Bedepee Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Hi all, I started work on the 1/48 trumpeter Westland Whirlwind. I have red the review here on Britmodeller but I have another question: The scale drawings always show some sort of strenghtening strips on the topside and underside of the wing. Trumpeter only shows some raised detail on the topside. As I want to build an early version, is this wing correct or just a serious mistake by Trumpeter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) Hi The raised area is the fuel tank self sealing mod and the lines the strips to strengthen/hold it i have just woke up, so cant recall the date it was done, sometime in late 1940/early 1941i think ? a good westland drawing of the wing is here, it is of the pre self sealing whirlwind the one marked cs252 https://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?2106208-Westland-Whirlwind cheers jerry Edited January 10, 2018 by brewerjerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) Bedepee, According to the photos, drawings, and text in the Valiant Wings monograph, there should be rolled longitudinal depressions on both the upper and lower surfaces of the wings- these would be directly above and below the fuel tanks. This type of beading is frequently used in the automotive world to add strength to thin sheet metal panels, and I'm just guessing here that because the fuel tanks take up all the space between the leading and trailing edge of the wings and do not allow for wing ribs along their location, these strengthening indentations are needed to preserve rigidity. FYI, if you're planning to have the flaps down on your model, the wing slats must be out, too- they were mechanically interconnected with the flaps, so when the flaps were extended, the slats were, as well. Here's a website you will find very useful; it is a group that is building a 1:1 scale replica of a Whirlwind, using original and fabricated parts- lots of excellent detail photos and drawings. Just register to gain access to the site's archives and gallery. Hope this helps; I've always wondered what the Whirlwind would have done if it had been fitted with better engines...can you say Merlins? Mike http://www.whirlwindfighterproject.org/ Edited January 10, 2018 by 72modeler corrected spelling Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Wasn't it supposed to be "fatally flawed", wich made it almost "unbuildable"...????? Best regards.... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 29 minutes ago, 72modeler said: Bedepee, According to the photos, drawings, and text in the Valiant Wings monograph, there should be rolled longitudinal depressions on both the upper and lower surfaces of the wings- these would be directly above and below the fuel tanks. This type of beading is frequently used in the automotive world to add strength to thin sheet metal panels, and I'm just guessing here that because the fuel tanks take up all the space between the leading and trailing edge of the wings and do not allow for wing ribs along their location, these strengthening indentations are needed to preserve rigidity. FYI, if you're planning to have the flaps down on your model, the wing slats must be out, too- they were mechanically interconnected with the flaps, so when the flaps were extended, the slats were, as well. Here's a website you will find very useful; it is a group that is building a 1:1 scale replica of a Whirlwind, using original and fabricated parts- lots of excellent detail photos and drawings. Just register to gain access to the site's archives and gallery. Hope this helps; I've always wondered what the Whirlwind would have done if it had been fitted with better engines...can you say Merlins? Mike http://www.whirlwindfighterproject.org/ Hi the Valiant wings book although a fair book is not the best reference, it has a few flaws, i.e. packard peregrine project, whirlwind at dieppe etc the whirlwind fighter project is the best source, i posted quite a bit of my research stuff on there. cheers jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 35 minutes ago, Artie said: Wasn't it supposed to be "fatally flawed", wich made it almost "unbuildable"...????? Best regards.... Hi not unbuildable, just a missed opportunity fatally flawed yes if you are a 'whirlwind nut' where is my SH 1:32 release, waiting in suspense https://www.hannants.co.uk/product/SH32047 cheers jerry Edited January 10, 2018 by brewerjerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ossington 2 Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 I'm going from memory here, but sometime in an early 70's (Almarks Modelworld?) an article updated the original (and Dreadful) Airfix Whirlwind. I took it that the lower wing was entirely flush, as was the upper wing, except for the raised ribbing, portrayed by lines of paint drawn on with a mapping pen, and not as raised panel with ribbing applied in addition. Is my memory at fault? As it happens, I'm having a loft clear-out and found my mapping pen this afternoon. Sometime soon I'm hoping to find my 1/32 vac-form Whirlwind. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dogsbody Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 I have these A. Granger drawings. Chris 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 5 hours ago, 72modeler said: I've always wondered what the Whirlwind would have done if it had been fitted with better engines...can you say Merlins? Mike Hi In the files at the NA/PRO there is a letter refering to an option with american engines in 1940, and a letter refering to the merlin XX option in 1941, saying they had overcome the undercarriage retraction problems associated with fitting merlin xx 's i have seen no drawings for the merlin xx, but i think it was ' lanc style ' merlin/radiator pod, with the existing wing radiator space, changed to fuel tanks. I also corresponded with a drawing office guy who designed a fit of merlins in early 1940 cheers jerry Edited January 10, 2018 by brewerjerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 It's pity that such a beautiful airplane didn't find her way into the RAF inventory....maybe a wrong conception ????? Something similar happened to the Grumman Skyrocket....way beyond its age they were..... Cheers.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 3 minutes ago, brewerjerry said: Hi In the files at the NA/PRO there are letters refering to an option with american engines in 1940, and a merlin XX option in 1941 i have seen no drawings for the merlin xx, but i think it was ' lanc style ' merlin/radiator pod, with the existing wing radiator space, changed to fuel tanks. I also corresponded with a drawing office guy who designed a fit of merlins in early 1940 cheers jerry I was thinking I had read somewhere that the Allison V1710 was considered at some point, which kind of makes sense, as the demand for Merlins for fighters and bombers was so great, I doubt that many could have been spared for the small production run of Whirlwinds. The Mosquito was far superior in almost every category, but I still wonder what might have been....Thanks for the details, Jerry! Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) If Merlins had been fitted, they would have required larger diameter props else much of the gains would have been lost. This would have required a greater span centre-section, and a taller undercarriage, thus a larger nacelle. The Merlin would have required greater cooling and greater fuel capacity. The increase in weight would have required a stronger undercarriage. The increased weight and side area forward would have required either a longer fuselage or a bigger fin/rudder, tailplane to restore the cg/aerodynamic centre relationship. We are not talking about minor changes but a new aeroplane. Westland did design a Whirlwind with Merlins - they called it the Welkin. Admittedly this was designed (not particularly successfully) for high altitude work, but as pointed out above, there was nothing a redesigned Whirlwind could do that the Mosquito wasn't already doing. Edited January 10, 2018 by Graham Boak 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gingerbob Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Someday I'd love to see a thread about the Whirlwind that did NOT devolve to "too bad they didn't put Merlins in it". 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) Yeah. Or a Centaurus in a Tiger Moth... just a more extreme case of the same problem, but reductio ad absurdum. To get back to the original question, I'm still not sure whether these stiffeners are bulges or grooves. Edited January 10, 2018 by Graham Boak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Artie Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Just now, Graham Boak said: Yeah. Or a Centaurus in a Tiger Moth... just a more extreme case of the same problem. naaaaaahhhh....you should add lots of lead to the tail to keep it from being a "nose sitter".... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Swindell Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 4 minutes ago, Graham Boak said: To get back to the original question, I'm still not sure whether these stiffeners are bulges or grooves. They're both, depends on which side you're looking at! Very difficult to see on most photo's, there's a touch of Escher about them. The centre spread of the 4plus book "appears" to show the under wing ones at least to be recessed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 As an (ex-)aerodynamicist, whatever happens on the inside (ducting aside) of an aeroplane is someone else's department. (Thank you Tom Lehrer.) What does the air see? But more generally, anything that protrudes inside the aircraft is likely to affect whatever is fitted inside - such as fuel tanks, in this case. Which is why the obvious thought is that these would be appear as bulges on the outside, which are at least easier to model, if so! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TallBlondJohn Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Is the Whirlwind Fighter Project still going? The website doesn't seem to have been updated for a while Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 1 hour ago, 72modeler said: I was thinking I had read somewhere that the Allison V1710 was considered at some point, which kind of makes sense, as the demand for Merlins for fighters and bombers was so great, I doubt that many could have been spared for the small production run of Whirlwinds. The Mosquito was far superior in almost every category, but I still wonder what might have been....Thanks for the details, Jerry! Mike Hi the other engine suggestion was from bristols who tried to convince petter to use radial engines i think it was bristol taurus ? cheers jerry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, TallBlondJohn said: Is the Whirlwind Fighter Project still going? The website doesn't seem to have been updated for a while Hi I think it stalled slightly due to a premises move ? cheers jerry Edited January 10, 2018 by brewerjerry typo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Graham Boak Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Whirlwind enthusiasts should look across to the Flypast site. In its Historic Forum they will find a discussion (perhaps a page or three down now) concerning the disappointing failure of production Whirlwinds to match the performance of the prototype above 20,000ft. The main participant suggests the fault lay not in the aircraft's aerodynamics but in the propeller blades, and the contemporary understanding of compressibility effects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 10, 2018 Share Posted January 10, 2018 Hi not my model, but a nice whiff cheers jerry 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
72modeler Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) 7 hours ago, Graham Boak said: Yeah. Or a Centaurus in a Tiger Moth... just a more extreme case of the same problem, but reductio ad absurdum. To get back to the original question, I'm still not sure whether these stiffeners are bulges or grooves. Graham and Dave, I pulled my best Whirlwind references, the one by Valiant Wings, the one by 4+ Publications that Dave mentioned, and the one by Allied Wings, and none of them have any description or photos of the skin above or below the fuel tanks, and none of the photos, save one, are clear enough to determine whether or not the stiffeners are concave or convex. There is one large photo in the 4+ monograph that shows P6986 on the ground, and the stiffeners look to be proud of the surface, to me, at least to my eyes; If that is so, I guess the beads were rolled from the underside of the panels, making them appear as chordwise bulges. (The maddening part is that in some photos they almost appear to be recessed and in others they appear to be bulged!) Best I can do for Bedepee's modeling project, I'm afraid. Graham, your comments regarding alternate powerplants were very interesting! Mike Edited January 11, 2018 by 72modeler added words for clarity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brewerjerry Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 (edited) Hi bedepee, stated he wanted to build an early version so any whirwind pre early 1941 would not have the self sealing tanks or strips the strips as i understand it on later whirlwinds were flat, maybe they changed shape in service, or maybe fuel load ? i will try to dig out my copy of the NA/PRO westland letter offering in jan 1941 the whirlwind with merlin XX engines fitted the letter is to sholto douglas from eric mensforth MD westlands extract ..... we are know able, because of the solution of certain undercarriage problems, to be able to offer to install in the whirlwind twin merlin XX engines cheers jerry Edited January 11, 2018 by brewerjerry extra info Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie @ Sovereign Hobbies Posted January 11, 2018 Share Posted January 11, 2018 A tank this size I would honestly expect to be baffled with a normal set of ribs complete with mouseholes just as a wet wing would be designed. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now