Miloch
November 7th 18, 03:28 PM
*
Miloch
November 7th 18, 04:55 PM
In article >, Stormin' Norman says...
>
>On 7 Nov 2018 07:28:15 -0800, Miloch >
>wrote:
>
>An excellent post series Miloch. I had never seen or even heard of
>this aircraft. It looks like an impressive design, I would be
>interested in learning more about why it was really pulled from
>service and wasn't more widely built.
>
>
from the source...
"Despite the Whirlwind's promise, production ended in January 1942, after the
completion of just two prototypes and 112 production aircraft. Rolls-Royce
needed to concentrate on the development and production of the Merlin, and the
troubled Vulture, rather than the Peregrine. Westland was aware that its design
– which had been built around the Peregrine – was incapable of using anything
larger without an extensive redesign. After the cancellation of the Whirlwind,
Petter campaigned for the development of a Whirlwind Mk II, which was to have
been powered by an improved 1,010 hp Peregrine, with a better, higher-altitude
supercharger, also using 100 octane fuel, with an increased boost rating. This
proposal was aborted when Rolls-Royce cancelled work on the Peregrine. Building
a Whirlwind consumed three times as much alloy as a Spitfire.
*
vBulletin® v3.6.4, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.