Author Topic: How about the Westland Whirlwind  (Read 1550 times)

Offline Lusche

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 23968
      • Last.FM Profile
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #15 on: November 30, 2006, 01:15:50 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Krusty
It fought, did it? Was it ever in combat? Did it ever get any kills? And it might be a 1940 prototype, but it wasn't actually active til.. what? ... 1942? The engine problems killed it, almost completely.



Yes / Yes, not sure but I would almost bet on it, was used mostly as a fighter-bomber / No, it was a 1938 prototype, first deliveries to squadron in July 40, operational in December 40, was in combat for almost 3 years!
« Last Edit: November 30, 2006, 01:18:22 PM by Lusche »
Steam: DrKalv
E:D Snailman

In November 2025, Lusche will return for a 20th anniversary tour. Get your tickets now!

Offline Ball

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1827
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #16 on: November 30, 2006, 01:21:56 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by zorstorer
Then why not just bump one of those old threads.


13- Do not punt topics. Punting would be making a non-substantive post for the express purpose of bring the thread to the top of the thread list.

Offline feejeean

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #17 on: November 30, 2006, 09:29:26 PM »


Heres some more info on this wonderful aeroplane

General characteristics
Crew: One pilot
Length: 32 ft 3 in (9.83 m)
Wingspan: 45 ft 0 in (13.72 m)
Height: 11 ft 7 in (3.53 m)
Wing area: 250 ft² (23 m²)
Empty weight: 8,310 lb (3,770 kg)
Loaded weight: 10,356 lb (4,697 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 11,410 lb (5,175 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Rolls-Royce Peregrine I Liquid-Cooled V-12, 885 hp (660 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 360 mph (560 km/h)
Range: 808 miles (1,300 km)
Service ceiling: 30,315 ft (9,240 m)
Rate of climb: ft/min (m/min)
Wing loading: 41 lb/ft² (204 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.17 hp/lb (0.28 kW/kg)
Armament
4x Hispano 20 mm cannon in nose (60 rounds per gun, 240 rounds total)
2x 250 lb (115 kg) or 500 lb (230 kg) bombs

This link to all the colour schemes for the Whirlwind in Service

http://www.cbrnp.com/profiles/quarter2/whirlwinds.htm

Excerpt from wikipedia

Philip J.R. Moyes notes in Aircraft in Profile 94: The Westland Whirlwind, “The basic feature of the Whirlwind was its concentration of firepower: its four closely-grouped heavy cannon in the nose had a rate of fire of 600 lb./minute – which, until the introduction of the Beaufighter, placed it ahead of any fighter in the world. Hand in hand with this dense firepower went a first-rate speed and climb performance, excellent manoeuvrablity and a fighting view hitherto unsurpassed. The Whirlwind was, in its day, faster than the Spitfire down low and, with lighter lateral control, was considered to be one of the nicest ‘twins’ ever built… From the flying viewpoint, the Whirlwind was considered magnificent.”

Bruce Robertson, in The Westland Whirlwind Described quotes a 263 Squadron pilot as saying, "It was regarded with absolute confidence and affection.”

At low level, the aircraft was a devastating fighter-bomber, armed with both cannons and bombs, and it could hold its own with the Bf 109 at low-level. The performance of the Peregrine fell off at altitude, so the Whirlwind was used almost exclusively at low level.

The aircraft is well summed up by Francis K. Mason’s comments in Royal Air Force Fighters of World War Two, Vol. One:

“Bearing in mind the relatively small number of Whirlwinds that reached the RAF, the type remained in combat service, virtually unmodified, for a remarkably long time…The Whirlwind, once mastered, certainly shouldered extensive responsibilities and the two squadrons were called upon to attack enemy targets from one end of the Channel to the other, by day and night, moving from airfield to airfield within Southern England.

“In retrospect the lesson of the Whirlwind is clear…A radical aircraft requires either prolonged development or widespread service to exploit its concept and eliminate its weaknesses, Too often in World War II such aircraft suffered accelerated development or limited service, with the result that teething difficulties came to be regarded as permanent limitations.”


Operational service

In the end only 114 Whirlwinds were produced in total, arming two squadrons (No. 263 Squadron RAF in July 1940 and No. 137 Squadron RAF in November 1941). Due to their good low-altitudes performance, they were used primarily as strike fighters and referred to as Whirlybombers. However even this role was soon marginalized with the introduction of the Hawker Typhoon, and the Whirlwind was removed from service in late 1943. Today none exist.

The first Whirlwinds were delivered to No. 263 Squadron in July 1940, after the decision had been made that No. 263, not No. 25, would be the first RAF Whirlwind squadron. However, from then until October, production of the Peregrine engine was so slow that only 11 Whirlwinds could be delivered to the squadron. Due to slow deliveries and the transition from being an operational Hurricane squadron while learning the new fighter, the squadron didn’t become operational with the Whirlwind until December 1940, but flew them until December 1943.

No better proof of the Whirlwind’s quality can be given than the fact that in the intense fighting environment of Northern Europe, a squadron flew the same fighter mark (not fighter type, the same airframes!) for three years. When No. 263 Squadron got its first Whirlwind, the newest Spitfire in service was the Mk. IA; by the time it gave them up, the Mk. XIV was a month away from entering service. If the Whirlwind had been a bad aircraft, it never would have served with Fighter Command for that length of time. A second Whirlwind squadron, No. 137, flew the type from September 1941 until June 1943.
« Last Edit: November 30, 2006, 09:43:59 PM by feejeean »

Offline Krusty

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 26745
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #18 on: November 30, 2006, 10:23:40 PM »
Don't take this personal, I know it's just an example, but I tell everybody that uses it: Don't trust Wikipedia. Now back to your regularly scheduled posting.

Offline zorstorer

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 950
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #19 on: November 30, 2006, 10:44:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Ball
13- Do not punt topics. Punting would be making a non-substantive post for the express purpose of bring the thread to the top of the thread list.


I really should have put in the part about aircraft data ;)  Thats what I should have said.

Offline Ball

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1827
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #20 on: December 01, 2006, 02:21:18 AM »
After reading this thread i was interested to see at which point replying to a topic was considered punting, i posted asking about it on General Discussion but i think someone figured it was a troll and immediately locked it.

Oh well.

Offline Stang

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6127
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #21 on: December 01, 2006, 02:33:41 AM »
Haha your punt got blocked, noob.

:lol

Offline Debonair

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3488
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #22 on: December 01, 2006, 03:28:15 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Stang
Haha your punt got blocked, noob.

:lol


lols

Offline feejeean

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #23 on: December 01, 2006, 03:34:52 AM »
bit more info - Service introduction began in No 263 Sqn in July 1940 and first 'kill' claimed January 12, 1941

Offline feejeean

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #24 on: December 01, 2006, 06:54:21 AM »

Offline feejeean

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #25 on: December 01, 2006, 07:16:47 AM »

Offline feejeean

  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 32
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #26 on: December 01, 2006, 07:17:31 AM »

Offline Ball

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1827
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #27 on: December 01, 2006, 10:49:47 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Stang
Haha your punt got blocked, noob.

:lol


:cry

Offline Ball

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1827
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #28 on: December 01, 2006, 10:50:35 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by feejeean


The Whirlwind says "im going to ****ing kill you" almost as good as the Typhoon and FW-190.

Offline FrodeMk3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2481
How about the Westland Whirlwind
« Reply #29 on: December 01, 2006, 03:57:56 PM »
Quote
The Whirlwind says "im going to ****ing kill you" almost as good as the Typhoon and FW-190.


Yes, true, but in AH it would be more like, "I'm going to ****ing HO you."