Breda Aircraft Designations

[hesham]

Breda A.13.

This type was renamed in A.14.

Jan

I think that was not true,

the Breda A.13 was acrobatic biplane;

http://www.avia-it.com/act/biblioteca/periodici/PDF%20Riviste/Ala%20d'Italia/L'ALA%20D'ITALIA%201931%2005.pdf

 

[cthornburg]

My name is Chris Thornburg in reply to post #13 I'm the owner of www.worldairforces.com currently down because I can't get the right combination to get it back up. Plus I'm working on another related project that has kept me busy. Anyway reference to Ba.58 was my mistake. I'm sure I found it somewhere where someone had listed the "Ba.82" as Ba.58 I found the pix that I had referenced it too.

Chris

 

[hesham]

Thank you Chris for that explanation,and welcome aboard.

 

[Retrofit]

Hi,

Is there a 3V drawing of the Breda 42 low wing monoplane tourism aircraft available somewhere?
Thanks in advance.

 

[Jjr]

Some Corrections:
A-1 there is no trace that there has be an A-1, maybe project??
The picture shows at a Breda site and which was also used at Airwar is the I-BACT.
This is an SAML A.3 which was build by Elettro Ferroviaria, c/n 7986 in 1924, cert. Of reg. 223, based at Cinisello and owned by Soc. it. Ernesto Breda.
The drawing showed at Airwar was the Breda A-4.
There were several aeroplanes of this type build by SAML/Aviatik, Ellectro Ferroviaria and Breda, most of these aeroplanes were used at the Breda flyingschools.

Breda 1 was the B-1.

A-2 the details mentioned were partly correct, because the pictures and the drawing of the A-2 , which are in publications, are from the version with a Colombo 130 hp, span 13,00, height 3,00 and length 8,50.

16
The I.F. Powered version was known as the A.16, which is visible on the fuselage.
The Jupiter version is on the fuselage Breda 16, but on the registration its mentioned as the Ba.16.

Ba.18 which was an project for the Guggenheim safety contest.
In an l'ala d'. italia its mentioned that it was a modified Ba.15.
If it was build or unther construction??.?.

 

[Jan den Das]

concerning the Breda B-1 and A-5 airliner
the first picture was somewhere mentioned as A-5, but as you see the other pictures is the same aeroplane.
as a-5 there is mentioned that there were 4 x SPA 200 engines, where are they, my opinion forget this one as A-5 it was the B-1

 

[Jan den Das]

Interresting, the details mentioned with this picture are from the Castoldi project, the Breda-Castoldi or Breda B.C.
Someone put these information and pucture together, but the information and type were wrong.

 

[hesham]

Interresting, the details mentioned with this picture are from the Castoldi project, the Breda-Castoldi or Breda B.C.
Someone put these information and pucture together, but the information and type were wrong.View attachment 648269

What is the right ?.

 

[Jan den Das]

The picture of the Breda B.1
The information is from the Breda-Castoldi or Breda B.C., drawing of the B.C
BA 5 is wrong.

 

[hesham]

From Aerophile 1925,

Breda A.5 ?.

 

[hesham]

Breda A.13.

This type was renamed in A.14.

Jan

I think that was not true,

the Breda A.13 was acrobatic biplane;

Tunaspoker: Daftar Situs IDN POKER Online | Agen Judi Online Poker

Tunaspoker adalah Daftar Situs IDN POKER Online terpercaya dan sebagai Agen Judi Online resmi IDN POKER tahun 2022 dengan menggunakan uang asli.

www.avia-it.com

To solve this problem,there is two solutions,the first from my dear Jan was only the serial number of the
aircraft,and the second,was a re-allocated to the design ?.

 

[hesham]

Dear Apophenia,please add,

A.5 was a biplane night bomber project,powered by four 200 hp SPA.6A engines
A.6 ? probably an airliner and transport version of A.5,not sure
CC.20 or CC2000,I think it's aka ---- Ba.20
CC3000,I think it's aka ---- Ba.30
Ba.203 ? may it was the same as Breda-600
BZ-307 it was twin engined project,maybe related to BZ.401 or led to develop it,as
a reconnaissance aircraft.

think (THINK) that its possible that the SC4 and SCA5, were designed as Breda 11 and 12 ??

 

[Apophenia]

Thanks hesham. I've added the A.5 and A.6 (with a qualifying note). And the BZ.307 ... although I'm curious as to why you associate it with the BZ.401 floatplane.

Due to the speculative nature of the others, I think we should wait for some confirming evidence before including them in our designation list.