Martinsyde F.1 and F.2

J

Jjr

I really should change my personal text
Joined
8 August 2011
Messages
116
Reaction score
40
Hai
There is very little information material concerning these two projects.
F.1, the was a hole in the top wing, from there the gunner could use a gun and the pilot behind the wing.
It was, I think, before the interrupter was there.
it is also possible that it was special designed as anti Zeppelin fighter????
F.2 was a two seat fighter with the pilot under the wing.

Who has more information concerning these two types.
I can remember that I have seen it in a small book about WWI aviation by Jack Bruce, with 3 side vieuw drawings?
Who can help me with these drawings?
Thanks
 
Hi,
Here are the 3-views & photos from War Planes of the First World War by Jack Bruce & a couple of photos from The Martinsyde File (Air-Britain).
Regards
 

Attachments

  • Martinsyde F.1 - 1.JPG
    Martinsyde F.1 - 1.JPG
    4.9 MB · Views: 41
  • Martinsyde F.1 - 2.JPG
    Martinsyde F.1 - 2.JPG
    2.7 MB · Views: 41
  • Martinsyde F.1 - 3.JPG
    Martinsyde F.1 - 3.JPG
    4.9 MB · Views: 42
  • Martinsyde F.1 3-view.JPG
    Martinsyde F.1 3-view.JPG
    2.2 MB · Views: 45
  • Martinsyde F.2 - 1.JPG
    Martinsyde F.2 - 1.JPG
    4 MB · Views: 41
  • Martinsyde F.2 - 2.JPG
    Martinsyde F.2 - 2.JPG
    4.3 MB · Views: 42
  • Martinsyde F.2 3-view.JPG
    Martinsyde F.2 3-view.JPG
    2 MB · Views: 49
That hole in the upper wing is a credible effort at improving the gunner's arcs of fire.
The aerodynamic disadvantage is that it allows high pressure air under the wing to escape to meet the low pressure air on top of the wing. This reduces lift and creates turbulence. In an extreme case, centre cut-outs create extra wing tip vortexes, 4 votexes for the top wing alone!
A few German WW1 prototypes tried two completely separate upper wings - to improve pilot visibility, but they were never made in significant numbers.
 
Hai, thanks all for the information/materials.
During the 1915/16 period there were some ideas concerning fighting etc.
The Germans had interrupter gear but British not and they were looking for an answer, so they get the idea of a longrange fighter, which (i think) were the Sopwith L.R.T.Tr., Vickers F.B.11 and Armstrong-Whitworth F.K.5 (did fly two pictures of crash).
An other idea was the Zeppelin chaser, Robey Peters R.R.F.25, Supermarine P.B.31 Nighthawk, Armstrong-Whitworth F.K.6.
All these types also the Martinsyde F-1 were powered by the earler R.R.250 hp and had an endurence of several hours.

the longrange fighter should be armament with machine guns, but the Zeppelin chaser with Davis gun and machine gun.

In the information you send me its mentioned that the F-1 was fixed with nightflying equipment, which gives the idea that the aeroplane was designed as Zeppelin chaser und the twin uprights (mentioned somewhere) where the pillars for the Davis gun and machine gun.
But was the cut out big enough??
 
The cut-out was large enough to allow the gunner to enter his cockpit so it would have been large enough for him to fire the Lewis and/or Davis. As it never saw service and was tested by the RFC later than the F2 I wonder whether arms were ever installed.
 
No the arms were never tested.
None of these Zeppelin chaser were ever tested with arms, because they found out that a Lewis gun with tracer bullits was effective to bring down a Zeppelin.
A correction the Supermarine P.B.31 was not powered by a R.R.250 hp, but two 100 hp Anzani radials.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom