly, and I remember him saying that it could pick up speed like nobody's business but bombs and bomb racks took 20mph off you.
This may be of interest to Mr Wood, who may recognise some faces in the photo.

[JW411]

John Wray had a lot of good things to say about the Whirlwind. He had some nice photographs in his albums. Sadly he is no longer with us.

[Chris Royle]

Giglamps,
Please contact Jim Munro at rjamesmunroATgooglemail.com
He is keen to make contact with you, and to ascertain who your Uncle was.
Jim has amassed an incredible amount of information about the Whirlwind with the intention of putting it together for a TV documentary.
Jim is in touch with at least 10 ex Whirlwind pilots, now scattered across the globe.

If anyone out there has information, photos, documents (perhaps knows where a complete Whirlwind is hiding in some remote hangar...:) please post here and please do contact Jim who will be delighted to correspond with you on the subject of this maligned and little known fighter aircraft.
Thanks,
Chris

[Giglamps]

Have emailed Jim Munro as suggested.
Pilot referred to was Stuart Lovell [1916-1944], elder brother of better-known Tony Lovell [1919-1945].

[Chris Royle]

Thanks Gig

[Shackman]

Late viewing of this thread, but glad to see George is still around to give some excellent information re the WW. Although I only saw him under less than ideal situations the stories of both Whirlwind and Typhoon ops were remarkable.

[Chris Royle]

Shackman,
Can you contact Jim Munro at the email address above in my 18th April post?
He would like to update you with information.
Thanks,
Chris