Whirlwind vs Me 109 during B of B

[Spitfires Forever]

I usually don,t post these kind of inquiries but have always been fascinated by certain "what ifs" and as I have been doing research on the Whirlwind (finally got the CA kit and I didn't have to mortgage my house to purchase it) I read that during the teething troubles with early Spitfire production there was quite a contingent in the RAF and certain ministerial departments who were ready to end the Spitfire program in favor of the Whirlwind. What if that had actually happened? How would the Whirlwind have fared in battle against the Luftwaffe aircraft of the time? Could the B of B been won with just the Hurricane and the Whirlwind? It would be interesting to speculate on an event that could easily have occurred, and perhaps very much to the detriment of the free world, and of course all of us who adore the Spitfire.

Cheers

[Greenshirt]

All in hindsight of course, but I think Goering's failure to neutralize CHAIN HOME and Hitler's strategic shift to bombing of cities changed what started as a very close affair to one that favored the RAF greatly. By having only the Hurricane and a heavy twin like the Whirlwind, the Me-110 would have faired better in the battles, and the Me-109 altitude advantage would have favored the Luftwaffe just a bit more; resulting in the bombers being more effective. These two changes may, and that's a weak "may", have worn down the RAF a bit quicker. Catastrophic if that had happened, and I am glad we'll never know.

Tim

[Work In Progress]

Whirlwind vs 109E is not necessarily the question. Whirlwind vs German bombers is more interesting. With its 4 x 20mm armament the Whirlwind would have been vastly more lethal against German bombers than anything armed by rifle-calibre machine guns, and at ranges which would not have enabled the German gunners to shoot back to any effect.

Bear in mind that the 8x.303 armament was reasonably effective against lightly armoured targets but with that armament German bombers were easy to hit, but hard to destroy. Fighters could easily use up all their ammunition and not bring one down, unless attacking at absolutely point-blank range, which was very dangerous for the fighter.

With 4 x 20mm Hispano, a half-second burst will destroy any early-war German bomber.

The Whirlwind would struggle to turn with a well-flown 109E, but then it is slightly faster, and may be able to disengage from a 109E at will.

The tactics of the whole air battle would have become very different. You would have to use Hurricanes as nuisance shields to keep off the 109 escorts as much as possible, and they would not do as well as the Spitfires, but I think you'd have seen a lot fewer German bombers getting home and that would probably force an earlier re-think by the Germans. It would also have become commonplace for the better shots among the RAF pilots to knock down six or seven targets in one sortie, simply because they could take a careful shot from outside the range of the defending machine-gunners, and use a quick squirt to kill the bomber, repeating at will.

If squadron commanders re-shuffled their flights so that the crack shots focused on the bombers, and the spray-and-pray merchants helped the Hurricanes to interfere with any fighter escorts, that might help too.

[JasonC]

I don't think spray and pray is a tactic that works well with a 60-round drum!

To address the previous post, I'm not sure the Whirlwind qualifies as a 'heavy twin' in the same vein as the Bf-110. Just have a look at the size of the CA kit to see how small it really is.

Generally agree with the points above though. The speed at the relevant altitude (say 15kft) is comparable or better that the 109, so hit and run is a good strategy, and the 20mm armament means that you don't need to slow down, or track the target for long. I think the challenge perhaps would be to get rid of the 'dogfight mentality' that arises from generally having had a more manoeuvrable aircraft (the Hurricane), and to recognise that the Whirlwind is in essence an energy fighter.

regards,

Jason

[gingerbob]

So many "ifs" - IF the Whirlwind had been coming from production in sufficient numbers, and IF the cannon actually worked reliably (I don't know how they fared in the Whirlwind in the early days- probably somewhat better than they did in the Spit) and IF the Whirlwind was able to get to the altitude at the right time to actually find the bombers there, and IF the "quick squirt from a safe distance" was perfectly aimed...

bob

[Brad]

Not sure it would have mattered much for the Battle of Britain. Deciding factors were German errors. Without switching targets to London causing both critical targets to go unmolested and exposing bombers to the RAF with limited fighter cover and the fighters being ordered into a close escort role, the Luftwaffe would probably have worn down the RAF.

The real problem would have come about when the 109F and Focke Wulf 190 appeared. I doubt the Whirlwind would have been as adaptable as the Spitfire and additionally, the twin engined heavy fighter concept was never as successful as single engine fighters.

[gingerbob]

Again, the Whirlwind is not a "twin engined heavy fighter" - it is about the same size as a Hurricane, with about the same horsepower as some (single) Merlins or other typical engines not that far down the road. There's no reason that the Peregrine couldn't have been developed along the same lines as the Merlin, and indeed RR was thinking about it and sometimes even lobbying for it.

The advantage was getting all the guns in one tight bundle (and an installation that was probably more reliable). The disadvantage was having to build, pay for, and maintain two engines (and props) instead of one for each fighter (and, most significantly then, complicate RR's production organization with another engine that only had one application, when many things needed Merlins). I don't think a twin HAS to be significantly less maneuverable than a single-engined aircraft.

bob

Edited March 15, 2013 by gingerbob

[Test Graham]

I do feel the Whirlwind was too late for the one battle it might have been effective in, but its general timescale and development problems meant that even if it had been selected for production over later Spitfire batches, the BoB would still have been fought with Spitfires and Hurricanes. For it to be effective, you are calling not just for additional orders at the time discussed but additional orders at a much earlier stage, a second production line with all the delays that would entail, and problem-free development, and many more Peregrines (ie less Merlins), and many more Hispanos: the last point being not the smallest problem. Plus, as pointed out, a different approach to fighting that might at least have been closer to the Air Ministry's Fighting Instructions. But even all that much wishful thinking would have been countered by the Germans being quicker with their drop tanks..... sauce for the goose, and all that.

Had just a few units been available, it should have been handled in the same way the Defiant should have been handled - as a second line of defence against unescorted bombers. Unescorted by Bf109s, anyway, considering Bf110 against Whirlwind as at least a fair fight.

I agree about the airframe being incapable of further development without massive redesign, largely through being too tightly tailored to the requirements. Not, to be fair, that the Spitfire's capability for growth was obvious at the time..

No twin-engined piston-engined fighter has ever matched the agility of contemporary single-engined designs. Not unless you cherrypick the best of one breed against the worst of the other. The Whirlwind was a fairly small and light example, as twins go, but check its wingloading.

[pigsty]

No twin-engined piston-engined fighter has ever matched the agility of contemporary single-engined designs.

This is the key. The Whirlwind may have been one of the smallest heavy fighters, but it remains a twin with more weight for its installed power and more drag. And the fight wouldn't have have been Whirlwind vs Bf 109 - it would have ended up as Hurricane vs Bf 109, and Whirlwind vs Bf 110, with neither British type guaranteed to come off well.

If the question is about production problems, rather than inherent faults in the aircraft, it's a bit of a non-starter. The Whirlwind had serious drawbacks, the most significant being its engines. There are instances on all sides of not-perfect equipment being produced anyway, and relying on numbers, but I doubt whether the Whirlwind would have managed that good-enough-but-only-just that this solution needs. For proof, look what happened after it was dedicated to ground-attack: useful, when it worked, but still not reliable enough and a distraction from the overall production effort because it shared relatively little with other types. It was replaced almost as soon as it could be.

Still, there's nothing stopping a what-if modeller from putting 74 Sqn insignia and a row of kill markings down the canopy rail of a Whirlwind ...

[gingerbob]

...and many more Hispanos: the last point being not the smallest problem.

A very good point about the Hispanos. I think the Whirlwind airframe posed some challenges, and Westland (and Petter) was not yet then a mature company. The biggest problem for the engine was simply that it was not the first priority. Both engine and airframe programmes were on-again off-again, and not always in synch with the other! No wonder that everything came a bit too late. But even if the Whirlwind/ Peregrine programme had flowed smoothly, they might have (without taking strong measures) found that there weren't enough Hispanos to arm them.

Though this isn't so true of the Whirlwind, one fundamental problem was that the rearmament programme in general was geared to a war imagined to start in 1941.

Hmm, what about the Whirlwind (Trop) in the Desert Air Force? It might have made a good roving fighter-bomber... there's another Whif.

bob

Edited March 15, 2013 by gingerbob

[Tripehound]

One of my favourite idle musings this. However, for the Whirlwind to have been available in time and large numbers, wouldn't Rolls Royce have had to expend considerable effort on the Peregrine, with something having to give - like Merlin development? Could it be we would have won the BOB and then lost everything else before chucking in the towel in 1941/2?

From what I understand the Peregrine was near the end of its development potential - it was relatively small, which was the reason it was selected for the Whirlwind.

I'm a big fan of the Whirlwind, but usually end up limiting my mental re-writing of history to the raid on the Westland factory coinciding with 263 Squadron being based nearby and handing out a pasting to the (unescorted) bombers.

[Stonar]

If the RAF gets Whirlwinds can the Luftwaffe have Fw 187s?

Steve

[The wooksta V2.0]

But we still get the Hornet - the Luftwaffe was terrified of the Mosquito, imagine the panic if they'd actually got the Hornet in service before the end of the war?

[gruffy]

An interesting what if!

I don't think we'd have any problems using whirlwinds. I'd hit the bombers from head on and do a bounce and dive to get away from me 109's. I'd use spitfires/ hurricanes to cover them and whirlwinds as bomber destroyers.

The Luftwaffe/ Germany had more worrying concerns like having Goring in charge, using caesars invasion of Britain as a battle plan, and treating the English Channel like a river crossing. Did you know if Germany actually invaded, that using river barges as part of their invasion their economy would collapse due to German river captains being taken away from transporting food, harvests etc?

[Paramedic]

The Hurricanes won the battle anyways so...

Don´t think there were any problems with the Hispanos in the Whirlwind by the way? The Spit Ib and IIbs got the problem because the Hispano was tilted slightly, or so I thought?

[JohnT]

I thought the Hispanos in the wing installation had problems because to get them to fit inside the wing they had fitted them on their side and the feed jammed under G when manouvering or something close to that

[Truro Model Builder]

I think the Whirlwind would have been adapted as a night fighter rather than the Hurricane.

But more interesting would have been if the RAF could have made use of the Whirlwind's greater range. Whirlwinds could have chased the Germans all the way back to the French coast; remember that the 109 had little fuel for combat over southern England as it was, they would have had none to have kept the Whirlwinds off the bombers on the return journey, and 110s would have had to be used (no problem for the Whirlwind). Also, patrols could have been established over the French coast to hit the Germans as they were forming up. It would have been more hit and miss, but we knew where the main German airfields were, and the Luftwaffe may have been forced to move their airfields deeper into France. No problem for bombers or 110s, admittedly but no 109s could have reached England from further back.

Yes, widespread availability of the Whirlwind could have resulted in a VERY different Battle of Britain.

[mrvr6]

whirlwind with merlins?

[Edgar]

The Hurricanes won the battle anyways so...

With 655 victories going to 30 Squadrons, at 22.5 per Squadron, while 19 Spitfire Squadrons got 530, at 28 per Squadron, the difference really isn't worth arguing about, but I'd say we have vindication of the old saying, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics."

Don´t think there were any problems with the Hispanos in the Whirlwind by the way? The Spit Ib and IIbs got the problem because the Hispano was tilted slightly, or so I thought?

As JohnT says, they were laid at an angle of 90 degrees, which was fine getting the shells into the guns, but it proved utterly impossible to get them out again into a right-angled chute; it was only when the empties were flung through a hole in the wingrib, then dropped out by the wheel well (in the Vb) that the problem was solved.

1/. The Merlin was too big to be fitted into the Whirlwind, without massive rework.

2/. Westland could only produce 1-2 airframes per week, not enough to replace losses.

3/. The Peregrine was only passed for +12lbs boost, with 100 octane fuel, for very short bursts; for full 100 octane rating, a virtually completely new engine would have been needed.

4/. The Peregrine ran out of "oomph" at about 24,000', and couldn't get to 30,000' without a struggle, no good for 1941.

5/. Rolls-Royce estimated a loss of two Merlins, for each Peregrine produced.

6/. With a landing speed of 110mph, Dowding doubted that the Whirlwind could ever be a nightfighter.

7/. With the Hurricane II capable of carrying the same armament, but using only one engine, the Whirlwind had no chance.

Edgar

[Enzo the Magnificent]

If the RAF gets Whirlwinds can the Luftwaffe have Fw 187s?

What about cavemen and astronauts?

[Enzo the Magnificent]

Also, patrols could have been established over the French coast to hit the Germans as they were forming up.

From what I have read about Keith Park, I think he would have had his Whirlwind squadrons hitting German bombers on their take-off roll.

[Work In Progress]

All good points from Edgar. I would add to his point 1 that a Merlin engined Whirlwind would be hopelessly nose-heavy, in addition to the structural issues.

My enthusiasm for the Whirlwind as a B of B bomber destroyer is purely hypothetical, of course, and based on the spurious pretext of its availability, and the entirely real superiority of its armament (which could have been reproduced in alternative, more practical, and more ecenomically viable single-engined fighter types) rather than anything inherent to the Whirlwind itself.

[mrvr6]

buggrit if i ever make 1 its getting 2 griffons!

[Work In Progress]

Which implies at least four-blade props.

In which case, either stretch out the rear fuselage about five feet or just stand it on the two main gears and the lower two prop blades on each side - a perfect six-point landing.

[The wooksta V2.0]

Griffon Whirlwind's been done - superbly - by one of the guys here. Do a search.