Any airworthy Typhoons in existence ?

MN235?

The one and only,”allegedly”?

Its not really up to me to say a lot as you may well imagine.

Well loved.

I can understand the problem of people holding on to their Typhoon parts. But how about pooling resources such as information, drawing to be able to construct wings? IIRC that happened with the Boomerang and several are now flying with many others in the pipeline.

Cees

an example of how a ‘soft’ object can grind away a ‘harder’ one.

You do see this quite a lot in engines especially pistons wearing out gudgeon pins; as has been said before improvements in lubricating oil and filtering could reduce the particals, but I do wonder about the crank cases and crankshafts (both of them) and their serviceability.

A bit off topic , but I have seen many cast steel camshafts worn down on the bearing surfaces , where they run direct against an alloy cylinder head ( with little or no damage to the head ) . Thats why the ” white metal ” in “White metal bearing shells” is so soft , it allows debris to bury deep into the white metal , and not grind into the matching component .

Been trying to do that for years, as well as some of the other guys interested in typhoons. As I have entitled before the parts are out there it is just a problem getting them in one place. Still keep trying…..one day 🙂

Typhoon Documentary …. very good !

Recieved my documentary tonight and watched it…..outstanding effort here by the producer & those who worked on it. Just nice to see these Typhoon pilots & ground crews get credit for their war efforts ! Great job here folks !

BlueNoser352

MN235?

It ran

When I was a kid, the babe at Hendon made smoke and lots of noise. I saw and felt and heard it.

She came into the shop with a four blade prop, and some missing paint round the bonnet.

What more can I say than “when you have had the best **** the rest”

:):):)

an example of how a ‘soft’ object can grind away a ‘harder’ one.

You do see this quite a lot in engines especially pistons wearing out gudgeon pins; as has been said before improvements in lubricating oil and filtering could reduce the particals, but I do wonder about the crank cases and crankshafts (both of them) and their serviceability.

81 answers on this thread (so far!) and it could been answered with one word! LOL!

It was answered with two words in post # 2 ‘Not one’ – but its still an interesting subject, hence the further 80 odd posts :rolleyes:

81 answers on this thread (so far!) and it could been answered with one word! LOL!

Back in the early eighties when I earned a crust as a draughtsman one of my bosses was an ex Napier apprentice.
In a discussion about the grinding wheels he related the story of Sabre engines coming back to Napiers for investigation. The alloy pistons and cylinder blocks were measured and found to be in tolerance yet the steel sleeves had been worn thin, Closer investigation showed the softer alloy parts to have hard particles embedded in them resulting in them acting as an abrasive.
Unfortunately the passage of time has caused me to forget what these particles were or how they got embedded but I’ve remembered it as an example of how a ‘soft’ object can grind away a ‘harder’ one.

Only one Typhoon left and thats in the RAF Museum. That will never fly again.

Not only that, but the spinner is from a Hastings. The four bladed openings have been blanked off and new ones cut to fit. Next time you are at Hendon, take a closer look. The radiator/oil cooler is makeshift and much of the engine cowls are not original either; nevertheless, it looks great.

Many of you will have seen this docu before,I post it in tribute to the Typhoon pilots/groundcrew…includes interviews with operational tiffie pilots 🙂

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qexMo-2ZLos&feature=related

Fantastic, thanks for sharing. The narrator was a bit wooden for my liking, but I was gripped. What a great documentary.

Many of you will have seen this docu before,I post it in tribute to the Typhoon pilots/groundcrew…includes interviews with operational tiffie pilots 🙂

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qexMo-2ZLos&feature=related

The design authority for the Sabre would be Rolls Royce as they purchased English Electric which had previously purchased Napier and Sons aero division. Napier turbochargers still exists but I doubt they would have accepted or wanted anything related to any of the old engine designs.

‘.the fact that I have heard from more than one experienced person that merlins weren’t as reliable as it was made out during the war was just an example of the bad rap the sabre had and that the merlin could do no wrong.’
DaveR post 68

The Merlin had it’s problems like every other engine, others on here are more qualified than me to talk about that.
Thing to remember of course is that Lord Hives at Rolls Royce was a very shrewd operator and not above exploiting other peoples problems. This I guess was one of the reasons for the removal from Napiers Acton works of the Sabre E122 prototype in around 1947. Obviously even at that late date they still considered it could offer competition (to the Eagle 22), so maybe post-war reliability was not too bad after all.
As an aside the sleeves for the Centaurus are 5.75″ and the sleeves that were adapted for the Sabre were from the Taurus with a bore of 5″. Not too many spare Taurus parts laying around methinks!

I believe the design authority would be with the parent company which is now BAe, they have a copy of all the surviving Hawker drawings but will not let them out of their sight at present (seems we have gone the opposite way to the americans regarding the use of drawings…gone are the days of a promise not to blame them for any problems caused by me or anyone else)

Wasn’t the MB5 ‘replica’ based on a Mustang and was it ever finished?

Oops, just discovered that this topic has been covered before in this forum although not in this thread. It seems we have to conclude that the USA item does not count as an accurate MB5 replica.

Hi HP111

See one of my other posts on this thread, re- the MB5 replica, I did say that it used Mustang components & was not a 100% true repro. The point being that the guy who built it, put a lot of money, time & effort into building it, & it was not built to represent a Spitfire or Mustang, but instead it was built to represent a one off prototype aircraft. Proving that if there is some one with enough will, money & interest in the Typhoon, then a flying example should not be ruled out altogether.
My mentioning of the MB5 replica in my posts, is relevant to this discussion thread, & not a repeat of a previous topic covered on an earlier thread.

Bob T. 😀

DaveR -There have been rumours of surviving Typhoon wings from the early 1980’s when Mike Cookman advertised for information on them. However there have been no sightings -pictures or adverts selling such items! Therefore in the age of the internet where its very easy to research an item you have to wonder why nobody would have asked for a valuation of advice on the Typhoon wings they have !

As for the Napier -its ok having large sums of money to fund one.However you then need a design authority -people brave enough to be the test pilot for one and access to large numbers of engineers who can redesign and adapt to overcome any difficulties. Any engines that are sitting ‘inhibited’ or ‘unused’ means nothing. They need to be stripped apart to every tiny component. That can quite easily find a can of worms.

Hi David

Out of interest, who/what is the design authority ?. & would’nt the same be needed for ADC Cirrus, AS Puma, Beardmore, LeRhone, Alvis Leonodise etc etc engines ?.

Bob T.

Could you not just reengineer the sleeve valve from scratch applying a modern solution but retaining the engine core layout or use a simple system like the Burt-McCollum sleeve valve?

According to wiki that is the system adopted by Bristol, it has been suggested that the centaurus sleeves were virtually identical to the sabre.