FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1946
1946 - 1478.PDF
no F LIG H7 AUGUST IST, 1946 IN THE AIR (XVII) Botha, Beaufort & Whirlwind Three Widely Differing Twins : Two Coastal Types and an Advanced Fighter By INDICATOR Cf us face it. One of the most criticised British aircraftof the war period was the Botha, so we may as wellsay the worst and get it over. Intended as a torpedo- bomber and originally produced to the same specification as the Beaufort, this aircraft came out, I believe, some- what on the heavy side and, for one reason or another, was eventually used for training purposes. A certain amount of trouble had been experienced with the control surfaces and shrouds during development and early production test flying, and it suffered in service from certain installation bothers which caused occasional engine failures. I always understood that the Botha had originally been laid out to take Taurus motors, and the fact that these were not then available in sufficient numbers and that the Perseus were standardized possibly had something to do with its failure to carry the expected load over the necessary range. But, after saying the worst, the Botha had a number of very good features, and many of those who found them- selves flying the type for considerable periods learned to like it. From the handling point of view it was certainly an extremely easy aircraft. Given a reasonable length of airfield, the Botha flew itself off and, with its compara- tively flat ground angle, the landing could not have been more easy. I must say that, in the course of fifty hours or so of fly- ing with the type—both on test and on the endless inter- satellite delivery work inevitable with an aircraft which was "not wanted"—no particular troubles were experienced other than those common to most aircraft. The hydraulic system had its peculiarities and, at least in the early ver- sions, the relief valve produced the most astounding and frightening noises and smells which, to the uninformed, could be very nerve-racking on a cross-country. It was for all the world as if some chap had been accidentally locked in the bomb bay and was hammering away at inter- vals to attract the pilot's attention. The smell was appar- ently the result of the presence of hydraulic fluid in fine suspension hanging throughout the aircraft. Model Layout In general, too, the Botha's control cabin.layout might well have served as a model to all designers. Everything was comfortably positioned, the view was excellent, and all essential controls were mounted in or on a central pedestal, with the flap, undercarriage and bomb-door selec- tor levers on the floor to one's right. The sliding windows at the side, with their one-handed catch-cum-handles, moved smoothly and positively, but these, like a great deal of the other equipment around, probably helped to increase the all-up weight. Entry provided the only real difficulty. Though there was a full-size sliding roof as well as an emergency hatch on the right side of the control cabin floor, one entered through the door at the rear of the fuselage and, to reach the control cabin, it was necessary to squeeze one's way along a very narrow passage on the starboard side of the fuselage This passage was no place for the claustrophobic- ally inclined passenger, either when flying or when the engines were being started up. Although the main fuel cocks were in the control cabin, the individual tank con- trols were arranged half-way down this passage. One of the more peculiar series of engine failure cases \^ Flight " pkotojraph.First of the twin fighters, the Whirlwind possessed a"number -•* of extremely up-to-date features and, in spite of its then pe-culiar tailplane position, was quite pretty. Flight " yhotOijlUiih. With an unfortunate history, following development troublesand an inter-pilot war of nerves, the Botha had, nevertheless, • , number of good points. was evenraalry' pained down by the investigating peo/>le to trouble with these controls. In some cases the inii'Ked positions did not quite correctly register, and the result was that the fuel supply might, at certain settings, be partially restricted. Consequently, there might be ample fuel for cruising or rated boost, but not quite enough for continuous running at take-off boost. It happened that one aircraft, which most of us had previously flown with- out incident, proceeded one day to suffer complete engine failure, one after the other, and the aircraft was put down in the sea. It transpired that the pilot concerned was in the habit of holding take-off boost until he had reached a reasonable operating height, whereas the other pilots in the team always reduced boost as soon as the undercarriage had been raised. Hence the fact that his motors died from
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
