Comments by "GivenFirstName FamilyFirstName" (@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935) on "Westland Whirlwind; The RAFs Heavy Hitter Fighter Bomber" video.

  1. Cheaper than a Mosquito too.
    2
  2. So it seems a Hornet with a wing area of 33.5 square metres is HALF THE SIZE of a Mosquito with a wing area of 42.2 square metres? What sort of half is that? (0.794). I’ve said ten thousand times, don’t exaggerate.
    2
  3.  @mebsrea  Volume would be better! A mosquito (insect) twenty two times longer would have ten thousand times the volume (and weight). Re dissimilar aeroplanes remember the increased strength needed to survive flying faster and heavier.
    2
  4. It was not that smart trying to make a first rate fighter using two strengthened but still obsolete previous generation small engines with no possibility of further development, it guaranteed quickly becoming uncompetitive. No other country tried it, the German Henschel 129 ground attack light bomber used similar power small French Gnôme-Rhone 14M radials.
    1
  5. Except a hornet was much bigger and was fully developed.
    1
  6. Er ....... there was no slipstream on the vertical stabiliser and rudder, that is most of what YouTube commentators mistake for ‘torque’. They were not particularly powerful engines.
    1
  7. There might be some repairable Kestrels about?
    1
  8. They took a photo during the early days of the war specially to annoy some video clip browser 80 years later.
    1
  9. It was designed for a pair of updated 22 litre ‘Super-Kestrel’s, the engine of the Hawker Hart and Fury.
    1
  10. They wanted to get something out of the obsolete Kestrel.
    1