Short Stirling Aircraft - Official Production film & Images

Davenport7 · Post by **Davenport7** » Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:27 pm

All,

Great insight into Short Stirling production!!

I would love to see one of these fly again, its a travesty the workhorse bombers of the war dont seem to have flying examples or even in the Stirlings case one in a museum even!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-BWMlC ... e=youtu.be

Regards

Ian Davenport

Post by **AlanW** » Sat Mar 08, 2014 7:14 am

Ian,
I've never seen that film before, and what a fascinating insight it was. First time also, that i've seen the Stirling undercarriage in action.

Post by **K4KittyCrew** » Mon Mar 10, 2014 9:34 am

Great work Ian, you have found the 'holy grail' for footage on the production of the Short Stirling.
I have put together some 'still' images from the movie. I had a quick look at the serial number but could not quite make it out. Maybe someone can pass it on.
Cheers,
John

Upkeep · Post by **Upkeep** » Mon Mar 10, 2014 10:40 am

What a find. Strictly a Lanc man myself, but there's no denying the Stirling is an awesome aircraft.

Post by **ME453** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 9:54 am

That undercarriage linkage and mechanism is incredible, no wonder so many collapsed if the landing was even a little bit shaky. Fascinating watching, the amount of manual labour used in offering up heavy structures was also interesting.
Max

Post by **K4KittyCrew** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 10:17 am

Agreed Max ................When you think of all the manual labour that went into these aircraft for which many would meet their fate after only a few hours airtime.
John

R5868 · Post by **R5868** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:04 pm

I've always wondered why they needed to create such a tall undercarriage. It's not as though it needed that much ground clearance.

Kerry

jamesinnewcastle · Post by **jamesinnewcastle** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 1:22 pm

Hi Kerry

I believe the answer is that the requirement changed to include take-off from shorter runways - with other factors fixed that meant a higher incident of attack which the tall undercarriage provides.

That may not be a very accurate answer but the general idea is there!!

James

Post by **ME453** » Tue Mar 11, 2014 9:55 pm

As I understand it the angle of attack/incidence of the wing had to be increased because of the shortened wingspan in order to generate the lift necessary.

R5868 · Post by **R5868** » Wed Mar 12, 2014 12:11 am

Is this another example of the main criteria on maximum wingspan was that it would fit through the hangar doors?
Kerry

Short Stirling & RAF Bomber Command Forum