Author Topic: The Whirlwind - a plane I'd forgotten... (Read 468 times)

Sparks · « **on:** April 30, 2002, 07:54:27 PM »

Just read a good article in ............... eeerrrrrrrrrrr ...... well I've forgotten the magazine name but it was about the Whirlwind fighter. Twin engine good low level performer and ground attack and EARLY WAR !!! - was phased out by '44.

I think it would be a cracking addition to the British plane set - and it was definitely operational.

Thoughts everyone??

Sparks

Kevin14 · « **Reply #1 on:** April 30, 2002, 08:04:31 PM »

Yeah, its like the mossy though, almost identical. And they just made the 110s so I don't think they would come out soon with it

ra · « **Reply #2 on:** April 30, 2002, 08:15:26 PM »

Only 120 or so built, it didn't really leave much of a mark on the war. Beaufighter would be better.

F4UDOA · « **Reply #3 on:** April 30, 2002, 08:29:15 PM »

If you want something differant and new try the Defiant. It saw alot of action in the BoB and would be like a flying AAA gun.

Boulton Paul Defiant N.F. Mk I
Role: Night-fighter
Crew: Two
Dimensions: Length 35 ft 4 in (10.77 m); Height 11 ft 4 in (3.45 m); Wing Span 39 ft 4 in (11.99 m); Wing Area 250.0 sq ft (23.23 sq m)
Engine(s): One liquid cooled, 12 cylinder Vee, Rolls-Royce Merlin III of 1,030 hp (768 kW).
Weights: Empty Equipped 6,078 lb (2,757 kg); Normal Take-off 8,318 lb (3,773 kg); Maximum Take-off 8,600 lb (3,900 kg)
Performance: Maximum level speed 250 mph (402 kph) at sea level, 302.5 mph (486 kph) at 16,500 ft (5,029 m); Cruising speed 259 mph (416 kph); Initial rate of climb 1,900 ft/min (579 m/min); Service ceiling 28,100 ft (8,565 m); Range 465 mls (748 km) at 259 mph (416 kph); Endurance 1.78 hr.
Armament: Four .303 in (7.7 mm) Browning machine-guns in power-operated Boulton Paul A. Mk IID dorsal turret, with 600 rounds per gun.

thrila · « **Reply #4 on:** May 01, 2002, 04:15:12 AM »

Add the beaufighter!
Would be nice to have an early war heavy fighter for the Uk. 4x20mm (240rpg) and 6x.303 (with 1000rpg with the .303's, enough ammo to ping people to death surely:D ) and able to carry bombs, a torp and rockets.

com'on HT surely it's time you added the "whispering death"

P.S. i have a feeling someone's gonna come in and ask for more italian/japanese planes...heheh.

Seeker · « **Reply #5 on:** May 01, 2002, 05:14:33 AM »

I'd love to see the Whirlwind, and I've a feeling that with it's weaknesses not modelled in AH (dodgy motors and a high landing speed) it'd be uber out of all proportion to it's war time service in the MA in the same way the Tiffy has so much more success in the MA than it ever had in service as a fighter.

MiloMorai · « **Reply #6 on:** May 01, 2002, 08:46:02 AM »

Seeker,

the Peregrine engines were too small(1296ci) but it was the cooling system of the a/c with flaps down that caused the engine problems. As for the high landing speed, compared to single engine fighters, yes the speed was high, but can any say what the landing speeds were for other British twin engine a/c of the day

Sabre · « **Reply #7 on:** May 01, 2002, 09:39:32 AM »

I've always had a mild facination for the Boltan-Paul Defiant, but it was a dismal failure in combat. Upon it's initial entry into combat, it achieved some minor but short lived success. Seems the Luftwaffe pilots initially misstook it for a Hurricane, and tried a high-6 bounce. Unfortunately for the British, as soon as the word got out the Luftwaffe became more careful and the Defiants were thereafter slaughtered enmasse. They were quickly withdrawn from fighter service and relagated to coastal patrol and training.

How would they fair in AH? With the weak guns and lack of any forward firing armaments, they would be an MA no-show. Likewise, they would be suitable for only one scenario/snapshot/CT, that being the Battle of Britain. In short, don't hold your breath.

Now the Beaufighter would be very useful, as it served in both the ETO, the PTO, and CBI. Australian colors would be my vote.

Tony Williams · « **Reply #8 on:** May 01, 2002, 09:48:52 AM »

The Defiant was intended as a bomber-destroyer, and was OK at that - it was never meant to mix it with fighters.

When the RAF planned their defence strategy and equipment, they were assuming that German bomber raids would not be escorted by fighters as it never occurred to them that the Luftwaffe would have the use of French airfields only a short distance from the UK.

Tony Williams
Author: "Rapid Fire: The development of automatic cannon, heavy machine
guns and their ammunition for armies, navies and air forces"
Details on my military gun and ammunition website:
http://www.quarry.nildram.co.uk
Military gun and ammunition discussion forum:
http://forums.delphiforums.com/autogun/messages/

Sabre · « **Reply #9 on:** May 01, 2002, 11:08:45 AM »

Sorry, but that is contrary to everything I've ever heard and read on the Defiant. And if you'll think about it tactically, you'll see why. With the only armament being four .303 machine guns, installed in a turret covering only the upper rear quadrant, it is totally unsuitable as a bomber destroyer. The only way to attack a bomber would be to ease up underneath it until just below and forward. Then, assuming the bomber pilot would oblige you by holding straight and level while you attack, you'ld bang away with only half the firepower of your lighter, faster, and more manueverable front-line interceptors. The RAF was spending a lot of time being bounced by the higher LW fighters, leading to the shaky conclusion that putting the armament on the rear of the fighter would solve the problem. Now you could argue that they might be more effective as close (very close) escort for your own bombers, but the Defiant's limited range becomes an issue in that role.

HFMudd · « **Reply #10 on:** May 01, 2002, 11:28:10 AM »

The British did a number of trials pitting the Defiant against the Hurricane in October of 1939. I'm not sure why they have done these if they did not intend to use the Defiant against fighters.

Sabre · « **Reply #11 on:** May 01, 2002, 11:52:20 AM »

I just did a little bit of web research. I found only one article that mentions an intended role for the Defiant as a bomber interceptor, though another stated its originally intended role as a "defensive partol" aircraft. I did however find that the turret could indeed fire forward in the upwards direction, which would help it regarding engaging bombers from the low six. This of course still assumes the bombers will sit still for you, and still makes any attacks from the upper hemisphere impossible. I've also noticed several references to the turret having both (perceived) offensive and defensive advantages over traditional fixed-forward fighter armaments. I maintain that it would be dead meat in AH, however.

Sabre

SELECTOR · « **Reply #12 on:** May 01, 2002, 12:13:04 PM »

beaufighter is a must historicaly... sunk 10 ships in 2 days just prior to normandy landings... kept the german fleet stuck in their own ports...

Replicant · « **Reply #13 on:** May 01, 2002, 02:02:29 PM »

The Defiant was originally used during daytime air defence of Great Britain against bombers and heavy fighters. The Luftwaffe became wise to the Defiants total lack of forward armament and therefore just went and HOd them.

The only time the Defiant gained some success was as a night fighter.

As for the Whirlwind, only two squadrons used this plane in RAF service. It was pretty much used in conjunction with the Typhoon (it entered service just before the Typhoon IA in 1941). It could carry 2 x 250lb bombs which I believe was eventually increased to 2 x 500lb. It's 4 x 20mm Hispano had 60 rds per gun and were originally very unreliable - think it was something to do with the cocking action and also going from drum to belt feed?

The Beaufighter Mk21 is one plane I would love to see. The Mk21 was the RAAF/RNZAF version with 4 x 20mm hispano & 4 x .50cal. It also had a mid upper single .303 gun.

Regards

Sabre · « **Reply #14 on:** May 01, 2002, 02:17:53 PM »

According to several sources I found today, the Defiant's first introduction to combat was during the evacuation at Dunkirk, where the Defiant crews claimed 65 German aircraft destroyed. This was do to tactical surprise, and was short lived. They appareantly had some success against bombers during the BoB, though I couldn't find any numbers on that. With the installation of an air-to-air radar set, they saw action and some success as night fighters, and were used to tow aerial gunnery targets and as a two-seat advanced trainer. The Defiant is as fine an example as can be found in history of incomplete data and otherwise faulty logic being used (by non-combat pilots, most likely) as a basis for design of a weapon system.