|
|
The first prototype flew on April 1, 1947.
 | A three-view drawing (600 x 488) |
| Steve Hannah, stinz1(@)gmail.com, 17.08.2009 Ditto Callum on the Skua/Roc, the Firebrand was an unfortunate case of stumbling, protracted developement which it seemed no-one could think of a good enough reason to stop. I always thought the Firecrest was a cracker & could have been Britains Sky Raider had it been adopted. | | calum morris, calum_94(@)hotmail.com, 09.02.2008 ok i agree on the skua+roc, but the other two are not THAT bad, they had faults, but would FAA use them until 1953 (in the case of firebrand) and the are quite sinister looking! | | Mick Dunne, hotideas(@)hotmail.com, 27.12.2007 From the awfull Roc & Skua to the appalling Firebrand & Firecrest, Blackburn really lost their way in Aircraft Design!
I can't believe that the company even approved the building of prototypes or had the temerity to hand them over to Service Trials units, when they were so manifestly blahdy awfull designs! | | 3VI, landmania(@)libero.it, 20.08.2007 This kind of wing shape was designed to reduce the lenght of landing gear and give the same ground clearance for a big diameter prop. | | charlie cussans, 26.03.2007 the blackburn firecrest has a sinilar wingshPE TO THE VOUGHT CORSAIR. Is this a coincidence or not? |
|
Do you have any comments about this aircraft ?
|
| |
