Any Idea 2?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your not wrong. The photograph appeared in an article, entitled "The Tiger Moth Fighter", in an October 1933 issue of Flight Magazine.
This Tiger Moth had been converted for use as a single seat fighter. A machine gun,firing through the propeller, was been mounted on the fuselage, and slung beneath the aircraft bomb racks capable of holding eight 20-lb.bombs. With a load of four bombs the machine carried fuel for a range of 500 miles. The machine gun. which had been tested on the machine, was manufactured by the Czechoslovakian Arms Factory, of Prague; the muzzle velocity is 839 m./sec, the maximum rate of fire 900, plus or minus 100 rounds a sec, the bore 7.92 mm., and a Pratt and Whitney synchronising gear is fitted, which was very light and efficient, the drive being taken from the top-half of the rear cover of the engine, where provision for hand-starting gear was normally allowed for. The gun was mounted in the front cockpit and shoots over the engine cowling; it was fixed to the machine mounting by two bolts, the rear bolt incorporating a vernier adjustment for direction and elevation. The ammunition box, holding 200 rounds, and the cartridge chute, were fixed to the mounting itself, the only connections between the gun mounting, and fuselage, being four holding-down bolts. The mounting was attached to the two top longerons by four bolts, but no extra holes have been drilled in the longerons.
In the photograph can be seen the gun mounting on the ejector side of the gun. The top chute is for the spent belt, and the larger chute for the used cartridges ; the muzzle of the gun can be seen in front between the " V " strut. An Aldis telescopic sight can be seen in the rear cockpit.
The article went on to say that "A detachment of this machine has been ordered by a foreign Government and has already been packed up for dispatch."
I am not sure what happened to the idea. Perhaps someone can shed some light on the subject.
This Tiger Moth had been converted for use as a single seat fighter. A machine gun,firing through the propeller, was been mounted on the fuselage, and slung beneath the aircraft bomb racks capable of holding eight 20-lb.bombs. With a load of four bombs the machine carried fuel for a range of 500 miles. The machine gun. which had been tested on the machine, was manufactured by the Czechoslovakian Arms Factory, of Prague; the muzzle velocity is 839 m./sec, the maximum rate of fire 900, plus or minus 100 rounds a sec, the bore 7.92 mm., and a Pratt and Whitney synchronising gear is fitted, which was very light and efficient, the drive being taken from the top-half of the rear cover of the engine, where provision for hand-starting gear was normally allowed for. The gun was mounted in the front cockpit and shoots over the engine cowling; it was fixed to the machine mounting by two bolts, the rear bolt incorporating a vernier adjustment for direction and elevation. The ammunition box, holding 200 rounds, and the cartridge chute, were fixed to the mounting itself, the only connections between the gun mounting, and fuselage, being four holding-down bolts. The mounting was attached to the two top longerons by four bolts, but no extra holes have been drilled in the longerons.
In the photograph can be seen the gun mounting on the ejector side of the gun. The top chute is for the spent belt, and the larger chute for the used cartridges ; the muzzle of the gun can be seen in front between the " V " strut. An Aldis telescopic sight can be seen in the rear cockpit.
The article went on to say that "A detachment of this machine has been ordered by a foreign Government and has already been packed up for dispatch."
I am not sure what happened to the idea. Perhaps someone can shed some light on the subject.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Speechless Two! I had no idea what that was.
Anyone got any other rarity's or oddity's?
I have many here and almost lost the lot today...
Hot water system blew and flooded the place out... The only casualty was and emergency handbook from 1910. The back cover is a bit warped, but it shall survive.
Edit: How about this?
Anyone got any other rarity's or oddity's?
I have many here and almost lost the lot today...
Hot water system blew and flooded the place out... The only casualty was and emergency handbook from 1910. The back cover is a bit warped, but it shall survive.
Edit: How about this?
Last edited by Akubra; 18th Dec 2007 at 11:24.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, but nice try Cpt P.
Nothing to do with attaching to airships or anything like that.
I did copy this from a book and was surprised that it was also on the net if the correct keywords is put into the search engine.
Nothing to do with attaching to airships or anything like that.
I did copy this from a book and was surprised that it was also on the net if the correct keywords is put into the search engine.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speechless Two,Yes it is a camera, in fact two cameras, but what's it mounted on? If you guess the reason, you will know what aircraft. (and vice versa)
Heres another slightly expanded shot.
Heres another slightly expanded shot.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Too Far North
Posts: 1,105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm intrigued by Mel's mention of a 500 mile range. I've only been in a tigermoth once, from Barton to Audley End, and we had to stop at Sywell to refuel. I was told it would do about 2.5 hrs to dry at 70 kts.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There can be another fuel tank fitted just forward of the front cockpit. So maybe this gives it the extra range? I was told they were fitted to the RAAF ones because of the vast distances between fuel stops involved.
Anyone confirm?
Anyone confirm?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Nottingham UK
Age: 84
Posts: 5,575
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Akubra
I think the aircraft is an Avro 504N and the camera is mounted above the tailplane.
Flap40
I appreciate your question, the figure quoted came from the Flight article, the article also stated that the engine was a Gypsy Major. I note that A J Jackson in his book De Havilland Aircraft since 1909 states the Tigermoth DH 82C had a range of 275 miles so whether this aircraft had a larger fuel tank I do not know
I think the aircraft is an Avro 504N and the camera is mounted above the tailplane.
Flap40
I appreciate your question, the figure quoted came from the Flight article, the article also stated that the engine was a Gypsy Major. I note that A J Jackson in his book De Havilland Aircraft since 1909 states the Tigermoth DH 82C had a range of 275 miles so whether this aircraft had a larger fuel tank I do not know
The Tiger Fighter
I am not sure what happened to the idea.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Speechless Two has it. 
The Parnell Parasole with wool tufts and a wing that can be adjusted to variable incidence.
More interesting features and history can be viewed at this page.
http://www.chew76.fsnet.co.uk/parnall/chap5.html
Bristol Aviation site: http://www.chew76.fsnet.co.uk/
Edit: Speechless: You have one ready to post?
The Parnell Parasole with wool tufts and a wing that can be adjusted to variable incidence.
More interesting features and history can be viewed at this page.
http://www.chew76.fsnet.co.uk/parnall/chap5.html
Bristol Aviation site: http://www.chew76.fsnet.co.uk/
Edit: Speechless: You have one ready to post?
Last edited by Akubra; 19th Dec 2007 at 06:41.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 210
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry about the drift, but I've done some looking around on the Moths range and fuel capacity.
Tank:
Filler Cap:
This front tank holds about 40 odd liters. Add that to the 80 liter 300 mile range in the top tank and It's highly unlikely it would make 500 miles. But then again, there would be more tank space as there is no passenger, so 500 mile range could be a reality.
Tank:
Filler Cap:
This front tank holds about 40 odd liters. Add that to the 80 liter 300 mile range in the top tank and It's highly unlikely it would make 500 miles. But then again, there would be more tank space as there is no passenger, so 500 mile range could be a reality.