Short Stirling & RAF Bomber Command Forum

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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.

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