I've read a fair bit on this topic and as seems to be the vogue, more recent accounts tend to pour cold water on the suggested timescale and chances of success of the project (a la, "TSR2 would have been a terrible aircraft"). No doubt there is a case for re-evaluation in the cold light of day and perhaps removal of some jingoism, but these accounts do seem somewhat mean spirited. Eric Brown certainly thought that they were on a to a winner and remained bitter that he missed out on the fame that Chuck Yeager achieved through being the first pilot through the sound barrier. Something not often discussed is that the X-1 was rocket powered and launched from a B-29, whilst the M.52 was a turbo-jet powered aircraft able to take off under it's own power. Perhaps a too ambitious first step?
I will write further on a related subject to this- principally the engine. I am of the opinion that history is tending to misjudge the matter to an ever larger degree. The problem with re-evaluation is that the people who were best placed to talk about this, (Dennis Bancroft, Frank Whittle, Eric Brown, Ben Lockspeiser etc) aren't with us any longer. It falls to those who remain to make judgements and balanced views are more difficult to obtain- absolutely as you say.
My own view on Eric Brown is that what he felt he missed out on was the chance to test an aircraft- this was his milieu (so to speak) and he wanted to find out how the it would perform. The fame may have come with that, but I think that this was not his primary aim.
In retrospect, the decision to write E28/43 was a good one- the ME163 was not an effective aircraft from an operational perspective and neither was the X1, but as aerodynamic test benches they could be regarded as useful. The Miles M52 however, was an engine test facility and, as such, would have fulfilled its usefulness fully. This is particularly the case when one considers the drag characteristics of the body. Whittle was developing the technology quickly with his team at Power Jets and it seems likely that, with the injection of new materials particularly for compressor blades, performance of later power plants would be considerably enhanced. Speeds of 1,500 mph might have been possible. Perhaps I will research further on this in time.
Looking forward to you taking this further Zin - I enjoy your well thought out and and nicely written pieces. I recently finished the new Eric Brown biography 'Winkle' by Paul Beaver - an excellent insight into the man by someone who knew him. I'd thoroughly recommend it.
I've read a fair bit on this topic and as seems to be the vogue, more recent accounts tend to pour cold water on the suggested timescale and chances of success of the project (a la, "TSR2 would have been a terrible aircraft"). No doubt there is a case for re-evaluation in the cold light of day and perhaps removal of some jingoism, but these accounts do seem somewhat mean spirited. Eric Brown certainly thought that they were on a to a winner and remained bitter that he missed out on the fame that Chuck Yeager achieved through being the first pilot through the sound barrier. Something not often discussed is that the X-1 was rocket powered and launched from a B-29, whilst the M.52 was a turbo-jet powered aircraft able to take off under it's own power. Perhaps a too ambitious first step?
Dear Phil,
I will write further on a related subject to this- principally the engine. I am of the opinion that history is tending to misjudge the matter to an ever larger degree. The problem with re-evaluation is that the people who were best placed to talk about this, (Dennis Bancroft, Frank Whittle, Eric Brown, Ben Lockspeiser etc) aren't with us any longer. It falls to those who remain to make judgements and balanced views are more difficult to obtain- absolutely as you say.
My own view on Eric Brown is that what he felt he missed out on was the chance to test an aircraft- this was his milieu (so to speak) and he wanted to find out how the it would perform. The fame may have come with that, but I think that this was not his primary aim.
In retrospect, the decision to write E28/43 was a good one- the ME163 was not an effective aircraft from an operational perspective and neither was the X1, but as aerodynamic test benches they could be regarded as useful. The Miles M52 however, was an engine test facility and, as such, would have fulfilled its usefulness fully. This is particularly the case when one considers the drag characteristics of the body. Whittle was developing the technology quickly with his team at Power Jets and it seems likely that, with the injection of new materials particularly for compressor blades, performance of later power plants would be considerably enhanced. Speeds of 1,500 mph might have been possible. Perhaps I will research further on this in time.
Thanks for writing again!
Best regards,
Z
Looking forward to you taking this further Zin - I enjoy your well thought out and and nicely written pieces. I recently finished the new Eric Brown biography 'Winkle' by Paul Beaver - an excellent insight into the man by someone who knew him. I'd thoroughly recommend it.