Stunning. Any more like this?

Edit – to answer my own question, yes. I should have followed the link! Worth trying the search. Some Fokker D.XXI’s as well – great stuff, Martti!

Whirlin?

Specifically the Merlin Whirlin.. I’ll get me coat.

All I know is it’s from Westland drawing 84132, 6th Dec 1940. This version appeared in ‘Aviation News’ in 1982. We have not found the drawing, but I will be asking again now that the Westland archive has been catalogued thanks to the efforts of Dave Gibbings and Emily Weeks.

Thanks Edgar. It does give simple reasons, doesn’t it? That thing about 50% more material does ring true.

The Merlin angle remains a ‘what if’, I suppose.. 410mph would have put it ‘out of range’ nicely, for a while anyway.

Edit – note that at that meeting Sholto-Douglas didn’t appear to mention the offer of a Merlin install from Westland, made to him only 13 days earlier. Not shouting ‘conspiracy’, more that the whole thing probably wasn’t at the forefront of anyone’s mind. The chances of anyone saying ‘By Jove, let’s try it and see’ rather than concentrating on more and faster Spitfires at the time were close to nil. I guess that answers my question.

Niall’s book is excellent, Edgar. Agree there. Nobody was being histrionic though. One Peregrine = two Merlins.. so, the logical thing to do was.. cancel the aircraft? No, it was to fit Merlins. And re production capacity and orders.. Westland subsequenty built 2,800 Spitfires and Seafires.

I tend towards the percieved shortfall in Merlin production as the main reason. The problem is lack of evidence in the records.

Amazing. Seven minutes! Thanks, Ian.

We’ve had a good look at the first photos of this kit over on Britmodeller.. and it’s terrible. Really very inaccurate.

As for unsuccessful.. built in small numbers, yes, but I’d be interested to hear you explain to the pilots of the two squadrons that did operate the aircraft very effecrively by day and night against ground and naval targets for two years why the aircraft they flew was ‘unsuccessful’

One of those QI ‘widely known but wrong’ things, the ‘failure’ of the Whilwind..

Hi! To clarify, then.. you need to know where to find a serial number that identifies the individual aircraft? That won’t happen, I’m afraid.. or do you know the aircraft – was ‘B-17’ from prop blade profile and diameter, or is this a known wreck?

If you need ident on the assembly to confirm aircraft type then the best method i know is to take it apart, check the blade roots for type ident stamps. Blades were more type-specific than hubs.

I am sure someone with more knowledge than me can identify engine type from the gubbins around the shaft.

Just caught up with the news.. bad luck, Moggy. Here’s to a speedy recovery and getting back in the saddle, as it were.