Wars and ConflictsΒ permalink
'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Β
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Wednesday, 30th November 2011
Wednesday 30th November, 2011. GMT:1027
Re: 'Short's Stirling'
With respect; are there any known remains of the so called 'Short's Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER') in Western Europe: still available for reference purposes? As far as I was led to believe as a child; the aircraft type is 'lost to time'.
I ask this question because recently it came to my attention that someone attached to the 'MOD (Ministry of Defence) was searching the records of the former 'DDR' (Deuches Democratic Republic) or former East Germany; on the understanding that a captured 'Short's Stirling' photographed during the 2nd World War in the 'German Forces Magazine: 'SIGNAL'' was still out there somewhere, east of the River Elbe. For the record; the magazine article was called: 'The Hunter and its Pray' and featured a captured 'Short's Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER') painted 'blue and yellow' in the background, together with a Me 109 fighter aircraft in the foreground.
ps. As far as I understand the original 'Short's Stirling' (four engined 'HEAVY BOMBER') was designed and built between 1924 and 1927. The producton 'tool set' took ten years to piece together and full production of the aircraft type only began in 1937. The 'full production run' at 'RINGWAY' / Liverpool from 1937 to 1942 was 87 (eighty - seven); including the 'pre - production model', which was painted 'light blue ground': as opposed to the camouflage pattern adopted by 'RAF BOMBER COMMAND' in the early stages of the 2nd World War.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 2
Posted by colonelblimp (U1705702) on Wednesday, 30th November 2011
David,
Yes, the Germans certainly captured and flew a Stirling, N3705 - though I suspect it was scrapped before the end of the war:
However, I'm not sure what aircraft the rest of your information relates to but I'm afraid it's not the Stirling, which was designed in response to Specification B.12/36, issued in 1936. Two prototypes were ordered in June 1937 and the first flight was on 14 May 1939. Total production was 2,383, at Rochester (Short), South Marston (Short), Belfast (Short & Harland) and Birmingham (Austin Motors).Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 3
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Thursday, 1st December 2011
Thursday 1st December, 2011. GMT:1655
Re: colonelblimp
First: with respect; many thanks for the information you made available from website 'sas.raf38group.org/f...'. The photographs and illustrations were very useful. My one comment would be that the 'Short's Striling' photographed for 'SIGNAL' magazine and which I saw featured in an old copy of 'WAR MONTHLY'; appeared to have an intact nose cone whilst there was damage to the fusalage and bomb bay. I'm not certain that the 'Short's Stirling' you refered to is the one I understand my contact with the 'MOD' and 'Imperial War Museum' are looking for. It's an interesting point that the 'REICH' possibly had a number of 'Short's Stirling' captures.
Second: with respect; I find the idea that 2,383 'Short's Stirling' were built over five years from 1937 to 1942 a little hard to understand given that each aircraft took 3 / 4 months to build by hand. As for Austin Motors (Birmingham) being considered capable of 'FIRST CLASS BUILD'; think again. It could have been used for 'sUB' but the roof was certainly too low for 'GRANDSTAND...'Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 4
Posted by Mutatis_Mutandis (U8620894) on Saturday, 3rd December 2011
No, the aircraft from the "Signal" picture is the same aircraft, N3705. If you are referring the pictures on which the aircraft is painted blue and yellow, with a Bf 109 parked in front of it, and three of the four engines are missing. The nose is not original, but more seriously repaired than in the original emergency repair done to fly the aircraft out from its landing site. The absence of three engines, a bent propeller on the fourth, and the bomb bay damage is thought to indicate that the aircraft suffered a take-off or landing mishap during test flying. Such incidents were common enough in RAF service, and a German pilot might easily be surprised by the Stirling's handling in a cross-wind.
The Luftwaffe is not thought to have flown any other heavy RAF bombers. Surprisingly so, as they found captured B-17s to be very useful, lacking any other source of combat-worthy four-engined aircraft... Maybe the British bombers, being less rugged, were less frequently in a repairable condition.
As for production, you have something of a point. The Air Ministry was sufficiently annoyed by the slow production rate to take direct control in March 1943, ordering changes in production methods. Probably most Stirlings were produced after that date: Production continued until November 1945.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 5
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Tuesday, 6th December 2011
Tuesday 6th December, 2011. GMT:1150
Re: Mutatis_Mutandis
With respect; thankyou for your reply. With regards to 'Short's Stirling'; N3705: I'm not sure whether to argue the toss. First; I'm grateful that you have seen the 'SIGNAL' magazine photograph in which the aircraft appears to be painted 'blue and yellow': together with it's 'Hunter'. It may indeed be N3705 after test and evaluation by the Luftwaffe and then again it might not. I can't really tell.
ps. As for captured 'ALLIED' aircraft used by the Luftwaffe during the 2nd World War; there is a detail which an old friend of my father's recently described to herself. Namely the apparent use by 'Luft - KG200' of 'ALLIED' aircraft types during the so called 'Baedeker Blitz'. These 'Biedecker Raids' may actually have been undertaken at night; from the 27th - 28th April, 1942: by 'Luft - KG200' using captured 'Short's Stirling'.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 6
Posted by Piltdown (U6504098) on Tuesday, 6th December 2011
Unlikely for several reasons. It would be reasonable to have expected at tleast one to have been shot down and to stay beyond the reach of British searchlights the Luftwaffe generally flew above 12,000ft; something a Stirling with anything like a useful bombload would struggle to do.
Whilst the Luftwaffe have been recorded as flying 60 or so B17s the only four engined Briitsh aircraft they appeared to have captured was Stirling N3705 and that was written off in an accident shortly after. I think the key factor here is that Bomber Command operated by night whilst the Americans flew their missions in daylight. That would make it nigh on impossible for an RAF crew in difficulties to make a forced landing which can have advantages over bailing out especially if there are injured crew aboard.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 7
Posted by Mutatis_Mutandis (U8620894) on Tuesday, 6th December 2011
KG200 did not participate in the "Baedeker raids". It did not even exist at the time: These raids were in 1942, KG200 was created in early 1944.
KG200 could have participated in the "Baby Blitz" of 1944, but it did not because it was not a regular bomber unit but a "special operations" group. Its main occupation at the time was the insertion of agents behind enemy lines.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 8
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011
Wednesday 7th December, 2011. GMT:1510
Re: Piltdown
With respect; whilst some authorities maintain that the 'Short's Stirling' (four engined 'HEAVY BOMBER') never flew above 12,000ft; including my old copy of 'WAR MONTHLY' magazine from the 1970's: the real deal is somewhat different and the Luftwaffe were very aware of it. In test and evaluation the 'Short's Stirling' pre - production model from 1924 - 1927 actually flew at 63,000ft above Warwickshire. Bizarrely this pre - production model had a pressurised cabin and the aircrew were to all intents and purposes in so called 'shirt - sleeves'. Even more bizarre was the fact that in 1934 a German aircrew took the same aircraft up for a spin above Lincolnshire, but then 'Adolf Hitler' wasn't necessarily the 'dirty name' it became later. Afterall in 1934 foreign sales were expected in the 'joint war' against the 'SOVIET UNION'. The weird detail is that once 'Short's Stirlings' were demoted to 'GLIDER tow arrangement' they were condemned to fly below 12,000ft, simply because above that altitude 'glider borne troops' began to experience not just 'air sickness' but 'altitude sickness' or 'an - oxyer'. Above 18,000ft purportedly, you die within 35 - 45 seconds.
ps. for one measure at altitude; note where 'EVEREST BASE CAMP' is historically.
NB. Please note that the 'Baedeker Blitz' was essentially 'fire - bombing' at night and that the amount of 'incendies' dropped totalled 32,000lbs from 'each pass'.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 9
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011
Wednesday 7th December, 2011. GMT:1538
Re: Mutatis_Mutandis
With regret I fail to agree with your understanding of Luft - KG200 historically. According to informed reports in 1942; principally 'RAF Intelligence': Luft - KG200 was formed from the remnants of the 'CONDOR LEGION' which flew against the 'Republican Wing' during the so called 'Spanish Civil War' in 1936. It was fully 'motive' in 1938 and apart from 'agent insertion' as you state; it was 'Biedecker Raid' perclivitive from day one.
ps. the weird detail is that the 'Baedeker Blitz' played cover for 'AGENT - insertion'. Principally by destroying 'RECORDS OFFICES' and 'Coroner's atend' which contained the 'Birth, Marriage and Death' certificates of potential 'German - agents' in the field. Without doubt; 'SS / Secret Intelligence' had a 'FIELD DAY' with 'EXETER'.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 10
Posted by colonelblimp (U1705702) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011
Wednesday 7th December, 2011. GMT:1510
Re: Piltdown
With respect; whilst some authorities maintain that the 'Short's Stirling' (four engined 'HEAVY BOMBER') never flew above 12,000ft; including my old copy of 'WAR MONTHLY' magazine from the 1970's: the real deal is somewhat different and the Luftwaffe were very aware of it. In test and evaluation the 'Short's Stirling' pre - production model from 1924 - 1927 actually flew at 63,000ft above Warwickshire. Bizarrely this pre - production model had a pressurised cabin and the aircrew were to all intents and purposes in so called 'shirt - sleeves'. Even more bizarre was the fact that in 1934 a German aircrew took the same aircraft up for a spin above Lincolnshire, but then 'Adolf Hitler' wasn't necessarily the 'dirty name' it became later. Afterall in 1934 foreign sales were expected in the 'joint war' against the 'SOVIET UNION'. The weird detail is that once 'Short's Stirlings' were demoted to 'GLIDER tow arrangement' they were condemned to fly below 12,000ft, simply because above that altitude 'glider borne troops' began to experience not just 'air sickness' but 'altitude sickness' or 'an - oxyer'. Above 18,000ft purportedly, you die within 35 - 45 seconds.
ps. for one measure at altitude; note where 'EVEREST BASE CAMP' is historically.
NB. Please note that the 'Baedeker Blitz' was essentially 'fire - bombing' at night and that the amount of 'incendies' dropped totalled 32,000lbs from 'each pass'. Β David,
Sorry, but this just isn't so. As I mentioned earlier, the first prototype of the Stirling only flew in 1939. In 1924 - 27, the 'state of the art' RAF heavy bomber was the Vickers Virginia biplane, with open cockpits and a ceiling of about 15,000 feet. When the specially-built Bristol 138 high-altitude research aircraft set a world altitude record in September 1936, it did so by reaching a height of 49,967 feet (incidentally, the pilot had to wear a pressure suit).
When the RAF took delivery of its first B-17 Fortresses in 1941, they were used in small numbers as specialised high altitude day bombers. They were able to operate at 35,000 feet, at the most. Even the much-modified, pressurised Wellington Mk V and Mk VI, designed in response to a specification for a high-altitude bomber issued in 1939, had a ceiling of less than 40,000 feet.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 11
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Wednesday, 7th December 2011
With respect, Colonel - DNFTT
Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 12
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Thursday, 8th December 2011
Thursday 8th December, 2011. GMT:0940
Re: The True and Very Real History of Flight Engineering
With respect; the true and very real history of flight engineering has hardly been discussed: principally because the first 'heavier than air' mechanically powered aircraft were financed my men who wanted to use them to 'KILL'.
The 'Wright Flyer' was 'bought and paid for' by 'US NAVAL Intelligence' for 'ariel observation' and 'WAR Fighting'. That's one of the reasons it remains with the Smithsonian Museum as part of the Library of Congress Archive even to this day. I note this because the battery of ideas which produced the 'Kittyhawk effect' saw a generational leap in design and engineering. People were literally falling over themselves with a fusilade of 'motive' ideas which saw copyright drawings produced during the 1st World war look positively 'BLUE SKIES'. Whether you like this or not and I very much doubt that you will 'colonelblimp'; the original outline design drawing for the 'Short's Stirling' was drawn in 1917 by an 'AVRO Ltd.' / Derby contract draughtsman trained at 'RALEIGH' the bicycle manufactures in Nottingham. 'Terry'; as he was called: actually knew the 'Wright Brothers' from 1902, when they visited Radford, Nottingham and was actually there that day, at 'Kittyhawk' when the 'BIRD' took flight.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 13
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Thursday, 8th December 2011
Thursday 8th December, 2011. GMT:1022
Re: colonelblimp
With respect; which I must add is wearing thin: the true and very real history of flight engineering as discussed by 'yours truely' can continue with regards to the 'Short's Wellington' (twin engined 'MEDIUM BOMBER'). As far as I am aware and my father; Harold John Wall as a 'Flight S' in 'RAF BOMMBER COMMAND': flew 87 sorties in a 'Short's Wellington Mk V' named 'Mr BLUE SKIES' between 1940 and 1942 on 'low level interdiction' over the RHUR: the 'Short's Wellington' was never designed for 'high altitude flight'. The simple reason; is that the 'doped fabric / cheesecloth' stretched over the 'Barnes Wallis' designed airframe: meant that pressurised fight was impractical and even 'deadly' for the aircrew involved ie. it was full of 'micro - dote holes'. For practical purposes it usually flew at 60ft above ground level under the 'BASE Net RADAR' ; to avoid 'RADAR directed FLAK'. For the record; the 'Short's Wellington' according to my father: got very, very cold in winter, however long the heating was switched on.
ps. Barnes Wallis actually put pen to paper 'vis a vis' the so called twin engined 'WELLINGTON' on 7th April 1904. Please note; that is the date of 'WILBUR WRIGHT's' first flight. As 'ORVIL WRIGHT' noted in a 'telephone call' to Barnes Wallis himself; that afternoon: the 'history of mankind' is 'BLUE SKIES from now on'.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 14
Posted by Piltdown (U6504098) on Thursday, 8th December 2011
I'll have a pint of what he's drinking.
Barnes Wallis was only 17 in 1904. I never realised he was so precocious.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 15
Posted by David James Wall (U14752090) on Friday, 9th December 2011
Friday 9th December, 2011. GMT:1213
Re: Barnes Wallis
Sir Barnes Neville Wallis was as far as I know born on the 26th September 1887 and was indeed seventeen years old in 1904. The weird detail is that though he was educated at 'Christ's Hospital, Horsham' (a 'co - ed' / Preparatory School) from the age of four years old to eight years old; his father (a motor mechanic by trade) found a position for him as an apprentice at 'ROLLS ROYCE / Derby' from the 1st January, 1897; the year it was founded as an idea (although of course it should be noted that the 'Limited Company' of the same name was only created in 1906). After all Barnes was born in Ripely, Derbyshire and he was indeed very precocious. His interest in 'FLIGHT' began at the of four years old and his 'mathematics' tutor was non - other than 'Lord Rolls of Monmouth' himself; whose work for 'ROLLS ROYCE / Derby' was principally 'certification' as well as 'finance'. It should be noted that the original Howard John Rolls was at one time a tutor in mathematics at Downing College, Cambridge University and had actually taught Mr Wallis Senior. More important than that was the fact that Mr Wallis Senior was Howard John Rolls' fourth cousin. Barnes actually had a 'bright' childhood followed by very heavy work at the drawing board from the age of eight years old, principally for his uncle.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 16
Posted by marchog_du_aka_Stoggler (U14998493) on Friday, 9th December 2011
The weird detail is that though he was educated at 'Christ's Hospital, Horsham'Β
Why is that weird? It's a school among many schools - the guy had to be educated somewhere!
Your posts are entertaining in their unorthodoxy, if nothing else DJW. And I applaud your perserverence in the face of much feedback stating that your style is alienating. Don't be surprised however if people fail to connect with you however.Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
-
Message 17
Posted by Sambista (U4068266) on Friday, 9th December 2011
Stoggler - I think the only apposite response to DJW is "DNFTT".Link to this forum: 'Stirling' (four engined / 'HEAVY BOMBER').
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Β to take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ iD
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ navigation
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ links
Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ Β© 2014 The Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.