sagindragin wrote:
you do realise james,
you have created a monster, fancy asking me to do that hudson, life just ain't been the same since.
Heh. Actually, I'm very grateful for the Hudson art, and delighted that you've built on that and your other earlier work. Keep going!
Cheers,
daveymac82c wrote:
The tail section of that neat flying boat has a striking resemblence to Supermarine Stranraer.
Was the designer of the Singapore the same as the Stranraer, or did companies share design innovations? Or, was that hull design just the cats meow and everyone used it until finally a better design came along?
James, I've got a feeling you may have an answer for me
Hi David,
As has already been pointed out, the designers were different. There was a degree of both competition and co-operation between British maritime aircraft companies and designers in the inter war period, including presentations on design at places like the RAeS and reported in
Flight and
The Aeroplane.
But fundamentally, the shape of the rear of the planing hull was pretty standard at the time for what's known as a two-step hull, and based on the hydrodynamic theory of the time. (A good example of a single step hill is the Walrus, and for the development of the step after these types, the Sunderland's 'kinfe edge' second step, and the fairing of the first step between the Mk.I and Mk.III version shows a development of an aerodynamic improvement with no hydrodynamic cost in a type.) The other key point of course is size - that the Singapore was much bigger. A four engine flying boat, 64 ft long, while the Stranraer was a twin, at 54 ft - 15% shorter (smaller) if my maths is correct. Hydrodynamics would be similar within that size bracket, of course.
This touches on an interesting point, which is being able to distinguish between designer and company stylistic notes, details and themes on the one hand, and engineering and aerodynamic 'standards' of the time. Despite the lack of acknowledgement, design is very fashion-driven and engineering options are often chosen on what's believed to be the best - and liked (fashion) - at the time.
There are design similarities in the shape of the cockpit canopy and overall shape of the hull with the Stranraer and Walrus, the key difference - apart from size - being the chines on the Stranraer and flat sides on the Walrus. There are lots of design differences in Shorts 'boats to Supermarines, such as the hull's overall shape and the raised canopy. As we all know, the main 'signature' area on aircraft was the shape of the fin and rudder arrangement, and this was the strongest illustration of a theme. Aerodynamic, mass and flutter balances were the main criteria, within which the designer chose his preferred shape - Hawker's version being common through the 1930s to the Hurricane being one of the most famous examples of that. In the case of Geoffrey de Havilland, he'd sometimes chose pointed wings over a good aerodynamic option, a story telling of how he resketched a calculated wing shape to the de Havilland style and the draughtsman was told to keep quiet. In the case of the Hornet Moth, square tipped wings had to be introduced for safety reasons.
Cheers,
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
