Bristol Helicopters

[JFC Fuller]

The Bristol 191 was intended as the Royal Navy ASW version of the Belvedere (Type-192) and was developed from the Type-173 with uprated engines and modified under carriage etc etc. According to 'Vanguard to Trident' (Eric J Grove) 68 had been ordered to fulfill half of the RN's ASW aircraft requirement. This leaves me a with a number of questions,

1)Why in the late 50s was it cancelled in favor of the Whirlwind, there are some suggestions of development difficulties although only 3 were built and they were all static (I dont know the validity of the last piece of information)?

2)Was it intended to be operated from ships? The types size and layout rather suggests that it would have been somewhat awkward for shipborne use?

3)Does anybody have any details about the equipment fit or appearance? Pictures of any form, artists impressions etc etc, would be very greatly appreciated!?

Edit: I have just found the below linked website, states that a shortened fuselage and folding rotor blades would have been used enabling it to be used with standard carrier deck lifts.

If anybody has any pictures or images of any sort it would be great to see them!

http://avia.russian.ee/helicopters_eng/bristol-173.php

Also if anybody has any details and/or images about the Types 203 and 214 (or any other never were Bristol helicopter designs) I would be great to see it!

 

[hesham]

Hi,

a little info about Bristol-203 & 214,please see;
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,2298.15.html

 

[boxkite]

Also if anybody has any details and/or images about the Types 203 and 214 (or any other never were Bristol helicopter designs) I would be great to see it!

I have a notice: drawings of Bristol Type 203 and Type 214 in the Putnam book

Bristol Aircraft since 1910 by C. H. Barnes (2nd edition 1970/page 374)

Sorry, sealordlawrence, but I'm not able to find the Xerox copies I made several years ago ...

 

[joncarrfarrelly]

Bristol 191.

Quoted/paraphrased from 'Bristol Aircraft since 1910', C. H. Barnes, 3rd edition, Putnam 1988:
Naval requirement HR.146, a ship-based general purpose machine for attacking surface and submarine vessels as well as normal rescue and communication roles, at first with Leonides Majors, to be replaced in later production by Napier Gazelles; HR.149 was similar for the Royal Canadian Navy; the R.A.F. requirement, H.150, was for a general purpose land-based helicopter for personnel and paratroop transport, casualty evacuation and to lift bulky loads by means of an external strop. The Company tendered three designs: Type 191 to meet HR.146(R.N.), Type 192 to meet H.150(R.A.F.) and Type 193, a variant of Type 191 for production in Canada, to meet HR.149(R.C.N.).

The RN canceled the 191 contract in favour of the Sikorsky S.58 due to gearbox problems with the third 173 prototype, the problems were not unusual or insurmountable so this is considered, by some, to be a politically motivated decision. The Canadians soon followed suit and canceled the Type 193. Due to this the Company was allowed to discontinue work on the Leonides Major installation and concentrate on the Gazelle for the 192, two of the first three Alvis-engined 191 airframes already built were fitted out as Gazelle test rigs, the third was used as a controls fatigue rig.

The fifth 173, XE288 (G-AORB), had been intended for carrier trials at sea and had the shortened fuselage and a long-stroke 'four-poster' landing gear of the type proposed for the Type 191.

See the attached images for sideviews and data relevant to the various types, including the 203 and 214.

Cheers, Jon

 

[fredgell]

I have seen 2 photos of trials of the 173 on board a carrier.
One was a deck shot, the other a hanger deck/lift shot.

Found on the web - possible at www.transportarchive.org
But I'm not positive about this - (nice site for Bristol projects anyway!)

If not I have copies on file somewhere which I could email to you.

Regards

Fred

 

[fredgell]

Just checked my reference files - 3 pictures at
www.transportarchive.org.uk

filed under type 173

regards

Fred

 

[JFC Fuller]

My apologies for bringing this thread back from the dead but I was struck by a curious thought today.....assuming that the Type 194 uses 4 Gnomes.

The Bristol Type 194 is itself curious with its 4 Gnome powerplant, the reasoning seems most likely that the Gnome was a Bristol Siddeley product and they wanted to keep it in the family. However if such a power increase was to be pursued an upgrade to the Napier Eland with just two engines would seem to be more logical, especially with the Westminster heading down that route.

However, what is more curious is that the Westland WG.11 of the 1960s was also planned to use 4 Gnomes, is it perhaps the case the the WG.11 was in reality a modified version of the Bristol Type 194 design that would have been acquired through the merger of the helicopter industry in 1959???

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

I have seen 2 photos of trials of the 173 on board a carrier.
One was a deck shot, the other a hanger deck/lift shot.

Found on the web - possible at www.transportarchive.org
But I'm not positive about this - (nice site for Bristol projects anyway!)

If not I have copies on file somewhere which I could email to you.

Regards

Fred

Web browser says that the website's address you're referring isn't valid. ???

 

[Petrus]

Here you are:

http://www.transportarchive.org.uk/getobject.php?rnum=G2570

http://www.transportarchive.org.uk/getobject.php?rnum=G3565

http://www.transportarchive.org.uk/getobject.php?rnum=G3566

http://www.transportarchive.org.uk/getobject.php?rnum=G2332

Best regards,
Piotr

 

[robunos]

...is it perhaps the case the the WG.11 was in reality a modified version of the Bristol Type 194 design that would have been acquired through the merger of the helicopter industry in 1959???

From 'Project Cancelled', 1st (silver) edition, pp. 127-9 :-

"Westland (re-)submitted to N.A.S.R. 358...
...In it's basic military configuration, WG.11 had twin 3-bladed rotors of
57ft diameter and the 4 1500shp Gnome engines grouped under the rear
rotor with transmission shaft to the front rotor. The cabin was 30ft long...
From the outset WG.11 as a three-service helicopter to undertake naval
ASW, and RAF transport and crane operations...
...Wings of 40ft span to carry 50% of the aircraft weight in cruising
flight were offered as an optional fit...
...In addition, Westland proposed a civil derivative...fuselage extended
by 12ft..."

Note how in the WG.11 the four engines are mounted below the rear rotor,
whereas the 194 has two engines in each pylon below the rotors.
(see below)


cheers,
Robin.

 

[Hammer Birchgrove]

Hammer Birchgrove:

http://www.transportarchive.org.uk/table.php?searchitem=%25XF785%25&mtv=G1&pnum=1

Thanks.

 

[mz]

The 173 fuselage seems very very shallow in the carrier trial pictures, I wonder what was the rationale there.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Robunos,

Thanks for the information, clearly there are substantial differences between the WG.11 and the Type 194. It is a real shame that RR killed the Napier Eland, a Bristol Type 194 with a pair of Elands makes for a salivating prospect for an all British heavy lift helicopter in the 1960s???

 

[robunos]

I don't know enough about the subject to offer more
than a cursory comment, but here goes...
The only thing I can think of for the cancellation
of the Eland is 'Not Developed by Us' syndrome,
after all, the engine was effectively developed to
a decent level, and by the time in question, the
mid-to-late 1950s, neatly fitted into RR's turboprop
product range, filling the gap between the smaller
Dart, and larger Tyne, plus, of course, having a use
as a turboshaft for helicopters.
Don't know, just a guess, but perhaps RR had plans
for a derated, or reduced size Tyne, to fill the Eland's niche...


cheers,
Robin.

 

[alertken]

Frank Halford, as freelance consultant, designed much for Napier and DH till 1944 when DH took him over. Sabre was unbuildable by new-hire labour, inoperable by conscripts and was prejudicing Defence of the Realm, so MAP caused their sale to English Electric, 1/1/43. In peace Napier had but one interesting scheme, E-131* by-pass axial, drawing upon Whittle W2/700. EE's majority owner, Westinghouse Inc (didn't know that, did you: R.Jones/O.Marriott,Anatomy of a Merger(GEC/AEI/EE),Cape,1970,P.194), new in aero-turbines, did not care to sponsor a competitor and caused Geo.Nelson to sell it to RR. One of Halford's new schemes, H.7, was of no interest to DH, so that came over to Napier, to become Oryx in a family of gas generators (Naiad, Nymph, Eland). Those, rocket motors and a Junkers-inspired notion of compound diesel/turbine, Nomad, was their business until a batch of 200 US-funded Avon 100 sustained them in 1951, when they initiated Eland and Gazelle as shaft turbines, for turboprop and/or helicopter use. Most prospective applications failed (e.g. Oryx for Percival P.74), leaving them with 26x2 Gazelles in Belvedere, 170 Gazelles in Wessex HAS.1/3/31, modest Eland sales in CV-variants competing with 501 and Dart. EE sold Napier in 1961 to RR, who shut them down in 1963.

DH took a GE licence in 1958 for T58, turned it into Gnome, basis of Small Engines Divn. The DH Enterprise was largely sold into HSAL, 17/12/59, who later sold Small Engines Divn. to (their own 50%-owned Associate), Bristol Siddeley Engines Ltd. 11/61. RR bought BSEL, 7/10/66.

(* corrected, 29/5/11)

 

[alertken]

sll: Bristol Putnam has lengths as T.191 (& RCN T.193 50' 3", T.192: 54' 4".
"what utility": none. RN had pioneered UK/ASW rotors and under US MSP in 1952 was allocated 18 Bell HSL-1. That type's failure was Bristol's gain, April,1956, despite the evidence of first T.173 flight, 3/1/52: "difficulty in moving in any direction but backwards" (Putnam, P.366.) RN was delighted to dump it early-1957 for S.58 (to be Wessex H.A.S.1).

mz: Slim cube was because it started in 1947 as a cut-&-shut for 2 T.171 power trains. The fuse was just the tunnel, front-to back, length defined by rotors' swathe. Leonides piston power, so modest (=no) payload.

sll: WG.1 (military, WG.11/civil) derived from Boeing-Vertol V.107 under 1961 licence, which failed to find a customer.

WHL had acquired Bristol Helicopters, 23/3/60, "encouraged" by 26 Belvederes. So, into inflammatory service: “Luckily, injuries (were) limited (to) sprains incurred by crews vacating (in) rather a hurry (not) waiting for the ladder.” R.G.Bedford,RAF Rotors,SFB, 96,P96. Belvedere's Gazelle defined it with a tendency to double-dump.

Weston's choppers are not UK industry's finest hours.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Type 194

Source: http://www.transportarchive.org.uk

Don't seem to have posted before.

 

[Stargazer]

Thanks for sharing! The Bristol 194 was one of the very finest UK helicopter designs, and I certainly wish this and others had not been cancelled. Especially since no similar type ever took the place.

 

[Caravellarella]

Re: Bristol 194 tandem-rotor airliner helicopter project......

Dear Boys and Girls, here is a picture with a caption in French of a model of the Bristol 194 tandem-rotor airliner helicopter "project"; from an article on the Bristol/Westland 192 Belvedere helicopter......

The picture comes from the 19th November 1960 issue of Les Ailes......

Terry (Caravellarella)

 

[Stargazer]

Terry, the filename reads "Model 174" instead of Model 194... Can you fix it?

 

[Hood]

In Airlife's 'Helicopters & Rotorcraft' by Rod Simpson, 1998, it says that the Type 193 was developed for the Royal Canadian Navy but not taken further.
Does anyone have any further details? I assume it was meant as an ASW type.

 

[Apophenia]

Yes, for RCN ASW to replace HS 50's Sikorsky HO4S-3s (S-55s). The Type 193 was the Type 191 variant to HR.149 mentioned in Reply #3 by Jon Carr Farrelly.

BTW: there were also single-rotored submissions from Westlands and Fleet-Doman. The ultimate winner was Sikorsky's CHSS-1 Sea King -- still in Canadian service today as the CH-124!

 

[JFC Fuller]

Hi,

Bristol 214 was first shown as a mockup in London 1959 but it generated little interest, however the resemblance it has with the later SA.330 in terms of both layout and performance is remarkable. 214 used the same rotor head as the 192 but powered by 2 Gnomes rather than a single Gazelle.

Bristol 194 became the Westland WG.1 in 1960 when the Bristol Helicopter division was merged with Westland. I assume that the 194 would have used 2 x 214 rotor head/engine packages.

Bristol 192 (Belvedere) was underdeveloped rather than flawed and in the last years of service it was remarkably useful, at least part of the maintenance issues (required more maintenance than a Wessex) was because it had 2 rather than 1 Gazelles and was a relatively small fleet, its later reliability was actually rather good. The final proposed modification never happened; an engine starter called Olympe and made by Plessey.

 

[uk 75]

The civil version caught the imagination of Dinky Toys who produced this colourful Bristol 173 model (picture from Ebay UK)

 

[Hood]

A letter from Peter Masefield to Sir John Baker at the MoS in February 1956 shows how keen Bristol was to get a civil derivative shoehorned into the development programme (having been cast aside by the MoS for an additional Type 192 prototype). Masefield had just conducted a through review of Bristol's helicopter development programme.

Bristol was considering the possibility of certifying a civil version of the 192 Series 1 with Twin-Leonides engines as a “single twin” helicopter, certified to single engine standards so not suitable for operation into built-up areas. Masefield argued this would assist full C.A. release for a Gazelle-powered civil version later. They wanted to build an additional 192 Series 1C aircraft, subject to a development contract being awarded by the MoS.

Masefield then described the Type 194 as it then existed as a concept; a civil development of the Type 192 with Napier Gazelle N.G.A.4 engines. It would either carry 16 passengers over 200 miles or an extended fuselage version would carry 22 passengers. If MoS would give them a development contract Bristol would then build two prototype flying shells with N.G.A.2 engines and the existing length fuselage during first half of 1958 for development and C.A. trials. it was suggested these could be in conjunction with 192 Series 1C. If gain C.A. by 1/8/60 Masefield felt they could begin deliveries in early 1961.

Bristol was also what he termed the Large Civil Helicopter with 40-50 seats powered by four Napier Gazelle N.G.A.4 engines. Masefield was hoping this might also fit a future military requirement. Presumably this four-engine design is what became the final Type 194, the initial lengthened Type 192 idea being dropped.

Source: AVIA 65/8 Bristol 173; Development of all Versions 1954-56

 

[hesham]

Hi,

http://archive.aviationweek.com/search?exactphrase=true&QueryTerm=gyrodyne&start=160&rows=20&DocType=Article&Sort=&SortOrder=&startdate=1916-08-01&enddate=1970-06-18&LastViewIssueKey=&LastViewPage=

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1963.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Air Pictorial 1971 describes a reuse of the Type 193 designation in 1961. This was for a slightly scaled down Type 194 using 3, rather than 4, Gnome H.1200s. It describes a helicopter with 'amphibious' capability, the ability to carry 33 passengers or a 10,000lb payload. Cruising speed was to be 130 kts and in an ASW role it would have performed a 4hr 40 min search 30nm from the ship. It used Wessex rotor blades and an epicyclic train in the transmission based on the that of the Wessex. The design also had a rear cargo ramp. There is a drawing of the design but I don't have access to it, does anyone have access to the relevant volume?

 

[hesham]

That's new for me dear JFC Fuller.

Here is a Bristol 190,194,203 & 214.

Kites, Birds & Stuff - BRISTOL Aircraft.

Bristol Aircraft - One of the early manufacturers of Great Britain, during the 20th. Century. A comprehensive study of this British manufacturer. Around four hundred and twenty four individual aircraft details. Around one hundred and fifty nine pictures with one and three plan diagrams...

books.google.com.eg

 

[Hood]

Air Pictorial 1971 describes a reuse of the Type 193 designation in 1961. This was for a slightly scaled down Type 194 using 3, rather than 4, Gnome H.1200s. It describes a helicopter with 'amphibious' capability, the ability to carry 33 passengers or a 10,000lb payload. Cruising speed was to be 130 kts and in an ASW role it would have performed a 4hr 40 min search 30nm from the ship. It used Wessex rotor blades and an epicyclic train in the transmission based on the that of the Wessex. The design also had a rear cargo ramp. There is a drawing of the design but I don't have access to it, does anyone have access to the relevant volume?

That is all true indeed.

I have attached the Air Pictorial drawing of the 1961 Type 193, but also attached is the real Type 193, an original GA drawing dated 4/4/1962, via Joe Cherrie (TSR Joe).
I think the Air Pictorial image is probably slightly a flight of fancy (in terms of details being a sketck drawing).

The most interesting aspect is that the 1962 Type 193 is almost identical to the WG.1 tendered to ASR.358 which had four Gnomes later that year.

 

[JFC Fuller]

Thanks Hood. The book Weston-Super-Mare and the Aeroplane also references the Type 193 as using parts of the Wessex Gearbox and the rotor blades but with Type 192 rotor hubs. This was known as the Westonian, as was the initial WG.1 design. Was this the moment that the Bristol Tandem rotor line finally morphed into the V.107?

The Type 192 series did have a shaft running between the forward and rear engines but it was lightly loaded and intended primarily for synchronising the rotor blades though contemporary reports said it could transfer sufficient power from one end to the other to retain control if one of the engines failed. The Synchronisation shaft was apparently one of the features that proved troublesome, it would be interesting to know if this was still the case at the end of the types service life.

The Type 192D raised the rear engine above the fuselage to allow for a rear ramp. In doing so that makes it, conceptually, a half way point between the Type 192 and the Type 194 in that it moved half the engines from the cabin.

 

[Ekimwest]

The main body of text in the Air Pictorial that is associated with the sketch of the 1961 Type 193 says that following the amalgamation (into Westland Group) the Bristol design team reworked the Type 194 as a Belvedere replacement. The new helicopter re-used the early designation Type 193 and introduced the name ‘Westonian’, but by 1962 it was re-worked again into the chinook-like W.G.1 ‘Westonian’. So both of Hood’s images show the Westonian, but at different stages of development.

In the Air Pictorial just below the sketch of the 1961 Type 193, there is also a similar style sketch of the 1962 Chinook-like version - so the sketchiness might be just because they are magazine illustrations rather than implying anything else.

In July 1962, a preliminary survey of possible helicopters capable of meeting the draft air staff target for a utility helicopter considered the Bristol Westonian, proposed by the Bristol Division of the Westland Group. At this time it was proposed with three Gnome H 1800 engines or four lesser rated engines, or the prototypes developed using 3 lower rated engines until the more advanced engines became available. This was the Chinook style machine shown by Hood and probably explains the missing engine.

 

[Hood]

The three-engined 193 I posted above had an AUW of 24,000lb and proposed payloads of;

2x air portable 1-ton trucks
28 troops with seating along the sides
18 stretchers and 2 attendants or 24 stretchers if 4x stacks used
39 passengers seated 3-abreast

From the documentation I have seen, Westland certainly felt that the three Gnome H1800 version was more than capable of meeting the draft OR.358 for a utility helicopter, except for max and cruising speed.
I suggest the main driver to adding the fourth engine was the naval requirements when OR.358 was merged with AW.165 in December 1962. This added three and then four hours endurance, dipping sonar equipment (with provision for the massive postulated future 360-degree scanning sonar weighing 5,000lb) and even more important, the requirement to cruise with normal payload with one engine out. All of this required a fourth engine - which is why four Gnomes were proposed for Chinook.
I have no doubt if OR.358 had stayed RAF-only, the 3-engine version would have been more than suitable (but of course not as capable as Chinook).

 

[Grey Havoc]

I have no doubt if OR.358 had stayed RAF-only, the 3-engine version would have been more than suitable (but of course not as capable as Chinook).

But more reliable than Chinook?

(Flees)

 

[yasotay]

I have no doubt if OR.358 had stayed RAF-only, the 3-engine version would have been more than suitable (but of course not as capable as Chinook).

But more reliable than Chinook?

(Flees)

Ha! That does not take much.

 

[GT6Boy]

Also if anybody has any details and/or images about the Types 203 and 214 (or any other never were Bristol helicopter designs) I would be great to see it!

Thanks in advance sealordlawrence.

The International Helicopter Museum have an excellent archive. I know that because I gave them my late Father's collection of just such documents!
He accumulated 2 large boxes of Bristol/Westland responses to Draft Air Staff Requirements and the like. All dating from the late 1940's to the early 1960's.
I kept these 2, as luck would have it.
The Type 193 General Arrangements drawing shown earlier in this thread comes from the preliminary 'Westonian' document.

 

[GT6Boy]

I have a few more images I can post here- are they better(admin wise), if reduced in size?

 

[hesham]

Also if anybody has any details and/or images about the Types 203 and 214

Amazing report,we want to see all stuff,and for drawings,please look to reply # 33.

 

[GT6Boy]

Here are the smaller images relating to the Blue folder 'Project and Research Report No.6-1, Preliminary Assessment of 'Westonian' to meet Draft Air Staff Target for a Single Utility Helicopter', dated 1st May 1962.

 

[hesham]

Thank you GT6Boy,

any drawings ?.