So, what actually happened to the original Blenheim that crashed back in 1988? It’s not the one being restored by the IWM or the one being restored to fly that crashed recently, because there both Bolingbrokes, or maybe it was a complete write off?
Are the engines now attached to the Bolingbroke that is being restored at East Fortune?
I thought that the one that crashed in 1988 was also a Bolingbroke?
In the 1990s Aeroplane Monthly ran a series called “Tested and Failed” on various aircraft that did not perform as planned (eg Miles Monitor – tendency towards massive fuel fires exacerbated by being made of wood…). I’m fairly crtain that the Firebrand was in it – looked mean, mean to fly.
I can’t comment on the Firebrand article in that series, but in the one on the Welkin, the author was a bit selective in his choice of quotes from the Boscombe Down reports. It seemed to me that he was quoting to fit his argument, rather than reading the reports then forming an opinion.
What’s the story concerning the outer slats on the Whirlwind? Most books and articles that I have read state that at some point they were locked and leave it at that. However, David Mondey in his book on the manufacturers Westland (Janes 1981) claims that only early Whirlwinds had slats, later aircraft being built without them. It would make sense in leaving them off if their use has been prohibited. Can anyone confirm this?
Was range a factor? The Coastal Command Halifaxes were able to carry a bombload in the in the wings and an extra fuel tank in the fuselage bomb bay, allowing an endurence of up to 16 hours (although in practice, flights were limited to 13 hours to allow a safety margin).
Sign In
