World War 1 Plane

[ExpatChris]

Hello All

Can anybody tell me which aircraft is in the photo

Photo was recently unearthed and that handsome chap is a relative

Photo was taken as part of Royal Flying Corps and around WW1 era

Any information would be helpful

Thanks in anticipation
https://cimg4.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/2000x1504/image_09f681818f9d8276976fe98182914d346ac851ff.jpg

[512]

I think it could be an Avro 500, but I am not absolutely certain. Someone with better knowledge will probably along soon.

512

[ExpatChris]

Thanks very much

[sandringham1]

I am also not certain but I believe it to be a French Coudron, the fuselage appears to be sitting above the wing on short struts, the lower wing is short with just a small amount of the angled interplane strut visible, the scalloped trailing edge is correct but the cowling is not like any I can find on a Coudron and it might even be a twin engine version.

Richard

[Tashritu]

Howard Leigh’s Planes of the Great War has an illustration with this cowling, engine mounting and engine.
I think it is a Nieuport two seater. Made by Soc. Anonyme des Etablissements Nieuport.
The text says a hole was left in the top wing so that the passenger could stand up and fire over the air screw. This procedure caused the machine to lose height, as it was underpowered. For this reason it did not long remain in service. This two seater was the forerunner of all the successful Nieuport biplanes
Nick.

[The Baron]

The engine is a 7 cylinder rotary, most probably a Gnome. My guess is it may be an early Sopwith Tabloid circa 1913/1914.
On second thought, the lower wing fuselage don't look right for a Tabloid.

[clareprop]

I think I'd go with Avro 500 as well..possibly a Duigan varient if there's any Australian connection.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_500#/media/File:Avro_500.jpg


https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/early-aviation-avro-500-pilot-404-219742755

Credits to Wikipedia & Worth Point

[DaveReidUK]

I think I'd go with Avro 500 as well..possibly a Duigan varient if there's any Australian connection.

I agree - Gnome-powered Avro 500.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1044x463/avro_500_3061bf0006d5a7c4bb30a4dc8dc4bb65ecdcf867.jpg

Avro 500 (http://flyingmachines.ru/Site2/Crafts/Craft28733.htm)

[washoutt]

The engine cowling side plating of the first picture is a bit waving, not the straight line as in the second picture.. But the trailing edge of the Avro 500 is straight, while the unknown aircraft is scalloped. Also, the lower wing seems to be below the fuselage, while the Avro 500 is attached to the fuselage. So the mystery remains, I think.

[treadigraph]

The RAF BE-3, BE-4 and BE-7 look very similar in design, wonder if it is one of those - I can't see a pic that shows the front cowling on the 4 or 7.

[clareprop]

washoutt - if you haven't already, take a look at the second link I posted above. Although it seems the wing is attached to the fuselage side, I think there may also be a gap under the front fuselage. The ports behind the propeller look identical.

[Quemerford]

In case you don't know, this photo is the standard format taken for flyers obtaining their Royal Aero Club 'ticket' and so if you don't have it for this airman, there may be more info to be had, such as examining officer, date etc. TOM Sopwith himself was an examiner for the RAeC.

[The Baron]

Avro 500 , and a real rarity from the earliest days of flight.

[Haraka]

The scalloped trailing edge (often indicative of a wire , not wood or steel tube member) is not typical Avro.
What is the member coming down to the lower left corner of the image? Possibly going to a skid? If so , not part of a central skid assembly as on the Avro.
It appears ( although it might be an illusion) that there is an under fuselage cabane down to the lower wing. Again, if so, not Avro 500.
Adding these features together they would all correspond to a possible Caudron G. II trainer variant, of which one at least went to the RNAS.

[MReyn24050]

The engine cowling side plating of the first picture is a bit waving, not the straight line as in the second picture.. But the trailing edge of the Avro 500 is straight, while the unknown aircraft is scalloped. Also, the lower wing seems to be below the fuselage, while the Avro 500 is attached to the fuselage. So the mystery remains, I think.

I agree with "washout". Whilst the engine installation is similar to the Avro 500 there is something odd about the lower wing. It would appear to pass below the fuselage. If one looks behind the gentleman's left lower arm there appears to be a gap between the fuselage and wing. similar to the B.E.4 wing installation. However I believe that whilst the B.E.4 had a 80 h.p. Gnome it had a four-bladed prop. .

[sandringham1]

The scalloped trailing edge (often indicative of a wire , not wood member) is not typical Avro.
What is the member coming down to the lower left corner of the image? Possibly going to a skid? If so , not part of a central skid assembly as on the Avro.
It appears ( although it might be an illusion) that there is an under fuselage cabane down to the lower wing. Again, if so, not Avro 500.
Adding these features together they would all correspond to a possible Caudron G. II trainer, of which one at least went to the RNAS
Thank you Haraka, as I said in post #4 its a Caudron type G, https://picryl.com/media/caudron-biplane .

Richard

[PDR1]

Thank you Haraka, as I said in post #4 its a Caudron type G, https://picryl.com/media/caudron-biplane .

Richard

Are you sure? I can't find any pictures showing a Caudron with the Avro's cowling

PDR

[Fourteenbore]

Speaking from total guesswork, I'll buy the Caudron. To the left of the pilot's arm there is a strut angling left, which seems to me likely to be the support for the wing skid on the Caudron.

[sandringham1]

Are you sure? I can't find any pictures showing a Caudron with the Avro's cowling

PDR

You are right PDR I also havn't found a picture either, I am going by the gap between the fuselage and lower wing, the scalloped trailing edge, the just visible 45' strut at the far left of the picture that went from the short lower wing tip to the longer upper wing tip, and the bit of strut that is mostly obscured by the persons right hand/arm, it went out to the forward tip of the landing skid.
The cowling is in a style fitted to several aircraft types using rotary engines, the Sopwith Tabloid being one and some Caudrons were build in the UK with Gnomes so a cowl of that style would be an option.

Richard

[A681001]

Similar thread though can't see picture , may be some info of use
How can I get some help identifying an aircraft? [Archive] - The Aerodrome Forum (http://www.theaerodrome.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-37274.html)

[The Baron]

Just had another idea. The Martinsyde S.1 had a 80hp Gnome and had the same cowl. It also has scalloped trailing edges. Thoughts?

[megan]

I am an engineer and the word "Plane" used to a flying machine is the most grating word I ever hearI guess you wouldn't be interested then in knowing what a "plane captain" is then? The navy equivalent of a USAF or US Army "crew chief". Plane has become common usage these days in the business, you'll find it in most dictionaries. ;)

https://www.2ndmaw.marines.mil/News/Article-View/Article/699222/plane-captains-provide-final-safety-check-before-every-flight/

[clareprop]

The word plane has so many other meanings.

So has the word 'engineer' :E

Just had another idea. The Martinsyde S.1 had a 80hp Gnome and had the same cowl.

I was wavering a bit but looking at those intakes (?) behind the propeller, they are quite different on the S1 - smaller, rounder and four rather than two

[Fourteenbore]

As an aside, I wonder what sudden piece of lateral thinking made someone think it good idea to bolt the crankshaft to the aeroplane and the propeller to the crankcase.

[PDR1]

So has the word 'engineer' :E


Indeed. As far as I am concerned this title should be legally restricted to those holding either I.Eng or C.Eng registration or Washington/Sydney Accord alternatives (although I would probably accept Eur.Ing and possibly the colonial PE registrations as equivalent).

PDR

[PDR1]

As an aside, I wonder what sudden piece of lateral thinking made someone think it good idea to bolt the crankshaft to the aeroplane and the propeller to the crankcase.

It was actually quite a good solution to the cooling problem. Rotary engines are self-cooling (that's rather the point) as well as being lighter through not having a flywheel. As specific power outputs increased cooling became a major concern (especially where total-loss splash lubrication was used). Primitive metallurgy and immature understanding of where the heat would accumulate, coupled to VERY primitive understanding of the aerodynamics of cooling ducts, severely limited the maximum power, but a rotary engine addressed most of these problems by putting constant wind over the cylinders. Too see just how far this got I suggest looking up the history of the ABC Dragonfly radial, whose copper-plated cylinder head finds would glow cherry red at high power settings. Liquid-cooled engines worked much better, but were heavier, more complex and had more components to fail.

As the science improved the introduction of better metals, better fin layouts (more focus on the heads where the heat is than the cylinders where it isn't), recirculating oil lubrication with oil coolers and MUCH better understanding of how convection cooling works led to better cowl/duct designs, innovations like the Townend Ring and the NACA Long-Chord cowl, made high power radials more practicable and thus obsoleted the rotary.

The heavy flywheels needed by pre-rotary engines became less necessary as decent cam profiles and ignition curves were developed, together with the general move to higher rpm (for more power). And of course the use of bigger, heavier and geared propellers contributed as well.

PDR

[MReyn24050]

Sandringham 1 you stated I am going by the gap between the fuselage and lower wing, the scalloped trailing edge, the just visible 45' strut at the far left of the picture that went from the short lower wing tip to the longer upper wing tip, and the bit of strut that is mostly obscured by the persons right hand/arm, it went out to the forward tip of the landing skid.The cowling is in a style fitted to several aircraft types using rotary engines, the Sopwith Tabloid being one and some Caudrons were build in the UK with Gnomes so a cowl of that style would be an option.

Whilst I agree with your comments regarding the similarity to the Caudron G3's wing, scalloped trailing edge etc i have yet to find a photograph of a RFC or RNAS Caudron G3 where the fuselage is mounted above the lower wing. In the Windsock Datafile No 94 on the Caudron G3 there is a photograph on page 15 of a Danish G3 and the caption states "Denmark's only G3 was unusual in that it is a G3 with the nacelle mounted above the lower wing..." .I have searched J M Bruce book "The Aeroplanes of the Royal Flying Corps" and Own Thetford book "British Naval Aircraft since 1912.and all photographs show the lower wing abuts against the bottom of the fuselage nacelle.The only photograph of a fuselage nacelle above the lower wing is that of Caudron No 311 obtained by the War Office in may 1913. J M Bruce states that this aircraft until 1st April when following an adverse report by the Squadron it was condemned.was used by No 4 Squadron The aircraft in the photograph could of course possibly be Caudron No 311. although the photograph published of the aircraft after acceptance by Scarborough has no cowling fitted.
Just a thought could it possibly a RNAS Coudron G.IV,, a twin engined derivative of the G.3, of which i understand they had 55 delivered?

[FlightlessParrot]

Aeroplane, Aircraft or the American Airplane that I will accept. Terminlogy is everything!.I am an engineer and the word "Plane" used to a flying machine is the most grating word I ever hear. The word plane has so many other meanings. Woodworking tool, Astrology, etc.

Ah yes, once recently when I had chosen not to travel by railway train, I was vexed to discover that my motorcar would not start. However, I was able to use my cellular telephone to summon a taxicab to the railway station and adopt my previously eschewed mode of transportation. Life is so much more satisfying when one adopts unabbreviated nomenclature, especially when one avoids inappropriate capitalisation (or use of litterae notabiliores if one is not writing in a minuscule script).

[Herod]

"It's an aeroplane, Mr. Bader"

[clareprop]

summon a taxicab

Sir! If you are referring to a Hackney Carriage, please say so. This hysterical inclination to use modern argot is displeasing in the extreme.

[Pontius Navigator]

Sir! If you are referring to a Hackney Carriage, please say so. This hysterical inclination to use modern argot is displeasing in the extreme.
or Madam. .

[Haraka]

There's been more thread drift on this site than in the seat of an old pair of long johns.......(And it was a Caudron G .II BTW):)

[DaveReidUK]

And it was a Caudron G .II BTW)

What do you base that conclusion on ?

[FlightlessParrot]

Sir! If you are referring to a Hackney Carriage, please say so. This hysterical inclination to use modern argot is displeasing in the extreme.
Alas, I have spent too long in Her Majesty's overseas dominions. Which reminds me, I must order another case of Angostura Bitters.

[Haraka]

What do you base that conclusion on ?

Structurally assessed elimination of other contenders. .

[PDR1]

"When you have eliminated all the possible whatever remains (no matter how improbable) must be speculative assumption" (Barret Homes, 1878)

Caudrons seemed to have a wide variety of engines - possibly adapting batches to suit whatever engines were available. My wife's great uncle was an RFC pilot - hanging in my study I have a propeller blade with several pictures set into it. One is clearly a Caudron, but this one seems to have a non-rotary engine:

https://i.postimg.cc/G2WbgJRv/IMG-20200823-143943.jpg

Other pictures on the prop include a vickers gunbus and a Sopwith 1-1/2 strutter.

PDR

[DaveReidUK]

Structurally assessed elimination of other contenders. .

Ah, right. How many do we have to eliminate before we can make a stab in the dark ? :O

[PDR1]

Can we start with Dominic Cummings?

PDR

[Haraka]

Ah, right. How many do we have to eliminate before we can make a stab in the dark ? :O

Well, what other alternative types do you suggest can be reasonably postulated and why? :)
Note PDR's picture and reasoned comment..

[DaveReidUK]

Well, what other alternative types do you suggest can be reasonably postulated and why? :)
Note PDR's picture and reasoned comment..

PDR's comment was indeed reasoned

Caudrons seemed to have a wide variety of engines - possibly adapting batches to suit whatever engines were available.

but I don't think it was intended to be exhaustive.

[PDR1]

but I don't think it was intended to be exhaustive.

Indeed not. But it's also worth remembering that military standardisation of types was something that started during WW1 (part of which gave birth to the AID and the requirement for interchangable parts). In the early part of the was RFC training units literally bought aircraft as required from any of dozens of local suppliers, many of which vanished without trace after delivering less than a dozen aircraft. These days that would pose a support/sustainment nightmare, but those were simpler times and the RFC technical cadres included skills in trades that could manufacture any needed parts at squadron level in much the same way that warships could make parts from raw materials when at sea. As a result it was quite feasible to have unique aircraft in regular service (especially away from the front line units). So it probably isn't possible to identify a single aircraft by elimination from a closed set of possibles.

PDR

[Haraka]

Absolutely agreed and by no means were all these variations photographed. Early uncowled rotary engined tractor aeroplanes were problematical operationally for a pilot with all the Castor Oil and other excreta being flung out through 360 degrees , including over the top of the coaming in to his face. The cowling was a means of containing this and one would expect a variety of field mods to achieve this. Hence its structure should not be necessarily taken as an essential recognition feature.
In this instance the scalloped t/e pretty well excludes Avro ( steel tube member giving the Avro straightness) and most British manufacturers by 1914, The evident sesquiplane layout also is not Avro 500, but both features are typical Caudron.
The skid layout is not Avro ( although later on a few 500 s were converted }., but again agrees with Caudron.
The lower cabane pretty well drives it to be a Caudron GII .as distinct from a GIII.
I cannot think of any other service contemporary type that would fit the basic airframe recognition criteria apparent in the image.
But perhaps somebody else can come up with a constructive alternative?
(Failing that, I think the balance of possibilities strongly supports the GII assertion)

[PPRuNe Towers]

Following on from PDR's mention of RFC/RAF technical trades my grandfather was a White Metal tradesman but rather ran just creating engine bearings his skill in metal meant he specialised in the one off fittings created in the factories without drawings or measurements passed on to purchasers. In one of the war museums you can see the tradesmans' wooden caravan where they did all the metalwork.

As a reservist he was called up for WW2, escaped from France in the back of a Fairey Battle and then spent the rest of the war on civvy hours doing the tear downs and analysis of failed radial engines sent to RAF Sealand as a central analysis point.

Rather good with his hands and spent the years between the wars doing the stained glass in St Asaph cathedral and then called in to do the ceramic cladding of the original Mersey tunnel.

Rob

[clareprop]

(Failing that, I think the balance of possibilities strongly supports the GII assertion)

Possible....apart from the images available strongly suggesting it's an Avro 500...

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/early-aviation-avro-500-pilot-404-219742755

Again, courtesy Worthpoint.

[Haraka]

Possible....apart from the images available strongly suggesting it's an Avro 500...

https://www.worthpoint.com/worthopedia/early-aviation-avro-500-pilot-404-219742755

Again, courtesy Worthpoint.

All discussed earlier in the thread...

[FlightlessParrot]

Given the date of this aerodyne (at the time still a significant distinction), it might be technically appropriate to call it a tractor (at the time an important distinction).

[longer ron]

It would be useful to know where the mystery 'Plane' picture was taken (ie which school did the pilot qualify for his RAe 'ticket')

Without even trying - we have found Caudron G types built by at least 5 different flying schools/factories (and there are probably more)

The Hall School of Flying operated Caudron based types and also Avro 500's,the photo below has 4 caudron based aircraft and they are all different.

https://i.imgur.com/mLG05zy.jpg

From the 'Windsock' Data File 94...

There was considerable inconsistency in both the shape of Caudron G.II and G.III Fuselage Nacelles and in the manner in which they were joined to the rest of the airframe.Some were rounded, some angular,some were suspended above the wings on the 4 cabane struts while others sat on or were faired on to the lower wing.

From 'Aeroplane' April 5th 1916
At the Ruffy-Baumann School the instruction is done by Swisspilots and therefore the difficulty has not arisen.
This firm, by the way, took over the old Caudron Works
at Old Hendon a month ago, and has already turned out three complete 50 Gnome Caudrons


Just to reinforce what PDR posted earlier - here is an extract from 'Aeroplane' April 26 1916.

Bournemouth Flying School...
The school equipment at present consists of three Caudron type biplanes, built by the London and
Provincial Aviation Co., of Hendon, and fitted respectively with 35, 45, and 60 h.p. Anzanis, the two latter
being dual-control two-seaters. A fourth Caudron-type machine has been built at Bournemouth under the
supervision of
- Mr. Samuel Summerfield, the school instructor, who has trained
local workmen. Every part has been made on the spot, and the workmanship appears quite excellent.
The assembling will probably be completed during the present week.