One for the old bomber pukes(joking), The Vickers Windsor

From a while back

Thought it might complemment the other Windsor thread!

Ciao!

The Wellington has a single main spar and the Warwick was a similar design so I’m sure it had the same – but the Windsor was quite different, even though it still featured geodetic construction. All were the design responsibility of the late Rex Pierson, Vickers’ Chief Designer and Barnes Wallis’ boss at the time.

The book isn’t very clear. It says the Wellington fuel tanks were fitted between the spars, states categorically that the Windsor didn’t have spars, and infers that the Wellington, Warwick and Windsor were all variations of a similar design.
Anybody been to Brooklands recently?

Steve, I’ll go back and check the Putnam book, which is where I got that from, but I’m fairly suspicious.

All geodetic and no wing spars so flapping is pretty certain I would think.
What sort of bloke comes up with the idea of knitting an aeroplane?

I’ve had to re-read that. No wing spars? Blimey! 😮 Was this also the case with the Wellington and Warwick?

Apart from the wing shape, nothing in common with the Supermarine aircraft. All geodetic and no wing spars so flapping is pretty certain I would think.
What sort of bloke comes up with the idea of knitting an aeroplane?
In similar vein, when a high altitude bomber was needed, I wonder what the thought processes were that suggested the Wellington would be a good subject for pressurisation.

v-stab looks awfully small, otherwise, interesting yet effective looking….

A unique bird that had 4 main undercarriage units, good job as on a test flight one refused to lower. Also heard that it had great wing flexability and gave the impression of gentle ‘flapping’ when in flight!

I wonder how much of it was derived from RJ Mitchells ‘Victory Bomber’ ?

I thought that wing shape (tip) looked familiar 🙂

“Strange looking bird”

The Mark 9 is a strange looking bird.