Is this the worst aircraft to fly? The Saunders Roe Lerwick
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 окт 2024
- Is this the worst aircraft to fly during the Second World War? The Saunders Roe Lerwick, is not a terrible looking aircraft, however its handling qualities were far from it. Considered to be unstable both in the air and on water, only 21 were built. Of these 21, eleven were lost, ten of which were to incidents. Designed to a 1936 specification, the Lerwick would first fly in October 1938. It entered service in mid 1939, however was found to be a difficult aircraft. It could not be flown hands off, had vicious stall characteristics and could not fly on a single engine. That is just a start of the list of issues. While it remained in service at the beginning of the Second World War due to Britain having a shortage of machinery, it was quickly replaced in 1941 with the Consolidated Catalina flying boat. Continuing on briefly as a trainer by the end of 1942 all had been retired and were heading to the scrappers.
Links:
Purchase your official The Antique Airshow merchandise here: www.tomatoeins...
Disclaimer: All comments that are not from The Antique Airshow in the comment section are not opinions of The Antique Airshow.
Follow The Antique Airshow on Instagram: / tomato_eins
Enjoy and be sure to like and subscribe for more!✈
Sources:
All-Aero: all-aero.com/in...
Autoevolution: www.autoevolut...
Aviastar: www.aviastar.or...
Destinations Journey: www.destinatio...
History of War: www.historyofwa...
Military Factory: www.militaryfa...
Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.o...
web.archive.or...
web.archive.or...
#ww2aircraft #aviation #aviationhistory #seaplanes #flyingboat #aircraft #britishhistory #flying #history #secondworldwar
I will keep on pumping your channel because I have no clue how you have just under 5K subscribers, you make such great historical videos!
Thank you, appreciate it. The channel is growing👍✈️
Unstable and difficult to fly - perfect for training squadrons :p
Yep makes a lot sense. Why not teach inexperienced pilots the hard way first. 😅
I read a first hand account somewhere (the website was a little dodgy looking) that another difficulty in training was that there was only one set of controls. So, the instructor couldn't even teach the student through the take-off, but simply give them verbal instructions. However I did find only a single photo of Lerwick cockpit, and it showed two sets of controls, so not sure how true the account is.
The Blackburn Botha is also strong candidate for that Crown.
Or the Breda 88
Indeed. Interestingly from a similar time period too. The 1930s definitely produced some interesting aircraft
Very interesting, the Lerwick looks something like a smaller Sunderland or the Boeing Sea Ranger (which might make a good video...hint, hint). I find all flying boats very interesting. Thanks for the post.
Thanks. Yeah it does have that look to it. Ideally this would of worked alongside the Sunderland. Agree, they are quite cool and interesting. Thanks for the idea, I'll have a look into it 👍✈️
I've seen photos of the Lerwick in publications published during the war.
I never knew much about it.
Until now.
👍✈️
Good job we had the Short Sunderland and Consolidated Catalina.
Thanks. The Short Sunderland and Catalina's performed well and were good assets for the Allies
My Father served with 461 Squadron RAAF in Sunderlands and said that their nickname for the Lerwick was "The Flying Pig". He also said that they were almost impossible to get unstuck from a glassy surface on take-off.
That is very interesting. I'm not surprised, it seems quite the handful to fly.
I have a wartime picture book of photos. The Lerwick's details cannot be released 'but pilots state that it is pleasant to fly'. I wonder whether any pilots were actually asked!
That is, while interesting, honestly quite funny. I would say no pilots were asked. Probably done as part of wartime propaganda. You couldn't really tell your population that one of your aircraft were terrible to fly
Only by the first impression i see high wing load and short stubby geometry which will lead to a stall and flat spin. Do not build planes that looks like a cartoon from Disney.
That makes a lot of sense. It seems there were structural issues with the wings too if the floats kept breaking off
G'day,
Hush yo' mouf ; Infidel...
When the Hull were
Lengthificated,
And the Wing
Extendified,
With an extra pair of Engines...
(An emergency Tactic later employed by
Avro - with it's benighted
Manchester/Lancaster
Metamorphosis...).
The
Lerwick
Became-ified the
s
Short
Empire-Class
Flying-Boat...; and then
It was armed and given slightly
Swept Wings
(To compensate, CG-wise, for the
Extreme Fatness, Weight and Mass
Of yonder Tailing of the
Turret...(!).
Short Brothers used a different
Method
To proof their Designs.
They built and flew a
50% Scale
Sterling, with 4
Pobjoy Niagaras and
Seating for one...
Perhaps that was the inspiration for the
Recently sensational
"Barling Bomber".
An
"Experimental" Registered
1/3 Scale Single-Seat version of a Boeing B-17 - powered by 4 Zenoah Ultralight Motors.
Mister Barling flew it to Oshkosh a few years ago, and displayed it on the Ground, before flying home again - and then going silent.
Mabe CoViD-19 got him...?
Such is life,
Have a good one...
;-p
Ciao !
It’s more like a Studio Ghibli design……..
I take issue! "TaleSpin" was a great show, and is the number one reason for my life-long love of flying boats!
I assume they were used for training on the idea that if you could control a Lerwick, you could handle anything!
It seems so. I would imagine anything would be better to fly after the Lerwick.
MY DAD FLEW THE CATALINA! He flew SeaPlanes during WWII and later went onto fly Bombers …
That is interesting. They were brave men. Lest we forget
I wonder if the brass kettle came as standard!
hahaha you would hope so
Saunders Roe didn't always design planes for roles that no longer existed. Sometimes they designed ones that simply didn't work properly.
They seem to have had an unhappy ability to design brilliant planes that nobody wanted and terrible planes that people would of wanted if they were any good. The Lerwick for instance, had it been a good plane would have found many ready roles and been as famous as the Sunderland, which ironically Saunders Roe ended up building on license as they had spare capacity because the Lerwick was a dud.
Indeed they do. It is rather interesting that ability too.
“would of wanted” makes no sense. You should write “would have wanted”.
They should have utilized Martin PBM Mariners under Lend-Lease!
Wow sounds like down right dangerous
It sure does. Definitely not something I would like to fly
Training crews on how to bail out of a flying boat ....did they not put a jet in this airfarme ?
It seems like it. I'm not sure about the yet. Saunders Roe did produce a few flying boat jets but I don't think this was one 👍✈️
How do you ground a flying boat?
In the context, I was referring to grounded in that the aircraft were ordered not to be flown.
Hi. If it looks right it'll fly right. This one didn't and didn't. Cheers, P.R.
Yep agree 👍✈️
Not enough wing area compared to the fat fuslage and underpowered.
Yep definitely a poorly designed aircraft
So someone did have the right idea early on with that prototype with twin rudders, yet they were dropped?
Yeah it seems so. Throughout its service life there was also quite a few other things they trialed to try and fix issues with the aircraft, however very few wherever introduced.
I wouldn't want to be a new pilot flying that plane....,
No I wouldn't want to either. I don't think I would even want to be an experienced pilot flying this.
The Canadians must get supplied like the Marines if no one else wants something give it to them.
It wasn't unusual for Commonwealth countries or other countries in general (i.e. free Polish squadrons) to get given what Britain didn't want. In the late 1930s when Australia was setting up aircraft manufacturing and looking for a general-purpose fighter/aircraft to build, Britain suggested the Lysander. Thankfully it was rejected, and Australia chose the North American Texan instead.
It's pronounced Ler-wick. I know. How is anyone supposed to know?
I figure he went by the pronunciation of Berwick.
It is possible the people flying the plane also pronounced Lerwick wrong?
Did they not test models in wind tunnels before building the full scale planes? Design by intuition seems like a terribly unprofessional way to run an aircraft manufacturing business.
Can you ground a flying boat?
Haha that is a very good point. I guess if you fly it bad enough you end up running it onto the shore and thus "grounding" it 😂
Too short a span, too short a fuselage, too chubby. Bad aerodynamics. Nobody noticed that?
Seems not. Once it was tested and the list of problems reported on, perhaps then they did.
Lerick
As is Lur wick. (Lurpak)
Certainly a loser, but compared to the effort and treasure poured into the Me.210 or He.177 , it was a world beater.
That is true
In my opinion, the list of worst British planes is rather long , as the great planes list is rather short .
I would agree.
Is any country’s tally of great planes a long one? It was war time and a lack of time and resource led to flying lemons from every side.
@@adriancash7063 That is very true and a good point raised
Please find a narrator who can pronounce English place names properly !
Very much not an English place name.
The name is pronounced LER-wick, rather than LAR-wick. Ler as in Err.....
Chonky boi