Miles Gemini
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miles Gemini
Wessex Boy,
Astonished to learn that there are any of these still flying.
I did what is now called the multi-engine rating on one in the early '50s. Like most Miles aircraft, the Gemini was quite nice to fly but it was no Twin Comanche! I can't remember all the figures but with the Cirrus Minor engines of 90hp each (some later production airframes were fitted with Gipsy Major 10's having 145hp), performance was less than electrifying and often bordered on the marginal at MTOW which was around 3000lbs.You had to keep your wits about you. Even at the time, there was a silly joke about not noticing an engine failure on take-off as 90hp was so little it wouldn't be missed. As far as I can recall, the VSI never went above 500ft/min, at least not going uphill but cruising speed was a reasonable 115kt or thereabouts and the range was exceptional for those days - over 900 miles if you could lean the mixture a bit.
With the short nose, (the integral landing light was considered rather sexy) cockpit visibility was excellent but forward vision in rain was somewhat impaired without the prop there to blow the stuff away. This left the side windows a bit obscured which was a pain as you needed to be able to see out to read the fuel gauges mounted on top of the wings. Tanks were behind the wheel well and engine; all in what at the time was a very swish, streamlined nacelle. It now looks rather quaint but was effective in reducing cabin noise which was quite low.
The main gear went up/down on an hydraulic system and it was a real feat to pump the gear up whilst maintaining a steady climb; a bit like patting your head and rubbing your tummy at the same time if you know what I mean, so you had to pay attention to the throttle friction nuts. A go-around was a nightmare! The rudders were unusually powerful and often could be used to counter an incipient ground loop without use of brakes. Oh! I could ramble on for hours . .
I you are able to wangle a ride in one, go for it! A very interesting aircraft by today's standards but I should be very wary of buying one. The wood framing with plywood covering was light and worked well in 1947 but I imagine that present maintenance costs would be stratospheric. Spares would be a nightmare, particularly in the case of the Blackburn engine and when I was tempted to take the plunge with one going cheap at Rochester in the '60s, there was some suspicion attached to the quality of horses used to make the glue . . . Fortunately, I did not buy it. But to preserve one as a non-flying exhibit would be tremendous fun.
Sadly, Miles, who had always sailed close to the wind financially, went tango uniform in the late 'forties, had an association with Handley Page and, I think, much later had some remnants to be found in the Beagle company. It was Lord Stansgate, a.k.a The Hon. Anthony Wedgwood Benn, a.k.a swinging Tony Benn who very neatly drove the last nails into the coffin of the British light aircraft industry before giving away very large sums of taxpayers money to a crook called de Lorean.
Next week, we shall take a look at the DH84 . . .
Astonished to learn that there are any of these still flying.
I did what is now called the multi-engine rating on one in the early '50s. Like most Miles aircraft, the Gemini was quite nice to fly but it was no Twin Comanche! I can't remember all the figures but with the Cirrus Minor engines of 90hp each (some later production airframes were fitted with Gipsy Major 10's having 145hp), performance was less than electrifying and often bordered on the marginal at MTOW which was around 3000lbs.You had to keep your wits about you. Even at the time, there was a silly joke about not noticing an engine failure on take-off as 90hp was so little it wouldn't be missed. As far as I can recall, the VSI never went above 500ft/min, at least not going uphill but cruising speed was a reasonable 115kt or thereabouts and the range was exceptional for those days - over 900 miles if you could lean the mixture a bit.
With the short nose, (the integral landing light was considered rather sexy) cockpit visibility was excellent but forward vision in rain was somewhat impaired without the prop there to blow the stuff away. This left the side windows a bit obscured which was a pain as you needed to be able to see out to read the fuel gauges mounted on top of the wings. Tanks were behind the wheel well and engine; all in what at the time was a very swish, streamlined nacelle. It now looks rather quaint but was effective in reducing cabin noise which was quite low.
The main gear went up/down on an hydraulic system and it was a real feat to pump the gear up whilst maintaining a steady climb; a bit like patting your head and rubbing your tummy at the same time if you know what I mean, so you had to pay attention to the throttle friction nuts. A go-around was a nightmare! The rudders were unusually powerful and often could be used to counter an incipient ground loop without use of brakes. Oh! I could ramble on for hours . .
I you are able to wangle a ride in one, go for it! A very interesting aircraft by today's standards but I should be very wary of buying one. The wood framing with plywood covering was light and worked well in 1947 but I imagine that present maintenance costs would be stratospheric. Spares would be a nightmare, particularly in the case of the Blackburn engine and when I was tempted to take the plunge with one going cheap at Rochester in the '60s, there was some suspicion attached to the quality of horses used to make the glue . . . Fortunately, I did not buy it. But to preserve one as a non-flying exhibit would be tremendous fun.
Sadly, Miles, who had always sailed close to the wind financially, went tango uniform in the late 'forties, had an association with Handley Page and, I think, much later had some remnants to be found in the Beagle company. It was Lord Stansgate, a.k.a The Hon. Anthony Wedgwood Benn, a.k.a swinging Tony Benn who very neatly drove the last nails into the coffin of the British light aircraft industry before giving away very large sums of taxpayers money to a crook called de Lorean.
Next week, we shall take a look at the DH84 . . .
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: England
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only ever seen one in the flesh.
T'was at Netherthorpe some 15 years ago. Performance can't have been that bad if it managed to get out of that field!
Can't remember the reg, but was covered in advertising for petrol/oil company. Can't remember which one..."Total", possibly?
The nice man who flew it treated us to some spirited low passes and wingovers when he left.
T'was at Netherthorpe some 15 years ago. Performance can't have been that bad if it managed to get out of that field!
Can't remember the reg, but was covered in advertising for petrol/oil company. Can't remember which one..."Total", possibly?
The nice man who flew it treated us to some spirited low passes and wingovers when he left.
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Takes me back to my time as a spotter at Newcastle in the early 1960s. Light aircraft visitors were just as likely to be Geminis, Proctors or Messengers as 172s or 175s. But most likely of all to be Austers.
Then they invented the Cherokee...
Then they invented the Cherokee...
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Warboys
Age: 55
Posts: 284
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks GQ!
I think there are 4 on the G register, I have seen 2 up for sale recently (around £35k)
I guessed that performance was not going to be their main strength, but they are a very, very pretty Aircraft
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...01&imgtype=jpg
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...02&imgtype=JPG
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...02&imgtype=jpg
I think there are 4 on the G register, I have seen 2 up for sale recently (around £35k)
I guessed that performance was not going to be their main strength, but they are a very, very pretty Aircraft
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...01&imgtype=jpg
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...02&imgtype=JPG
http://www.caa.co.uk/applicationmodu...02&imgtype=jpg
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In "BIG SKY".
Age: 84
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gemini.
You may joke about the shortage of power, and yes I have flown them. The Gipsy version was a lot more spritely and there was a Continental powered one as well.
But, find anything newer that can carry 4 people in relative comfort on 2x90hp??
Oh, did I forget the fact that it is fairly quiet and handles well.
Shell had one for years and Douglas Bader flew it all over the place, until they got a Beech Travelair. I saw him in Gibraltar with it.
But, find anything newer that can carry 4 people in relative comfort on 2x90hp??
Oh, did I forget the fact that it is fairly quiet and handles well.
Shell had one for years and Douglas Bader flew it all over the place, until they got a Beech Travelair. I saw him in Gibraltar with it.
>One came into leicester a while ago it is owned by the RAF chief marshall or ex chief marshall<
AVM Sir John Allison.RAF. Believe the aircraft was/is kept at RAF Bicester.
AVM Sir John Allison.RAF. Believe the aircraft was/is kept at RAF Bicester.
Luvverley!
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: --
Posts: 259
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw one a few years back at White Waltham. What a fabulous sight! Phoned my dad straight away to tell him about it, only for him to drag out his somewhat dusty logbook to discover he'd flown one too!
He was very impressed!
Foxy
He was very impressed!
Foxy
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"You may joke about the shortage of power, and yes I have flown them. The Gipsy version was a lot more spritely and there was a Continental powered one as well.
But, find anything newer that can carry 4 people in relative comfort on 2x90hp??"
Good heavens! I had no idea my little opus would generate so much interest!
I am unaware of a Continental powered variant. Was this a Woodley thing or a much later retrofit? The radial Continentals would have been too powerful so I imagine that it must have been a flat sawmill engine. I recently saw a DH114 with this type of conversion and it looked as ugly as hell. The Gemini was, by any standards, a pretty aircraft but to my mind, seemed to have an air of vulnerability. This probably is unjust and borne of lingering memories of practice engine failures after take-off. Also watching passengers like a hawk to make sure they did not step on the trailing flaps. I never flew one but I imagine the de Havilland engined types had a vastly superior performance.
The Gemini, like the Proctor, Messenger, Magister, Auster and a host of small production aircraft were very much products of their own time. Most were post-war designs or developments of wartime communications aircraft. Strangely, de Havilland did not continue their Moth series after the war. Rationing, National Service and a particularly austere post-war economy, not to mention the numbers of aircraft coming off military secondments, made life really difficult for British manufacturers. To some extent, they had a protected market in the Empire but the dissolution of this coincided with the burgeoning of American exports and with no support from successive governments, the industry just quietly slipped away to leave the field to Piper and Cessna.
And no, I know of nothing of later vintage that might be comparable (2 X 90hp) - I suppose the Apache might be a sort of contender but that was a dog to fly in comparison with the gentle, responsive and, yes, tender Gemini. But people saw things differently in those days; I mentioned the sexy landing light. The pants of a Miles Falcon or the spats of a Percival Gull were akin to the allure of a couple of straight seams on a pair of stockings . . . . . Perhaps it was just me (!) - but I have never been similarly stirred by any trans-Atlantic offering save the Beech and Lockheed twin-tails which were rather different animals anyway.
But in self defence, I should claim that my rose tinted glasses are not sufficiently strong to make the Prentice any less ugly than it was.
But, find anything newer that can carry 4 people in relative comfort on 2x90hp??"
Good heavens! I had no idea my little opus would generate so much interest!
I am unaware of a Continental powered variant. Was this a Woodley thing or a much later retrofit? The radial Continentals would have been too powerful so I imagine that it must have been a flat sawmill engine. I recently saw a DH114 with this type of conversion and it looked as ugly as hell. The Gemini was, by any standards, a pretty aircraft but to my mind, seemed to have an air of vulnerability. This probably is unjust and borne of lingering memories of practice engine failures after take-off. Also watching passengers like a hawk to make sure they did not step on the trailing flaps. I never flew one but I imagine the de Havilland engined types had a vastly superior performance.
The Gemini, like the Proctor, Messenger, Magister, Auster and a host of small production aircraft were very much products of their own time. Most were post-war designs or developments of wartime communications aircraft. Strangely, de Havilland did not continue their Moth series after the war. Rationing, National Service and a particularly austere post-war economy, not to mention the numbers of aircraft coming off military secondments, made life really difficult for British manufacturers. To some extent, they had a protected market in the Empire but the dissolution of this coincided with the burgeoning of American exports and with no support from successive governments, the industry just quietly slipped away to leave the field to Piper and Cessna.
And no, I know of nothing of later vintage that might be comparable (2 X 90hp) - I suppose the Apache might be a sort of contender but that was a dog to fly in comparison with the gentle, responsive and, yes, tender Gemini. But people saw things differently in those days; I mentioned the sexy landing light. The pants of a Miles Falcon or the spats of a Percival Gull were akin to the allure of a couple of straight seams on a pair of stockings . . . . . Perhaps it was just me (!) - but I have never been similarly stirred by any trans-Atlantic offering save the Beech and Lockheed twin-tails which were rather different animals anyway.
But in self defence, I should claim that my rose tinted glasses are not sufficiently strong to make the Prentice any less ugly than it was.
twin 90hp
I have as my long term project the restoration of twin 90hp Pobjoy powered Short s16 scion. At one time it was claimed to be "spritly" with 5 or 6 up and it did manage a 600 foot circuit when one engine died with only 4 up.
The aeroplane is still some time away from completion but this last year a milestone was reached with the first Pobjoy running. Prior to WW2 a total of 180 hp was considered quite a lot!
At any rate I must say I prefer the shapes and sounds of old aeroplanes.
The aeroplane is still some time away from completion but this last year a milestone was reached with the first Pobjoy running. Prior to WW2 a total of 180 hp was considered quite a lot!
At any rate I must say I prefer the shapes and sounds of old aeroplanes.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Norfolk, England
Age: 58
Posts: 1,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was impressed with the Percival Vega Gull that I first saw at a PFA rally years ago, and have seen many times since. The performance was as I recall from chatting to the owner, far superior to anything American with the same hp even then, let alone back when it was produced. All that, plus ..... It looked gorgeous!
SS ( a confirmed vintage aircraft nut! )
SS ( a confirmed vintage aircraft nut! )
Last edited by shortstripper; 21st Jul 2007 at 06:25. Reason: to add a picture
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In "BIG SKY".
Age: 84
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miles Gemini.
Gipsy Queen,
The prototype G-AGOS was fitted with 2 Continental C-125-2 flat 6's at one time, and it was modified by the Mikes company at Woodley. How it flew I have no idea, and have not read any pilot reports on it. It had straight exhausts so was probably quite noisy.
The Gipsy Major powered ones were quite noisy as well as they also had straight exhausts. I was involved with a Jack Ried at Elstree in fitting his with an exhaust manifold from a Magister and adding the rearmost section of a Dove exhaust to it. It was a cone shape with lots of holes to release the exhast gas. Worked well and was a lot quieter. Not sure the ARB knew too much about it??
There was a Miles M.75 Aries that was a Gemini with 155hp Cirrus Major 111's, and a couple of Gemini 3A's were converted to that standard. I believe "Flight" magazine had one of them??? They had bigger fins to give better directional control with the extra power.
"Scion", I had forgotten about the Scion with its wonderful little Pobjoys, but there was also the Miles Aerovan which initially had 90hp Cirrus engines.
Speedbird 48.
The prototype G-AGOS was fitted with 2 Continental C-125-2 flat 6's at one time, and it was modified by the Mikes company at Woodley. How it flew I have no idea, and have not read any pilot reports on it. It had straight exhausts so was probably quite noisy.
The Gipsy Major powered ones were quite noisy as well as they also had straight exhausts. I was involved with a Jack Ried at Elstree in fitting his with an exhaust manifold from a Magister and adding the rearmost section of a Dove exhaust to it. It was a cone shape with lots of holes to release the exhast gas. Worked well and was a lot quieter. Not sure the ARB knew too much about it??
There was a Miles M.75 Aries that was a Gemini with 155hp Cirrus Major 111's, and a couple of Gemini 3A's were converted to that standard. I believe "Flight" magazine had one of them??? They had bigger fins to give better directional control with the extra power.
"Scion", I had forgotten about the Scion with its wonderful little Pobjoys, but there was also the Miles Aerovan which initially had 90hp Cirrus engines.
Speedbird 48.
2 Pobjoys? Is that all?
The Short S31 had 4 of the little things:
The Short S31 had 4 of the little things:
A half scale Stirling. It was later scrapped, I understand.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Looking for the signals square at LHR
Posts: 236
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortstripper,
Thank you for the picture of what, undeniably, is a very beautiful aircraft. Oh! it's back to nylons again!!! So much better looking than the Proctor which superseded it and was seamless stockings by comparison. I have always thought that well-engineered metal-framed windscreen/cabin windows looked so much nicer than the blown Perspex ones. Puss and Leopard Moths come to mind . . The Vega Gull is a cracker.
Some years ago, I had the privilege of sitting in Jean Batten's Gull before it was restored and hoisted into the roof at Auckland Airport.
Speedbird48,
Thanks to you too for the info. I presume from the designation that the Continentals were 125hp; that seems a relatively small increase in power for what I suspect was an appreciable increase in weight given that they were six cylinders and the Cirrus Minor was pretty light.
These threads can be terrible time-wasters but such fun! I too had forgotten the Scion with it's little Pobjoy engines. There can't be many old fogeys like me who have a Monospar ST25 in their log. This also had a couple of Pobjoys which, if I remember correctly, were the 90hp "Niagara", being a souped-up version of the "R" type used in the Comper 7. I always thought their "art deco" front plates rather quaint. They were very smooth under load but the reduction gears used to chatter a bit at idle but they were unusually efficient. Forgive me if I get the figures wrong - it's been a long time - but the "R" type gave 90hp from something like 2,75 litres and the "Niagara 5" which I think was the last of the Pobjoys, produced 130hp from less than 3,5 litres. That's a lot better than today although I suspect TBOHs might be a little shorter. I always thought that leaf spring holding down the rocker covers was a clever idea.
And as one things tends to lead to another, mention of the "Aerovan" reminded me of the unbeautiful Edgar Percival "Fossicker", "Golddigger" or some such name but that was a single (Gipsy Six?).
Enough of this but thanks for the memories . . . time to get back to the C150.
Thank you for the picture of what, undeniably, is a very beautiful aircraft. Oh! it's back to nylons again!!! So much better looking than the Proctor which superseded it and was seamless stockings by comparison. I have always thought that well-engineered metal-framed windscreen/cabin windows looked so much nicer than the blown Perspex ones. Puss and Leopard Moths come to mind . . The Vega Gull is a cracker.
Some years ago, I had the privilege of sitting in Jean Batten's Gull before it was restored and hoisted into the roof at Auckland Airport.
Speedbird48,
Thanks to you too for the info. I presume from the designation that the Continentals were 125hp; that seems a relatively small increase in power for what I suspect was an appreciable increase in weight given that they were six cylinders and the Cirrus Minor was pretty light.
These threads can be terrible time-wasters but such fun! I too had forgotten the Scion with it's little Pobjoy engines. There can't be many old fogeys like me who have a Monospar ST25 in their log. This also had a couple of Pobjoys which, if I remember correctly, were the 90hp "Niagara", being a souped-up version of the "R" type used in the Comper 7. I always thought their "art deco" front plates rather quaint. They were very smooth under load but the reduction gears used to chatter a bit at idle but they were unusually efficient. Forgive me if I get the figures wrong - it's been a long time - but the "R" type gave 90hp from something like 2,75 litres and the "Niagara 5" which I think was the last of the Pobjoys, produced 130hp from less than 3,5 litres. That's a lot better than today although I suspect TBOHs might be a little shorter. I always thought that leaf spring holding down the rocker covers was a clever idea.
And as one things tends to lead to another, mention of the "Aerovan" reminded me of the unbeautiful Edgar Percival "Fossicker", "Golddigger" or some such name but that was a single (Gipsy Six?).
Enough of this but thanks for the memories . . . time to get back to the C150.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Somewhere near CPT
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was lucky enough to fly G-AKKH last year. Beautiful aircraft ! Very strange having the engine RPM gauges on the engines themselves - makes for a very wide scan !
Only 4 left now I believe. Three in the UK and one in New Zealand
Random
One came into leicester a while ago it is owned by the RAF chief marshall or ex chief marshall<
AVM Sir John Allison.RAF. Believe the aircraft was/is kept at RAF Bicester.
True ! Still kept there. That's G-AKKH.
Only 4 left now I believe. Three in the UK and one in New Zealand
Random
One came into leicester a while ago it is owned by the RAF chief marshall or ex chief marshall<
AVM Sir John Allison.RAF. Believe the aircraft was/is kept at RAF Bicester.
True ! Still kept there. That's G-AKKH.
Last edited by Randomtox; 25th Jul 2007 at 08:39. Reason: More info
