Miles M52 Supersonic Aircraft

Miles M52 Supersonic Aircraft

[@Lensman864]

"When we handed over all the data ..." That's why the government cancelled it. Yeager mentions the moving tail as essential to the success of the X1 in his autobiography but not its source. Interesting ... 🤔

[@doktorbimmer]

*The brits did not invent the stabilator... lets lay that old false urban myth to rest right now... The rear mount stabilator first appeared on aircraft as early as 1912 on the Fokker Eindecker, Halberstadt D.II and Morane-Saulnier G. The world's first heavier-than-air aircraft, the Wright Flyer had a front mounted stabilator.*

[@doktorbimmer]

*The Messerschmitt Me-262 and the Bell X-1 were both originally designed with adjustable stabilator trim... there is no doubt that the source of electrically-powered and actuated cockpit controlled stabilator trim control was taken from the Messerschmitt Me-262.*

[@barracuda7018]

The so called data handed over was common knowledge.Nothing the Brits have invented.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

That is not true, the design of Bell X1 cockpit adjustable stabilator trim control is identical to the one found on the Messerschmitt Me-262 that was already flying in 1941.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@G0INWAYBACK What data? What similarities? Britian was clearly years behind in the race to the speed of sound. Why do the brits persist in these ridiculous conspiracy tales of "secret data" and government sabotage??? There is zero evidence to support either myth. The Bell X1 borrowed nothing from the Miles M.52 which was years behind. The M.52 was canceled because Britian was bankrupt after the war and Frank Whittle failed to deliver a working engine for a plane that was years behind schedule.

[@claudebylion9932]

Eric Brown, the greatest ever test pilot. When he talked, everyone should have listened.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Eric Brown was a great test pilot but he often made contradictory statements about things he later claimed to have first hand knowledge. Many of his statements are simply not credible.

[@Dwainpipe21]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Provide evidence or you are talking hot air as usual.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@Dwainpipe21 Just the facts, Brown was one of the best test pilots ever, but the man's memory was very poor, he often made statements that contradicted what he had been said or written after he retired.

[@garrington120]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 YOU are the most discredited poster on you tube you complete and utter lying asshole !!!!

[@richardvernon317]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 The Guy had a bee in his bonnet about not being Chuck Yeager!!!

[@pookiejink]

Great footage and info thank you.

[@brucelunsford4058]

Like your work

[@ciashill9799]

2.27. Just look at that cigarette in the techs mouth. Those were the days. The ingenuity of the tiny UK against the might of the rest of the world. UK boffins and can do anything with a little back room workshop, a meager budget and that all concurring spirit

[@doktorbimmer]

Anything but build a supersonic aircraft before the Americans... the big mistake was allowing Whittle a second chance after rehab to design and build the engines... clearly the man was out of his depth, and his sanity..

[@Dwainpipe21]

@@doktorbimmer Whittle never went into rehabilitation for alcohol or substance abuse , provide evidence or it didn't happen.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@Dwainpipe21 Bill Gunston is the most respected British aviation historian in world ... you calling him a liar?

[@Dwainpipe21]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Are you providing evidence that he went into rehabilitation for alcohol abuse ? .

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@Dwainpipe21 Whittle admits to being an alcoholic. He was hospitalized for addiction to amphetamines and benzodiazepines.

[@martentrudeau6948]

It seems the Brits gave the US a gift of technical know how to go faster than the speed of sound. The Bell X-1 looked like a bullet too, just like the M-52. The big money people were backing the US to be the first to break the sound barrier, and some of those forces were located in the UK as well.

[@doktorbimmer]

*There is absolutely no factual evidence to support that false claim... just false rumors and wishful thinking, the brits were no where near reaching the speed of sound the M.52 was an embarrassing failure...*

[@martentrudeau6948]

@@doktorbimmer -- There were some credible people in this video who don't agree.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Nothing but wishful thinking lad... the brits were no where close to reaching the sound barrier safely...*

[@doktorbimmer]

*There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest that any information transferred from the british contributed in any way to the success of the Bell X-1...*

[@doktorbimmer]

*The british government cancelled the Miles M.52 because it was nothing but a massive cock-up... a proper bodge job.*

[@maofmf]

Thr reason to put the project to a halt, was "American-British Special Relationship". The Americans applied pressure to the British Government.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Cancelled because Frank Whittle was a degenerate drug addict/alcoholic, he was removed from his own company and sent to rehab in the USA. His Power Jets W.2/700 engine was cancelled before the M.52 was, leaving the aircraft design without an engine...*

[@doktorbimmer]

*Whittle's Power Jets W.2/700 engine was a complete and total failure, unable to successfully generate the required thrust to take the M.52 supersonic and unable to complete a full power test without shutting down or self-destructing.*

[@haraldpettersen3649]

@@doktorbimmer - Could you please direct me to books, movies or anything online that deals with what you are writing about.

[@davidmyersretiredaerospace8038]

Sure did.

[@redroostermcmlxxl]

@@JOOLZNED He's swiss, them who make cheese with holes in and cuckoo clocks, other than that, nowt worthwhile.

[@garethessex]

Though it never flew, the Miles aircraft would have used exceptional technologies that proved to be essential in high-speed flight in the future.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Unfortunately Frankie Whittle was a drug addled alcoholic, a degenerate junkie... and he managed to completely bodge the W.2B/700 engine good and proper.*

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Easy to say about any aircraft that didn't exist... the M.52 is nothing more than pure fiction.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

No aircraft powered by a centrifugal turbojet ever reached sustained supersonic speed in level flight. The M.52 was doomed to failure right from the start

[@WilhelmKarsten]

The M52 scandal is a disgusting act of treason! Dennis Bancroft and Frank Whittle embezzled nearly every pence of the funds that were allotted to build Britain's first supersonic aircraft.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

In hindsight we know today that the Miles M.52 (if it had existed) was completely incapable of supersonic performance, No aircraft powered by an inefficient and obsolete centrifugal jet engine has ever reached Mach 1 in level flight.

[@KrillLiberator]

I like that he said the DH.108 acheived mach 1 "in an uncontrolled dive". Didn't Eric Brown call the Swallow "a killer"?

[@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819]

Andrew Givens that's nothing Flight Lieutenant Edward Powles got to 690mph (or Mach 0.96) in his photo-reccon Spitfire in a dive from 51,550ft. He got out of the dive at 3,000ft. This is a verified claim as he had air temperature surveying equipment on board.

[@dartmaster501]

3 were built and each killed a pilot including De Havilland's son.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

de Havilland killed alot of pilots... the company's aircraft had an appalling safety record.

[@raymondyee2008]

Saw this being mentioned on “Warplane”; Eric ‘Winkle’ Brown was pissed that everything was given to the U.S.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

That's a slanderous lie that comes directly from Dennis Bancroft. There is absolutely no evidence to support this revisionist myth, the Miles M.52 never existed and the M.52 scandal is one of the most humiliating and shameful chapter's in British history. Miles Aircraft was charged by the Crown court with 24 counts of fruad and embezzlement and Frank Whittle was accused of allegations of embezzlement, extortion and derilection of duty.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Both Miles and the RAE received technical data from NACA Langley in technical paper regarding the Curtiss XP-42 and its horizontal stabilator stabilator system. Bell Aircraft copied the electric, fly-by-wire (analog) Horizontal Stabilator system from the Messerschmitt Me-262. The Me-262 was the first aircraft to use a stabilator system to counteract the effects of Compressibility at high transonic speeds and was wind tunnel tested to Mach 1.4. The Allies did not have supersonic aircraft wind tunnels during WW2. The RAE would not begin construction of a of a supersonic aircraft wind tunnel at Bradford until 1947.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Eric Browns reputation was severely tarnished by his association with Bancroft and the M.52 scandal. He did not receive his Knighthood because of his association with with the embezzlement scam.

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

Never happened... the Miles M.52 scandal revealed that Miles Aircraft and Frank Whittle embezzled all the funds paid out to build the two prototypes. Never in history has there been so much discussion about an aircraft that did not exist.

[@ManojKumar-vq2zu]

Good

[@jeremysaunders9916]

Interesting and exciting times, development and innovation seemed to be so rapid. Perhaps because health and safety protocol was less in the process. What a shame it was not allowed to develop its full potential this side of the pond, the start of government short sighted ness in this country we call the UK !

[@glyndowning3076]

Not short sightedness, it's called selling ou t to the Yanks. They couldnt design a piss pot without stealing the plans.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@glyndowning3076 The plans for the M.52 were never completed and the prototype was never built... the aircraft did not exist in reality and remains a figment of the British imagination.

[@richardvernon317]

It was cancelled by the organisation who were paying for it, the Royal Aircraft Establishment. Reason. Aircraft unable to do what the user wants to do with it!!!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@richardvernon317 The M.52 was cancelled by the new Labour government after the M.52 scandal was exposed. Miles Aircraft was charged by the Crown with 24 counts of fruad and embezzlement and Frank Whittle was facing allegations of embezzlement, extortion and derilection of duty, he was discharged from the RAF, removed from Power Jets Ltd. and sent to a drug rehab facility in America to spare the new Labour government any further embarrassment.

[@winstonsmith478]

Book - The Miles M.52: Gateway to Supersonic Flight "Eric Brown and others directly involved including Dennis Bancroft, the Chief Aerodynamicist on the M.52, have now come together to try and finally solve the mystery behind the cancellation." Hardcover: 224 pages Publisher: The History Press (October 10, 2012) Language: English ISBN-10: 0752470140 ISBN-13: 978-0752470146 Available in Kindle and print. Haven't yet read it myself.

[@spottydog4477]

Winston thank you for you comments. I have additional film of Dennis Bancroft and Eric Brown which I intend to post. thank you for your interest in this astonishing British project.

[@barracuda7018]

+Winston Smith '' "Eric Brown and others directly involved including Dennis Bancroft, the Chief Aerodynamicist on the M.52, have now come together to try and finally solve the mystery behind the cancellation." The book is for the public consumption in Britain only, I wouldn't put any faith in it as all the facts are known...Book of sore losers, I miss Jeremy Clarkson, he should have joined the team..lol..

[@lechevaliermalfet1]

+barracuda7018 that's your opinion,and your opinion is worth jack

[@spottydog4477]

Barracuda...I think you being too unkind the Miles development team of the day.....those boys had the smarts..and the publication is a valud reflection on the whole story..it has merit. As for Clarkson...we'll I miss that grumpy ol bugger on the telly....

[@doktorbimmer]

To anyone familiar with Frank Whittles fall from grace and eventual exile from the british aerospace industry the cancellation of the Miles M.52 is certainly no mystery.. but its understandable that the brits would go to such efforts to protect the image of this unlikely hero.. they still believe he invented the jet engine!

[@MrSensible2]

Cutting edge, 1940s, British aviation technology - powered by Woodbines...

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Science fiction is always ahead of what's possible at the time... and often gets predictions the future completely wrong.

[@rosewhite---]

8:58 is Chuck Yeager.

[@mrrolandlawrence]

And a smashing evolution of the m52!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Eric Brown still bitter until he died...

[@neildahlgaard-sigsworth3819]

Cancelled for 2 main reasons - Barnes Wallis got cold feet over using men to test out his inventions after the Dams raid, and we just couldn't afford it. We were not able to create the Welfare State that Bevin had envisaged as we were trying to get the bomb and the means of delivering it.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Cancelled for just one reason, Whittle bodged the engine design.. without a functional engine the M.52 had no hope to achieve its primary goal and there was no reason to continue a program that had become a national embarrassment.*

[@pauldavidson6321]

The Bell X1 was unable to break the sound barrier until it recieved the all moving tailplanes from the UK , Something the Americans always omit from th X1 story.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Not true... But the Stabiator (aka All Moving Tail) was not a brit invention.. the idea dates back to WW1 with the Fokker Eindecker and Morane-Saulnier G.* *American aircraft manufacturer Curtiss had just completed a Stabilator research program with the XP-42.*

[@barracuda7018]

Paul Davidson .. Bullshit . Difference between British fairytale fantasy and reality !!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Bollocks! Curtiss-Wright and NACA conducted high speed research on horizontal stabilators before Miles did. Everyone knows the Messerschmitt Me-262 was the world's first jet aircraft to use a horizontal stabilator to offset the effects of "Mach Tuck" in a dive. Hans Mutke was the first pilot to break the speed of sound in a dive and live to tell the tale

[@nickdanger3802]

Hansard Civil Aviation HC Deb 17 December 1942 (on line) Before the war we had a number of debates on civil aviation. Those debates took place because there was in this House a large body of opinion that all was not well with civil aviation. I can assure the Government that there is still in the House and in the country a body of opinion which is perturbed about the position.

[@BOOOZB]

What seems incredible is that , in 1946 , this brittish team had not printed what the Germans had known since 1940 ! : This prototype that is provided for supersonic flight has not even a swept wing design ! They had the example of Me262 , the Me 163 wing shape ready to copy , and they did not even do the calculation of wing circulation , that proves the efficiency of swept-wing for transonic speeds

[@agt155]

+LEBLEU JULES Me163 was a rocket powered glider with no hope of exceeding the speed of sound, the 262 was just as hopeless. Swept wings are not a requirement for supersonic flight, an all moving tailplane is however.

[@BOOOZB]

That's true ! I did not notice, but Bell could have done much better with its BellX1. In fact they were " lucky " !! It is a basic flaw in US engeneers , tu refuse foreign discoveries , by a stupid american pride . But when the stake is the life of pilots , it is awfully stupid ! ( the Gruman F9F Panther , was only a flying target for the Chinese pilots in Mig 15 . Their lift ceiling with straight wings staid well below the tropopause , as the Migs were very easy to stir aerobatics over 12000m m and at Mach 90 .

[@mandernachluca3774]

What, i read that the ME 163 broke the sound barrier (it was unstable but it broke it ). So, is that true, or just propaganda?

[@doktorbimmer]

*The Miles M.52 was such a massive bodge job it never made it off the drawing board... an epic engineering failure!*

[@doktorbimmer]

*The Miles M.52 was such a massive bodge job it never made it off the drawing board... an epic engineering failure!*

[@barbarybar]

Will never forgive the British government for this.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

You can't blame the new Labour government for trying to cover up the M.52 scandal... it was a very shameful and embarrassing chapter in British history.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Hard to believe Frank Whittle was evolved in this massive embezzlement scandal... his career was ruined and he narrowly escaped being court martialed! He never worked in the UK aircraft industry ever again as an engineer.. Hero to Zero in 10 seconds flat..

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

In hindsight we know today that the Miles M.52 (If it had existed) was completely incapable of achieving Mach 1 in level flight, No aircraft powered by an inefficient, obsolete centrifugal jet engine has never flown Mach 1

[@juleshammond5652]

It was totally unimportant who broke the sound barrier first in the late 1940s, the British with the M.52 or the Americans with the X-1. British political and economic policy towards the aircraft industry, as well as a chaotic management structure ensured that most ground breaking projects were dead in the water before development or ill conceived in the first place. The only real British aeronautical tragedies of the post war period were the failure to develop the Fairey FD.2 into a 'British Mirage', the enormous wasted resources on building not one but four nuclear bombers all doing the same job and the Concorde debacle. We shouldn't shed any tears for the TSR.2 either. The Hunter was excellent, the Canberra so good even the Americans used it and the same for the Harrier. Jaguar was an excellent collaboration as was Tornado. We should celebrate the excellence we did put into service not mourn the 'pie in the sky' we didn't and shouldn't have bothered with anyway.

[@barracuda7018]

''We shouldn't shed any tears for the TSR.2 either.'' You shouldn't .. This aircraft was an engineering disaster second to none in the history of British aviation is nothing but a compassion babble.TSR2 was an aircraft that barely flew and never developed beyond the prototype stage. Only 4 prototypes were built and none of them achieved full operational capability as they had been experiencing serious technical problems ... The cancellation of it saved Britain millions The avionics were right on the bleeding edge, performance was well short of the original requirement due to weight growth, the capacity for conventional weapons was limited.( 10,000 pounds), it was limited to a 741 kilometer combat radius. Compare this to the F-111s combat radius of 2,140km carrying a bombload of 30,000 pounds!! But the really sad part of TSR2 disaster is the endless repetition of the fifty-year old story of how a wicked Wilson government under US pressure wilfully destroyed what was to have been Britain's greatest aeronautical achievement. it makes for very good BBC 4 or ITV propaganda... and its good for a laugh !

[@doktorbimmer]

*The TSR-2 was a pathetic bodge job... millions over budget, unable to meet its proposed performance specs and would have arrived in service over 10 years obsolete... at a cost that the UK could not afford in the first place.*

[@barracuda7018]

@@doktorbimmer And 10 years later one TSR2 would cost as much as one Concorde !!! The TSR.2 was seemingly designed to power British aviation forum trolls 50 years later !

[@jennacarson8982]

Never handed over information. Eric Brown is mad he isn't in the history books as the one who broke the sound barrier

[@jennacarson8982]

Winkie - sore l oser

[@jennacarson8982]

So what? Self-promotion does not make those things true.

[@garytarr8216]

Rubbish Jenna !! It is a known and historic fact that Bell and US government scientists came to Britain in 1944 and took ALL the M 52 info , promising a retrospective visit for Miles engineers .

[@doktorbimmer]

@Gary Tarr *Cancelled because Frank Whittle was a degenerate drug addict/alcoholic*

[@vitakyo982]

Ben Lockspeiser , director of scientific research cancelled the program , not caring about the job done & the fact that the plane was close to ready ... May be someone paid him to do so .

[@richardvernon317]

His exact words are as follows. "We must cut our losses and cancel the contract on this aircraft. The matter was fully discussed at the last meeting of the Supersonic Committee and I have subsequently discussed the matter with the firm. There will be no tears anywhere except perhaps at PJs (Power jets) -but we are not paying £250000 to test an engine. I believe that the conception behind the the decision to build this aircraft was to get supersonic information. We now know that was putting the cart before the horse. No more supersonic aircraft till our rocket propelled models and wind tunnels have given us enough information to proceed on a reliable basis."

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Miles Aircraft was charged by the Crown with 24 charges of fraud and embezzlement related to the M.52 embezzlement scandal, Frank Whittle was removed from Power Jets Ltd and discharged from the RAF amid allegations of extortion, embezzlement and dereliction of duty. When Ministry auditors raided Miles Aircraft the found nothing but incomplete drawings and a partially built wood model of the cockpit layout. Nearly all of the government funds to construct the two M.52 prototypes had been diverted though shell companies to key Miles executives and Frank Whittle.

[@garytarr8216]

What I cannot understand is why the programme did not utilize the Rolls Royce Nene which had a thrust of more than 5000 lbs with all the problems associated with Power Jets and Frank Whittle at that time

[@doktorbimmer]

*The Nene was GARBAGE!*

[@doktorbimmer]

*The brits only have a drug addicted alcoholic named Frank Whittle to blame for losing the sound barrier record. Whittle's W.2B/700 engine was a failure and an embarrassing write-off.*

[@barracuda7018]

@@doktorbimmer There were no aircraft requiring 5000 lbs , so Rolls-Royce produced a less powerful version which was the Derwent V with a thrust of 3500 lbs. Some Nenes were sold to Russia and without any license they were copied , reverse engineered and produced in great numbers to power MiG-15 fighters in Korea

[@doktorbimmer]

barracuda7018 *The Nene at 50 inches in diameter and weighing over 3/4s of a ton it didn't fit into any aircraft being considered for production. The VK-1 was a significantly improved version of the Nene rated at a more reasonable 6,000 lbs for its size and weight.*

[@garytarr8216]

@@@doktorbimmerGarbage huh !!! First turbojet of 5000 lbs thrust Nene used in the following aircraft Armstrong Whitworth AW.52 Avro Ashton Avro Lancastrian (test-bed) Avro Tudor VIII Boulton Paul P.111 Boulton Paul P.120 Canadair CT-133 Silver Star Dassault Ouragan de Havilland Vampire FMA IAe 33 Pulqui II Gloster E.1/44 Handley Page HP.88 Hawker P.1052 Hawker P.1081 Hawker Sea Hawk Nord 2200 Rolls-Royce Thrust Measuring Rig SNCAC NC.1071 SNCAC NC 1080 SNCASO SO.4000 SNCASO SO.6000 Triton Sud-Est Grognard Sud-Ouest Bretagne Sud-Ouest Triton Supermarine Attacker Vickers Type 618 Nene-Viking Pratt & Whitney J42 Grumman F9F Panther Kuznetsov RD-45 Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-15

[@mickc6987]

Today the M.52 would be called a technology demonstrator, perhaps not suitable as a basis for a front line aircraft, but that wasn't the object of the project. There are many varieties of reasons why the project was shut down, even if any or all of them have merit why was any technical data about the M.52 given to the Americans ?

[@doktorbimmer]

Anthony Smith An interesting anecdote but unfotunately it has nothing to do with the reasons why the M.52 was a failure or the Bell X-1 a success

[@doktorbimmer]

Anthony Smith Chief Aerodynamicist Dennis Bancroft stated that the Bell Aircraft company was given access to the drawings and research on the M.52 in 1944 BEFORE design work was completed on the Bell X-1 but unfortunately his remarks do not prove accurate nor is there any evidence that the already completed X-1 design was influenced at all by the Miles .M52 data as it empennage bares no similarities whatsoever... stories that the stabilator was added after the X-1 design was completed is also false as the pivot assembly for a stabilator was already build into the X-1 original design as far back as early 44' this confirmed by the development team that installed an electric trim actuator without any knowledge of the M.52s tail design. One only has to look at the two aircraft to see there see no similarities in their control surfaces or design. The brits are very fond of quoting that "they" invented the flying tail as part of the development of the M.52..... the truth is the stabilator was in mass production on French and German aircraft as early as 1915... and 2 American designs the Curtiss XP-42, XP-55, it was already a 30 year old design when the brits claimed to have invented it.

[@reggiep75]

The real doktorbimmer How can you call a British plane project that was cancelled 'a failure' when it didn't fly but the sound data that was handed to the US proved the concept of needing a moveable tailplane for a supersonic jet - NOT a subsonic, when the US engineers were in two minds at the thought of a supersonic jet needing one and were more in the 'not needing one' camp. The data the British gave to the US proved the concept and the Bell X-1 was swiftly modified as it was a dead cert that a tailplane was NEEDED. The invention of the tailplane indeed was long before it's implication on the M.52 or the X-1 but they thought that a supersonic jet would need new concepts when old proven concepts were just that. The British only implicated from the beginning the plane had to have one, the US were undecided. They only failure was the shortsightedness of the British government, NOTHING ELSE!!

[@reggiep75]

Anthony Smith This is exactly the similar approach they took to the McMahon Act regarding atomic energy. The US conveniently neglect to mention the other nations in the Manhatten Project - Britain and Canada, and part of the British team were Australian scientists too. So everyone in the Project contributed a lot of scientists & scientific data but were unable to commit materials and manpower. So the 2/3rds of contribution were neatly obliterated in a flash and told 'Make your own fucking bomb and atomic energy!' So we went and fucking did that in 7 years and suddenly we were welcomed back into the fold incase we had developed anything new that they didn't know about or wanted to share. The US eh!? it does irony, but strangely doesn't understand it.

[@doktorbimmer]

reggiep75 Because the M.52 program was overreaching and doomed to failure from the very beginning... The UK lacked both the high speed aerodynamic research and the jet engine technology. The Governments very poor decision of selecting of the Miles company and Whittles PowerJets Ltd. sealed the fate of the M.52. NACA engineers saw little value in data from plane that never flew or had any chance of reaching the sound barrier. The Bell engineers predicted the possiblity, and left the option in the design of the aircraft AOA elevator trim adjustment. US Airforce test team confirmed the need... The actual stabilator design was developed by the Air Force test team.. not Bell. The Miles M.52 could never reach the sound barrier without a viable engine design, Frank Whittles failure to produce the required engine left the program with no option other than cancellation.

[@Steve-hd4tv]

Cancelled so America could get the glory?

[@doktorbimmer]

Steve walletofmoths Failed because of Whittle's engine

[@Steve-hd4tv]

I see,

[@lechevaliermalfet1]

+The real doktorbimmer have you got proof to back that up,or are you talking out of your ass.

[@doktorbimmer]

the dab Yup, I do... the Whittle's W.2/700 engine completely failed to meet the required design specs... he was fired and later exiled to the US and Power Jets Ltd was shuttered shortly after... check the facts for yourself.. No conspiracies... just the true story having been quietly "swept under the rug" so many years ago.. to save the UK government at the time from embarrassment.

[@lechevaliermalfet1]

+The real doktorbimmer so why can't i find anything on the net

[@rickravenrumney]

Why the argument? The Brits had great innovations and invented and made practical use of many systems to break the speed of sound. They may have done it first. One problem. After WW2, Great Britain was broke. I believe they had to ration food and many other things until 1950. The people wanted food, eyeglasses and dentures. Money spent on breaking the sound barrier, although romantic. Did nothing to feed England's hungry kids. I believe this was the main reason that had the Brits sent all their research to the USA. And without it the USAF may have broken the barrier later on, but not much later. It had been reported that the YF-86 already had broken the sound barrier in a dive and damage to the aircraft.

[@doktorbimmer]

The pivotal mistake made by the Miles team and the UK government was believing Whittle could actually build a jet engine with the required thrust... If they had gone with captured German rocket technology the brits would have most likely broken the sound barrier first.

[@nickodell3950]

I was there. Food rationing lasted until 1953 (candy until 1954, which we kids hated!) and in the late 40s was more strict than it had been in WWII. Many asked "who the hell actually won the war if we are so badly off?"

[@barracuda7018]

@@doktorbimmer They did with a rocket propelled aircraft ..Maybe they copied the rocket technology from the Americans who knows. . It proves only one thing . In 1947 an aircraft powered by a Whittle engine would never have broken the sound barrier before Bell X1 .Period ..

[@andgate2000]

The difficulties the English had ....is they used a jet...whereas the US used a rocket. The English had to develop a jet and a airframe.. the US just the airframe.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

The problem the brits had was they hired a junkie to design the jet engine.

[@richardvernon317]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 No the problem was Whittle was an Amateur!!! None of his engines actually came close to giving the power output that he promised. It Was Hooker at Rolls Royce who saved the Welland.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@richardvernon317 Indeed, it was Stanley Hooker and Adrian Lombard who were the real geniuses of the British jet engine.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Never in history has there been so much discussion about an aircraft that never existed. When the embezzlement scam was discovered investigators found nothing more than incomplete drawings and a partially built wood model of the cockpit layout.

[@alexlo7708]

The Brit approach sound practical. But American cheat by using rocket jet in stead of turbine engine. By this judgement , I'd say the German is the first in breaking speed of sound by their jet plane dive vertical.

[@doktorbimmer]

*Not true, Whittle bodged the W.2B/700 engine good and proper leaving the program without a viable engine capable of supersonic flight, typical of any brit fiasco it was covered up to save the new government any further embarrassment and Whittle was exiled to the states never to work in the UK aerospace industry again.*

[@tarlach1280x960]

Would have, should have, could have, maybe might have.... Didn't use the engine... Sorry you loose....

[@JMS1089]

Look at the design of the miles m.52, bell x-1, and bachem ba 349.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

The Bell X1 and the Natter were real, the M.52 never existed.

[@tahititoutou3802]

"...and there was no,in my opinion, no logical explanation to justify this cancellation". (at :17). Well, in MY opinion, there is. And it is called U.$. political intervention. To leave no competition to the Bell X-1. The same occurred many times. The British TSR 2 and the Canadian Avro CD 105 Arrow were also "mysteriously" cancelled for the Lockheed F-104 Starfighter. This is no mystery...

[@doktorbimmer]

+Tahititoutou Its called a complete and total failure of Frank Whittle and Power Jets Ltd to deliver a working engine that met the specified design requirements.. the W.2/700 failed to produce the required thrust and could not complete a full power test without damage..

[@doktorbimmer]

barracuda7018 The Power Jets W.2/700 engine was cancelled before the M.52 was, leaving the aircraft design without an engine... with no other jet engine capable of delivering the specified thrust certainly left serious doubt that the aircraft could ever reach the speed of sound without a major and very costly redesign.. I was also becoming evident that the team had gone down the wrong path in terms of aerodynamics.. by failing to use the swept wing data captured from the Germans.

[@agt155]

+Tahititoutou Yes, the British SR.53 rocket/jet hybrid interceptor was cancelled in favour of that flying coffin Starfighter. Lockheed payed out over $30M in bribes in the 1950's to secure sales of that junk. The SR.53 could climb at 60,000 ft/min which would put an F-15 to shame. Interesting that the American SR.71 was also a Jet/Rocket hybrid many years later...hmm.

[@tahititoutou3802]

agt155 Actually, the SR-71 DID have hybrid engines, but they were not jet / rocket. The P&W J-58 was a turbojet with a bypass-fed afterburner that, at high speeds, acted as a ramjet. Hence the extreme power they could develop --at the expense of extreme fuel consumption!

[@barracuda7018]

Tahititoutou ''The P&W J-58 was a turbojet with a bypass-fed afterburner that, at high speeds, acted as a ramjet. Hence the extreme power they could develop --at the expense of extreme fuel consumption! '' Thats correct !!!! for many the greatest turbojet ever developed. No other jet engine could stand these extreme exhaust temperatures for such a long period of time sometimes an hour and an even longer ,its engine cowls became translucent !!!! Viktor Belenko, the MIG-25 pilot defected in 1976 said this was the decisive factor why MIG failed to intercept the Blackbird at 80.000 feet. It was not only the speed, but ENDURANCE !!!!

[@george385]

Dennis should be given a medal

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Dennis should have gone to jail...

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Indeed, a medal for World's biggest Liar!

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

Bancroft was a traitor!

[@reginaldmcnab3265]

Sorry! the Germans had already broken the sound barrier!

[@pimpompoom93726]

No they hadn't.

[@doktorbimmer]

@Phil *Actually they did... Germany built the first unmanned supersonic aircraft and Hans Mutke on April 9th, 1945, took off from flugplatz Lagerlechfeld in his Messerschmitt Me 262 and at full power put the jet into a steep dive, he is the first person to ever experience, describe and survive the phenomenon of what is now called "Mach tuck" at supersonic velocity (which only occurs at supersonic airspeeds in the 262) he also used his electrically powered stabilator trim control to recover the aircraft just as Chuck Yeager did 2 years later in the Bell X-1.*

[@pimpompoom93726]

@@doktorbimmer I'm not talking about ballistic missiles which obviously can fly faster than the speed of sound, I'm talking about manned aircraft. As for the Me-262, I seriously doubt that aircraft could ever break the speed of sound-in a dive or otherwise. The F-86 had significantly more thrust and it couldn't. You'd have to provide data to demonstrate that, not just reports from a pilot who experienced some per-mach buffet or whatever. Chuck Yeager had documented radar measured speed when he did it in the X-1.

[@doktorbimmer]

@Phil *Why would you seriously doubt that the fastest air-breathing combat fighter aircraft in the world until the F-86 in Sept, 1948 not reach supersonic speeds in a steep dive?* *On Aug. 19th 1944, Luftwaffe pilot Heinz Herlitzius took off from Flugplatz Leipheim and reached a record top speed in level flight for air breathing combat aircraft of 624mph (1004km/h) in a Messerschmitt Me 262. This was the fastest flight of a production combat aircraft until the F-86 Sabre in Sept 14, 1948 at 670mph.*

[@pimpompoom93726]

@@doktorbimmer As I've said, I want to see RADAR PROVEN FLIGHT SPEEDS, not simply pitot tube technology. Regular airspeed indicators are notoriously inaccurate as you approach the speed of sound. After WW2 MANY US pilots came back and said (P-51, P-47, P38) "I broke the speed of sound in a dive!". But none of them did, piston engine, propellor driven aircraft are incapable of breaking the speed of sound. Even many early jets were incapable.

[@doktorbimmer]

But the Stabiator (aka All Moving Tail) was not a brit invention.. the idea dates back to WW1 with the Fokker Eindecker and Morane-Saulnier G American aircraft manufacturer Curtiss had just completed a Stabilator research program with the XP-42

[@doktorbimmer]

soaringtractor Not the brits!... that for sure.. and what manned aircraft was first to break the sound barrier??? It sure as hell wasn't the Miles M.52 that for damn sure...

[@doktorbimmer]

*Other countries had it long before the brits did... the **_STABILATOR_** is not a brit invention.*

[@doktorbimmer]

+Piers Coode *An interesting assumption, except the German R1 **_Rheintochter, V4 Rheinbote and Feuerlilie F-55_** missiles featured or tested stabilator control fins in 1943 at both transonic and supersonic velocities in the **_Luftfahrtforschungsanstalt_** the world's only supersonic wind tunnel at the time it could model speeds in excess of Mach 1,2. The A9 facility was captured by American forces and transported to White Oak, Virginia where it was used by NACA and the NASA program and still exists today.*

[@doktorbimmer]

Tigermoth, *How can that be true? When the brits didn't invent the stabilator.*

[@doktorbimmer]

Tigermoth, *Miles was not the first to use a stabilator, the brits didn't invent the stabilator.*

[@PacificAirwave144]

It would seem the Canadian and British aircraft manufacturers were shut down a time or two...with their own excellent development programs...because the US could offer a deal on the F-104 or whatever. Incentives, $'s... Bummer that that cut-throat business-mentality can overwhelm little companies with great ideas!

[@michaeltalbot8242]

More like the could offer. I'll ions of dollars to those that had expressed an interest in the Saunders an roe aircraft

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Canada never really had its own aircraft industry back then, it was mostly joint British or American license production or foreign subsidiaries. Britain was already lagging behind in aircraft technology when it was nationalized during the war, by 1946 with the economic collapse, the aircraft industry had no choice but to remain nationalized and could only afford to produced aircraft to meet Ministry of aircraft Supply proposals... with little or no real concern for foreign sales. Very few private venture aircraft were designed after the ministry took control. This deeply flawed system is what drove the slow but complete collapse of the British aircraft industry.

[@PacificAirwave144]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Canberra and Harrier proved the USA hadn't figured it all out yet. Awesome stuff from Britain!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@PacificAirwave144 Both interesting aircraft but didn't generate much sales success for the British aircraft industry. American preferring the much improved Martin B-57 and McDonnell Douglas AV-8B.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@PacificAirwave144 F-35 Lightning proved the British haven't figured it all out yet.

[@nickdanger3802]

HMG had plenty of funds for the Bristol Barbizon luxury airliner, Saunders Roe luxury flying boat, Avro Tudor, DH Comet jet liner and Blackburn Beverly military transport.

[@pimpompoom93726]

When the Brits sold the design for the Rolls-Royce Nene engine to the Soviets in 1947 they gave up any consideration for being one of the preeminent jet aircraft technology powers. That was irresponsible beyond any measure and it cost lives of US pilots in Korea.

[@doktorbimmer]

*The Nene was a lackluster and a very unpopular engine it never sold in large volume, Rolls-Royce had invested heavily in this design and it was a great disappointment financially... They hoped to recoup some cash out of licencing the engine to the Soviets... No one expected that the Soviets could or would completely re-engineer it and substantially improve its performance to the point it was a capable fighter jet engine.*

[@pimpompoom93726]

@@doktorbimmer The Soviets did not 'reengineer' it all that much, it was just a much better fit with the Mig-15 fighter. Regardless, it cost many US pilots their lives fighting Mig's in Korea. Without the Nene there would be no Mig-15 and the Soviets had no comparable jet engines. Stalin was incredulous that the Brits would allow some of their best technology to be sold like that.

[@doktorbimmer]

@Phil *You are very, very mistaken sir, the Klimov VK-1 is not only completely re-engineered, it is significantly larger and produces 1,000 pounds! more thrust than the Nene could.* *Without famous Heinkel engineer Dr. Siegfried Günter there would be no MiG-15, It was a clean sheet design by the genius who by the way also designed the world's first jet aircraft, the Heinkel He-178.*

[@doktorbimmer]

@Phil *The R-R Nene was certainly not the best available jet engine... it was already considered very outdated by that time and was not used by any particularly successful Western aircraft in significant numbers, it was consider to be too big and heavy, too unreliable and did not deliver a good power-to-weight ratio performance.* *True, most of the advanced jet engine technology and thousands of scientists and engineers that existed in Germany was relocated to the United States by "Operation Lusty" and "Operation Paperclip" which gave the United States a massive lead in jet technology after WW2.*

[@pimpompoom93726]

@@doktorbimmer The point being, it was better than anything the Soviets had at that time. They were flying the Mig-9 with 2 axial flow turbojets based off of the BMW-003 which was inefficient at high altitude. The Nene gave them all the key design information they needed to use high temperature alloys and a centrifugal flow turbine and-with one engine-still realize a 40% improvement in thrust over the two prior engines. And to maintain that thrust up to 55,000 feet. They could not have produced the MIG-15 without that engine, they would have still been flying Mig 9's in Korea.

[@doktorbimmer]

It would appear there was considerable evidence that the Whittle W.B.2/700 engine fell well short the performance required, in addition Frank Whittle himself was failing, at this point deeply locked in the grip of amphetamine, tranquilizers and alcohol abuse he was committed to a hospital for rehabilitation, he was removed from Powerjets ltd. in January 1946 and 2 weeks later the Miles M.52 project was canceled. The UK government at this time was deeply in debt due to the war and its unlikely the project would have continued even if Whittle had delivered a viable engine but it was most likely the main factor in the projects cancelation. Cheers Spotty!

[@barracuda7018]

The real doktorbimmer How true doktor, always looking for excuses and inventing conspiracy theories and fantasy stories .. M.52 would never have gone anywhere near 700 miles an hour with Whittle's primitive and outdated engine I always remember the TSR.2 story which still makes me laugh very loud.

[@doktorbimmer]

barracuda7018 I love how the brits persist in the myth that the Stabilator was invented during the Miles M.52 project lol!!! Fokker Eindecker featured a stabilator in 1915

[@doktorbimmer]

Anthony Smith The Whittle W.B.2/700 engine was a failure... it did not produce the specified thrust required to go supersonic and never successfully completed a full power test without damage... Whittle abandonded the project and the W.B.2/700 was never completed and was canceled The UK government had no choice but to cancel the already over budget and behind schedule debacle that is now remember as the M.52 a plane that never was and certainly never flew

[@doktorbimmer]

Anthony Smith They certainly did.. Whittle was fired, forced to quietly resign in order to save what little reputation Power Jets Ltd company had left in a desperate attempt to survive the M.52 fiasco... faced with accusations of incompetence, Dereliction, embezzlement and appropriation of project funds, intoxication and pending charges of assault and battery. Whittle was discretely exiled to a drug rehab in the US to avoid an further embarrassment to the current government that was already facing serious criticisms for budget short falls and a general collapse in the UK economy. Whittle was asked not to return to the UK and never worked in the british aero industry ever again

[@barracuda7018]

The real doktorbimmer Good comment doktor !

[@HeavensGremlin]

What a tragedy - it would have been the biggest single leap in aircraft design - ever.

[@doktorbimmer]

+HeavensGremlin Actually the TSR2 was rather outdated by the time of its first flight..

[@barracuda7018]

+The real doktorbimmer Did it really fly doktor? four prototypes were built, three were permanently grounded for whatever reason nobody knows and only one took off and was in the air 13 hours in total !!! Yes , only after 13 hours of flight test it was declared as the most advanced flying vehicle ever created.. HAHAHA ..British humor is second to none in the world, remember M 52 engineer Dennis Bancroft invented the all moving tail plane which Americans have stolen !!!!!! hahahahahaha..

[@doktorbimmer]

barracuda7018 I think what wasn't declared was more important.. the fact that those precious dozen hours of flight test data showed that the design was going to be a serious disappointment in terms of performance with a full combat load..

[@agt155]

+barracuda7018 Yes it did fly easily out-accelerating it's escorting EE lightning - the worlds best performing fighter aircraft of the time.

[@barracuda7018]

agt155 ''it's escorting EE lightning '' Hans Multhopp and M.Winter..You should read this dude..The foundation of EE lightning was laid down by these two guys .. ''the worlds best performing fighter aircraft of the time'' Absolutely ! of all time , definitely dude , like King Arthur pulling the Excalibur from stone ! I think I read that somewhere in an other forum .... Anyway the myth didn't help very much as the Mirage III emerged as the best and most successful fighter ever developed in Europe ( first fighter exceeding Mach 2.2 ) sold +1500 fighters in 50 countries including Australia, a close British ally www.artefactsconsortium.org/Publications/PDFfiles/Vol3Trans/3.05.Transport-Nahun,GermanAeroSciencePicsGrBlank5,6WEBF.pdf

[@jackywhite880]

In the aviation arena, as in many others, the much-vaunted 'special relationship' between Britain and America has never amounted to anything other than the USA telling the UK to jump, and successive UK governments asking how high. To be fair, that relationship has always been as much about British political cowardice as anything else - not to mention more than a few bulging back pockets. Evidenced, more than once, by the fact that many projects weren't simply cancelled but totally erased.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Bollocks, the Miles M.52 was canceled before the $60 billion dollar Amglo-American loan was signed. The "special relationship" was not in effect yet. The truth is that the M.52 scandal was a major embarrassment for the new Labour government. Frank Whittle was sacked from his own company the same week and the 24 counts of fraud and imbezzeement against Miles Aircraft Company was quitely dropped.

[@richardvernon317]

Not true!!!! most of the documents are still extant, they just got locked away for 30 years due to the Official Secrets Act before going into the public archives. The people who say that all of the documents have been destroyed are the people who f*cked up the project in the first place because they have too big an ego to admits they were not as good as the thought they were!!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Miles Aircraft was charged with 24 counts of fraud and embezzlement after the M.52 scandal broke, and Frank Whittle was forceably removed from his own company or face criminal charges. He was exiled to a drug rehab in America and never worked in the British aerospace industry in any significant capacity. Unable to find meanful work in the U.K. he immigrated to the U.S.

[@richardvernon317]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Your Source on that is???

[@richardvernon317]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Yep, Miles did get investigated for some kind of Fraud after the Compony was wound up 1947.

[@martentrudeau6948]

Why did the British government pull the plug on M52? This doesn't pass the smell test!

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

The Miles M.52 was rumored to be 80% complete but Frank Whittle had failed to deliver an engine that met the thrust required and run reliably. The M.52 program was cancelled the same week Whittle was removed from his position at PowerJets ltd. and committed to a mental hospital for a "nervous breakdown" related to his substance abuse problems.

[@arnolddill]

It’s also worth remembering that it was terminated by the incoming post war Labour government that was committed to implement a socialist agenda in which any defence or military spending had minimal priority.

[@martentrudeau6948]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 ~ That's interesting, I did not know that!

[@martentrudeau6948]

@@arnolddill ~ You know communism was created by the Bolshevik's, funded by Wall Street Bankers, established communist government, murdered 66 million and enslaved the rest of the Russians.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

@@martentrudeau6948 The British invented the Concentration Camp and the Victorian Holocaust murdered more than 100 million.. Colonial Imperialism enslaved over 100 independent nations.

[@Sirikazy]

Usa pay to be the first... like always!

[@doktorbimmer]

Why would the US bribe the UK? The brits owed 60 trillion dollars to the US and Canada after the war.

[@sseim5654]

Remember, the Brits were forced to hand over working engines as well as all Intellectual property associated with the M52 to Bell. Why, and why Bell? The XP 59 and the X1 had a lot of help still not fully explained. Miles recorded success putting an all flying stabs on a couple of M6 airframes. They were well ahead of their time.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

Pure revisionist fiction. Bell Aircraft never took or received any technical data from the Miles M.52 because the M.52 never existed. The M.52 scandal is one of the worst corruption and embezzlement scandals in British aviation history... a truly shameful and humiliating chapter in British history.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

You are a bald faced liar! Your entire comment is nothing more than lies and misinformation.

[@YARROWS9]

The British(in particular the Scots and the English) were always inventing things and not able to capitalise on their ideas.

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

America invented supersonic aircraft, the Miles M52 was a failure.

[@marktucker7454]

Whittle didn't, repeat DIDN'T invent the jet engine. Hans von Ohain of Germany was the designer of the first operational jet engine, though credit for the invention of the jet engine went to Great Britain's Frank Whittle. Whittle, who registered a patent for the turbojet engine in 1930, received that recognition but did not perform a flight test until 1941.

[@doktorbimmer]

*TRUE! and Whittle's patent was never renewed because it was invalid, the turbojet engine had already been patented in 1921 The first patent for using a gas turbine to power an aircraft was filed in 1921 by Frenchman Maxime Guillaume. ," French patent no. 534,801 (filed: 3 May 1921; issued: 13 January 1922).*

[@nickodell3950]

Absolute uninformed rubbish! Frank Whittle wrote the basic formula for the aviation turbojet engine for his final year thesis in the RAF academy. Although he was a serving officer (and pilot) he managed to squeeze in enough time aside from his RAF duties to work on, and finally produce, the first working jet engine. On the advice of friends, he lodges a patent for his invention in January 1930. In 1936, even when fully committed to his RAF duties, he formed a tiny company called Power Jets to make a working engine. The same year, Hand von Ohain, a physics student at Germany's Gottingen University, must have read Whittle's patent [the problem with patents - from the Latin word meaning "open" was that the details and drawings are published around the world and you can be certain that they were in the university's library.] Ohain tried to copy Whittle's idea, but didn't grasp the essential detail that a turbojet engine is self-acting - it has, essentially, one moving part, a shaft with a compressor at the front and a power turbine at the rear. Ohain tried, instead, to use an electric motor to force air in. The result was that flame shot out in the reverse direction, destroying the motor. No Ohain engine was ever used in any aircraft. The giant engineering company Heinkel, and later BMW and Junkers (who made the Me-262's engines) developed the idea. Whittle's problem was that he could not get the British government to pay attention to his invention, which is why Germany flew the first jet-powered aircraft a few months before Britain. Had the RAF, and the government, listened to Whittle, they could have fielded jet fighters and bombers before WWII. Ohain himself later said "If the British had had the vision to back Whittle, World War II would probably never have happened. Hitler would have doubted the Luftwaffe's ability to win."

[@doktorbimmer]

+Nick O'Dell *Whittle plagiarized the work of AA Griffiths... and still managed to completely bodge his formula... Griffiths pointed out several errors Whittle made attempting to copy his own work. Frank's 1930 patent engine was never constructed because it was fundamentally flawed... and not valid patent either.*

[@nickodell3950]

More uninformed twaddle. Plagiarizing A.A. Griffith (not Griffiths, just one more of your errors)? What nonsense. Griffith was not even working on a turbojet engine for the classic propulsion by reaction, he was trying to adapt the engine to drive a propeller (prop-jets became highly successful prime movers for short- to medium-range aircraft in the 1950s and onward, but Griffith had nothing to do with it.) Whittle, a newly-commissioned Pilot Officer in the RAF (equivalent of a US 2nd. Lt.) had been trying since the early-30s to get someone at RAF command or the government to look at his proposal, and perhaps put Britain a decade ahead of any future enemy. His base commander at RAF Wittering arranged for him to meet with Griffith at the Air Ministry research laboratories, together with his drawings and mathematical formulae. Griffith, obviously sensing that his own fruitless research might well be exposed by this young whipper-snapper, declaring that the idea of propelling an aircraft purely by the force exerted by the expulsion of hot gases through the tailpipe would never work, dismissed him with the comment that he was foolishly optimistic and his calculations wrong. He later received a condescending letter from the Air Ministry (probably written by Griffith) "any suggestion submitted by people in the service is always welcome." [Now shut up and get on don't get in my way; carry on with your RAF duties.] Not only was Whittle the originator of the aircraft turbojet engine in his 1928 thesis, he also showed how the power could be greatly increased by injecting fuel into the exhaust downstream from the power turbine - i.e., the afterburner - and also wrote, accompanied by drawings "The emission of gases may also be directionally controlled for maneuvering purposes." So he also originated two key factors in modern jets like the F-35. He also patented the idea of the turbofan engine, a design used on virtually every jet airliner. Whittle's request for a government research grant was turned down. D.R Pye, deputy director of research, wrote: "It is hardly likely you will be successful when so many better-equipped people have failed." A bureaucratic Catch 22: Because of your lack of equipment you won't succeed, and we won't give you money to buy any. Richard Pohl, Gottingen University's director of the physics institute, discussed Ohain's idea with his friend Ernst Heinkel, who was building aircraft for the emerging Luftwaffe but had no experience in engines. He arranged for Ohain to present his ideas to the company's engineers, who concluded that while his proposed engine design would never work (it was similar to other dead-ends in Japan and Italy), they, with their engineering resources, might be able to design something similar to Whittle's patent. So the race for the first jet flight was on. One contestant was working in a broken-down disused foundry in his spare time, using money borrowed from friends and relatives; the other was backed by the resources of a giant engineering company. Apprentices at the British Thompson-Houston company in Rugby built Whittle's first engine as an engineering project. It was something that could justifiably be called revolutionary, a machine never seen before. Whittle calculated that the compressor would deliver 19,000 cu. ft. of air to the combustion chambers per minute, while burning four gallons of kerosene and producing 3,000 lb thrust. Sir Stanley Hooker, the genius who was largely responsible for doubling the power of the Rolls-Royce Merlin piston engine (which powered, among many others, the P-51D) wrote: "For the preceding 30 years the performance of piston engines in flight was only known to a very rough approximation based on inaccurate formulae, yet Whittle predicted what a jet engine would do before he had even made one ... 40 years later his formulae were used unchanged." On April 12, 1937, the engine was run for the first time. Five months later Heinkel ran the HeS2. However, while Whittle's engines were developed by Rolls-Royce into designs that powered British (and some American) fighters and also the DeHavilland Comet, the world's first jet airliner, after the Heinkel He-178V1 became the first jet aircraft to fly, Ohain had been effectively sidelined by now; Heinkel's jets retained little of his original concept and none went into production. The Luftwaffe's own bureaucracy and short-sightedness intervened. Officials who saw the plane fly told Heinkel "Your turbojet is not needed. We will win the war with piston engines." Then they gave Heinkel's design details to BMW. Finally, in June 1939, three months before the start of WWII, and years too late, Dr. Pye, the same official who had dismissed Whittle's idea earlier, came to observe Whittle's engine run at full power (16,000 rpm) for several 20-minute runs and asked him if he was willing to proceed if Pye could obtain the funds, even if it prejudiced Whittle's RAF career. The RAF would "buy" the engine but leave it with Whittle's tiny Power Jets company to develop. Soon, his first production engine ran at 94% of full power. He was then ordered to allow Rover car company to actually produce the engines, while he concentrated on research. Unfortunately, Rover had no real interest in the idea, and two vital years were wasted until RR finally took over development and production, and things went at warp speed from then on, helped by a letter, written in red ink by Sir Stafford Cripps, Minister of Aircraft Production: "Nothing, repeat nothing, is to stand in the way of the jet engine." Post Script. Sir Frank Whittle (knighted by the queen) received many other honors, retired from the RAF as an Air Commodore (equiv. one-star general), emigrated to the US in 1976 and became research professor at the US Naval Academy, Annapolis. He died at his home in Columbia, Md., in 1996.

[@nickodell3950]

Whittle didn't renew his patent because, as a junior officer, he couldn't afford the fees and the RAF not only refused to fund it, they reminded Whittle that his first obligation was to the service, of which he was one of their top aerobatic pilots and had to be available at any time for overseas postings. And his 1930 patent, granted in 1932, contained many features absent from Guillaume's, including vectored thrust. If you want to be picky, the original turbojet engine, for static ground use, had been in existence decades before Guillaume had even been heard of.

[@garrington120]

Yank pressure .. WE will be the first to go through the sound barrier so cancel this winning project !! or we will hit you for enhanced payments for lend lease

[@nickdanger3802]

1945 All but 586 million USD of Britains' Lend Lease debt was written off and the USA and Canada loaned Britain almost 5 Billion USD, First payment was deferred to DEC 1951. 1948-52 USA gave Britain 2.7 Billion under the Marshall Plan (ERP).

[@sandervanderkammen9230]

The Miles M.52 never existed.. It is the biggest lie of all the fake British propaganda hoaxes and revisionist history myths.

[@garrington120]

@@sandervanderkammen9230 Hello Asshole LIAR and FAKE posts always you piece of crap !!! You have been taken down by so many on your anti British post , why dont you just dry up and PISS OFF !!!

[@garrington120]

The Miles M 52 was a prototype under development it therefore EXISTED !! you MORON

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Never in history has there been so much discussion about an aircraft that never existed. When the embezzlement scam was discovered investigators found nothing more than incomplete drawings and a partially built wood model of the cockpit layout.