Short Stirling
Wed Jul 23, 2014 5:54 pm
Do any of them survive today? spelling changed
Last edited by Pat Carry on Thu Jul 24, 2014 9:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Short Sterling
Wed Jul 23, 2014 6:26 pm
Short answer (pun intended)
No, and it's Stirling.
http://stirlingproject.co.uk/
Check out the link.
Andy Scott
No, and it's Stirling.
http://stirlingproject.co.uk/
Check out the link.
Andy Scott
Re: Short Sterling
Wed Jul 23, 2014 7:56 pm
What even those interested in aviation history do not often realize is that this was the penultimate British - at least in terms of size. The Lancaster was an upgraded twin-engine aircraft (Manchester) and smaller that the Stirling. The Brits built some 5000 of these.
If anyone ever needs evidence that Hitler was a total idiot, here at least is my definition for Total Idiot: Someone who with their twin-engine bombers bombs a country that has four-engine bombers.
If anyone ever needs evidence that Hitler was a total idiot, here at least is my definition for Total Idiot: Someone who with their twin-engine bombers bombs a country that has four-engine bombers.
Re: Short Sterling
Wed Jul 23, 2014 9:06 pm
old iron wrote:What even those interested in aviation history do not often realize is that this was the penultimate British - at least in terms of size. The Lancaster was an upgraded twin-engine aircraft (Manchester) and smaller that the Stirling. The Brits built some 5000 of these.
If anyone ever needs evidence that Hitler was a total idiot, here at least is my definition for Total Idiot: Someone who with their twin-engine bombers bombs a country that has four-engine bombers.
He didn't stop qualifying as an "idiot" just there - he did that and then he ALSO turned around and opened a second front on the opposite border by attacking a country more than 10 times the size of his own - with resources completely out-classing those of his own country AND with T-34 tanks as well. And with IL-2 Sturmoviks... and American Lend-Lease...etc.
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 3:57 am
You can also add to the 'idiot-list' the pronouncement of 'Blitz Bomber' when he first saw the Me 262.
Back to the Stirling topic. I understand that initially it performed much better than the Lancaster and the Halifax, until they drastically reduced the wingspan. I believe it was something to do with not being able to fit between the standard door opening of RAF hangars. Evidently it was easier to chop a few feet off each wing of the poor Stirling than to build wider hangars.
No doubt somebody will correct me if I am wrong as I'm relying on memory and might be having a 'senior moment'.
Barry
Back to the Stirling topic. I understand that initially it performed much better than the Lancaster and the Halifax, until they drastically reduced the wingspan. I believe it was something to do with not being able to fit between the standard door opening of RAF hangars. Evidently it was easier to chop a few feet off each wing of the poor Stirling than to build wider hangars.
No doubt somebody will correct me if I am wrong as I'm relying on memory and might be having a 'senior moment'.
Barry
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 5:49 am
My memory is that it was designed to fit the standard RAF hangars from the get-go, but I can re-check my source later today.
I'm thinking that it was Combat Aircraft of the World: 1909 - Present, edited by John W. R. Taylor of Jane's, circa 1969.
One of my most treasured possessions since early childhood.
I'm thinking that it was Combat Aircraft of the World: 1909 - Present, edited by John W. R. Taylor of Jane's, circa 1969.
One of my most treasured possessions since early childhood.
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:12 am
From Volume I of "Remembering The Canadian Yanks":
The Stirling Bombers were built in two factories, Rochester, England and Belfast, Northern Ireland. Designed by the Short Brothers Aircraft Company, Stirlings were the first four-engined monoplane bombers to enter RAF service and the first to be used operationally in World War II. As the war progressed, they were soon replaced by the Handley Page Halifax and the Avro Lancaster. Stirling's had a major design flaw in that they could barely reach an altitude of 20,000' when fully loaded due to a poorly designed wing. Additionally, they could not be modified to carry the newer larger bombs (in excess of 2,000 pounds) which were being developed. From 1943 on, Stirlings were used only as conversion trainers, transports and glider tugs. In total, 2,383 were constructed - 712 Mk I's, 1,061 Mk III's, 450 Mk IV's and 160 Mk V's. Post War RAF figures reveal Short Stirlings flew 18,440 combat sorties. Total losses from all causes amounted to 791 aircraft.
Cheers,
Tom Walsh.
The Stirling Bombers were built in two factories, Rochester, England and Belfast, Northern Ireland. Designed by the Short Brothers Aircraft Company, Stirlings were the first four-engined monoplane bombers to enter RAF service and the first to be used operationally in World War II. As the war progressed, they were soon replaced by the Handley Page Halifax and the Avro Lancaster. Stirling's had a major design flaw in that they could barely reach an altitude of 20,000' when fully loaded due to a poorly designed wing. Additionally, they could not be modified to carry the newer larger bombs (in excess of 2,000 pounds) which were being developed. From 1943 on, Stirlings were used only as conversion trainers, transports and glider tugs. In total, 2,383 were constructed - 712 Mk I's, 1,061 Mk III's, 450 Mk IV's and 160 Mk V's. Post War RAF figures reveal Short Stirlings flew 18,440 combat sorties. Total losses from all causes amounted to 791 aircraft.
Cheers,
Tom Walsh.
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:56 am
From my limited reading on the topic, the Stirling was built to the RAF spec. The designers wanted to have a longer wing but the RAF would not change the spec. There seems to be some debate as to whether the hangar door issue was the real reason for the too short wing or not. The planes were never hangared so I'm not sure why that would be important.
There's a pretty good book written by a bomber pilot, Murray Pedden RCAF, called A Thousand Shall Fall. The book covers the author's experience going through the BCATP, training on and flying Stirlings on operations, and then his conversion to B-17s. He has some discussion in the book about the performance of the Stirling and it's limitations.
The B-17 bit was interesting to me as the RAF used them as electronic warfare platforms, something that I hadn't been aware of. I also recently learned that the RCAF used them as mail trucks, check out: http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/ ... -RCAF.aspx
Terry
There's a pretty good book written by a bomber pilot, Murray Pedden RCAF, called A Thousand Shall Fall. The book covers the author's experience going through the BCATP, training on and flying Stirlings on operations, and then his conversion to B-17s. He has some discussion in the book about the performance of the Stirling and it's limitations.
The B-17 bit was interesting to me as the RAF used them as electronic warfare platforms, something that I hadn't been aware of. I also recently learned that the RCAF used them as mail trucks, check out: http://www.vintagewings.ca/VintageNews/ ... -RCAF.aspx
Terry
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 6:56 am
William Green's Famous Bombers of the Second World War clearly states that the Sterling was required by the RAF to fit not only standard hangar door widths but also standard packing cases. The former limited the wingspan and the latter impacted fuselage cross-section. To keep wing-loading down the short wing of necessity had a very low aspect ratio. Shorts of course understood these limitations and proposed remedies but the needed modifications were not approved for production. Had the wings been modified performance characteristics forecasted were quite impressive - at least equal to that of the Lancaster.
Re: Short Sterling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 7:20 am
The Stirling was handicapped by it's short wingspan and lack of power. Though some blame was put on the Short Company, it was a pre-development requirement of the British Air Ministry that the wingspan could not exceed 100 feet as that was the opening of the pre-war RAF hangars. The Stirling had a wingspan of 99'1".
Also, there was a requirement for short takeoff as there was a restriction on length of runways pre-war. This was a another government action to "preserve agricultural land" ! The incidence of the wings had to be dramatically changed to increase lift for shorter takeoffs. This created the towering landing gear the Stirling is famous for (and another weakness). As the war developed this restriction was, of couse, done away with.
The wingspan and lack of power caused the Stirling to have to fly at lower altitude than the Halifax and Lancaster. This caused higher losses to flak and fighters as they were easier to reach.
For all it's problems the Stirling was liked by many crews. Many pilots considered it the most maneuverable of the heavy bombers. Also, it was easier to bail out of. The Lancaster was considered the most difficult for egress.
Some good books on the Stirling are "The Stirling Story" by Michael Bowyer and "Stirling Wings" by Jonathan Falconer.
Also, there was a requirement for short takeoff as there was a restriction on length of runways pre-war. This was a another government action to "preserve agricultural land" ! The incidence of the wings had to be dramatically changed to increase lift for shorter takeoffs. This created the towering landing gear the Stirling is famous for (and another weakness). As the war developed this restriction was, of couse, done away with.
The wingspan and lack of power caused the Stirling to have to fly at lower altitude than the Halifax and Lancaster. This caused higher losses to flak and fighters as they were easier to reach.
For all it's problems the Stirling was liked by many crews. Many pilots considered it the most maneuverable of the heavy bombers. Also, it was easier to bail out of. The Lancaster was considered the most difficult for egress.
Some good books on the Stirling are "The Stirling Story" by Michael Bowyer and "Stirling Wings" by Jonathan Falconer.
Re: Short Stirling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:16 am
It was a very large aeroplane. See:
British bombers size comparison
The Halifax also fit within the 100' limit and the Lanc only cheated by 2 feet, but the Stirling had over a 20% longer fuselage and was just a lot more plane for the same wing and engines to pull around. With much more power (e.g. 4 Griffons) and a wing stretch it might have been a winner, but it would then have been in the B-29 class.
August
British bombers size comparison
The Halifax also fit within the 100' limit and the Lanc only cheated by 2 feet, but the Stirling had over a 20% longer fuselage and was just a lot more plane for the same wing and engines to pull around. With much more power (e.g. 4 Griffons) and a wing stretch it might have been a winner, but it would then have been in the B-29 class.
August
Re: Short Stirling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:19 am
From Combat Aircraft of the World: from 1909 to the present, edited by John W. R. Taylor (c) 1969, pp. 413-414:
Short Stirling
The Stirling was the first of the three heavy strategic bombers initiated by the British Air Staff in 1936 and which during World War II formed the backbone of Bomber Command’s offensive against Germany.
Designed to Air Ministry Specification B.12/36, it was a four-engined monoplane of all-metal stressed-skin construction. The specification placed a limit on wing span so that the bomber could be housed in standard RAF hangars; this resulted in a wing of comparatively low aspect ratio, as the designers increased the chord to obtain the necessary wing area. In turn, this low aspect ratio resulted in relatively low ceiling, which proved a serious handicap in action. The wing construction was generally similar to that of the Sunderland, consisting of a main spar torsion-box, to which the leading- and trailing-edge assemblies were attached. Gouge-type flaps were fitted inboard of the ailerons.
The fuselage was a slab-sided monocoque structure, with the bomb-bay occupying almost all of the interior below the wing. The bay held a maximum load of 14,000 lb, which could be carried 590 miles. With the load reduced to 3,500 lb, the range was increased to 2,010 miles. The bay was, however, divided into sections, which meant that the heaviest bomb which could be accommodated was a 4,000-pounder. This limited the usefulness of the Stirling as a warplane.
The shoulder position of the wing resulted in a tall and very complicated main undercarriage, and a correspondingly complicated retraction sequence, into the nacelles of the inboard engines.
Defensive armament consisted of two 0.303 Browning machine-guns in each of the nose and dorsal power-operated turrets, and four guns in a power-operated tail turret.
The two prototype Stirlings were each powered by four 1,375-hp Bristol Hercules II engines, but production Mk I aircraft had 1,595-hp Hercules XI engines. They went into service in August 1940, with No. 7 Squadron, constituting the first four-engined RAF bomber squadron of the war. Their initial sortie was made on 10 February 1941, when three Stirlings dropped fifty-six 500-lb. bombs on oil storage tanks at Rotterdam. In that same year, Stirlings pioneered the use of an early form of Oboe blind bombing device, during attacks on German warships at Brest.
The Stirling Mk II was a version powered by Wright Cyclone engines; not many of this type were built.
The Mk III was a major improvement, powered by 1,650-hp Bristol Hercules XVI engines, and incorporated a new type of dorsal gun turret. This was the standard version in Bomber Command during 1943 and 1944.
The Stirling Mk IV was a version adapted for glider towing and transport duties, retaining only the dorsal gun-turret, and the Mk V was a special unarmed transport capable of carrying 40 troops.
Production of Stirling bombers exceeded 1,630 aircraft, made up of 756 Mk Is and more than 875 Mk IIIs.
Short Stirling
The Stirling was the first of the three heavy strategic bombers initiated by the British Air Staff in 1936 and which during World War II formed the backbone of Bomber Command’s offensive against Germany.
Designed to Air Ministry Specification B.12/36, it was a four-engined monoplane of all-metal stressed-skin construction. The specification placed a limit on wing span so that the bomber could be housed in standard RAF hangars; this resulted in a wing of comparatively low aspect ratio, as the designers increased the chord to obtain the necessary wing area. In turn, this low aspect ratio resulted in relatively low ceiling, which proved a serious handicap in action. The wing construction was generally similar to that of the Sunderland, consisting of a main spar torsion-box, to which the leading- and trailing-edge assemblies were attached. Gouge-type flaps were fitted inboard of the ailerons.
The fuselage was a slab-sided monocoque structure, with the bomb-bay occupying almost all of the interior below the wing. The bay held a maximum load of 14,000 lb, which could be carried 590 miles. With the load reduced to 3,500 lb, the range was increased to 2,010 miles. The bay was, however, divided into sections, which meant that the heaviest bomb which could be accommodated was a 4,000-pounder. This limited the usefulness of the Stirling as a warplane.
The shoulder position of the wing resulted in a tall and very complicated main undercarriage, and a correspondingly complicated retraction sequence, into the nacelles of the inboard engines.
Defensive armament consisted of two 0.303 Browning machine-guns in each of the nose and dorsal power-operated turrets, and four guns in a power-operated tail turret.
The two prototype Stirlings were each powered by four 1,375-hp Bristol Hercules II engines, but production Mk I aircraft had 1,595-hp Hercules XI engines. They went into service in August 1940, with No. 7 Squadron, constituting the first four-engined RAF bomber squadron of the war. Their initial sortie was made on 10 February 1941, when three Stirlings dropped fifty-six 500-lb. bombs on oil storage tanks at Rotterdam. In that same year, Stirlings pioneered the use of an early form of Oboe blind bombing device, during attacks on German warships at Brest.
The Stirling Mk II was a version powered by Wright Cyclone engines; not many of this type were built.
The Mk III was a major improvement, powered by 1,650-hp Bristol Hercules XVI engines, and incorporated a new type of dorsal gun turret. This was the standard version in Bomber Command during 1943 and 1944.
The Stirling Mk IV was a version adapted for glider towing and transport duties, retaining only the dorsal gun-turret, and the Mk V was a special unarmed transport capable of carrying 40 troops.
Production of Stirling bombers exceeded 1,630 aircraft, made up of 756 Mk Is and more than 875 Mk IIIs.
Re: Short Stirling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 10:24 am
Out of 791 lost, THERES GOT TO BE ONE IN A LAKE SOMEWHERE!
PS: When is CWH going to acquire and restore a Halifax to fly alongside the Lancaster?
PS: When is CWH going to acquire and restore a Halifax to fly alongside the Lancaster?
Re: Short Stirling
Thu Jul 24, 2014 2:57 pm
Warbird Kid wrote:Out of 791 lost, THERES GOT TO BE ONE IN A LAKE SOMEWHERE!
PS: When is CWH going to acquire and restore a Halifax to fly alongside the Lancaster?
According to a posting over at the FlyPast forums, there is supposed to be one in a lake (the poster offered no details), but it reportedly considered a war grave, which (if true), for all practical purposes means it might as well be on the moon with the B-32 in terms of recoverability.
To the OP, your best source for all sorts of fun rumors and gossip regarding any potential Stirling survivors would be the the FlyPast forums:
http://forum.keypublishing.com/forumdis ... c-Aviation
Do a search, as there have been several quite entertaining threads over the years there concerning the subject, especially the ones regarding the rumors of a complete (but disassembled) Stirling stored in two hangars somewhere in Russia. Nothing has come of it, and most have written it off as an urban legend, but one can still hope.
Re: Short Stirling
Fri Jul 25, 2014 6:42 am
JFS61 wrote:Do a search, as there have been several quite entertaining threads over the years there concerning the subject, especially the ones regarding the rumors of a complete (but disassembled) Stirling stored in two hangars somewhere in Russia. Nothing has come of it, and most have written it off as an urban legend, but one can still hope.
Like the rumor of a complete squardron of Spitfire buried in Burma