Hi all...

this is one for the record books...me asking about a British WW2 plane :-)

Nevertheless ...
The Westland Whirlwind is regarded as far as I know as a good aircraft waiting to be great. It never met its full potential due to its unreliable powerplants.
Many experts agree that if it had been given a brace of Merlins it would have been up there amongst the top 3 or 4 aircraft to come out of WW2.

I ask was there any prototype made with Merlins? Did it fly?

And if it would have had them what changes would have been likely to the nacelles, exhaust stacks etc? A bit of a what if question.

I ask because I'm tempted to do a Merlin version....yes me
Are there any 1/48th kits out there? another first for me :-)

Many thanks
Peter


M :-)

There is a 1/48 kit out there, made by Classic Airframe, link to the kit at Hannants

Have the kit myself, but only have opended the box to have a quick look.

Hi Peter,

Never heard of a Merlin powered Whirlwind, but that would have been a great idea, that would probably have then led to our never hearing about the Mosquito.

I can't help in your infoseek, but will keep an eye on the post, as I currently have CA's Whirlwind on the bench !

Regards,

Richard

Hi Peter,
The whirlwind with merlins would have been an awsome machine I believe though that it was designed from the outset to use the Perigrins and there were never any plans to use Merlins.
I would imagine the a Merlin instalation would have been something like the Mosquito, but without the rear pointy overhangs. The undercarriage might have been a bit different, to accomodate the, possibly, longer prop blades.
Mal

Hi Peter,

From what I understand the Whirlwind was going to use Merlins, but at the design stage it was changed to the Perigrins due to the demand placed on RR for Merlins for use by Spitfires, Hurricanes, Lancasters/Manchesters and the 'new' Mosquito (Recce and bomber).
RR were already fully stretched to keep up with demand with out another aircraft using them - hence the reason for the use of the Perigrin.

But I do agree the Whirlwind would have been a awesome aircraft with Merlins.

I hope that goes some way to answering your question.

Ciao
Luciano

Thanks one and all...


Hi Luciano, that is pretty close to my understanding, I think it was hoped Merlins would be available when the initial plans were laid down, but due to allocation priorities being elsewhere...i.e. Spitfire, Hurricane, Lancaster and the Mossie, the Perigrins became the standard powerplant.



Hi Mal, this what I had hoped, some educated guesswork as to what details/modifications may have been made to allow the Merlins. Maybe clipped props might have helped with the length and therefore height of the undercarriage.
So any more suggestions as to how Merlins may have been adapted would be brilliantly helpfulllllll.

I do fancy trying doing this...so its thinking caps on...

Again many thanks

Cheers
Peter

lght another candle, its getting dark in here :-)

And... Pottier and Thomas



Is it any good?
Would I have to do lots of non-modification surgery re fit, seam gaps etc or is it good enough to concentrate on the Merlin installation?

Thanks for the tip

Cheers
Peter
:-)

Hi Peter!

To avoid the prop blades to be too long and without changing the undercarriage, using four bladed propellers could have been a solution I think!? More power = more propellers usually... maybe you could even do a Whirlwind with two five bladed propellers!

Jean-Luc

Hi Peter

The Classic Airframes kit is pretty good - it's a few years old, but includes an excellent interior licenced from Cooper Details.

But before you get too excited about a Merlin installation, this was never a serious possibility. Reports at the time concluded that the Whirlwind's airframe was simply too small and weak to fit Merlins. An investigation suggested a Merlin development would weigh 12,000lb with a wing loading of 48lb/sq ft. To accomodate the larger propellers needed, a major wing design would have been neccessary and a larger wing would have increased weight and decreased speed.

Put simply, the Whirlwind was so closely designed around its Peregrines, further development wasn't practical when that engine was dropped. Westland had unwittingly made a fundamental error in opting for the smallest, lightest possible airframe built around the Peregrines. In 1940, Westland tried to interest the Air Ministry in a version powered by American radial engines but, by then, the Whirlwind was thoroughly out of favour with the powers-that-be and the idea was never seriously considered.

All the best

Rowan

Thanks Rowan....I think...lol.

It rings a bell re the airframe being to weak for Merlins, but I did live in hope for a short while..

Also the Peregrine would probably have become a very good engine if it had had the development that was given too the Merlin and Griffon etc or so I've read.
A case of too much to do and not enough time I suppose.

Ah well...dilema time. I was getting a little enthusiastic there for a moment...

Cheers
Peter
:-)
Another short lived thread by flitzer

And ...oh there's more...

I was under the impression the Merlin was the more powerful engine over the Peregrine but after visiting
http://www.arthistoryclub.com
I'm forced to review this.

The Merlin Xll (Spitfire Type 329 Mk ll) of Winter 40/41 produced 1175 hp. (x 2 = 2350 hp).

The Peregrine produced 1885hp (x 2 = 3770 hp)

So if the development time HAD been given to the Peregrine, would the Merlin have been a desirable unit anyway?

And the Whirlwind was used by only 2 squadrons yet had at least 10 Mk's. I find this quite surprising considering the delicate nature of the powerplants.

Hmmmmm...???

Cheers
Peter
:-)

Hi Peter

Yes - the most significant point is that Westland actually fought the idea of fitting Merlins for so long. Their preferred option was a Peregrine II running on 100 octane fuel. Their predicted performance figures were very impressive - although a Rolls Royce report disagreed with them and stated they'd need 400 octane fuel to achieve such results! :-)

To be honest, if all the modications neccessary for a Merlin had been implemented - larger wing, heavier structure, shift of wing to maintain centre-of-gravity... the list goes on - would the result have been anything like a Whirlwind? I love the Whirlwind as-built, for all its faults - faster than a contemporary Spitfire down low and more manoeverable than a Hurricane.

All the best

Rowan

Thanks Rowan.

I have a real softspot for the Whirlie.
If only, if only. :-)

Still its been a worthwhile trip. So much info gathered.

Cheers
Peter
:-)