A picture for our non-US friends...
Sat May 02, 2009 10:04 pm
Especially those of the Commonwealth. Here's a less-then often seen aircraft in combat theater. It's an Avro Anson (I think) carrying Sir Robert Thomas, Governor of India, who has just disembarked.
He is speaking to a Maj. McCarten while on a tour of a US AAF base in India.
I know most of the warbird shots here are US themed...
Ryan
He is speaking to a Maj. McCarten while on a tour of a US AAF base in India.
I know most of the warbird shots here are US themed...
Ryan
Sun May 03, 2009 1:03 am
Thanks Ryan, it is indeed an Avro Anson, often used as a communications aircraft, although originally designed as a maritime reconnaissance-bomber. Interesting in the SEAC roundels too.
Sun May 03, 2009 3:39 am
Ah yes the faithful old 'Annie'.
Known for its mating habits.
..and fertility
PeterA
Known for its mating habits.
..and fertility
PeterA
Sun May 03, 2009 5:16 am
And its amazing inability to sideslip!
Sun May 03, 2009 5:43 am
.
In some ways an evolution from a tri-engined "Avro Six" or downsized "Avro Ten" design, with repositioned mid-wing, twin engines and retractable undercarriage, the wing was still based on the old and tried Fokker F-VII design.
Light years ahead of its UK contemporaries DH Express and Rapide, and miles behind its US contemporaries of the DC-2 and Boeing 247D.
But still an important aircraft during WW2 in the training of Bomber Command crews.
regards
Mark Pilkington
In some ways an evolution from a tri-engined "Avro Six" or downsized "Avro Ten" design, with repositioned mid-wing, twin engines and retractable undercarriage, the wing was still based on the old and tried Fokker F-VII design.
Light years ahead of its UK contemporaries DH Express and Rapide, and miles behind its US contemporaries of the DC-2 and Boeing 247D.
But still an important aircraft during WW2 in the training of Bomber Command crews.
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sun May 03, 2009 5:57 am
Mark_Pilkington wrote:.
But still an important aircraft during WW2 in the training of Bomber Command crews.
regards
Mark Pilkington
...and still in service with the RAF up until 1968.
PeterA
Sun May 03, 2009 7:35 am
PeterA wrote:
...and still in service with the RAF up until 1968.
PeterA
Replaced by the sexy looking Basset which couldn't carry as many pax!
As they were primarily for transporting V-Bomber crews between bases
they often had to use two of them to do the job of a single Anson.
Isn't progress wonderful?
Sun May 03, 2009 7:40 am
Mark_Pilkington wrote:.
Light years ahead of its UK contemporaries DH Express and Rapide, and miles behind its US contemporaries of the DC-2 and Boeing 247D.
Mark Pilkington
I would agree with you in general, but what about the Rapide? I challenge you to name me another aircraft that was as efficient on 2 fairly low powered engines, that could carry the same load and at quite reasonable speed for the same range.
Sun May 03, 2009 7:54 am
Glyn wrote:I would agree with you in general, but what about the Rapide? I challenge you to name me another aircraft that was as efficient on 2 fairly low powered engines, that could carry the same load and at quite reasonable speed for the same range.
It's a lovely aeroplane, but it wasn't a world class airliner.
Without empire preference, DH's commercial element of the 30s would have been in big trouble. It's notable that Australia got Lockheed and Douglas types as soon as they could (and the failure of the DH 'Express' was a breakpoint in taxes for that) and the Canadians found the combination of bigger-engined tougher types over the border and the underpowered DH types meant they left DH behind as quick as they could. The test was the Rapide on floats. Uh oh.
Mark's point was the reality.
As for the Anson, give me a Hudson. Not perfect, but a world ahead as a weapon and a tool. The Anson was good trainer and comms aircraft but using a Fokker wooden wing (with hand-wound undercarriage) into W.W.II for an anti-sub aircraft?
Regards,
Sun May 03, 2009 7:57 am
Glyn wrote:Mark_Pilkington wrote:.
Light years ahead of its UK contemporaries DH Express and Rapide, and miles behind its US contemporaries of the DC-2 and Boeing 247D.
Mark Pilkington
I would agree with you in general, but what about the Rapide? I challenge you to name me another aircraft that was as efficient on 2 fairly low powered engines, that could carry the same load and at quite reasonable speed for the same range.
Well to find a true competitor and successor to the Rapide requires another DH product some 11 years later - The Dove, designed to be its replacement, and demonstrating the advantage of the metal monoplane over the wooden biplane.
I was'nt complaining about the performances of the Express or the Rapide, they, along with the Beech 17 are some of the most elegant and evolved biplanes, but DH, and the UK more generally had rejected the monoplane during WW1, and had remained with wooden construction too long as compared with Germany and the USA, and the sleekest wooden biplane, and even the wooden monoplane could'nt really compete with the stressed metal skin designs. Of course DH extracted the Mosquito and the Vampire from his wooden design expertise, so he could still compete on his terms into the monoplane and jet age.
Interestingly both DH and Qantas passed up the opportunity to deliver a DH-86 to Australia via use in the 1934 air-race, and the only Rapide to compete did not make a significant place against the DC2 or 247D.
General characteristics
DH-89 Rapide
Crew: 1
Capacity: 8 passengers
Length: 34 ft 6 in (10.5 m)
Wingspan: 48 ft 0 in (14.6 m)
Height: 10 ft 3 in (3.1 m)
Wing area: 340 ft² (32 m²)
Empty weight: 3,230 lb (1,460 kg)
Loaded weight: 5,500 lb (2,490 kg)
Powerplant: 2× de Havilland Gipsy Six inline engine, 200 hp (149 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 157 mph (136 kn, 253 km/h) at 1,000 ft (305 m)
Range: 573 mi (498 nmi, 920 km)
Service ceiling: 16,700 ft (5,090 m)
Rate of climb: 867 ft/min (4.3 m/s)
Wing loading: 16 lb/ft² (79 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.036 hp/lb (60 W/kg
DH Dove:
General characteristics
Crew: 2
Capacity: 8 passengers
Length: 39 ft 3 in (11.96 m)
Wingspan: 57 ft (17.37 m)
Height: 13 ft 4 in (4.06 m)
Wing area: 335 sq ft (31.1 m²)
Empty weight: 5,725 lb (2,600 kg)
Loaded weight: 8,800 lb (4,000 kg)
Powerplant: 2× de Havilland Gipsy Queen 70 Mk.2 geared, supercharged 6-cylinder in-line inverted air-cooled engine, 380 bhp (283 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 202 mph @ 8,000 ft (325 km/h @ 2,400 m)
Range: 1,070 mi (1,720 km)
Service ceiling: 20,000 ft (6,100 m)
Rate of climb: 920 ft/min (4.7 m/s)
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sun May 03, 2009 11:28 am
[quote="JDK"]
It's a lovely aeroplane, but it wasn't a world class airliner.
Are you playing to the crowd here, JDK? I'm sure you know the DH89 was never meant to be a world class airliner. It was a scaled down version of the DH86 Express and aimed at operators still using the 130 hp DH 84 Dragon. At the time De Havilland was still a small, if successful, company with little metalworking experience so it was entirely in keeping for them to produce them in wood.
Without empire preference, DH's commercial element of the 30s would have been in big trouble. It's notable that Australia got Lockheed and Douglas types as soon as they could (and the failure of the DH 'Express' was a breakpoint in taxes for that) and the Canadians found the combination of bigger-engined tougher types over the border and the underpowered DH types meant they left DH behind as quick as they could. The test was the Rapide on floats. Uh oh.
Are you aware the Dragon operated on floats with even lower powered engines than the Rapide?
Mark's point was the reality.
America is a huge place, not then well served with railways, canals or roads like a well established country. It is not surprising to me that aviation became increasingly important as a means of travel to 'defeat the tyrany of distance'. Consequently the 'go-getting' manufacturing companies invested time, effort and money into developing efficient and reliable aircraft that would appeal to the airlines and travelling public. Unfortunately the UK manufacturers became left behind. After the Wall Street crash there was deep recession which lingered on in a Britain still burdened with debt from the first world war. If you were in the shoes of the UK aircraft producers would you have ventured far into metal aircraft that the home airlines would not buy?
As for the Anson, give me a Hudson. Not perfect, but a world ahead as a weapon and a tool. The Anson was good trainer and comms aircraft but using a Fokker wooden wing (with hand-wound undercarriage) into W.W.II for an anti-sub aircraft?
And how does that answer the Rapide question I posed? Of course the early retractable undercarriage was hand-wound. It was in every country.
Not only the Anson but the Spitfire and Hurricane suffered from this.
It's a lovely aeroplane, but it wasn't a world class airliner.
Are you playing to the crowd here, JDK? I'm sure you know the DH89 was never meant to be a world class airliner. It was a scaled down version of the DH86 Express and aimed at operators still using the 130 hp DH 84 Dragon. At the time De Havilland was still a small, if successful, company with little metalworking experience so it was entirely in keeping for them to produce them in wood.
Without empire preference, DH's commercial element of the 30s would have been in big trouble. It's notable that Australia got Lockheed and Douglas types as soon as they could (and the failure of the DH 'Express' was a breakpoint in taxes for that) and the Canadians found the combination of bigger-engined tougher types over the border and the underpowered DH types meant they left DH behind as quick as they could. The test was the Rapide on floats. Uh oh.
Are you aware the Dragon operated on floats with even lower powered engines than the Rapide?
Mark's point was the reality.
America is a huge place, not then well served with railways, canals or roads like a well established country. It is not surprising to me that aviation became increasingly important as a means of travel to 'defeat the tyrany of distance'. Consequently the 'go-getting' manufacturing companies invested time, effort and money into developing efficient and reliable aircraft that would appeal to the airlines and travelling public. Unfortunately the UK manufacturers became left behind. After the Wall Street crash there was deep recession which lingered on in a Britain still burdened with debt from the first world war. If you were in the shoes of the UK aircraft producers would you have ventured far into metal aircraft that the home airlines would not buy?
As for the Anson, give me a Hudson. Not perfect, but a world ahead as a weapon and a tool. The Anson was good trainer and comms aircraft but using a Fokker wooden wing (with hand-wound undercarriage) into W.W.II for an anti-sub aircraft?
And how does that answer the Rapide question I posed? Of course the early retractable undercarriage was hand-wound. It was in every country.
Not only the Anson but the Spitfire and Hurricane suffered from this.
Sun May 03, 2009 12:15 pm
I challenge you to name me another aircraft that was as efficient on 2 fairly low powered engines, that could carry the same load and at quite reasonable speed for the same range.
Well to find a true competitor and successor to the Rapide requires another DH product some 11 years later - The Dove, designed to be its replacement, and demonstrating the advantage of the metal monoplane over the wooden biplane.
The DH 104 Dove was indeed intended to replace the Rapide. It was built of metal and had a nosewheel undercarriage, suited to flying from paved runways which had become common during the 2nd WW but were not common when the Rapide was designed. The Australian designed 'answer' to the Dove was the DHA 3 Drover and that still had a tailwheel (and 3 engines!) I'm not knocking it as there are horses for courses and it was produced to fill a perceived niche.
Of course DH extracted the Mosquito and the Vampire from his wooden design expertise, so he could still compete on his terms into the monoplane and jet age.
Yes, wood was viable for the 436 mph Mosquito PR VIII, and the 568mph Vampire FB 53, and the even faster Venom but future De H designs were all metal.
Interestingly both DH and Qantas passed up the opportunity to deliver a DH-86 to Australia via use in the 1934 air-race, and the only Rapide to compete did not make a significant place against the DC2 or 247D.
The DH 86 Express was a failure, no doubt about that but would you really expect a wood and fabric feeder liner to shine in a race of that distance?
Well to find a true competitor and successor to the Rapide requires another DH product some 11 years later - The Dove, designed to be its replacement, and demonstrating the advantage of the metal monoplane over the wooden biplane.
The DH 104 Dove was indeed intended to replace the Rapide. It was built of metal and had a nosewheel undercarriage, suited to flying from paved runways which had become common during the 2nd WW but were not common when the Rapide was designed. The Australian designed 'answer' to the Dove was the DHA 3 Drover and that still had a tailwheel (and 3 engines!) I'm not knocking it as there are horses for courses and it was produced to fill a perceived niche.
Of course DH extracted the Mosquito and the Vampire from his wooden design expertise, so he could still compete on his terms into the monoplane and jet age.
Yes, wood was viable for the 436 mph Mosquito PR VIII, and the 568mph Vampire FB 53, and the even faster Venom but future De H designs were all metal.
Interestingly both DH and Qantas passed up the opportunity to deliver a DH-86 to Australia via use in the 1934 air-race, and the only Rapide to compete did not make a significant place against the DC2 or 247D.
The DH 86 Express was a failure, no doubt about that but would you really expect a wood and fabric feeder liner to shine in a race of that distance?
Sun May 03, 2009 3:30 pm
Here is the story behind PeterA's post "Known for its mating habits."
From UTube.
The mid-air collision of two Avro Anson aircraft, on a training flight from No. 2 Service Flying Training School (2SFTS) based at Wagga Wagga, resulted in this dramatic and successful crash landing. On 29 September 1940, the two Ansons of 2 Service Flying Training School were flying at near 1,000 ft in the Brocklesbury area. N4876 (piloted by L. Fuller, observer I. Sinclair) and L9162 (J. Hewson, observer L. Fraser) lost sight of each other. The first aircraft descended onto the other. The lower aircraft's turret became lodged in the wing root of N4876, and much of L9162's cabin was crushed. Both port engines were making strange noises. The occupants of the lower aircraft bailed out, Hewson being obstructed by the damage and slightly injured. In the upper aircraft, Fuller decided a forced landing was possible, and ordered his observer out. Southwest of Brocklesbury he brought the two aircraft down, locked together. He was uninjured. N4876 was surprisingly undamaged and continued in use after repairs, but L9162 was only fit to continue as an instructional airframe.
Fuller went on to fly with the RAAF in Europe and won the DFM. Unfortunately he was killed at East Sale on 18 March 1944 when he was hit by a bus while riding a bike.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp478Tgm ... annel_page
From UTube.
The mid-air collision of two Avro Anson aircraft, on a training flight from No. 2 Service Flying Training School (2SFTS) based at Wagga Wagga, resulted in this dramatic and successful crash landing. On 29 September 1940, the two Ansons of 2 Service Flying Training School were flying at near 1,000 ft in the Brocklesbury area. N4876 (piloted by L. Fuller, observer I. Sinclair) and L9162 (J. Hewson, observer L. Fraser) lost sight of each other. The first aircraft descended onto the other. The lower aircraft's turret became lodged in the wing root of N4876, and much of L9162's cabin was crushed. Both port engines were making strange noises. The occupants of the lower aircraft bailed out, Hewson being obstructed by the damage and slightly injured. In the upper aircraft, Fuller decided a forced landing was possible, and ordered his observer out. Southwest of Brocklesbury he brought the two aircraft down, locked together. He was uninjured. N4876 was surprisingly undamaged and continued in use after repairs, but L9162 was only fit to continue as an instructional airframe.
Fuller went on to fly with the RAAF in Europe and won the DFM. Unfortunately he was killed at East Sale on 18 March 1944 when he was hit by a bus while riding a bike.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp478Tgm ... annel_page
Sun May 03, 2009 4:45 pm
Glyn
The issue with both the Express and Rapide was that time and technology was overtaking them, and DH's love affair with wood and the biplane.
Yes the Mossie and the Vampire showed his genius, but even he couldn't hold back the tide.
The DH86 had some structural design problems with the tail on top of that, but the DH89 was probably the final and best evolution of the Biplane twin airliner, really no argument with that. (leaving the Dragonfly as primarily a private twin rather than airliner).
However even in 1934 there were wooden monoplane designs that were emerging to compete with the Rapide on the same power or less, but the airliner issue quickly became larger aircraft, with larger engines and more seats, ie the Boeing 247D with 10 seats, the DC-2 with 14 seats and the DC-3 with initially 21, and later 28 seats, so the future clearly belonged to the metal stressed skin monoplane, even if it needed larger engines.
While the Rapide was as efficient as it could be on 2x 200hp engines, it only carried 8 passengers, and for an airline "efficiency" meant more seats, not smaller engines as this was still the age of cheap oil.
LJ Wackett in Australia designed and built two high wing monoplanes from 1934 onwards, the LJW6 Codock with 160hp Napiers and the LJW7 Gannet with 200hp Gipsy six's, admittedly with 2 less passengers.
In 1933 the Shorts Scion was also available, using only 2x 90hp Pobjoy's although its seating capacity of 5 more competed with the Dragon than the Rapide.
In January 1935 the civilian Avro 652, the forerunner of the Anson flew with a capacity of just 4 passengers, on 2x 270HP engines, but at a speed of 188MPH and 1271 NM, both significantly exceeding the DH89 where this aircrafts objective was not more seats but high speed mail runs and long international legs, the military Anson of the same year used much larger 350HP engines but primarily to increase weight carrying ability for bomb load.
The Rapide held its own for a while, and had a reprise with the Dominie during WW2 but it was quickly being passed by the rise of the monoplane and dawn of the metal stressed skin airliner even while it was being first built, and the race became for more seats at greater overall efficiency.
DH89 (8 seats) - 1934, Boeing 247D (10 seats) -1933, Douglas DC-2 (14 seats) -1934, Douglas DC-3 (21 seats)- 1935.
A measure of what Airlines considered "successful" is the fact that each of the US aircraft above were made obsolete a year later by the next development that increased passenger capacity by 50%.
Of course the Avro 652 quickly fell by the wayside as an airliner, and similarly the Anson as a bomber, (but it held on as a trainer), also quickly superceded by metal designs.
While war accelerated aircraft development, it halted airliner development for at least 5 years, the Dove and Drover may have arrived much faster since they didnt rely much on wartime developed technology, and James has already mentioned the Lockheed 10/12 pre-war series, to be joined by the Beech 18 later, all competing in the 8-10 seat range but with much faster speed due to monoplane stressed skin design, larger engines and retractable undercarriage.
I would have expected DH and Qantas to enter the latest and largest UK airliner into the 1934 air-race, they had to be delivered to Australia in anycase, 4x 200hp engines, and 10-12 passengers, but of course DH knew the only way a UK aircraft could win against the new US designs was through design of a purpose built racer.
DH through his Comet won the speed race, but the true winner was Douglas in terms of long term impact.
It was a bit much to expect the DH89 to place significantly, but its race performance was lacklustre in anycase more due to technical problems. I do think the DH89 is an important type regardless, as the last and perhaps most successful Wooden Biplane twin engined airliner.
Data from "A14 Wackett Gannet"
General characteristics
Crew: 1 pilot
Capacity: 6 passengers
Length: 10.51 m (34 ft 6 in)
Wingspan: 15.85 m (52 ft 0 in)
Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 6 in)
Empty weight: 1,470 kg (3,234 lb)
Gross weight: 2,449 kg (5,388 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × de Havilland Gipsy Six, 150 kW (200 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 240 km/h (150 mph)
Range: 885 km (553 miles)
Service ceiling: 17,000 m (5,200 ft)
Rate of climb: 4.3 m/s (850 ft/min)
Specifications (Scion II landplane)
Data from British Civil Aircraft 1919-1972: Volume III [6]
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Capacity: 5 passengers
Length: 31 ft 6 in (9.60 m)
Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.80 m)
Height: 10 ft 4½ in (3.16 m)
Wing area: 255 ft² (23.7 m²)
Empty weight: 1,770 lb (804 kg)
Loaded weight: 3,200 lb (1,455 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pobjoy Niagara III radial engine, 90 hp (67 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 128 mph (111 knots, 206 km/h)
Cruise speed: 116 mph (101 knots, 187 km/h)
Range: 390 mi (339 NM, 624 km)
Service ceiling: 13,000 ft (3,960 m)
Rate of climb: 625 ft/min (3.2 ft/min)
Wing loading: 12.5 lb/ft² (61.4 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.056 hp/lb (0.092 kW/kg)
DH-89 Rapide
Crew: 1
Capacity: 8 passengers
Length: 34 ft 6 in (10.5 m)
Wingspan: 48 ft 0 in (14.6 m)
Height: 10 ft 3 in (3.1 m)
Wing area: 340 ft² (32 m²)
Empty weight: 3,230 lb (1,460 kg)
Loaded weight: 5,500 lb (2,490 kg)
Powerplant: 2× de Havilland Gipsy Six inline engine, 200 hp (149 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 157 mph (136 kn, 253 km/h) at 1,000 ft (305 m)
Range: 573 mi (498 nmi, 920 km)
Service ceiling: 16,700 ft (5,090 m)
Rate of climb: 867 ft/min (4.3 m/s)
Wing loading: 16 lb/ft² (79 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.036 hp/lb (60 W/kg
Avro 652
General characteristics
Crew: 2
Capacity: 4 passengers
Length: 42 ft 3 in (12.88 m)
Wingspan: 56 ft 5 in (17.2 m)
Height: 13 ft 1 in (3.99 m)
Wing area: 410 ft² (38.1 m²)
Empty weight: 5,375 lb (2,437 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 7,400 lb (3,358 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah V radial engine, 270 hp (201 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 163 kn (188 mph, 302 km/h)
Cruise speed: 143 kn (165 mph, 265 km/h)
Stall speed: < 60 mph ()
Range: 687 nmi (790 mi, 1,271 km)
Service ceiling: 19,000 ft (5,791 m)
Rate of climb: 770 ft/min [4] (3.9 m/s)
Avro Anson
General characteristics
Crew: 3-4
Length: 42 ft 3 in (12.88 m)
Wingspan: 56 ft 6 in (17.22 m)
Height: 13 ft 1 in (3.99 m)
Wing area: 463 ft² (43.1 m²)
Empty weight: 5,512 lb (2,500 kg)
Loaded weight: 7,955 lb (3,608 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,500 lb (3,900 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah IX radial engines, 350 hp (260 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 188 mph (163 kn, 303 km/h) at 7,000 ft (2,100 m)
Range: 790 mi (690 nmi, 1,300 km)
Service ceiling: 19,000 ft (5,791 m)
Rate of climb: 750 ft/min (3.8 m/s)
Wing loading: 17.2 lb/ft² (83.9 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.088 hp/lb (140 W/kg)
regards
Mark Pilkington
The issue with both the Express and Rapide was that time and technology was overtaking them, and DH's love affair with wood and the biplane.
Yes the Mossie and the Vampire showed his genius, but even he couldn't hold back the tide.
The DH86 had some structural design problems with the tail on top of that, but the DH89 was probably the final and best evolution of the Biplane twin airliner, really no argument with that. (leaving the Dragonfly as primarily a private twin rather than airliner).
However even in 1934 there were wooden monoplane designs that were emerging to compete with the Rapide on the same power or less, but the airliner issue quickly became larger aircraft, with larger engines and more seats, ie the Boeing 247D with 10 seats, the DC-2 with 14 seats and the DC-3 with initially 21, and later 28 seats, so the future clearly belonged to the metal stressed skin monoplane, even if it needed larger engines.
While the Rapide was as efficient as it could be on 2x 200hp engines, it only carried 8 passengers, and for an airline "efficiency" meant more seats, not smaller engines as this was still the age of cheap oil.
LJ Wackett in Australia designed and built two high wing monoplanes from 1934 onwards, the LJW6 Codock with 160hp Napiers and the LJW7 Gannet with 200hp Gipsy six's, admittedly with 2 less passengers.
In 1933 the Shorts Scion was also available, using only 2x 90hp Pobjoy's although its seating capacity of 5 more competed with the Dragon than the Rapide.
In January 1935 the civilian Avro 652, the forerunner of the Anson flew with a capacity of just 4 passengers, on 2x 270HP engines, but at a speed of 188MPH and 1271 NM, both significantly exceeding the DH89 where this aircrafts objective was not more seats but high speed mail runs and long international legs, the military Anson of the same year used much larger 350HP engines but primarily to increase weight carrying ability for bomb load.
The Rapide held its own for a while, and had a reprise with the Dominie during WW2 but it was quickly being passed by the rise of the monoplane and dawn of the metal stressed skin airliner even while it was being first built, and the race became for more seats at greater overall efficiency.
DH89 (8 seats) - 1934, Boeing 247D (10 seats) -1933, Douglas DC-2 (14 seats) -1934, Douglas DC-3 (21 seats)- 1935.
A measure of what Airlines considered "successful" is the fact that each of the US aircraft above were made obsolete a year later by the next development that increased passenger capacity by 50%.
Of course the Avro 652 quickly fell by the wayside as an airliner, and similarly the Anson as a bomber, (but it held on as a trainer), also quickly superceded by metal designs.
While war accelerated aircraft development, it halted airliner development for at least 5 years, the Dove and Drover may have arrived much faster since they didnt rely much on wartime developed technology, and James has already mentioned the Lockheed 10/12 pre-war series, to be joined by the Beech 18 later, all competing in the 8-10 seat range but with much faster speed due to monoplane stressed skin design, larger engines and retractable undercarriage.
I would have expected DH and Qantas to enter the latest and largest UK airliner into the 1934 air-race, they had to be delivered to Australia in anycase, 4x 200hp engines, and 10-12 passengers, but of course DH knew the only way a UK aircraft could win against the new US designs was through design of a purpose built racer.
DH through his Comet won the speed race, but the true winner was Douglas in terms of long term impact.
It was a bit much to expect the DH89 to place significantly, but its race performance was lacklustre in anycase more due to technical problems. I do think the DH89 is an important type regardless, as the last and perhaps most successful Wooden Biplane twin engined airliner.
Data from "A14 Wackett Gannet"
General characteristics
Crew: 1 pilot
Capacity: 6 passengers
Length: 10.51 m (34 ft 6 in)
Wingspan: 15.85 m (52 ft 0 in)
Height: 3.50 m (11 ft 6 in)
Empty weight: 1,470 kg (3,234 lb)
Gross weight: 2,449 kg (5,388 lb)
Powerplant: 2 × de Havilland Gipsy Six, 150 kW (200 hp) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 240 km/h (150 mph)
Range: 885 km (553 miles)
Service ceiling: 17,000 m (5,200 ft)
Rate of climb: 4.3 m/s (850 ft/min)
Specifications (Scion II landplane)
Data from British Civil Aircraft 1919-1972: Volume III [6]
General characteristics
Crew: 1
Capacity: 5 passengers
Length: 31 ft 6 in (9.60 m)
Wingspan: 42 ft 0 in (12.80 m)
Height: 10 ft 4½ in (3.16 m)
Wing area: 255 ft² (23.7 m²)
Empty weight: 1,770 lb (804 kg)
Loaded weight: 3,200 lb (1,455 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Pobjoy Niagara III radial engine, 90 hp (67 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 128 mph (111 knots, 206 km/h)
Cruise speed: 116 mph (101 knots, 187 km/h)
Range: 390 mi (339 NM, 624 km)
Service ceiling: 13,000 ft (3,960 m)
Rate of climb: 625 ft/min (3.2 ft/min)
Wing loading: 12.5 lb/ft² (61.4 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.056 hp/lb (0.092 kW/kg)
DH-89 Rapide
Crew: 1
Capacity: 8 passengers
Length: 34 ft 6 in (10.5 m)
Wingspan: 48 ft 0 in (14.6 m)
Height: 10 ft 3 in (3.1 m)
Wing area: 340 ft² (32 m²)
Empty weight: 3,230 lb (1,460 kg)
Loaded weight: 5,500 lb (2,490 kg)
Powerplant: 2× de Havilland Gipsy Six inline engine, 200 hp (149 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 157 mph (136 kn, 253 km/h) at 1,000 ft (305 m)
Range: 573 mi (498 nmi, 920 km)
Service ceiling: 16,700 ft (5,090 m)
Rate of climb: 867 ft/min (4.3 m/s)
Wing loading: 16 lb/ft² (79 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.036 hp/lb (60 W/kg
Avro 652
General characteristics
Crew: 2
Capacity: 4 passengers
Length: 42 ft 3 in (12.88 m)
Wingspan: 56 ft 5 in (17.2 m)
Height: 13 ft 1 in (3.99 m)
Wing area: 410 ft² (38.1 m²)
Empty weight: 5,375 lb (2,437 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 7,400 lb (3,358 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah V radial engine, 270 hp (201 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 163 kn (188 mph, 302 km/h)
Cruise speed: 143 kn (165 mph, 265 km/h)
Stall speed: < 60 mph ()
Range: 687 nmi (790 mi, 1,271 km)
Service ceiling: 19,000 ft (5,791 m)
Rate of climb: 770 ft/min [4] (3.9 m/s)
Avro Anson
General characteristics
Crew: 3-4
Length: 42 ft 3 in (12.88 m)
Wingspan: 56 ft 6 in (17.22 m)
Height: 13 ft 1 in (3.99 m)
Wing area: 463 ft² (43.1 m²)
Empty weight: 5,512 lb (2,500 kg)
Loaded weight: 7,955 lb (3,608 kg)
Max takeoff weight: 8,500 lb (3,900 kg)
Powerplant: 2× Armstrong Siddeley Cheetah IX radial engines, 350 hp (260 kW) each
Performance
Maximum speed: 188 mph (163 kn, 303 km/h) at 7,000 ft (2,100 m)
Range: 790 mi (690 nmi, 1,300 km)
Service ceiling: 19,000 ft (5,791 m)
Rate of climb: 750 ft/min (3.8 m/s)
Wing loading: 17.2 lb/ft² (83.9 kg/m²)
Power/mass: 0.088 hp/lb (140 W/kg)
regards
Mark Pilkington
Sun May 03, 2009 6:14 pm
I wonder if we are talking past each other, Mark. One of the ways I approach history, including aircraft history, is to try and see it in the round. As far as the UK goes that means I have to take account of the social, geographical, political and financial aspects. From the mid 1930s the Air Ministry was awarding small contracts for metal aircraft to firms such as Bristol and Handley Page for the main reason that these firms would gear up for later, developed designs. There was not enough money and what there was had to be spread thinly. Shorts, Fairey, Supermarine and Hawker were making metal aircraft and to be fair most of the others had already got involved in that to a greater or lesser extent. Civilian aircraft were a luxury the country could not afford at a time the RAF needed building up and the manufacturing staff also needed experience in the 'new' material. (In fact Shorts built in metal years before) Civilian air travel was just not seen as important. Few people in the UK went by air as they were well served by trains and roads. The airlines were beginning to get their act together in anticipation of the forthcoming war but the amalgamation of the fleets meant initial problems with equipment, there were far too many types and a shortage of money to buy much in the way of new aircraft. Add to that the airframe manufacturers were gearing up for military aircraft production so there were precious few types available. De Havilland did bring out the DH 95 Flamingo, its first stressed skin all metal aircraft that could carry between 12 and 17 depending on the range. It had a maximum speed of 243mph and cruised at 204mph. Production had barely started when war broke out. It seemed that a military version known as the Hertfordshire would be ordered as that could carry 22 troops, but only the prototype was built as the newly awarded contracts for existing designs took the firms full manufacturing capacity. The Flamingo could have been successful as an airliner, who knows? but the timing could not have been worse.