Westland Whirlwind

[rickshaw]

In two different directions at the same time! 

Hmmm, with no Defiant prop in the way, that BP turret could also be fired in the forward, low-drag position ...

You don't think the pilot might be a little uncomfortable with four MMGs going off next to his ears?

[van883]

I think the fuselage would have to be MUCH fatter to accommodate a turret. nice profile, though!
Van

[jorel62]

Maybe something like these?

[Weaver]

I think the fuselage would have to be MUCH fatter to accommodate a turret. nice profile, though!
Van

Well why not run with that? Make the fuselage wider to take a turret and them mount the nose Hispanos in a horizontal line like a Mosquito's .303s, thus:

[Weaver]

Maybe something like these?

Like it - Whirlwindified other types....

I still have a Whirlwind-winged Defiant on the to-do list.

[rickshaw]

Maybe something like these?

I suppose imitation is the sincerest form of flattery...

What engines are you proposing and where are the radiators?

[sequoiaranger]

Oh, yeah!

Curtiss *DiD* make a twin-engined P-40, but the engines were more on top of the wings (blocking side-view considerably) than the Whirlwind's more rational underslung ones.

Someone here (sorry, I forgot who) made one like that, and I have one "in the pipeline" for a future build.

As far as "fattening" the Whirlwind to put in a turret, one of the salient features of the Whirlwind was the extremely narrow fuselage that kept wind resistance to a minimum. Fatten the fuselage and put in a turret, and, well,...the aerodynamic advantages disappear. You would now have a "Mosquito" with the low power of Peregrine engines instead of Merlins.

[Weaver]

As far as "fattening" the Whirlwind to put in a turret, one of the salient features of the Whirlwind was the extremely narrow fuselage that kept wind resistance to a minimum. Fatten the fuselage and put in a turret, and, well,...the aerodynamic advantages disappear. You would now have a "Mosquito" with the low power of Peregrine engines instead of Merlins.

Yes, but it'd be funny in a "really bad ideas" kind of way........

[Mossie]

Altough that was exactly the way Westland went about it.  There are two turreted designs with design elements of the Whirlwind in British Secret Projects, both single engined with a Centaurus. There's a turreted naval aircraft to N.9/39 that uses similar fuselage & tail to the Whirlwind, but deepened.  There's also a dive bomber to B.20/40 that is similar, but has a slightlydifferent profile to the rear fuse & Whirlwind wings.

I came across these when I was I thinking about a single engined Whirlwind & saw that Westlands themselves had come up with several designs.

[kitnut617]

Thinking about the discussion about whether the Whirlwind should have been up-engined to use the Merlin, I've found that is what Westland had planned.  I've been reading an article about the Westland Welkin in the latest issue of Aeromilitaria that I get from Air-Britain, and it's written by Phil Butler, that is very interesting.  The Welkin was originally designed to Specification F.4/40 (later to F.7/41) and it was at first refered to as the Whirlwind Development (Merlin XX).  So really it's no accident that the Welkin looks very similar to the Whirlwind.

Comparing my models of the Whirlwind and Welkin, I can see that simply installing the Merlins onto the Whirlwind wasn't as easy as it sounds, the aircraft got at least one and half times bigger, almost two times bigger.

Further into the article it says there was to be a Welkin Mk.III with uprated Merlins (or even 'handed' Merlins) and a Mk.IV which was a Mk.III but with Griffons.  Both these types would have got a 'high speed' wing which would have had 20% increased chord but with the same maximium chord depth.   The Welkin wing was the factor to it's restricted speed even though the Merlins could have powered it faster.

Interestingly, the single Welkin NF Mk.II was used right up to 1950 in various testing rolls.

[rickshaw]

I've just found out that Special Hobby do a Whirlwind kit in 1/72.  Has anybody made one?  How does it compare to the Airfix one?  Its about 3 times the price. Is it worth it?

[NARSES2]

I've just found out that Special Hobby do a Whirlwind kit in 1/72.  Has anybody made one?  How does it compare to the Airfix one?  Its about 3 times the price. Is it worth it?

I've got both versions of the SH kit (and will get the third). It's very nice in the box. Looks as though it will make a superb model. As for value for money then thats a bit subjective. The Airfix kit still gives you an accurate looking Whirlwind the SH one gives you all the bells and whistles as well...horses for courses.

Personally my SH kits will be real world,excepting the thrid issue which will inc. the version tested with a 37mm (40mm ?) cannon which will become a SEAC bunker buster. Airfix is ideal for Wiffery, ask Martin Higgs 

[sequoiaranger]

I'm curious what you meant by that. To me, the BEST rendition of the model kit you can find of a subject makes the BEST whiff. But, if your point is that the thicker plastic of the old kits (Airfix, FROG, Comet, Lindberg, Aurora, etc) allows for a little "wiggle room" when matching things up or shaping to fit, then I would agree.

The original Airfix kit of the Westland Whirlwind (pre-1970?) was fairly crude (I had one built), but they put out a highly improved version in the 1970's, I think, and it was much better and more detailed. I have not seen the SH one.

[Martin H]

Airfix is ideal for Wiffery, ask Martin Higgs 

The Bearded wonder speaks the truth

[NARSES2]

I'm curious what you meant by that. To me, the BEST rendition of the model kit you can find of a subject makes the BEST whiff. But, if your point is that the thicker plastic of the old kits (Airfix, FROG, Comet, Lindberg, Aurora, etc) allows for a little "wiggle room" when matching things up or shaping to fit, then I would agree.

Simply that the Airfix kit is far cheaper (at least in the UK) and probably more readily available as well. I'm really only a re-paint man rather then a "cut and shut" man when it comes to wiffery, but if embarking on "cut and shut" I wouldn't want to butcher the expensive kit. Understand what you are saying though