Might not be necessary to do all of it as part of the rear fuse.. perhaps just the rear angle and a temporary plate to form a rigid jig? Mike, Gunnar has a ‘beermat special’ sketch of what I’m getting at..

Buchon. It’s not a Messerschmitt. But it is a mess. And maybe then we could avoid the half-ar**d ‘combat’ sequences that necessarily show the public what a low-G and stately affair a dogfight was. Controversial, I know..

Those tyre dimensions are a bit odd, are you sure the second one isn’t 10.00 x 11.5?

33 x 9 looks like a type VII designation, I think post-war, suggesting a 33″ overall diameter and a 9″ tyre width, wall-to-wall. It doesn’t say much about the hub/rim, though.

The wheel is a standard Dunlop 4-spoke type, as per Spitfire and many other types. I couldn’t say by looking at it which – can you measure it rim-to-rim? Or look for an AH-prefixed number stamped into the casting?

there is the (albeit possibly slim) chance of you breathing in the dust, thereby getting non-degradable radioactive material into your lungs, with all that entails.
If museums buy a Geiger counter, and supply visitors with dust-proof sprayers’ masks and over-suits, which can be destroyed after use, maybe 100% access might be regained, but don’t hold your breath.

Hmm.. DO hold your breath. That’d also work.

Hi P&P

Yep, people who know me know how appropriate my name on here is. I think it was propeller design that drove me to it!

The main difference between the Whirlwind prop and those of the Lanc, Mosquito and other Merlin powered aircraft is the diameter of the shank end where it fits in its sleeve on the hub. It is of a slightly smaller diameter, making it a 3DX rather than the more usual 3EX (no preceding ‘2’ as bracket-type, not hydro).

In de Havilland speak it’s 4,000 series, not 5,000 as per Merlin powered aircraft. Thus it’s a 54409 – 5 means ‘bracket type’, 4 for the series (shank size = 4,000), 4 actual individual design sheet number, 0 for right-hand tractor and 9 for 9 inches removed from the overall diameter of the drawn design (4.5 from the blade). For comparison, the Spit 1 had a 55409

There were lots of other 4,000 series blades around, but they were all on British radials – meaning left-hand tractor.

The WW’s blades were the shape they were because of a unique combination of variables – high speed at relatively low individual power transmission for that speed, a sleek inline cowling sitting behind (not a wall of cylinders), and a sub-900hp right-hander to boot.

Interesting what you say about Hamilton thinking that ‘their’ aerofoil (airfoil?) is proprietary. In fact it is an RAF6, but they might not know that in the legal department!

I guess the 1930’s data you have is the same as I have – all those NACA reports? I would love that book as well – and also I am very interested to know whether DH designed their own blades during the war or whether all those 4,000 and 5,000 series blades were equivalents of Hamilton designs, such that 6519 = 455x0x

Ah, back to my obsession. One note to add – 23EX is not just a licence built 23E50. It is the American Hamilton designation for a 3 blade E-shank hub with a ‘foreign’ shaft, indicated by an ‘X’ instead of a size. Normally this meant an SBAC 5, to fit a Merlin etc. I know you knew this as well, Anon – I think it was you who explained it to me on here way back when?

Jeff (Reckless) – first of all, apologies for disappearing in Yeovil the other day – can you pm me your number, I think I have lost it (phone memory issues)? Hope you enjoyed the day anyway – and a bit of a result re P7056.. we’ll pin that letter down, I’m sure.

Re your post – you mentioned Rotols as a logical next step for the Whirlwind II – of course, the second prototype had Rotols, with no real changes necessary to the aircraft except a narrower nacelle front due to a smaller diameter spinner (Once again, thanks Gunnar). However, for me the next step would just as likely be featherable DH Hydromatics..

Merlins.. Tightly-designed it might have been, but it turns out that the parabola that Petter drew for the nacelles allows a lot of spare space around a Peregrine (The space is, in fact, Merlin-sized)

The souped-up Peregrine – well, there was an aircraft flown with modified engines after adaption by RR, which according to one pilot who flew it went like the clappers. There is a photo somewhere… the only obvious difference is a new intake on top of the nacelle.

Nice. There are also some Curtiss Hawks, a 109, a He111, a Tupelov something, an Ilyushin DB-3, and all kinds of obscure goodies. I haven’t had much luck with using the search, I’ve just been clicking through, and have seen all these in the first 100 colour images.