If you have followed a B727 to the holding point you will see why it's a 3 holer. (3 a** holes).

And yet you are still missing the point of why it was referred to as a 'One and a Half Strutter' - it was specific to this one aeroplane type ;)
I have explained it to you twice now but you have totally ignored it !
Most discussions on this section of the forum are adult and polite - there is absolutely no need for anybody to go into full Jet Blast mode ;)

I know why it's called a 1 1/2-Strutter: that was never the point of the original post. It was about why people are calling it a "Strutter". I think my posts make that apparent.

Whatever anyone says or makes excuses for, "Strutter" is incorrect.

A picture says a thousand words, the W.


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....e5f9c793ab.jpg

Makes the Tiger an N Strutter? ;)


https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....0466b90dfa.jpg

N strutter is the Geezer in the front seat in East London telling ya wot to do innit...

My point was that describing the "1½ Strutter" as simply the "Strutter" was akin to describing a "3-holer" as simply a "holer", that's to say utterly meaningless.

So quite analogous, really. :O

Terminology used by a fraternity is moot, unless you are part of that fraternity. What I mean is, when you are part of the team associated with, say, an aircraft type, the vocabulary takes on a life of its own. You refer to things in the context of how it fits in the team's overall world, as long as that terminology is precise enough to be understood by colleagues, and generally as concise as possible.

eg; a Shorts 360. To the manufacturer or aviation journalist , it would probably be described as such. Or as SD3-60. Or as SD360. In my experience on a regional airline it was a defined, verbally or in writing, as either a 360, a Shorts, a Shed, an SH36, or a Sh**-Heap. If we had operated different versions, we would probably have referred to them only as a dash-number.

The term used is always going to be enough to define the subject, without excessive ink or syllables, so I could imagine that, within the context of the workforce, "one and a half strutter" could be abbreviated to "Strutter". Six syllables become two.

Of course, when I referred earlier to "journalism", I specified journalists who understand what they are writing about. Its interesting to note that the BBC News website currently has a feature on 60 Years of Loganair, one picture captioned "A Sports Skyvan ........".

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotla...iness-63505252

Except that '3 Holer' is not an abbreviation for the Aircraft name per se.
Almost every aircraft I worked on in my 45+ years as a techie had some form of abbreviation or nickname (as Duncan posted above),the only aircraft type which was not abbreviated had such a short name - it really was not worth it :)
It is normal human behaviour to abbreviate everything down to the minimum amount of syllables otherwise one is having to cope with long drawn out mouthfulls of syllables on an hourly basis :) - aviation is most certainly the spiritual home for abbreviations/acronyms

To return to one of pypards earlier rants

He surely does realise that almost every aircraft in history has had a 'nickname' or abbreviation.
So 'Hurri',Spit,Mossie,Whirly/Crikey,Lanc are just a few off the top of me head.

Very well put Duncan.
Abbreviation is definitely not just a modern 'thing'.

regards LR

and summarises my original point, I'd say.

Then finish the matter…
 

One must specify further: an interplane strut, or cabane strut, parallel struts, I-strut, N-strut, V strut, Warren truss struts, all which can equally be called braces.

regarding 351 vs 327: I’ll take either one. The one I grew up with and had the fondest memories of was a 283 which was in a ‘55 Belair Chevrolet, two door sedan, white to be as accurate as possible. Today I use a BMW with a very imprecise 2.0L engine, or motor, or power plant, whichever is most accurate.

"Strutter" is the same sort of linguistic construction that requires the addition of "ie" to any English cricketers name. It's the sort of "between mates" shorthand

I've never heard or read of the word before - it was always spelt out as the full name in everything I've come across. But I guess those working on the replica can call it what they damn well like. It's only a copy after all

To be fair to the Replica building team - when you look on their FB page +Hangar 32 website - they use both forms of the unofficial name ;)
I find it quite amusing that people think abbreviations are a modern 'thing'.
I also find it quite amusing that they think the replica building team have 'invented' this abbreviation :)
As I posted previously - the team have done thousands of manhours of work on this beautiful replica and previously were based at East Fortune where they would have had access to much information about the history of this Sopwith Aircraft.

Though you seem to have invented the notion that someone said they did.

Except WWW is six syllables where World Wide Web is only three

I'm 100% with Pypard.
This is the first time ever in the fat end of 55 years as an aviation fanatic that I've ever heard this aircraft being called a "strutter". In all literature is solely and universally a "1 ½ Strutter" .
It was named that becaue the rigging architecture involved one and a half braced and strutted bays as opposed to the more usual one, two or more.
Calling it a "Strutter" merely suggests it walks in an imperious manner.
This is a completely new aberration and is simply incorrect. You can't go just inventing new nicknames for historic matters or you'd have King Henry the Bonker/Harry the Syph and the War of the ee-bah-gums (or maybe the Ecky-thump bash). It's equivalent to calling a Spitfire a "spitty" or a Lancaster a 'lancy' or a quadrowizard. It isn't clever, correct or least of all right.
What do afficiandos of such revisionist claptrap call a Ju52? A three-puff? A three wheeler? A trike?
Frank Zappa might well have favoured Rotoplooker for an Apache but I really shouldn't go into that...
And what of the Pup? A dawg, pooch or God helpus a Cock-a-kraut or a Soppy-poo like their similarly revisionist and risibly named dogs wh remain mongrels nonetheless?

Let's stick to the correct names and not let moden and historically ignorant keyboard warriors bowlderise them, shall we?

... well, anyhow... FFS

The key point of interest is that these chaps have built a wonderful Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter reproduction (apart from the engine) and I, for one, am very much looking forward to seeing it fly.

My only concern is that the modern engine might not deliver enough power, modern horses obviously being more feeble than their earlier brethren. A big, slow turning (maybe 1300 rpm) prop fitted to a Clerget is going to deliver more thrust than something smaller whizzing around at 2450 rpm

There is a valid point to be made about the fundamental difference in sound and smell between a relatively whizzy(!) radial replacing a sedentary castor-oil spewing rotary though I think fears about the relative weakness of modern horses is unfounded; modern engineers have a far sounder handle on what's required than their predecessors ever did.

Think how people would howl if the latest Spitfire build appeared with a PT6 or some kind of geared-down automotive V8.

Horses for courses where possible though I do recognise that for a flying replica rotarys do present massive practical problems.

The 'Strutter' and Ships Strutter were probably of course RNAS in origin.
JM Bruce MAFRAes,FRHistS was happy with the name.
John McIntosh Bruce was known to all as Jack. He was Keeper and Deputy Director of the Royal Air Force Museum until his retirement in 1983. He was the foremost authority on British aircraft of World War One.
This picture from Windsock Data File 34 (author JM Bruce)


https://i.imgur.com/jZ9hKZW.png

Happy New Years longer ron - or can I just shorten that to Ron? :)

I Googled that Windsock publication yesterday and found a decimal Strutter!


https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....d170a1bcf6.png