• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

British Specification 14 & 15/38 (Bristol 154, GAL-40, Shorts S.32)

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,152
Reaction score
1,814
That's a nice bit of digging.
I'd never come across that directory, looks a very interesting and useful site.
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,492
Reaction score
598
Some more on the Short S32 from an article by Lipscomb, a senior designer under Gouge
 

Attachments

  • S32_2.jpg
    S32_2.jpg
    62.1 KB · Views: 184
  • S32_1.jpg
    S32_1.jpg
    89.8 KB · Views: 62
  • S32_3.jpg
    S32_3.jpg
    71 KB · Views: 62
  • S32_5.jpg
    S32_5.jpg
    45.6 KB · Views: 38
  • S32_6.jpg
    S32_6.jpg
    44.7 KB · Views: 26

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,492
Reaction score
598
...and a selection for the GAL40
 

Attachments

  • GAL40_3.jpg
    GAL40_3.jpg
    162.9 KB · Views: 28
  • GAL40_2.jpg
    GAL40_2.jpg
    150.9 KB · Views: 42
  • GAL40_4.jpg
    GAL40_4.jpg
    73.3 KB · Views: 54
  • GAL40_1.jpg
    GAL40_1.jpg
    74.6 KB · Views: 61
  • GAL40_5.jpg
    GAL40_5.jpg
    90.7 KB · Views: 59

Hood

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
2,152
Reaction score
1,814
Can't help thinking that Shorts flying boat experience was making too much of a penalty in terms of the internal layout.
Even allowing for Imperial Airway's lavish tastes and the fact that lounges etc. could still be found on American large airliners until 1970 (747), the space required for 12 passengers seems rather excessive. So does the flight deck, there is acres of workspace for the navigator, radio oeprator and engineering and even a rest station/bunk, which seems lavish.
The competing Airspeed and Folland designs seem more like a 'cram-em-in' approach with a respectable passenger capacity and perhaps some chance of operating at an economic level.
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,492
Reaction score
598
There's some truth in that. Gouge felt that he had a winning formula from the Empire flying boats and stuck with it as long as he could. His initial design for what became the Stirling was rejected on the grounds that it was too much derived from a flying boat.
Then on the other hand spec. 14/38 for the long-range trans-Atlantic airliner only specified a payload of 7500lbs, a recognition of the range v payload limitations of that era.
 

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,692
Reaction score
3,218
Hi! Fairey FC.1.

http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft21745.htm

https://www.alternatehistory.com/forum/threads/unknown-aircraft-that-could-have-been-great.369745/page-8

Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_FC1
 

Attachments

  • FairyFCIFlightAug1939.jpg
    FairyFCIFlightAug1939.jpg
    25.4 KB · Views: 106
  • FC.1.jpg
    FC.1.jpg
    149.4 KB · Views: 114
  • lossy-page1-653px-Fairey_FC1_tif.jpg
    lossy-page1-653px-Fairey_FC1_tif.jpg
    39.8 KB · Views: 117
  • Fairey FC1 model.jpg
    Fairey FC1 model.jpg
    249 KB · Views: 124
  • fairey.jpg
    fairey.jpg
    52.4 KB · Views: 126

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,692
Reaction score
3,218
Short S.32 model and larger three side view drawing.

http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Arts/Art3408.htm

Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_S.32
 

Attachments

  • Short S.32.jpg
    Short S.32.jpg
    38 KB · Views: 36
  • S.32.jpg
    S.32.jpg
    133.7 KB · Views: 31
  • S.32 model.jpg
    S.32 model.jpg
    14 KB · Views: 28

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,692
Reaction score
3,218
GAL.40 larger three side view drawing.
 

Attachments

  • GAL.40.jpg
    GAL.40.jpg
    133.2 KB · Views: 34

blackkite

Don't laugh, don't cry, don't even curse, but.....
Joined
May 31, 2007
Messages
7,692
Reaction score
3,218
Hi! Bristol 154 larger three side view drawing.
 

Attachments

  • The Bristol submission to Specification 15 38.jpg
    The Bristol submission to Specification 15 38.jpg
    135.1 KB · Views: 45

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,652
Reaction score
4,622
From Flying magazine 1942-9,

I can't is this Model from England,but it is not Fairey FC.1 ?.
 

Attachments

  • 1-1942-9.png
    1-1942-9.png
    357.5 KB · Views: 20
  • 2-1942-9.png
    2-1942-9.png
    340.6 KB · Views: 20

robunos

You're Mad, You Are.....
Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
1,970
Reaction score
375
Looks like the Fairey FC.1 to me, but without the centre fin, maybe the reason for the wind tunnel tests ?

cheers,
Robin.
 

Schneiderman

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
1,492
Reaction score
598
The FC.1 design continued to be developed through the winter of 1938/39 and by March featured a redesigned fuselage with lengthened nose and twin-fin tail, as in the photos. The mock-up was also of this developed design, which was the aircraft that would have been constructed, yet for some reason it is the initial design that is usually shown in articles and books.
 
Top