• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

Westland project to F.19/40

cluttonfred

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
99
Website
cluttonfred.info
More thoughts of Allied emergency fighters...

Looking through Tony Buttler's British Secret Projects 3: Fighters and Bombers 1935-1950 last night, I came across a mention of a Westland project for a low-cost, lightweight fighter suitable for rapid mass production to Specification F.19/40. This was an all-wood, fixed-gear design in competition with or in parallel to the Miles M.20 and powered by a RR Merlin or alternatively a Bristol Hercules.

Does anyone have any more info, specs or images of the Westland design? Were there any other projects to F.19/40?

Cheers,

Matthew
 

cluttonfred

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
99
Website
cluttonfred.info
OK, bumping my own post is bad etiquette and we've had an exciting time with disk space and Latvian hackers, but does anyone have any leads on this one?
 

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,895
Reaction score
233
quick look in putnam's 'Westland' gives:-

'single hercules all-wood fighter to F19/40'

nothing else i'm afraid. :'(

cheers,
Robin.
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,588
Reaction score
889
Mole,

Thanks for bringing this up -- it raises all sorts of questions.

Is it coincidence that Westland was working on a single-Hercules powered P.9 Whirlwind derivative in the same month (Nov 1939)? Would Westland have tried to use 'standard' parts the way Miles did?

It is tempting to suggest that some of the work done on the Hercules P.9 would have been re-expressed in wood for the Mass Production Fighter. Perhaps looking something like a spatted version of Westland's submission to the near-contemporary N.8/39?
 

smurf

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
547
Reaction score
26
From Planemakers 2 Westland, David Mondey table on p154

Mass production fighter F19/40 1400hp Hercules span 41ft, wing area 240sq ft, estimated all up weight 7200lb
Estimated max speed 336mph
Hercules as Merlin in short supply; all-wooden construction, fixed spatted landing gear.
No pic. According to the same table, two submissions to N8/39
9600lb auwt, span 45', wa 260sqft; 360mph RR Griffon fixed guns, folding wings
11600lb auwt; span 50', wa 375sqft; 1260hp Taurus, guns in turret
and N9/39 as Taurus version above, no wt given, but speed given as 255mph, fixed guns
All listed as Design Study Fleet Fighter
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,588
Reaction score
889
Thanks Smurf.

Oddly, BSP3 illustrates the N8/39 single-seater with a Whirlwind-like planform while the two-seat N8/39 and N9/39 submissions have simpler tapered planforms. The later would seem more probable for the Mass Production Fighter's wooden construction.
 

cluttonfred

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2008
Messages
1,386
Reaction score
99
Website
cluttonfred.info
The single-Hercules-powered Whirlwind derivative is intriguing, but in going from a twin with two relatively small, light engines to a single, large, heavy engine, you have to wonder how much would really have carried over from one to the next. At best the outer wings, empennage, perhaps the rear fuselage, not much else. Still, I'd love to see a sketch. I'll go back to look at BSP3 tonight.

Tony Buttler, are you reading this? Got any more for us? ;D
 

smurf

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
547
Reaction score
26
The table in Mondey's book lists a
single-seat day/night fighter (P9) to Specification F37/35, Bristol Hercules, span 47'9, wing area 370sq ft, au wt 10,000lb Design study only.
That is a considerably bigger wing than the Whirlwind (span 45', wa 250sq ft). Tony Buttler's book refers to Bristol suggesting their engines for the Whirlwind when the Peregrine was abandoned, but Westland knowing two of them were too big. The single Hercules study sounds to me more like a parallel study than a "Whirlwind conversion".
As Mole said
The single-Hercules-powered Whirlwind derivative is intriguing, but in going from a twin with two relatively small, light engines to a single, large, heavy engine, you have to wonder how much would really have carried over from one to the next. At best the outer wings, empennage, perhaps the rear fuselage, not much else.
Sorry, Apophenia, but if you apply "if it looks right, it probably is right" to your suggestion, I don't think it looks right at all. Those nacelles, even with 'directable' cannon, are far too large for two cannon each. After all, four went into the Whirlwind's nose. Then there is the extra drag from the big radial. With a bigger wing you could retract the wheels normally into it and have much smaller blisters for the cannon. Keep the 'bubble' cockpit though.
Basically F37/35 called for four 20mm cannon, and there were Hurricane and Spitfire variants suggested for it. It didn't demand two engines. Bristol produced two submissions, one single Hercules, the other two Aquila.
Air Britain's British Aircraft Specifications File has as its last entry for F37/35 (Whirlwind its first)
Westland Type P.9 Alternative designs.Design studies of the P.9 were carried out on thetype,powered by a single Hercules engine, and with twin turbojets.
 

Apophenia

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2007
Messages
2,588
Reaction score
889
Yep, you're right Smurf. I missed the span difference. [link removed]
 

Similar threads

Top