Register here

Author Topic: Armstrong Whitworth designations  (Read 22333 times)

Offline AM

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 201
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #30 on: July 15, 2015, 04:56:19 am »

On the subject of AW numbering systems, however, they did seem to have a completely different Type Number series running parallel to the AW series. In his article on the Whitley in Aeroplane Monthly May 1912, Martyn Chorlton gives the following:
Type 188 - Whitley Prototypes (& Mk.I?)
Type 197 - Whitley Mk.II
Type 201 - one-off higher AUW Whitley Mk.I
Type 205 - Whitley Mk.III
Type 206 - Whitley MkIV
Type 210 - Whitley Mk.IVA
Type 207 - Whitley Mk.V
Type 217 - Whitley Mk.VII


Hi all
 
from Profile No.139
 
Type 188 - Whitley prototype to B.3/34 (K4586)
Type 193 - Whitley Mk.I
Type 194 - Whitley prototype to 21/35 (K4587)
Type 209 - Whitley Mk.III (K9016)

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22820
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #31 on: July 15, 2015, 05:10:47 am »
Nice find my dear AM.

Offline Schneiderman

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1129
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #32 on: July 15, 2015, 06:00:03 am »
Its a small point but the date of the change from the 'named' projects to the A.W. series coincides with major changes at corporate level; the purchase of the parent Armstrong-Whitworth company to Vickers and the reorganisation of the aircraft and engine divisions, which were not included as part of this deal, by John Siddeley.

Offline Jan den Das

  • CLEARANCE: Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 249
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #33 on: December 12, 2016, 12:41:53 am »
Concerning the aircooled engine (F.K.19??), this was build.
Dont forget Mr. Koolhoven came from the car world.
Before he became interrested in aviation her worked for the Minerva factory in Antwerp, for which he was also, what is called now, factory driver. He was number 3 in Coupe d'Ardens.
When I have to believe the small drawing published during his Dutch period, it was a V-8 aircooled engine, just like RAF engines, but with more HP.
Mr. Jaap Tuyt, who worked with Koolhoven until May 1940, told that the engine made at least one run.
Its possible that it was not prommissing or that they stopped because at that time the first ABC Wasp showed very good results.

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22820
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #34 on: August 09, 2017, 10:43:16 am »
From the same source;

the Armstrong Whitworth AW P series.

Offline Schneiderman

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1129
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #35 on: August 09, 2017, 10:48:14 am »
Hesham, the guy who owns that website is a member here and has posted on this thread. Better if he posts the information

Offline ursrius

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 66
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #36 on: August 09, 2017, 11:06:03 am »
Schneiderman, Thanks. I have no problem with Hesham having posted a screenshot here, but of course (blatant plug!) best going to the source, http://www.britishaviation-ptp.com/, especially as this is totally open to all to view. The hope is to eventually create a full database of all this designation and production data, but it's going to a long haul. Besides, it's summer and I'm enjoying that too!

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22820
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #37 on: August 09, 2017, 11:07:49 am »
Hesham, the guy who owns that website is a member here and has posted on this thread. Better if he posts the information

OK Schneiderman,I just want the members know this series,I will mention the
source.

http://www.britishaviation-ptp.com/aw.html

Offline simmie

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 25
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2018, 06:34:27 pm »
A.W.17 (1) (1931) — single-seat monoplane fighter project with two Rolls-Royce  pusher engines (not built)
A.W.17 Aries  (2) (1930) — two-seat army co-operation biplane; improved Atlas I with easier access for maintenance,
increased dimensions, one 460 hp  A.S. Panther IV - 20/25 (1 built)

Am I the only one to spot the apparnt contradiction in the above entries.  the designation AW.17's second use is the year before the first.

Offline Schneiderman

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1129
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #39 on: June 23, 2018, 12:43:05 am »
No you're not the only one.
AW seem to have set out to rationalise their numbering system sometime around 1930. Not only do the AW numbers appear to start with 14 but their drawings initially use a mix of Roman and normal numerals. For example the Atalanta drawings are mainly titled XV but some documents say 15.  I have not seen the drawing of the Aries (flown May 1930) but apparently this says 17 while the twin engine monoplane fighter project (dated Aug 1931) is definitely XVII. So maybe just the result of confusion in the drawing office.
« Last Edit: June 24, 2018, 11:43:58 am by Schneiderman »

Offline hesham

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 22820
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #40 on: June 23, 2018, 08:15:53 am »
in a French magazine,I found this; AW.12 and AW.13 were a light bombers,
but I don't remember it now or its name.

We must don't forget this Info.

Offline Schneiderman

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1129
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #41 on: June 23, 2018, 08:23:10 am »
in a French magazine,I found this; AW.12 and AW.13 were a light bombers,
but I don't remember it now or its name.

We must don't forget this Info.

No, I think that we can ignore that for now. Without a reference to the source that we can check it is not information.

Offline ursrius

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 66
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #42 on: June 23, 2018, 02:20:17 pm »
The Aries was ordered to contract 725892/26 to meet Specification 20/25. Clearly there was a very long ‘gestation period’ as it didn’t fly until May 1930. By the time the Aries finally appeared, the Type Number system was well underway, so perhaps not unreasonable that it was retroactively denoted AW.17 when it became clear the original recipient of that type number would not see the light of day.

Offline Schneiderman

  • Senior Member
  • CLEARANCE: Top Secret
  • **
  • Posts: 1129
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #43 on: June 24, 2018, 12:35:41 am »
The AWXVII twin-engine fighter concept is a bit of an oddity. It would certainly fit the remit for F.7/30 (4 guns, excellent view for the pilot) although what the unspecified R-R engines would have been is hard to say. The nacelles are far too small for Kestrels.  The AW20 twin-engine bomber, which is the same design with very minor modification and Kestrels, makes much more sense. 
As a concept the AWXVII probably did not really need a full project number so reusing 17 for the Aries makes sense.

Offline Bazinga

  • CLEARANCE: Confidential
  • *
  • Posts: 37
  • I really should change my personal text
Re: Armstrong Whitworth designations
« Reply #44 on: March 01, 2019, 01:40:43 pm »
The AWP projects even had sub designs