|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 2, 2019 19:07:00 GMT 12
That has been debated elsewhere before and James Kightly insists it was named after the place Wellington in Somerset, England, following the convention at the time of naming bombers after British cities and towns. But I would love to have it confirmed because New Zealand was very early in on the ordering of the type and I have to wonder if during the political discussions when they ordered Vildebeests did some Whitehall johnny or a Vickers employee hit on the idea of enticing our Wellington johnnies with a name they recognised.
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jul 2, 2019 19:43:08 GMT 12
Well you have the official basis that you give that aligns with the official naming scheme, then you have various reasons behind the selection.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 2, 2019 19:48:44 GMT 12
Yes exactly. I see no other reason why a very small town in Somerset was chosen than to evoke a larger town known to a potential buyer spending up large on the manufacturer's other products.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 5, 2019 11:43:18 GMT 12
Mark McGuire emailed me the following for this thread:
Hi Dave
I came across this information in a Post and Telegraph file in Archives NZ ( Archives code R21678680). In August 1939 the Controller of Civil Aviation informed P&T that the following commercial call signs had been allocated to the first six Wellingtons, ZM-ZAB to ZM-ZAG.
Kind regards
Mark McGuire
|
|
|
Post by fwx on Jul 5, 2019 11:55:34 GMT 12
Yes, the call signs are included in the crew lists for the 1st Mobile Flight that NZLO Sid Wallingford sent on 15 August 1939. - Archives NZ.
|
|
|
Post by chinapilot on Jul 7, 2019 0:59:31 GMT 12
Dave - think the name has nothing to do with NZ ordering it or even British towns/cities. As I understand it the name comes from the Duke of Wellington - Vickers named the Wellesley after one of the Dukes of Wellington and it seemed to be a Vickers convention.
As for where they might have been utilised given different circumstances - with RAAF Hudson’s going to Malaysia and Canadian troops sent to Hong Kong a few months before the Jap attack to ‘boost the HK public confidence’ they may have found themselves at Kai Tak...
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 7, 2019 9:56:06 GMT 12
It was the British Air Ministry that approved and sometimes gave names to aircraft that entered service with the RAF, and they had naming conventions - trainers for example were themed after education (Oxford, Harvard, Tutor, Prefect,etc). Bombers were named after places (Lancaster, Halifax, Stirling, Whitley, Hampden, Lincoln, Warwick, Washington, Boston, Hudson and Wellington are all place names.) Perhaps Vickers selected the name ad for their own purposes it was after the Duke, but that would not have been the reason the RAF approved the name as their convention was for a place name. So Vickers selected a name that also fitted the RAF's requirement. Not sure who the Duke of Vildebeest was though. I still reckon our Wellingtons would have gone nowhere near Singapore or Asia in 1941/42.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 7, 2019 11:13:52 GMT 12
Has anybody consulted the big book ("the Bible", the title of which I cannot recall at the moment) on naming conventions for British military aircraft, by Gordon Wansbrough-White? Unfortunately I do not have a copy of this most useful reference to hand, but I am in no doubt that the Wellington was named after the "Iron Duke" (as was the Wellesley). As has also been mentioned above, several other British Bombers of the era were named after the "seats" of various titled gentlemen such as the Beaufort (not strictly a bomber as such), and Blenheim, or part of the title itself. The "rule" about bombers being named after place names was, I think, fairly liberally interpreted, as is explained in this book. As with so much in British history, class and hierarchy infiltrated everything. Anyway, unlike the naming of the EE Canberra, the Wellington bomber was certainly NOT named after OUR capital. Despite the fact that there were laid-down procedures for applying names to British military aircraft, the ingenuity of the Nomenclature Committee knew no bounds. David D
|
|
|
Post by ErrolC on Jul 7, 2019 12:10:32 GMT 12
I'd thought Beaufort come under land-based maritime reconnaissance (like the Anson) rather than bomber, so after the RN hydrographer. Maybe another inventive application.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 7, 2019 12:29:20 GMT 12
Well I am just repeating what I have read when this topic has been mass-debated at length on the FlyPast forum.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 7, 2019 19:33:58 GMT 12
Well, I would say that any surviving records of the Air Ministry's Aircraft Nomenclature Committee would easily trump any debates conducted on an enthusiasts forum using nil primary research material. But then I have never seen ANY records of that Committee (whereas Wansbrough-White has) so I cannot vouch as to their content or completeness. This subject has yet to run its course, and that Wansbrough-White book has yet to be inspected for any clues. David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 7, 2019 19:51:12 GMT 12
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 9, 2019 18:38:56 GMT 12
Well, I have read every post on that Flypast site, and nobody seemed very struck on the idea that the Wellington was named to honour a tiny town in Somerset, in fact the "Iron Duke" was a very clear favourite. Wigram has a copy of that Gordon Wansbrough-White "bible", but I failed to locate it today - it is proving bloody hard to find for some reason. Will have another look later in week. David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 9, 2019 19:26:09 GMT 12
That is not the only debate I have seen. It must have been somewhere else, and I am sure James Kightly held that view having researched it.
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 9, 2019 19:27:37 GMT 12
I am not saying it's right. Just saying what I have seen claimed. Frankly I don't care what it was named after.
Although I know for sure it was nicknamed Wimpy after J. Wellington Wimpy from Popeye.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 20, 2019 14:21:44 GMT 12
Have finally got around to checking on the Wansbrough-White book ("Names with Wings") but sadly could find no mention of the Aircraft Nomenclature Committee (or whatever it was called) so have come to the sad conclusion that it is entirely possible that the minutes of that obscure body may have been purged partially or completely at some time in the past. Strangely, so far as I can tell, Wansbrough-White never even mentioned the Committee anywhere in his book (but I did not read it all by any means, just what I thought were the "obvious places"). Thus it may be that we will NEVER know why the Committee decided to assign this or that name to any particular type of aircraft, nor why they chose that name from the short-list, nor even the significance of the name itself. Apparently some surviving company archives have provided a few glimpses into the workings of the selection process, and knowing the various versions of the naming "rules" (which are included in the book) can provide much insight, but I fear that many of the mysteries of seemingly strange choices or inappropriate names (according to the rules pertaining at the time) will remain just that (speculation aside). I just hope that a very curious person might one day accidentally come across a faded and detached page among the archive lists of Air Ministry files, headed up something along the lines of "Miscellaneous committees, NOT included in Main Listing", and therein find the only surviving record of that very shy committee! Even should such a miracle occur, it is just as likely that these minutes turn out to be of that enragingly vague type that includes absolutely nothing of any interest at all! (Example: "Members of the Committee assembled in the Board Room at 1300 hours, and after an extraordinarily heavy schedule of 19 agenda items, many of them of a rather complex nature, the meeting was called to a close at 1500 hours. The Chairman was, as usual, heartily thanked by all present for his wise counsel. Most of those still present gratefully retired to the local hostelry at 1500 hours for light refreshments.") David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 20, 2019 17:22:06 GMT 12
In the vane of 'what ifs' for this period, here is something I have never heard before. When the New Zealand Government ordered the Wellingtons and the original batch of Airspeed Oxfords, they were reported as having also ordered a third type, the Bristol Bolingbroke! (This is the Blenheim Mk IV's original name, and later when Fairchild produced licence-built Blenheim IV's they used the original name Bolingbroke too).
AUCKLAND STAR, 25 AUGUST 1937
NEW 'PLANES.
STATE PURCHASES.
AIR DEFENCE OF N.Z.
FORMIDABLE MACHINES.
THREE TYPES ON ORDER.
(By Telegraph—Special to "Star.") WELLINGTON, this day.
It is believed here that the full plan for stronger defence, portion of which was announced by the Minister of Defence, the Hon. F. Jones, last Saturday, is not likely to be revealed before Parliament meets on September 9, and that, because of the large expenditure involved, disclosure of it may be delayed until presentation of the Budget.
Meantime, however, it is possible to reveal something of what is being done to improve air defence. Three types of 'planes are being purchased by the Government. The first of these is the Airspeed Oxford, a superior type of Airspeed Envoy. This comes first in the list for the reason that it is a type of advanced training machine. The Oxford is a twin-engined monoplane, and may be regarded as a development of the Envoy, which has proved successful for civil transport. It differs from that machine, however, in several features, notably in the forward portion of the fuselage, which allows dual controls to be fitted. An Armstrong-Whitworth gun turret is fitted aft of the wing, and a light bomb load may be carried for training purposes.
Composite Construction. The engines are two Armstrong-Siddeley Cheetahs, which drive D.H. variable pitch airscrews. A retractable undercarriage and trailing edge flaps are features of the 'plane. It has a top speed of about 200 m.p.h., and is of composite construction.
The second type of machine to be purchased, according to existing plans, is the Bristol Blenheim. This, unlike the Airspeed Oxford, is not in the "new and experimental" class, but is of proven performance. It is probably the fastest medium bomber in the world, with a speed of about 279 m.p.h. It is a low-wing monoplane with twin engines, and was evolved from a pattern machine purchased by Lord Wakefield and presented to the British Government. According to one report the machine which will come to New Zealand will be not the Bristol Blenheim, but a later edition known as the Bristol Bolingbroke. This may prove to be the case because of delay in getting the machines delivered. The Bristol Bolingbroke, even the name of which is not yet publicly announced, is a "hush-hush" machine, and all that is known is that it is a still more formidable version of what is, at the moment, Britain's fastest bomber. It is believed that it will, among other things, eliminate the blind spots of the present machine due to the fixed position of the gun.
Range a Secret. The third type to be purchased is the Vickers Wellington, a long-range twin-engined mid-wing monoplane with a long wingspan, and capable of travelling at great heights. Its range remains a secret, but it could easily hop the Tasman Sea. It falls into the heavy bomber class, has a speed of over 200 m.p.h. It is altogether a formidable machine, and one which will make air co-operation with Australia, or even defence of the Singapore Base, something within the ability of this country.
There will be no lack of personnel to fly these machines. The number of would-be recruits responding to recent appeals made that clear. Trained personnel's another matter, but that is being remedied, and the "rush" order is Oxfords is likely to be for the Airspeed Oxford.
Ground organisation is being planned under the direction of a special officer who recently arrived on loan from the British Air Ministry. One aspect of the new ground organisation is the development of the centrally situated aerodrome at Ohakea, near Palmerston North, as a central base for the North Island, with a possible additional field at Auckland and extensions at Wigram to meet the new needs there.
|
|
|
Post by davidd on Jul 21, 2019 10:07:46 GMT 12
I had forgotten about this mention of the Blenheim/Bolingbroke at the time of the announcement of the purchase of the Wellingtons and Oxfords, and it seems likely that the Blenheim was also under discussion at the time, as a possible candidate to meet the recommendations of Cochrane's report. It is known that this man (the "special officer" mentioned above) strongly favoured the Wellington because of its generally superior performance, particularly as regards range and bomb load, and possible also its advertised superior armament (which turned out not to be as effective as first hoped). New Zealand certainly was NOT intending to buy two types of bombers to re-equip the RNZAF. Remember at this time, Australia had on order (and may have been receiving the first of) 48 Ansons to defend its shores, and Canada, so far as I know, had nothing, although it was thinking along similar lines to the Anzacs, and was even considering building modern British combat aircraft, including bombers. Australia soon realized that the Anson was a very limited "bomber", and was considering purchasing something with modern performance with initial thoughts being given to the as yet unbuilt Beaufort, although later they ordered a considerable number of Hudsons when they became available, as an interim measure. David D
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Jul 21, 2019 14:18:57 GMT 12
It would make a great "What If" though, Blenheim Mk IV's in RNZAF pacific colours.
|
|
|
Post by tbf25o4 on Jul 21, 2019 14:29:28 GMT 12
David, don't forget that in early 1942 we were also looking at getting Beauforts from Australia, and had some aircrew over there training on them including George Gudsell. Fortunately for us we got the aircraft from the USN as the aussie beauforts at that time were fraught with mechanical difficulties.
|
|