Cy-27 said:
The flying mock-up, named the 'Hoopla', was not given a Miles type number and it is not even known if it was ever test flown, or if it was, where from
To me, to describe something as a 'flying mock-up' seems to be a contradiction in terms. If it could fly, it would have hardly been a 'mock-up' and is unlikely to have been described as 'a project'. However if Don Brown is to be accepted (and whilst I acknowledge that over the years, since his book was published, many errors therein have been identified, he was working for the company at the time of the Hoopla project), it would seem that a 'mock-up' was precisely what is was and that it never proceeded beyond that stage. In the book he says:
'Miles therefore built the
mock-up of a cheap light aeroplane capable of carrying a 1,000 lb bomb - the largest bomb in general use at that date - and powered by a
projected cheap mass-produced engine. In addition, a radio directed automatic pilot
would be designed and, according to RAE calculations,
should be capable of operating with a reasonable degree of accuracy up to a range of 400 miles. The
idea and the
mock-up were duly submitted to the Ministry of Aircraft Production with the suggestion that this weapon should be put into large-scale production and stored, but not used except as a deterrent should the enemy first resort to such means of warfare. So far from appreciating that this was a wise and prudent precaution, the Ministry would have nothing to do with it. There the matter ended for the time being.' [The italics are mine]
In the circumstances, I think it reasonable to assume that the Hoopla project never proceeded beyond a mock-up and that such mock-up never flew. However if Peter Amos, in his book, advances an argument to suggest that the mock-up
might have flown, I'd be interested to hear that. Unfortunately I do not have his book.