Sat Apr 19, 2008 3:41 pm
Jack,
This is a very unique photo in many ways. To my knowledge, with the exception of their Seaplane force, the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial. Does anyone know how many of these round engined Lanc's were ever built and what use was made of them during WWII ? Were these types relegated to target tug status unlike their other heavy 4 engined bombers of WWII such as the Stirling ? And I am also not unaware of the radial engined Halifax either, but it went on to have a successful career as a mainstay bomber in the RAF Fleet, whereas the Stirling was under-designed and almost too large for it's intended mission(s), and ended up relagated to being a target tug for quite some time if memory serves me correctly.
Any Thoughts ?
Paul
This is a very unique photo in many ways. To my knowledge, with the exception of their Seaplane force, the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial. Does anyone know how many of these round engined Lanc's were ever built and what use was made of them during WWII ? Were these types relegated to target tug status unlike their other heavy 4 engined bombers of WWII such as the Stirling ? And I am also not unaware of the radial engined Halifax either, but it went on to have a successful career as a mainstay bomber in the RAF Fleet, whereas the Stirling was under-designed and almost too large for it's intended mission(s), and ended up relagated to being a target tug for quite some time if memory serves me correctly.
Any Thoughts ?
Paul
Sat Apr 19, 2008 3:41 pm
Jack,
This is a very unique photo in many ways. To my knowledge, with the exception of their Seaplane force, the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial. Does anyone know how many of these round engined Lanc's were ever built and what use was made of them during WWII ? Were these types relegated to target tug status unlike their other heavy 4 engined bombers of WWII such as the Stirling ? And I am also not unaware of the radial engined Halifax either, but it went on to have a successful career as a mainstay bomber in the RAF Fleet, whereas the Stirling was under-designed and almost too large for it's intended mission(s), and ended up relagated to being a target tug for quite some time if memory serves me correctly.
Any Thoughts ?
Paul
PS - Sorry for the duplicate posting
This is a very unique photo in many ways. To my knowledge, with the exception of their Seaplane force, the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial. Does anyone know how many of these round engined Lanc's were ever built and what use was made of them during WWII ? Were these types relegated to target tug status unlike their other heavy 4 engined bombers of WWII such as the Stirling ? And I am also not unaware of the radial engined Halifax either, but it went on to have a successful career as a mainstay bomber in the RAF Fleet, whereas the Stirling was under-designed and almost too large for it's intended mission(s), and ended up relagated to being a target tug for quite some time if memory serves me correctly.
Any Thoughts ?
Paul
PS - Sorry for the duplicate posting
????
Sat Apr 19, 2008 4:00 pm
the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial
Don't forget the Wellington, Stirling & Halifax (they did OK didn't they?), Mitchell, Boston & Hampton.
BTW wasn't the Stirling so big it has 2 tail wheels?
Glad you like it
Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:16 pm
the Stirling was under-designed and almost too large for it's intended mission(s),
The Stirling was handicapped by an air ministry specification stating the wingspan had to be under 100 feet to fit in existing hangers. It had excellent manouverability , but because of the short wingspan (99ft 1in) had a lower service ceiling than the Halifax and Lancaster. P.S Jack I think you mean Hampden
Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:26 pm
Aircraft Mech Paul wrote:Jack,
Does anyone know how many of these round engined Lanc's were ever built and what use was made of them during WWII ?Paul
Previous page - about 300. Use? Heavy bomber.
The Stirling wasn't underdesigned. The Air Ministry insisted on a wingspan of less than 100' so it would fit in existing hangars. The wing wasn't big enough so the service ceiling was unacceptable.
The Hercules engined Halifax was very successful. It was overshadowed by the Lancaster but it was still an excellent aircraft and loved by the crews.
Edit: must type faster...
Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:50 pm
Oh and p.s. Please don't forget the Blenheim and Lysander!!
Sat Apr 19, 2008 5:59 pm
And the Beaufighter and Sunderland.
Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:29 pm
Aircraft Mech Paul wrote:This is a very unique photo in many ways. To my knowledge, with the exception of their Seaplane force, the RAF in WWII mainly relied on "V" style engines versus a radial.
Not true, really. The excessive success and thus fame of the wide range of Merlin and later Griffon engined aircraft has skewed the perception of Britain's engine type mix. It'd be difficult to quantify, but there was something in the order of similar numbers of radial types, maybe numbers (proportionately) to USAAF.
British radials (mainly Bristol types) were based on very different engineering principles to US engines, however.
As has already been said, the radial powered Lancaster was a backup design pending Merlin problems which didn't occur. As to it being a radical redesign from the Manchester isn't really true - the central fin was an addition (fabric covered) to the later Manchesters and early Lancs. The early Lancs carried over the Manchester endplate fins which were enlarged and the centre fin removed. The fuselage was essentially the same, the wing structure likewise.
Cheers,
Sat Apr 19, 2008 8:41 pm
Then again, there's the odd engine H and X - Handley Page Hereford and Hawker Hector - Napier Dagger 'H' engine.
Fairey Seafox the earlier Napier Rapier.
Not to mention the better known 'H' Sabre.
The Manchester's Vulture (X) was also an unusual configuration... Stupid name for an engine ("Well, there's your problem.")
Cheers,
Fairey Seafox the earlier Napier Rapier.
Not to mention the better known 'H' Sabre.
The Manchester's Vulture (X) was also an unusual configuration... Stupid name for an engine ("Well, there's your problem.")
Cheers,
Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:41 pm
Don't leave out the Lincoln or my personal favorite, the Albemarle, now there was an..............the words escape me, something about the packaging for a B-25 with about as much performance as a packing crate
Sat Apr 19, 2008 9:57 pm
I just recently learned of the "Round-Motor" variant of the Lancaster with this neat example in one of my new books.
Avro Lancaster LL735: Used as a Jet engine Test platform
(sharp looking ship)
A lot of other neat Lancaster based test bed aircraft besides LL735
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
Avro Lancaster LL735: Used as a Jet engine Test platform
(sharp looking ship)
A lot of other neat Lancaster based test bed aircraft besides LL735
Shay
____________
Semper Fortis
Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:01 pm
No round engines on a Lincoln. Round (-ish) nacelles yes, but Merlins.
Sat Apr 19, 2008 10:48 pm
OOPS! then what other WW2 British, four radial engined bomber was I thinking of besides the ones listed above? 
Sat Apr 19, 2008 11:02 pm
I can't think of another.
All Stirlings were radial, Lancaster and Halifax were both. The Lincoln was just post war but was Merlins, admittedly with annular radiators so round-ish in appearance. The only other 4-engined bomber I can think of was the Vickers Windsor but they only built a couple (edit - I lie - three) - and that had Merlins anyway.
All Stirlings were radial, Lancaster and Halifax were both. The Lincoln was just post war but was Merlins, admittedly with annular radiators so round-ish in appearance. The only other 4-engined bomber I can think of was the Vickers Windsor but they only built a couple (edit - I lie - three) - and that had Merlins anyway.