Author Topic: Westland Whirlwind (Read 90330 times)

nrshida · « **Reply #315 on:** November 30, 2012, 11:01:58 AM »

How good would this look:

If done to the same standard as this:

Bustr said the gunsight was the same. Also see some common instruments.

New Hurricanes have a mirror someone said?

Bruv119 · « **Reply #316 on:** November 30, 2012, 05:06:40 PM »

I heard the installation of the mirror is for zack1234 to make sure his hair is still looking good.

JUGgler · « **Reply #317 on:** November 30, 2012, 10:42:43 PM »

JUGgler

nrshida · « **Reply #318 on:** December 01, 2012, 04:07:49 AM »

Quote from: Bruv119 on November 30, 2012, 05:06:40 PM

I heard the installation of the mirror is for zack1234 to make sure his hair is still looking good.

Zack's got dreadlocks, his hair always looks good.

Control column is also the same. Interestingly I think you can see the Whirlwind would have better frontal visibility (as the 'What Fighter 1940' review found) if you use the two shoulder rails and main six gauge instrument panel as reference.

FTJR · « **Reply #319 on:** December 01, 2012, 05:49:53 AM »

Quote from: nrshida on December 01, 2012, 04:07:49 AM

Zack's got dreadlocks, his hair always looks good.

Control column is also the same. Interestingly I think you can see the Whirlwind would have better frontal visibility (as the 'What Fighter 1940' review found) if you use the two shoulder rails and main six gauge instrument panel as reference.

Would expect so, no big engine to peer over, just a gentle sloping nose cone

Scherf · « **Reply #320 on:** December 01, 2012, 06:33:48 AM »

^ You still talking about Zack?

Lusche · « **Reply #321 on:** December 01, 2012, 06:34:57 AM »

nrshida · « **Reply #322 on:** December 01, 2012, 06:51:03 AM »

Beermat · « **Reply #323 on:** December 02, 2012, 03:04:35 AM »

Quote from: nrshida on November 29, 2012, 08:01:20 PM

I must admit Matt, I find AgustaWestland's Copyright claim to be tenuous in the extreme

I've been told by a genuine officer of the Extinct Aeroplane Police that one area Westland could have us on is under Section 12 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 -
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/section/12 - where original tech drawings and diagrams are considered as 'Graphic Work' ("any painting, drawing, diagram, map, chart or plan") Ref Section 4, Para 2(a), and therefore have a 70 year rule applied measured from the first date of public release. I know it's arguable, but there you go..

nrshida · « **Reply #324 on:** December 02, 2012, 05:35:32 AM »

That Copyright pertains to literary, dramatic, musical or artistic works and those are computer reproductions of working drawings - none of the above.

Copyright does not prohibit all copying anyway. Quick look on Wikipedia:-

Fair use and fair dealing: Copyright does not prohibit all copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. Section 107, permits some copying and distribution without permission of the copyright holder or payment to same. The statute does not clearly define fair use, but instead gives four non-exclusive factors to consider in a fair use analysis. Those factors are:

The purpose and character of your use.

The nature of the copyrighted work.

What amount and proportion of the whole work was taken, and

The effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Have they got a lot more blueprints in private that they are withholding until you agree to a new Copyright agreement Matt?

Beermat · « **Reply #325 on:** December 02, 2012, 01:59:12 PM »

The copyright pertains to Graphic works - from the Act:- "'Graphic Work' ("any painting, drawing, diagram, map, chart or plan")

Reproduction is the exact issue - That is why it is called copyright. Should one print those plans in a book, they will have arrived there via a computer. And copyright law would very much still pertain.

Patent applies to the designs described by the drawings, Copyright applies to the drawings themselves.

You have quoted the US Copyright Act - I am more familiar with the UK equivalent.

There is clause in the UK Act that seems equivalent to the doctrine in the US one, so that reproduction for academic or research use is indeed allowed. However, it does clearly prescribe the use of appropriate acknowledgement in this circumstance.

There's no hidden agenda - just a gentleman's agreement to honour their request. They are not aware of any more material, but it doesn't mean that more rummaging won't unearth it. To allow us to rummage in their archive - which is on their HQ and factory site - we need their goodwill.

AAaaanyway - I know it's all very arguable - and I am not a lawyer. Having said all of this, I would always be minded to acknowledge my sources even if there wasn't anything to gain nor legal imperative.

JVboob · « **Reply #326 on:** December 19, 2012, 05:28:34 AM »

I WANT THE WHIRLY DOOOO whilwing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

its sexy and has 2engines +1 x's a million

JUGgler · « **Reply #327 on:** January 20, 2013, 08:42:25 AM »

I found this out in the cold, suffering from neglect and exposure.

JUGgler

phatzo · « **Reply #328 on:** January 20, 2013, 02:46:22 PM »

It's a bit of a shame that the Westland Welkin never went into production, it would have been a great High alt buff buster over the strats.

tuton25 · « **Reply #329 on:** January 20, 2013, 03:01:36 PM »

Wouldn't the Welkin be similar to the Mossie Mk. 30

Aces High Bulletin Board