Westland Whirlwind

[jcf]

There is an old debate on what that photo shows.
What is known is that the extended and broadened nose was for the testing of a four-abreast mounting of belt-fed 20mm cannon.
This modified nose is also stated to have been intended for a single 40mm (rather than 37mm cannon) mounting, however there is some
doubt that this weapon was ever flown. Evidently some have argued over the years that the photo does not show a 40mm cannon, rather
they believe that it shows a 20mm cannon standing in for the 40mm.

The twelve .303 mount was originally mocked up by Martin-Baker and it was built as a 'quick-reload' weapon egg (a fairing covered cadmium plated steel-tube structure mounting the guns and ammo boxes), the intent being that a pre-loaded egg would be swapped out for the empty one after a sortie.

'Westland Aircraft since 1915', Derek N James, 1991 Putnam/Naval Institute Press

Jon

[Mossie]

TWELVE .303's? ONE 37mm?

Re: the 37mm--WHY?? it seems that FOUR 20mm's would put out a dose of explosive lead far in excess to that of a single .37mm.  If it's for anti-tank usage, even the single-engined Hurricane carried TWO 40mm guns-- a SINGLE 37mm gun seems way under-armed for a twin-engined plane.

I would imagine that they were looking for a larger punch, probably against armoured targets.  A 20mm shell (even four) has trouble penetrating armour, but a I think a 37mm shell woulld.  So as a can opener, one 37mm cannon would be more effective than four 20mm.

[kitnut617]

There is an old debate on what that photo shows.
What is known is that the extended and broadened nose was for the testing of a four-abreast mounting of belt-fed 20mm cannon.
This modified nose is also stated to have been intended for a single 40mm (rather than 37mm cannon) mounting, however there is some
doubt that this weapon was ever flown. Evidently some have argued over the years that the photo does not show a 40mm cannon, rather
they believe that it shows a 20mm cannon standing in for the 40mm.

The twelve .303 mount was originally mocked up by Martin-Baker and it was built as a 'quick-reload' weapon egg (a fairing covered cadmium plated steel-tube structure mounting the guns and ammo boxes), the intent being that a pre-loaded egg would be swapped out for the empty one after a sortie.

'Westland Aircraft since 1915', Derek N James, 1991 Putnam/Naval Institute Press

Jon

That's very interesting Jon, would you know if the extended nose was also to enclose the guns for better streamlining.  What would the two bulges be for on top of the nose just in front of the windshield ? Some .303's maybe to give it the same punch as a Mosquito/Beaufighter ?

[GTX]

Something I just threw together - a super, developed Whirlwind:



Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

Something I just threw together - a super, developed Whirlwind:

Regards,

Greg

Love it, what would it look like with the rear fuselage stretched out say three or four feet Greg, to offset some of that forward weight.  As the fuselage is practically a straight tube it wouldn't have proved to be a problem I think.

Robert

[jcf]

That's very interesting Jon, would you know if the extended nose was also to enclose the guns for better streamlining.  What would the two bulges be for on top of the nose just in front of the windshield ? Some .303's maybe to give it the same punch as a Mosquito/Beaufighter ?

Hi Simon,
adding .303s along with the 20mm Hissos was evidently part of Petter's new armament scheme.

The ammo amount for the 20s was greatly increased in the belt-fed scheme:
two guns with 150 round belts and two with 200 hundred round belts, 700 rounds total.
A dramatic increase over the four 60-round drums of the standard layout.

A version with that nose armament (adding a couple of Brownings and a near tripling of the 20mm load would add considerable weight) and re-engined with Merlins would have required a fuselage stretch, especially with Petter's plans to increase fuel tankage... of course, knowing Petter, he probably would have resisted a lengthening, insisting that he could rearrange and re-ballast to get the correct CG, regardless of how crowded and questionable the final layout. He was often blinded by his own 'brilliance'.

Jon

[GTX]

Something I just threw together - a super, developed Whirlwind:

Regards,

Greg

Love it, what would it look like with the rear fuselage stretched out say three or four feet Greg, to offset some of that forward weight.  As the fuselage is practically a straight tube it wouldn't have proved to be a problem I think.

Robert

How's this:



Regards,

Greg

[kitnut617]

Ooo! now that looks like a serious what-if in the making.  Thanks Greg 

[Weaver]

It's usually stated that the Whirlwind was "so tightly designed" around it's Peregrins that no other engine could be substituted, Merlins being too big & heavy for the wing structure etc....

However, if you simply want to replace the Peregrins with something more reliable, rather than more powerful, then why couldn't a pair of Mercurys have been fitted? The Mercury XX with 100 octane fuel could put out nearly 1000hp, and although obviously more draggy, was also a useful 140-odd lb lighter than the Peregrine. Since the aircraft ended up being used mainly for ground attack, the damage tolerance of the air-cooled Mercury would have been useful, and although the Whirlwind's radiators were pretty slick, eliminating them would still have clawed back a bit drag. You could also have used that 280lb weight saving for armour/fuel/payload.

The result would have been, effectively, a "Blenfighter".....

[JayBee]

I have just found this thread, and to say that my flabber was gassted when I saw GTX's profiles, is a serious understatement.

This was sarted about four months ago (I am a slow builder!).

The fuselage stretch is about five scale feet, and yes it is getting a Sea Fury's canopy.

JayBee

[sequoiaranger]

>...it is getting a Sea Fury's canopy.<

I can't think of any rationale for it, but I think the stretched Whirlwind would look COOLwith the twin-bubble "Baghdad Fury" canopy look!

[sequoiaranger]

OK, so it looks silly rather than cool. Still............?

[kitnut617]

The twin seat Welkin Nightfighter canopy might be better.

[JayBee]

Rationale! RATIONALE!! WHO NEEDS A RATIONALE?

OK, better visibility from a fully blown canopy, as compared to the segmented one of the original design (like the early and late Wyverns).

AND it will look COOL!

But not the Baghdad Fury twin Canopy.
Ye Gods, you might as well make it up like the Persian, or Russian, two-seater Hurricanes, with an open front cockpit.
NO, No, I did not suggest that!!!

JayBee

[ElectrikBlue]

Whirlwind with fw-190 canopy and Whirlwind with bigger guns! 

Regards,

EB