I know it's been discussed before but it still is unfathomable that the UK Typhoon project refuses to work together with your project. Such a waste in duplication and time. Just so they can claim they are building the only viable airworthy Typhoon in the world. Anyway, that being the case you are doing a brilliant job and wish your project all the very best. I'm confident you will eventually get your project up and in the air as well Ian.
That is disappointing, I am a member of the RB396 project, shame people's egos get in the way of knowledge sharing. The more airworthy Hawker Typhoons the better.
Hi Ian the whole series about JP843 is just awesome and your dedication and expertise is beyond description along with that of your sponsors. Please keep up the great work, I await all episodes in the series with great interest. Regards from NZ.
Extraordinary episode. So wonderful you have access to those resources in Canada, and have the bona fides to fabricate the all important tooling to facilitate the work with your industrial partners. I was fortunate to witness the fabrication of a wing box carry through for the B-1 bomber, made from a block of titanium - was shaped with C&C controlled cutters. Just amazing to see the modern equivalent of the Great Pyramids and the Great Wall of China, being built today. I wish I had the money. Thank you for sharing.
There are some amazing companies with people wanting to help! An interesting note on the B-1 wing box, I saw a similar titanium forging for the F-35 and my jaw dropped, amazing! ~Ian
Great to see you continue your Typhoon construction series! The detailed description of solving problems and the construction process is fascinating! It acknowledges that the design and construction of a good aircraft is so much more than just riveting a bunch of parts together!! I'm now curious how Focke-Wulf designed and constructed the rear fuselage plug for their FW-190D; in a similar location to the Typhoon.
I find it crazy that all this work and effort is being gradually made to bring a single aircraft to life when only 80 years ago they were making multiple daily. The only difference being the experience, parts and tooling is all gone. Basically relearning the whole process without instructions
Ian, Many thanks for your excellent exposition on the “fishplate “ problem “. The drawings and technical solutions etc perfectly explained the arguably unresolved Issue
I always loved the Typhoon. Never knew anything about tail failures and the unfortunate pilots who lost their lives flight testing or in combat, until this video. The skills required to build these parts is amazing. Good luck, keep at it. Thanks for uploading. New sub.
Hi Clayz1, I have just left a comment for Ian regarding tail structural failure on the Hawker Typhoon, also mentioning our up and coming Typhoon video, which you may be interested in. Kind Regards, Gary
At Westland (now Leonardo) the back to back frame construction was common on Seaking & Lynx helicopters the extrusions were stretch formed on a Hurford machine.
Mike are you following Neville Wheeldon’s video updates on the restoration / rebuild of Avro Lancaster NX611 ‘Just Jane’ to airworthy at East Kirkby, UK? That’s a fantastic project, albeit vastly different to this.
Hi Ian Great informative video presented as usual in your natural and engaging style. My several times over promised Typhoon video special now looks set to go live on the 6th June ... so D-DAY in more ways than one. We have been adding to it the last few weeks and have made a few corrections regarding continuity. The Typhoon pilot featured was a member of 197 Squadron, so know you will relate to that, we have found out he was sadly killed due to tail structural failure on the Hawker Typhoon he was flying. Will be sending you the link to the video soon. Keep up the great work. Gary
thanks Ian I was wondering when you'd get to this point with the structural issues, and how you had planned to ensure your fine example makes it thru to airworthiness.
Nothing novel about the mosquito. Its how aircraft ware made up until a few years prior to its design. Metal was new and only just really becoming common in fighter construction.
And more resilient to shrapnel and bullet strikes. They really had to protect the planes lamination's in humid/damp conditions though. They did lose a few pilots who did not give it full power on take off and it had some 'roll to the left' 'quirk' that had to be quickly corrected as well. If it had not been designed around a laminated wood construction, it would never have been built, due to the shortage of aluminium. (The Air Ministry would have cancelled the order.)
Fascinating to see the processes involved Ian - thank you so much - however, i'm guessing all this was done in a simpler and more rapid way back in the war?
It seems to be an laborius process to pull the shape to form. Especially when you think about when this was designed with the tools and knowlegde they had back then. There must be an reason behind why this was pulled instead of being milled from one solid block of material.
You would need a multi axis machine to mill these parts given their shape, not to mention the machine / operator time and material waste. Machined parts of this shape would also have the grain cut which would reduce the part strength. Stretch forming produces repeatable accurate parts very quickly and keeps the grain running through the shape. ~Ian
Just watched the video about the typhoon being restored at RAF Duxford, the guy said it would be the first fuselage to be built since the war. Do these people not research what other people are doing? Maybe we might see 2 flying typhoons before the next decade?
Good techical brief on the original Typhoon flaws and solutions. Why are you rebuilding with a 3-bladed prop? I thought the 4-bladed prop was key to reducing vibration?
The four blade propeller did reduce some vibration, however the three blade Typhoons were still in use until the end of the war. You will notice that all of the four blade Typhoons are newer aircraft with the larger tailplane; JP843 was originally built as a "car door" aircraft in September of 1943 and then modified. ~Ian
I watched the bending process with interest. How do you account for the aluminium springing back slightly after bending? With my model making I always have to 'overbend' slightly at the ends of the part which sometimes causes the curve to distort slightly.
In the operation shown in the video the material was in a fully annealed condition which means it is soft and easily formed to the required shape, followed by further heat treatment to relieve any stress that might lead to distortion. Really interesting episode 👍
While the material was annealed, there is still some springback (minimal), however the forms were designed to overbend by approximately 1.5 degrees. They were also built to form several inches past the required length, and clamped several inches past that again, ensuring the actual part was spot-on! ~Ian
Before I start a ramble, can you tell me what was the driving force for the resonant modes, was it in the documentation from Hawkers? Was it mechanical, i.e., the Sabre (although, to me, that seems unlikely) or aerodynamic? This must have occurred in many other aircraft, resonance being just a simple matter of mass, stiffness (compliance), damping, and the driving force. Now for the ramble. . I just have to say that this is really fantastic work, of course, it has to be, a pilot's life and the fate of the aircraft depend on it. The side benefit is the accumulation of knowledge that this work fosters. The British aircraft industry vandalized its own legacy. Some of the very rare stuff, such as prototype engines, was destroyed in the late 70s, or later. And the records, drawings, reports, etc., were just thrown out after moves, takeovers, mergers or extinction. The US, on the other hand, has kept so much. Bringing together and organizing all the knowledge that remains is a worthy task, you never know your luck, there may come a time when that knowledge could be used to build a new Typhoon, Tempest, or Sabre VII-powered Fury, we can but dream. Of course, for me, nothing beats the aggressive beauty of LA610 (except for VP207) when she was fitted with a Sabre VII, Sydney Camm's greatest creation, no history, but speed, for British piston aircraft, only the Hornet was faster. Compared to the Sabre VII Fury, the Centaurus Fury just doesn't come up to snuff. pbase.com/marauder61/image/55757158 pbase.com/marauder61/image/55757137 Now I wonder where you could find a Sabre VII to use as a template for a new engine, hmmm, I know, midnight visit to CASM! Just joking. Greetings from Oz.
While I have no written confirmation on the root cause of specific vibrations which resulted in the nodes in question, I suspect the primary cause was do to the engine and its mounting. The early Typhoons suffered from extreme vibration problems which were noted as being painful for the pilots to sit in the aircraft; these vibrations were engine vibrations, and were transferred directly into the front spar cross member be the rear (solid steel) engine mounts. With the cockpit structure being all steel rigid tubular construction, it is easy to see how efficient the transfer was. Eventually rubberized engine mounts were added which helped, and the pilots seat was "sprung" to help isolate the pilots rear end. The vibrations were reduced, but never stopped. When the Tempest was designed, the main fuel capacity from the wing needed to be moved (new wing too thin), and a fuel tank was added between two firewalls in front of the cockpit; when they did this, the Sabre engine mounts were moved off of the primary structure leading to a massive change in vibrations. LA610, I agree, the top of the chain! We have a Sabre VII in the shop and will be working towards a reliable running VII.... why? Because it took all of the lessons learned from tens of thousands of Sabre flight hours and put them into the ultimate variant, strength, reliability and safety. ~Ian
So if i got it right, the build will be 3 blade prop, small tail but with latest tail mods as per tempest v and a retrofit mod bubble canopy. Will the powerplant be Sabre IIa or Sabre IIb spec ?
It’s a shame you could not have made 4 of the special components. You really never know when they’ll be needed. Possibly one day, a brand new Tiffie/Tempest. Who knows.
There are four parts that make up the transport joint, all different. We made two of each so we have two complete ship-sets of front and rear transport joint halves. ~Ian
Any idea why Hawker came up with what looks like a Heath Robinson (or Rube Goldberg) contraption to prevent flutter? The problem is to keep the CG of a moving control in front of the aerodynamic centre, so it behaves like an arrow. The usual solution , as Ian said is a mass balance (a weight on a forward-projecting lever), or weighted leading edge. Both are cheap, simple, and effective, which Hawker's device clearly wasn't.
My understanding is that they tried placing weights in the elevators, but this caused a stability issue. I've not been able to locate any additional details. ~Ian
I guess there are no problems with introducing this kind of modification to the design? I mean, they are for sure less than the problems you might have if you didn't, so there's that.
It can be tricky making changes to a type design, however in this case both aircraft use the same part numbers and assemblies for the bulk of the structure in this area, Hawker kindly introduced the change to the design. ~Ian
Hi, No one can imagine the amount of technology needed to fly this glorious warbird. It's prodigiously interesting, I understand the manufacturing process, but then you have to check that the parts conform to the plans and the specifications. The metal must not be cracked, what control methods do you use? Do you use ultraviolet light? I thank you and congratulate you on the work you are doing. Alain, I live in France. (Google translate)
Hi Alain, both heat treatment and the forming process were completed to modern aerospace standards specific to each process. With this forming method there is no requirement for non destructive testing. ~Ian
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 76 | คู่เอก "ผึ้งหลวง vs สมิงดำ"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9SBshmGQOIM/mqdefault.jpg)
I know it's been discussed before but it still is unfathomable that the UK Typhoon project refuses to work together with your project. Such a waste in duplication and time. Just so they can claim they are building the only viable airworthy Typhoon in the world. Anyway, that being the case you are doing a brilliant job and wish your project all the very best. I'm confident you will eventually get your project up and in the air as well Ian.
That is disappointing, I am a member of the RB396 project, shame people's egos get in the way of knowledge sharing. The more airworthy Hawker Typhoons the better.
Hi Ian the whole series about JP843 is just awesome and your dedication and expertise is beyond description along with that of your sponsors. Please keep up the great work, I await all episodes in the series with great interest. Regards from NZ.
Thank you very much, glad to have you following! ~Ian
I admire your dedication and skill in this undertaking.And all the other people ,and firms involved.
Thank you Dave! ~Ian
Another fantastic episode, I have never seen the Typhoon tail issues explained as well anywhere before.
Thank you! ~Ian
The dedication you guys have is amazing,its lovely seeing your progress over here in the UK. Well done all of you.
Thank you Mike! ~Ian
Extraordinary episode. So wonderful you have access to those resources in Canada, and have the bona fides to fabricate the all important tooling to facilitate the work with your industrial partners. I was fortunate to witness the fabrication of a wing box carry through for the B-1 bomber, made from a block of titanium - was shaped with C&C controlled cutters. Just amazing to see the modern equivalent of the Great Pyramids and the Great Wall of China, being built today. I wish I had the money. Thank you for sharing.
There are some amazing companies with people wanting to help! An interesting note on the B-1 wing box, I saw a similar titanium forging for the F-35 and my jaw dropped, amazing! ~Ian
Great work Ian! starting to take shape. Thank you for sharing this most important airworthy rebuild.
Great to see you continue your Typhoon construction series! The detailed description of solving problems and the construction process is fascinating! It acknowledges that the design and construction of a good aircraft is so much more than just riveting a bunch of parts together!!
I'm now curious how Focke-Wulf designed and constructed the rear fuselage plug for their FW-190D; in a similar location to the Typhoon.
Greetings from the UK, it is great to watch the progress of this wonderful project.
Thank you Colin! ~Ian
I find it crazy that all this work and effort is being gradually made to bring a single aircraft to life when only 80 years ago they were making multiple daily. The only difference being the experience, parts and tooling is all gone. Basically relearning the whole process without instructions
And in many cases the engineering drawings and original material specifications don't exist. ~Ian
@@TyphoonLegacyCoLtd Of course that too, how each part needs to bare weight and stresses
Ian,
Many thanks for your excellent exposition on the “fishplate “ problem “. The drawings and technical solutions etc perfectly explained the arguably unresolved
Issue
Great episode, nice to see you again. Keep up the good work buddy 👍👍
Great Job Ian. Great to watch
Thank you very much!! ~Ian
Incredible work, just incredible.
Thank you! ~Ian
Fascinating processes Ian. Steve.
Nice to have a new video
I always loved the Typhoon. Never knew anything about tail failures and the unfortunate pilots who lost their lives flight testing or in combat, until this video. The skills required to build these parts is amazing. Good luck, keep at it. Thanks for uploading. New sub.
Great to have you following along! ~Ian
Hi Clayz1, I have just left a comment for Ian regarding tail structural failure on the Hawker Typhoon, also mentioning our up and coming Typhoon video, which you may be interested in.
Kind Regards, Gary
At Westland (now Leonardo) the back to back frame construction was common on Seaking & Lynx helicopters the extrusions were stretch formed on a Hurford machine.
Hands down, this series is one of my two favorites on youtube. The other being the Bf-108 restoration over on Kermit Weeks channel
Thank you Mike! ~Ian
Mike are you following Neville Wheeldon’s video updates on the restoration / rebuild of Avro Lancaster NX611 ‘Just Jane’ to airworthy at East Kirkby, UK? That’s a fantastic project, albeit vastly different to this.
@@brycenew Yes I am. I love that series. I look forward to his regular updates lol. The two I named are updated rather infrequently
Some impressive machinery on display there.
Brilliant presentation
Sometimes the tooling is at least as beautiful as the finished parts - those laminated wood stretch-form blocks were a work of art! ☺️❤️
They are beautiful strong and have perfect form, I was really happy with them! ~Ian
Simply spectacular.
Love your work, man and happy you are local to me here in the lower mainland. :)
This video has excellent content & delivery, like this project! Go well with all aspects of it!!
Hi Ian
Great informative video presented as usual in your natural and engaging style.
My several times over promised Typhoon video special now looks set to go live on the 6th June ... so D-DAY in more ways than one. We have been adding to it the last few weeks and have made a few corrections regarding continuity. The Typhoon pilot featured was a member of 197 Squadron, so know you will relate to that, we have found out he was sadly killed due to tail structural failure on the Hawker Typhoon he was flying. Will be sending you the link to the video soon. Keep up the great work. Gary
Great to hear Gary, I'm really looking forward to this one! ~Ian
Thanks!
Thank you Tony! ~Ian
Thanks from England.
As usual just Wicked stuff Ian.
Thanks Chris! ~Ian
Really enjoyed the video cheers Ian 👍
Thank you Terry! ~Ian
Cant wait to see and hear a tiffy fly
thanks Ian I was wondering when you'd get to this point with the structural issues, and how you had planned to ensure your fine example makes it thru to airworthiness.
I'm glad it was helpful. ~Ian
Thankyou lan.
It’s interesting that Mosquito (with a completely novel structure of moulded birch and balsa plywood) had very few structural failures.
Nothing novel about the mosquito. Its how aircraft ware made up until a few years prior to its design.
Metal was new and only just really becoming common in fighter construction.
And more resilient to shrapnel and bullet strikes. They really had to protect the planes lamination's in humid/damp conditions though.
They did lose a few pilots who did not give it full power on take off and it had some 'roll to the left' 'quirk' that had to be quickly corrected as well.
If it had not been designed around a laminated wood construction, it would never have been built, due to the shortage of aluminium. (The Air Ministry would have cancelled the order.)
Fascinating to see the processes involved Ian - thank you so much - however, i'm guessing all this was done in a simpler and more rapid way back in the war?
I've not confirmed how the contractors produced these parts during the war, but they would have either been stamped or stretch formed. ~Ian
It seems to be an laborius process to pull the shape to form. Especially when you think about when this was designed with the tools and knowlegde they had back then. There must be an reason behind why this was pulled instead of being milled from one solid block of material.
You would need a multi axis machine to mill these parts given their shape, not to mention the machine / operator time and material waste. Machined parts of this shape would also have the grain cut which would reduce the part strength. Stretch forming produces repeatable accurate parts very quickly and keeps the grain running through the shape. ~Ian
Just WOW from the UK
This was the era of high speed airplanes and the accompanying issues high speed causes on the frames. The p-38 lightning had similar issues.
A lot of tech involved with making these parts.
But I wonder how it was done by Hawker back then, did they use pressed parts?
They may have pressed them, but it is quite possible they were stretch formed then too. ~Ian
Good video and good luck with the build of JP843. Are you aware of Hawker Typhoon RB396 rebuild?
Thank you! We are aware of them. ~Ian
Just watched the video about the typhoon being restored at RAF Duxford, the guy said it would be the first fuselage to be built since the war. Do these people not research what other people are doing? Maybe we might see 2 flying typhoons before the next decade?
A decade would be tight, but it sure would be nice to see two.... or more in the air! ~Ian
Good techical brief on the original Typhoon flaws and solutions.
Why are you rebuilding with a 3-bladed prop? I thought the 4-bladed prop was key to reducing vibration?
The four blade propeller did reduce some vibration, however the three blade Typhoons were still in use until the end of the war. You will notice that all of the four blade Typhoons are newer aircraft with the larger tailplane; JP843 was originally built as a "car door" aircraft in September of 1943 and then modified. ~Ian
I watched the bending process with interest. How do you account for the aluminium springing back slightly after bending? With my model making I always have to 'overbend' slightly at the ends of the part which sometimes causes the curve to distort slightly.
In the operation shown in the video the material was in a fully annealed condition which means it is soft and easily formed to the required shape, followed by further heat treatment to relieve any stress that might lead to distortion.
Really interesting episode 👍
While the material was annealed, there is still some springback (minimal), however the forms were designed to overbend by approximately 1.5 degrees. They were also built to form several inches past the required length, and clamped several inches past that again, ensuring the actual part was spot-on! ~Ian
Before I start a ramble, can you tell me what was the driving force for the resonant modes, was it in the documentation from Hawkers? Was it mechanical, i.e., the Sabre (although, to me, that seems unlikely) or aerodynamic? This must have occurred in many other aircraft, resonance being just a simple matter of mass, stiffness (compliance), damping, and the driving force. Now for the ramble.
.
I just have to say that this is really fantastic work, of course, it has to be, a pilot's life and the fate of the aircraft depend on it. The side benefit is the accumulation of knowledge that this work fosters.
The British aircraft industry vandalized its own legacy. Some of the very rare stuff, such as prototype engines, was destroyed in the late 70s, or later. And the records, drawings, reports, etc., were just thrown out after moves, takeovers, mergers or extinction. The US, on the other hand, has kept so much.
Bringing together and organizing all the knowledge that remains is a worthy task, you never know your luck, there may come a time when that knowledge could be used to build a new Typhoon, Tempest, or Sabre VII-powered Fury, we can but dream.
Of course, for me, nothing beats the aggressive beauty of LA610 (except for VP207) when she was fitted with a Sabre VII, Sydney Camm's greatest creation, no history, but speed, for British piston aircraft, only the Hornet was faster. Compared to the Sabre VII Fury, the Centaurus Fury just doesn't come up to snuff.
pbase.com/marauder61/image/55757158
pbase.com/marauder61/image/55757137
Now I wonder where you could find a Sabre VII to use as a template for a new engine, hmmm, I know, midnight visit to CASM! Just joking.
Greetings from Oz.
While I have no written confirmation on the root cause of specific vibrations which resulted in the nodes in question, I suspect the primary cause was do to the engine and its mounting. The early Typhoons suffered from extreme vibration problems which were noted as being painful for the pilots to sit in the aircraft; these vibrations were engine vibrations, and were transferred directly into the front spar cross member be the rear (solid steel) engine mounts. With the cockpit structure being all steel rigid tubular construction, it is easy to see how efficient the transfer was. Eventually rubberized engine mounts were added which helped, and the pilots seat was "sprung" to help isolate the pilots rear end. The vibrations were reduced, but never stopped. When the Tempest was designed, the main fuel capacity from the wing needed to be moved (new wing too thin), and a fuel tank was added between two firewalls in front of the cockpit; when they did this, the Sabre engine mounts were moved off of the primary structure leading to a massive change in vibrations. LA610, I agree, the top of the chain! We have a Sabre VII in the shop and will be working towards a reliable running VII.... why? Because it took all of the lessons learned from tens of thousands of Sabre flight hours and put them into the ultimate variant, strength, reliability and safety. ~Ian
👍
So if i got it right, the build will be 3 blade prop, small tail but with latest tail mods as per tempest v and a retrofit mod bubble canopy.
Will the powerplant be Sabre IIa or Sabre IIb spec ?
We are working with a Sabre VII to capture all of the lessons learned from Sabre II series operations. ~Ian
@@TyphoonLegacyCoLtd Oh cool so plan is to have hobson injection with updraft air intake and make 3000 Hp with ADI ? 😂👍🏼
It’s a shame you could not have made 4 of the special components. You really never know when they’ll be needed. Possibly one day, a brand new Tiffie/Tempest. Who knows.
There are four parts that make up the transport joint, all different. We made two of each so we have two complete ship-sets of front and rear transport joint halves. ~Ian
Anyone know why alder was chosen?
It helped keep the costs of materials down while still providing enough strength for the work being performed. ~Ian
Any idea why Hawker came up with what looks like a Heath Robinson (or Rube Goldberg) contraption to prevent flutter? The problem is to keep the CG of a moving control in front of the aerodynamic centre, so it behaves like an arrow. The usual solution , as Ian said is a mass balance (a weight on a forward-projecting lever), or weighted leading edge. Both are cheap, simple, and effective, which Hawker's device clearly wasn't.
My understanding is that they tried placing weights in the elevators, but this caused a stability issue. I've not been able to locate any additional details. ~Ian
@@TyphoonLegacyCoLtd It sounds as though there's a Master's thesis topic in there, but I'm not sure if it's in History or Aerodynamics. :-)*
So horrible to lose all those lives, not in battle, but to a design fault.
Very true, the silver lining is that those sacrifices kept a program moving which undoubtedly saved many thousands. ~Ian
I guess there are no problems with introducing this kind of modification to the design? I mean, they are for sure less than the problems you might have if you didn't, so there's that.
It can be tricky making changes to a type design, however in this case both aircraft use the same part numbers and assemblies for the bulk of the structure in this area, Hawker kindly introduced the change to the design. ~Ian
Hi,
No one can imagine the amount of technology needed to fly this glorious warbird.
It's prodigiously interesting, I understand the manufacturing process, but then you have to check that the parts conform to the plans and the specifications. The metal must not be cracked, what control methods do you use? Do you use ultraviolet light?
I thank you and congratulate you on the work you are doing.
Alain, I live in France. (Google translate)
NDT
Hi Alain, both heat treatment and the forming process were completed to modern aerospace standards specific to each process. With this forming method there is no requirement for non destructive testing. ~Ian
Is it true that the Typhoon killed more RAF pilots than the enemy?
No that was the RAF cooks!
Not at all! ~Ian
Thanks!
Thank you so very much!! ~Ian
Thanks!
Thank you Very much! ~Ian