Talk:de Havilland DH.88 Comet

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the De Havilland DH.88 Comet article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Aviation: Aircraft

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Propellers[edit]

The article states that the Comet was first fitted with Hamilton V-P propellers. This is contradicted by Harald Penrose, who says that the design team went to New York for discussions with Hamilton but concluded that their props were not suitable, firstly because they were designed for much more powerful engines but also because their hydraulic actuation would be problematic. I find this account more plausible than that in the article; apart from anything else I would have expected DH to have tested the installation in another aircraft rather than waiting for the Comet to be completed.TheLongTone (talk) 16:00, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Penrose is not always reliable, I have caught him out before. I have on my shelf the Putnam book on the de Havilland aircraft, Martin Sharp's history of the company, Geoffrey DH's own autobiography, and Oglivy's book on the Comets. They tell in a good deal more detail about the visit to the States, how despite the concerns you note they ordered a cut-down set for the Comets but then, as a fallback, went to France and ordered a set of Ratiers. Ogilvie has photos of the prototype in its earliest form, visibly confirming that it was initially fitted with the Hamiltons. They did indeed interfere with the cooling airflow as had been feared (this could not have been tested on another plane), so the fallback plan was implemented. The crankshafts had been made with an integral Hamilton fitting, so an adapter had to be made for the Ratiers. If you have concerns over any given factoid, by all means tag it and I'll dig out a suitable reference. (Henshaw's account of reworking an engine for the King's Cup leaves a puzzle over the path of the hydraulic oilway, but that is another question altogether. I doubt that Shuttleworth would let me take it apart to find out.) — Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 17:22, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I agree about Penrose. I don't have eithe Sharp or Ogilvie & it is a while since I read Geoffrey dH's autobiog.TheLongTone (talk) 15:01, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]