World War 1 Plane
 

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....346ac851ff.jpg

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

512

Thanks very much

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

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 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.

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_5...e:Avro_500.jpg


https://www.worthpoint.com/worthoped...-404-219742755

Credits to Wikipedia & Worth Point

I agree - Gnome-powered Avro 500.


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....65ecdcf867.jpg

Avro 500

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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. .

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

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.

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

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

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

I 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/...-every-flight/

So has the word 'engineer' :E

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

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.

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

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

Sandringham 1 you stated 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?

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).

"It's an aeroplane, Mr. Bader"

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. .

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):)

What do you base that conclusion on ?

Alas, I have spent too long in Her Majesty's overseas dominions. Which reminds me, I must order another case of Angostura Bitters.

Structurally assessed elimination of other contenders. .

"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

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

Can we start with Dominic Cummings?

PDR

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

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