Wikiposts
Search
Aviation History and Nostalgia Whether working in aviation, retired, wannabee or just plain fascinated this forum welcomes all with a love of flight.

Short Stirling

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 28th Dec 2014, 20:51
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nottingham
Age: 76
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Angry Short Stirling

My late stepfather served half a tour on 7 Sqn Stirlings (previously flying in Wimpies) He then spent a rest tour helping evaluate the B17C for RAF service before heading back on ops. He was always adamant that the early Stirlings though plagued by u/c and throttle problems were far better aircraft than we now allow for he was convinced that the first production batch climbed higher faster and flew further than any of the subsequent machines.


Cookies take on this was that he thought that after Rochester had been bombed by the Luftwaffe all subsequent production a/c were built with the wing incidence slightly out and no one noticed.


Anyone out there with there have a better theory? Just down the road from out house stands a memorial to a Stirling Crew who fell to earth in 1944
Prangster is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2014, 21:10
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Cheshire, California, Geneva, and Paris
Age: 67
Posts: 867
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am not too sure about higher and faster, but it was reported that it was much more maneuverable than the Lancaster and Halifax and was able to out turn a Hurricane in fighter affiliation exercises.
DC10RealMan is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2014, 22:08
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
evansb is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2014, 22:08
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Southwater
Age: 73
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
There was too little wingspan for the size of the aircraft due to the RAF's insistence that it fitted into the 100' wide hangars. That is a well known fact.
I have too heard the tale that an empty one - because of that - was really rather manouverable for an aircraft of that size.
RedhillPhil is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 02:15
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Colchester
Age: 40
Posts: 454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Short Stirling

I have never read a single account of Stirlings flying higher, and lots of it being below the other heavies, and having to navigate through the Alps on the raids against Turin...
Dash8driver1312 is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 02:57
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kammbronn
Posts: 2,122
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Redhillphil
That is a well known fact.
Of course, the beauty of such statements is that you can support it with a source.
diginagain is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 03:56
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Thailand
Age: 81
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Specification for "Short Stirling".

Air Ministry Specification B.12/36 called for the design and development of a strategic four-engined heavy bomber that could quickly is placed into production, giving the RAF Bomber Command a high-speed aircraft capable of delivering a large bombload at long ranges. It was to be crewed by seven or eight men with defensive armament consisting of multi-gunned nose, ventral and tail turrets. The initial maximum take-off weight had to be between 48,000 lbs (21769 kg) and 53,000 lbs (24036 kg), but with the capability of that figure being increased to around 65,000 lbs (29478 kg). The weapons bays also had to be compatible with all standard RAF bomb ordnance in use at that time. The specification also demanded that the aircraft be capable of lifting off a 500 ft (152.4 m) runway and is able to clear 50 ft (15.2 m) trees at the end, with the wingspan not exceeding 100 ft (30.48 m).
oldpax is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 06:14
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manchester MAN
Posts: 6,644
Received 74 Likes on 46 Posts
It was only a couple of years ago that I noticed the Stirling had twin tailwheels. Does anyone know why?

Here's my favourite Stirling picture with Joan Hughes for scale:
India Four Two is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 08:10
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: South Africa
Age: 87
Posts: 1,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Isn't it true that the Stirling was the 1st a/c that Short's built with an undercarriage?

Everything the built before this floated!
ian16th is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 08:11
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: On the Rump of Pendle Hill Lancashi
Posts: 614
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I am sure that TV prog about the Women Aux Pilots who flew new aircraft all over the UK to bases also mentioned they flew the Sterlings and Lancasters as well well as more mundane everyday things like Spits and Mustangs.

Peter R-B
Peter-RB is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 09:00
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: South East of Penge
Age: 74
Posts: 1,792
Received 8 Likes on 8 Posts
Isn't it true that the Stirling was the 1st a/c that Short's built with an undercarriage?
No , not by a long way.
Includes the Silver Streak of 1920, all duralumin and claimed ( erroneously) by some sources as being the first all metal aircraft , The Springbok,Gurnard series, the Scylla airliner( bit like an H.P.42) plus various other types that had land/sea alternatives.
But I think it's fair to say that it is the flying boats and seaplanes that come first to mind.

Last edited by Haraka; 29th Dec 2014 at 09:15.
Haraka is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 10:45
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 5,222
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes on 3 Posts
The specification also demanded that the aircraft be capable of lifting off a 500 ft (152.4 m) runway and is able to clear 50 ft (15.2 m) trees at the end, with the wingspan not exceeding 100 ft (30.48 m).


????????????????????????????????

To to the second trick it would have to get airborne in three wingspans. A Feisler Storch coudn't do that.
Fareastdriver is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 12:57
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I42,
There was another thread on here recently in which we got into the Stirling in some detail.
You might like to refer to that.
Stanwell is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 17:37
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: 40nm east of BLL
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That makes actually one common detail between the Halifax and the Saab Draken: Twin tailwheels :-o

http://www.flugzeuginfo.net/acimages..._karldrage.jpg ;-)
Flybiker7000 is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 17:50
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Manchester MAN
Posts: 6,644
Received 74 Likes on 46 Posts
om15,

Thanks. I wasn't aware that they were retractable.
India Four Two is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 20:34
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: New South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 9,764
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
The specification also demanded that the aircraft be capable of lifting off a 500 ft (152.4 m) runway and is able to clear 50 ft (15.2 m) trees at the end,

Dunno why they plant trees at the end of a runway, but the Stirling came up 'Short' meeting that part of the specification as I have at 57,400 lbs it took 1,160 yards to clear that big tree and at 70,000 lbs 1,380 yards.

RAF's insistence that it fitted into the 100' wide hangars.
Wasn't Mason the first author to prove there were no 100 ft hangars, they were all 126 ft at the time of the specification?


Isn't it true that the Stirling was the 1st a/c that Short's built with an undercarriage?
If you meant retractable, then yes, I believe the Stirling was Short's first production aircraft to feature this, although the half-scale wooden S.31 was first into the air. Incidentally, I read the S.31 was the only four-engined aircraft that Eric Brown looped.



And from elsewhere on the net I found this. Harris was no fan of Oswald or the Stirling?...

Harris wrote a fantastic letter to Sinclair, Secretary of State for Air, in which his opinion of the Stirling, and the Short management, and the Halifax and Handley Page are made very clear indeed.

"I understand that the Stirling is to go in favour of the Lancaster as fast as the changeover can be achieved. But it will not be fast, or achieved at all with goodwill and good intent, as long as His Majesty's Government balk at the issue of taking the Stirling management away from the incompetent drunk who at present holds our fate in his hands. The Stirling Group has now virtually collapsed. They make no worthwhile contribution to our war effort in return for their overheads."

Last edited by Noyade; 29th Dec 2014 at 20:46. Reason: Because it's easy and fun.
Noyade is offline  
Old 29th Dec 2014, 21:00
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Towers Senior was also 149 Squadron - arrived to Wimpeys and OCU training over to the Stirling initially at Mildenhall and later around the local satellite fields.

His ops covered everything from the earliest 1000 bomber raids through to later 'gardening' missions at low level over French rivers and estuaries which he found by far the most stressful.

It was the very earliest missions where he mentioned performance most critically. Over the Alps to bomb Northern Italy's manufacturing base.

Return fuel? Nominated bomb load? He claimed they never made the equivalent of MSA once outbound over the Alps and they never got within 30 knots of projected airspeed.

Hospitalised twice - ditching off the East Anglian coast and rescued by the Southwold lifeboat and later a delayed takeoff, overheated engines, crash after take off with bomb load blowing up. Spent a very long time at Ely after that.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2015, 21:07
  #18 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Nottingham
Age: 76
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 4 Posts
Stirling Again

Hi prune towers. Possible that stepfather Flt Lt Horace Cooke DFC and your relative served together. Cookie went from 149 to 7 in late 1940. Finished the tour and wandered to I think 90 evaluating the B17 before coming back to ops on 156 where he was signals leader. Don Bennett finally threw him out after 68 ops sending him to Canada to cross train as a pilot. His verdict on the B17 was marvellous aeroplane but a lousy bomber.
Prangster is offline  
Old 1st Jan 2015, 21:18
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: UK
Posts: 7,737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Afraid I can't check up Prangster - my dad is no longer with us and his log book went during a move across the Atlantic. Spent hour after hour poring through them but that was all before the age of 10.

Rob
PPRuNe Towers is offline  
Old 3rd Jan 2015, 01:13
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: At home
Posts: 1,232
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
His verdict on the B17 was marvellous aeroplane but a lousy bomber.
I've heard it said that the P-38 Lightning did with one man and two engines, what the B-17 Flying Fortress did with 10 men and four engines. Is there any truth in that?
Mechta is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.