If you love the Typhoon

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Denis Watkins]

The Green Padlock, for safe transactions appears ST, as you press Donate

So that part of the site is safe

[Callsign Tarnish]

It's commendable that they're restoring one and I'm looking forward to seeing it fly, however I find it laughable that they claim to be restoring a 'combat veteran' when from what I can see they don't have the wings, undercarriage, any engine cowl parts or any of the empenage. I'm happy to be corrected but I can't imagine they'll be much left apart from a few tubes and some data plates, just enough to class it as a restoration and not a recreation.

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Gary Manuel]

I love the Typhoon

It's my favourite jet fighter

[Former Member]

[This posting has been removed]

[Trevor Crook]

I've had this one for a few years. Spent some time in the shed this evening working on fitting a 3-blade prop and better spinner to the lower kV motor that's now fitted.

[Andy Meade]

I've got three Tiffies in build currently

Needless to say, am already a member of the supporter's club

[Jon H]

Posted by Callsign Tarnish on 03/12/2018 21:02:12:
It's commendable that they're restoring one and I'm looking forward to seeing it fly, however I find it laughable that they claim to be restoring a 'combat veteran' when from what I can see they don't have the wings, undercarriage, any engine cowl parts or any of the empenage. I'm happy to be corrected but I can't imagine they'll be much left apart from a few tubes and some data plates, just enough to class it as a restoration and not a recreation.

Just do a google search for data plate restorations and i am sure you will be able to read all about how most of these 'combat veteran' aircraft are actually replica's. The problem is a replica costs the same to make as a restoration but its worth nothing as it has no provenance.

Lets be honest, its all nonsense anyway as just refuelling it and wiping the bugs off makes it no longer original.

When the replica FW190 flew at duxford a few years back powered by a chinese version of the russian engine that powered the aircraft it fought against....nobody cared. It was an FW190, we could see it was and that was all that mattered to us as 'real' 190's are so rare anything is better than nothing.

In the case of the typhoon i really hope they can pull it off. The key is the engine as nothing else can be substituted. If they and the canadian mob (they are doing a replica to flying condition) can get the engine side sorted that opens the door for tempest's to be restored as well.

Also as an fan of all things engine the idea of a 2000+hp 24 cylinder napier sabre screaming across an airfield is very appealing!

[Andy Meade]

RB does have an engine, but it's not been opened up yet. Still amassing funds to start that bit.

[Cuban8]

They had a stall at Duxford's airshows this year, I was very impressed with what they're trying to do and I think it's worthy of support.

[alan p]

As Andy said they do have an engine(all one ton of it) saw it last year inside the boult bee academy hanger at Goodwood. One of the principle members was my pilot in a Harvard ride, he showed me round and said they hope to get it to the states for refurb to zero timed. They are also in possession of all drawing specs and mods one of which eliminates Co2 in the cockpit. Good Luck to them.

[Colin Leighfield]

I visited this stand at Duxford and subscribed to it. I would love to see and hear one of these in the air, whether it is realistic in the time scale envisaged remains to be seen. These projects usually over-run by years and this is particularly difficult. The Sabre is a difficult engine by any standards and almost certainly the greatest challenge in this project. Certainly not the virtually guaranteed result you get with a Merlin or a Griffon. At least with the Tempest V restoration running in the USA there is significant effort going into resolving the engine problems, so it sounds hopeful. The final cost might make your eyes water though.

[Jon H]

Yes absolutely. Just having the engine is not enough, you need to be able to service it, have spares readily on hand, and have an established maintenance network in place. Ideally you also want a 2nd engine so that if one needs service you swap them and keep flying while the other is sorted out.

The canadian guys working on it are going the reverse engineering route and plan to make the whole thing more or less from scratch. Personally i think this is a far better bet but the CAA dont agree. I think Rolls Royce also have a beef with people reproducing their designs. Which is fine, but only if they produce them!

To my mind its much better for safety to have brand new engine parts in use than to use 70 year old items. With modern materials and machining its likely the engines could have much greater reliability which can only be a good thing in my mind. With modern 5 axis CNC it would be pretty simple to sort it all out.

[David Davis]

I've always thought that in model form at least, the cowling of a Typhoon cries out for the installation of an inverted single cylinder engine!

I've too much on so I won't be building a model version, but Mr Wheeler, a train driver who lived at the bottom of our street, flew a Typhoon during the Second World War. He also flew the Hurricane and the Tempest.

When we bought our first motorbikes we were all dead jealous of his son who wore his father's sheepskin lined Irvin Jacket whenever he rode his machine!

[Colin Leighfield]

It’s interesting that RR now possess the design of this Napier engine, although I can understand why they might be nervous about anybody else making one from scratch, I suppose there could still be expensive liability issues that could cause them to take legal action to stop it. As a bit of an aside (forgive me), the last major piston aero engine that RR produced was the Eagle and perhaps not a coincidence that it was an H24, almost an enlarged Sabre. Several flew in the original Westland Wyvern prototypes and it was intended to be the engine in the TF1. When the Eagle was cancelled there was a switch to turboprop, originally the later abandoned RR Clyde and in production the Armstrong Siddeley Python. The reason I mention it is that the only Wyvern remaining is an original unflown pre-production TF1 with what must be a new and unused Eagle engine sitting in it at RNAS Yeovilton! Wouldn’t it be great to get that going!

[Jon H]

I was using RR as an example as they will not allow merlin parts to be re-manufactured. I dont know if the Napier designs are held by RR or BAe. If its BAe then i suspect the same mentality will prevail as they would only release the plans for the horsa glider and westland whirlwind to restoration groups on the basis that the aircraft produced from them would not fly.

A bit sad really, how cool would it be to see a handfull of Dc3's towing Horsa gliders up at an airshow? They could do a dummy invasion of the airfield, it would be awesome

[Colin Leighfield]

As a kid when dad was in the Parachute Regiment I used to play in a Horsa that was parked in the parade ground at Witton Barracks. Happy memories from 65+ years ago. Sadly they eventually burned it. Preservation wasn’t on people’s minds in those days.

Amazing how we all love the Typhoon, me included. It was a failure in its intended role as a fighter and until 1944 had probably killed more of our own pilots than it had of the enemy’s. It was a fluke that it turned out to be so good as a fighter bomber and came into its own after D-Day, but I believe the loss rates were pretty high. Respect to the heroes that flew them. It will be awesome if we see this project up and running and can listen to that ear-splitting engine, but better not stand too close!

[Martin Harris - Moderator]

Posted by David Davis on 04/12/2018 16:04:23:

I've always thought that in model form at least, the cowling of a Typhoon cries out for the installation of an inverted single cylinder engine!

Better than that - an inverted Laser V twin fits in the bulbous cowling (at least of my Tempest project) rather nicely!

[Trevor Crook]

No problem hiding the outrunner and esc in my one pictured above! Cooling air exits via the exhaust stubs.

The Typhoon is a good subject to model, as said above easy to hide the engine, and a nice thick wing for the u/c. Short nose though, the Tempest is better in that respect, but it does have a thinner wing.

[thomas oliver 1]

During WW2 I was stationed at RAF Fighter Leader School at Millfield, Northumberland. Although I never worked on the Typhoons, I was allocated 5 fuel injected Spitfire MK5s to service - Yes! Fuel injected. I worked on the next flight to the Typhoons which apart from their FLS use were also used to practice rocket firing with dummy rockets. I do not recollect ever seeing any aircraft with engine trouble, but I saw many in trouble landing with burst tyres, which were I believe slick. Maybe the Sabre trouble was like many reports - a bit unfounded. I was sitting one day on the flight hut steps having a cuppa when a Typhon on landing approach was given a red flare as a little Magister was about to take off. The Typhee pilot must have banged open his throttle and the engine cut dead. The approach passed over a large wood then a river and he just went down into the wood. We could see the trees part as he shot along the deck. A brave LAC from our flight jumped on his bike, pedalled to the river and swam across somehow. From what he later told me, the fuselage without wings was hanging upside down as was the pilot. He took out the axe provided on the aircraft and chopped the pilot free, who was unscathed apart from a broken collarbone. He possessed a little Austin 7 car and for the next week or two could be seen driving around the unit with one hand, and his other in a NAZI salute. I later once had to fly in a Dominie to Manston in Kent as ground crew to deliver a spare aircrew, and whilst there I saw why the injected Merlins I worked on were never used. There was flight of strange aircraft there - they were Meteors and the jet age had arrived, although we were told nothing about anything ever.

[Bob Cotsford]

I seem to recall reading somewhere, possibly Rolly Beaumont's book, that the Sabre's liner issues were solved with the help of Bristol's liner technology so later engines were quite reliable.

[Colin Leighfield]

Bob, that’s right. For the first two or so years in service the Sabre suffered significant failures and a lot of planes and pilots were lost as a result. Continuous quality problems in the factory in Liverpool I believe were never resolved and Bristol was approached because of its successful record with sleeve valve design, from the Aquila, through the Taurus, Hercules and later the Centaurus. Their involvement resolved most of the issues and from then, I think some time in 1943, the engine became acceptably reliable although I don’t think ever approached RR standards. It was complex mechanically with high maintenance needs and could not be started in cold weather because of very high oil drag unless it was kept heated at all times when not running. At the end of the war the RAF grounded the Typhoons very quickly and they were scrapped, many of them at RAF Lichfield, Fradley, where they were flown in and reduced to produce immediately. The Sabre did continue of course with the Tempest V and VI for a number of years, but never in large numbers and no other planes went into service with that engine. You might recall that the promising Sabre powered Martin Baker MB3 crashed on take off on an early test flight due to engine failure, killing Valentine Baker. They didn’t choose the Sabre for the MB5! Also the Heston racer was destroyed very early on for the the same reason.

I read somewhere that the total combat kill claims for the Typhoon was something over 200, many less than were lost in accidents and other attrition apart from combat losses. The Tempest scored a similar number with only about a year in service. Really the Tempest was what the Typhoon was expected to be in 1941 but failed because of the mistake with the very thick wing and engine unreliability. Oddly enough the Tornado under test suffered very little trouble with the Vulture that was so troublesome in the Manchester, but that’s another story.

It does look as if the design rights for Napier aero engines are now held by Rolls Royce, from a quick search on-line.

[Jon H]

Posted by Bob Cotsford on 06/12/2018 09:34:38:

I seem to recall reading somewhere, possibly Rolly Beaumont's book, that the Sabre's liner issues were solved with the help of Bristol's liner technology so later engines were quite reliable.

yea thats right. Apparently the much maligned RR peregrine fitted to the westland whirlwind was considerably more reliable than the early sabre. If it had been given more development it would have been a good engine but as power demands were higher it was not worth it.

Once the liner issues were sorted the sabre was as reliable as any other engine of the type during that time and power output started to climb with 2600hp in service and up to 5500hp on test engines. As jets overtook them its hard to know how far it could have gone.

One thing that always makes me laugh when reading the specs is the fuel and oil consumption. At maximum power it would chew through more than half a litre of oil a minute and a staggering 18 litres of fuel. It would drain my car fuel tank in 2 minutes!

[Colin Leighfield]

Good point about the Peregrine Jon. It was of course only half the size, actually a “Merlinised” Kestrel of 21 litres. They realised there really wasn’t much point in the engine, the Whirlwind was really too small to be worth developing further as a single seat fighter when you had the Spitfire so capable of further development.

The Vulture was another example of what could have been. The primary failing was the odd design of the big end bearing on the master-rod and a solution was identified. RR had it up to 3,000 hp under test. The cavitation problems in the oil and cooling systems were pretty much resolved. However with the Griffon getting up to approaching 2,500 hp and jets coming there wasn’t much point, as with the Sabre. They had the Eagle coming along as well, but that was abandoned for the same reasons. That was a promising engine, the crashes with the early Wyverns were caused by propeller rather than engine problems. It is quite possible that the Tornado could have been in service with a “sorted” Vulture more quickly than the time it took to resolve the problems with the Sabre and Typhoon with hindsight and although also 24 cylinders it was far less complicated. Probably the huge work-load on RR including sorting out the mess that Rover got into with the jet engine project was a reason for this.