Letters To The Editor
All letters will be carefully considered; those of general interest will be used. Send to Model Aviation, 1810 Samuel Morse Dr., Reston, VA 22090.
Short Stirling
In the past I have written expressing admiration for the multi-engine models of Frank Baker, especially those subjects which are near and dear to me, like his latest offering in the March issue. However, the secondary purpose of my note is to correct a spelling for the sake of historical accuracy. The name of the aircraft is the Stirling, spelled with an I, not an E.
The Royal Air Force had a definite policy with respect to naming its aircraft, and in the case of multi-engine machines they were named for towns and cities within the British Commonwealth. The Stirling was named for the picturesque town in Scotland. Other examples of naming are the Lancaster, Halifax, Bombay, Hyderabad, and Oxford.
During my service career I have sat enthralled listening to the reminiscences of my more senior colleagues as they regaled me with their experiences on the wartime aircraft. While the Stirling may have been criticized for its poor service ceiling and rate of climb, there were many enemy pilots — and friendly ones, too — who were put to shame by the bomber's rate of roll and general maneuverability, especially in the corkscrew: a climb, dive, and roll maneuver used when a fighter was on one's tail. On takeoff at a gross weight of 68,000 lb (30 tons), the aircraft required some leg muscle. Some of today's pilots would describe the Stirling as a "ground looping SOB." Certainly, by all accounts, some careful juggling and "leading" of the outboard throttles was required if a smart about-face was to be avoided. Ah, yes — those throttles!
I am sure the vocabulary of the new Stirling pilot must have been tested to the extreme by those throttles. Just as in the Westland Whirlwind, the four engines were controlled by the Exactor hydraulic throttle system in which the only connection between the throttle pedestal and the carbs was by way of a pressurized hydraulic line, the object of which was to totally eliminate friction due to pulleys, cables, or rods. If the stories I heard were true, I think (as a pilot today) I would have cast my lot with cables and pulleys. If those hydraulic lines were not properly primed, then the position of the throttles and reading on the tachs bore little relationship to each other, with the levers standing in an untidy row across the quadrant like a line of drunken sailors.
For those wishing to read more on the Short Stirling, there is an excellent treatise (complete with one of J. H. Clark's superb cutaway drawings) in Aeroplane Monthly for July 1987. Actually there are various articles and reminiscences spread throughout the volumes of Aeroplane Monthly, Air Enthusiast, and Air International, not forgetting that excellent Putnam book, Shorts Aircraft Since 1900, by Chris Barnes.
One surprising fact has emerged from my reading: there was Giant Scale even in the dark days of World War Two. Before committing themselves to the expense of the full-size Stirling, Shorts built a half-size version powered by four Pobjoy Niagara radial light-plane engines. The chief complaint of the test pilot was that the windshield was a bit on the small side! At one point in my young life I can recall looking out of a railway carriage window across the expanse of an airfield and seeing that "Little Stirling" sitting forlorn and apparently forgotten. It had served its purpose, I suppose.
How sad that none of the Stirlings have survived the cutting torch to thrill us today in the manner of restored Lancasters and B-17s.
Jim Newman Hobart, IN
The reason for this letter is twofold. First, I have corresponded for some time with Frank B. Baker, who made the flying model of the Stirling bomber so well covered in the March edition of Model Aviation. He told me earlier that he hoped for publication of his plans by your magazine, and you have certainly "done him proud," as the British cockney say. He sent me several copies of your magazine to distribute to some of the Stirling ex-aircrews (I am one).
The article rightly stated that not one Stirling was retained. I have formed a group of ex-aircrew and ground staff with hopes of salvaging and restoring a Stirling wreck. Alas, only minor pieces have been found, and a few engines. I even went to Russia where one was reported, but alas it was just another rumor. Fact is that after nearly 50 years, the winds, tides, and silt will have played great havoc on any wreck, so a great deal of replica work will be required to make it whole. You can see from the enclosed brochure that we have plans for a really authentic replica making use of as many original pieces as possible.
Frank Baker told me that Model Aviation has many thousands of readers. While I realize that few have seen the Stirling (apart from the many U.S. Air Force men in the domes adjacent to ours in the U.K. during WWII), perhaps their interest will have been stirred by the article on Frank's flying model.
Dare I ask if you might mention our project and ask if any of your readers might like to be "shareholders" in it — at — say — a dollar or two a head? It would help our funding enormously. Progress sheets will be issued (in the form of an air letter to those overseas) as the project gains momentum. Any boost that you might be able to give our project would be received with open arms. The cost of the project will be many thousands of pounds — but so very little when equated with the huge numbers who gave their lives.
F. H. P. Clear, DFC 9 Cadogan Close Crownhill, Plymouth Devon PL6 5NE, England
Jim Newman was one of several who wrote us about the faux pas in spelling the name of the famous British WWII bomber in the March 1989 issue. One reader remarked how it seemed strange we had called attention to another common misspelling in that same issue while letting the Stirling gaffe get through. Everyone who worked on the article must have had a mindset, we now think.
Curtiss AT-9
The letter from Del Wood that was printed in the April 1989 Model Aviation magazine gave me quite a nostalgia trip. I, too, flew the Curtiss AT-9.
After receiving my wings at Roswell, N.M., class of 43-B, I was kept on as an instructor in twin-engine advanced training. We flew mostly AT-17s but also had AT-9s which were used mostly for instrument flight practice.
We enjoyed using the AT-9 for the cadet's first "dollar ride" which consisted of a flight over the practice area, traffic pattern procedures, location of auxiliary fields, etc. I would finish off the "ride" with a loop and an aileron roll, then come into the pattern at 800 ft. On the approach I would hold the altitude at 800 ft. until the end of the runway disappeared below. With gear down and full flaps I would then chop the throttles and dive for the runway. I never did figure the glide angle, but the reaction of the student, as we hung in the safety belts watching the runway come up at us, was something else.
As Mr. Wood mentioned in his letter, the Curtiss AT-9 was a beautiful airplane, though it is not now well known at this time. I would like to have some plans for this ship, or even some good photos or drawings.
Art Fleming, LTC USAF Ret. 422 No. Lincoln St. Lake Crystal, MN 56055
Transcribed from original scans by AI. Minor OCR errors may remain.
