Fairey Prototypes & Projects Pre-1945

[hesham]

Hi,

We can talk here about Fairey and its prototypes and Projects,and here is early
drawing to Fairey single seat fleet fighter to Spec. D of R.6 and some drawings
to Fairey Flycatcher,I don't know if some of them still Projects only or not ?.

Model Aircraft Monthly 10/2003

 

[hesham]

Hi,

in Spec. 9/23 for boat seaplane,Fairey submitted a proposal but no more Info about
it is available ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

This is one where I suspect that Meekcoms and Morgan are wrong, as they are when they say that the Blackburn Iris meet the spec. 9/23 was cancelled and replaced by a number of revised specs in 1924; the Iris was built to the new spec. 14/24
By 1923 Fairey had built just two flying boats, N4 Atalanta and Titania, and for both the construction of the hulls had been subcontracted to boatbuilders as Fairey had no expertise in this field. Both were of the Linton Hope type, for which Fairey held a licence. When 9/23 was issued Atalanta had just commenced flight tests but it would be two years before Titania flew.
Any tender by Fairey to 9/23 would have had to address their lack of experience with these types of aircraft, difficult when in competition with proven flyingboat constructors. All in all I doubt that they would have submitted a tender, unless is was for a simple conversion of one of the two N4 aircraft, which were obsolete.

 

[Schneiderman]

Construction number 533, which would date to late 1923, is said to have been for a three-engined flying boat. But why would a construction number, not a project number, be allocated to what would have been at best a highly speculative tender? I still suspect an intended modification to one of the N4 'boats.

 

[hesham]

Many great thanks my dear Schneiderman,and do you have the this Drawing-533 ?;

and in Spec. 10/23 for day bomber landplane,also Fairey submitted a Proposal,any
chance to know it ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

That's the problem, so many of the early Fairey drawings have been lost. However in this case 533 isn't a drawing number its a construction number, which suggests that Fairey either had a contract to build the aircraft, or where intending to build it as a private venture. Neither seems very likely for a large flying boat.

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Schneiderman,

I thought you have it,and also you bsee in first post,a construction number No-375.

And here is anther Fairey Day Bomber Project,intended for Spec. 26/23 ?,Construction
number No.541.

 

[Schneiderman]

I think that reads Drng No. 37512 B

 

[hesham]

I think that reads Drng No. 37512 B

OK my dear Schneiderman,

and same thing for Spec. 13/24,no experience for Fairey to do this,but in Spec. 24/25
for Torpedo Bomber Landplane,Fairey submitted a proposal,did we know anything about
it ?.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

also in Spec. 24/25 for torpedo bomber landplane,Fairey submitted a proposal,maybe
developed from its existing aircraft ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

Hi,

also in Spec. 24/25 for torpedo bomber landplane,Fairey submitted a proposal,maybe
developed from its existing aircraft ?.

Almost certainly. Despite Fairey's constant complaints that Air Ministry specifications restricted designs it was mostly the companies that showed little imagination, although lack of money was definitely a major factor too. Fairey was amongst the worst at excessive cost-cutting and reusing designs. The Fox was a most unusual exception.

 

[hesham]

That's right my dear Schneiderman.

 

[blackkite]

Hi! Fairey long range record breaker monoplane.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Long-range_Monoplane

Picture source.
http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/index.php?/topic/234973927-fairey-long-range-monoplane-milliput-time/&page=2
https://www.pinterest.jp/pin/306807793348990051/?lp=true
http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft30408.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGepvIdbad8

 

[robunos]

It intrigues me as to why this aeroplane has such an odd shaped fin? With it's low aspect ratio, and straight cut tip, if you can call it a tip, it just doesn't match the rest of the flying surfaces. To me, it looks like there were aerodynamic problems, and the designers went for a quick fix. Does anyone know?


cheers,
Robin.

 

[blackkite]

Ummm.......

Top picture explanation.
"The careful streamlining of the tail can be seen on the right. Note the "canoe stern." The tail plane can be trimmed, and is itself balanced so as to facilitate trimming."

Bottom picture explanation.
"The rudder of this year's Fairey (Napier) Monoplane has a new design of balance but the whole tail retains its extremely clean appearance"

http://aviadejavu.ru/Site/Crafts/Craft30408.htm

 

[Schneiderman]

It intrigues me as to why this aeroplane has such an odd shaped fin?

The original Fairey Fox had a very similar shape, as did the Flycatcher to some extent. Perhaps nothing more than just a short-lived 'house style' thing, as seen with Hawker and de Havilland

 

[robunos]

You are, of course, totally correct; if I'd bothered to do some basic research, or even just looked upthread, I would have seen that the Long Range Monoplane's fin is indeed, a classic Fairey low aspect ratio surface, albeit with a raked forward trailing edge, which is what led me to believe otherwise.
In 1928, when the Long Range Monoplane was designed, Fairey moved away from the angular fin, towards a more elegant curved style, as seen on the Fairey IIIF. Since, fin apart, the Long Range Monoplane is such a handsome looking aeroplane, I mocked up a quick image of the Long Range Monoplane with a Fairey IIIF fin. I think it's a great improvement . . . ;D :
Interestingly, Blackkite's images posted in reply #14 shows a difference between the two aircraft built. The first, J9479, has a trapezoidal inset balance area, whereas the second, K1991 has a classic horn balance.
WARNING: THE IMAGE POSTED BELOW IS A FAKE THE LONG RANGE MONOPLANE DID NOT EXIST IN THIS FORM.

cheers,
Robin.

 

[blackkite]

Thanks a lot gentlemen. Very interesting discussion.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

Also for Spec. 26/27 which made around General Service Landplane,Fairey sunmitted
an unknown Project,but no details.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

also in Spec. F.29/27 for COW Gun Fighter,Fairey submitted a proposal but no
more details are known ?.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

also in Spec. 20/28 for civil transport flying boat,Fairey submitted unknown Proposal,
any idea ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

also in Spec. 20/28 for civil transport flying boat,Fairey submitted unknown Proposal,
any idea ?.

I think that it is unlikely that Fairey submitted a formal tender to this specification. The company had never built a flying boat hull, had no experience in metal skin construction and their only coastal works at Hamble was set up for testing seaplanes and had no production capability. With four capable flying boat constructors in Britain, all producing metal hulls, Fairey would have known that they had no chance of winning a contract.

 

[hesham]

Thank you for the Info my dear Schneiderman,

and also in the same year at the Spec. 21/28 for Mail Carrying Aircraft,Fairey submitted
a proposal,maybe based on a known design ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

Richard Fairey always complained that Air Ministry specs were too restricting and resulted in poor aircraft, but in truth a large part of the problem was him as he was a very conservative man who focussed too much on profit and not enough on innovation. As a consequence he tended to have his team recycle designs as much as he could. So I would guess that 26/27 and 29/27 submissions would have been based on III and Fox and 21/28 would have been a reworked version of the long range monoplane.

 

[hesham]

Thank you my dear Schneiderman,

and also about Spec. 23/28 for Commercial Amphibian,only Fairey submitted a proposal,
what you think about it ?.

 

[Schneiderman]

and also about Spec. 23/28 for Commercial Amphibian,only Fairey submitted a proposal,
what you think about it ?.

That's a strange one as there appears to have been neither a commercial nor military requirement for such an aircraft in late 1928/early 1929. Whatever it was it was no doubt cancelled following the glodal financial crisis in 1929 and beyond. Possibly written around the Saro Cloud, which was in the final design stage at the time, as a small number were ordered later as a trainer for the RAF. I've no idea what Fairey may have proposed.

 

[hesham]

From Aeroplane Monthly 2001/12.

 

[hesham]

Does anyone hear about Fairey Amphibian Project of 1922 ?.

 

[hesham]

Hi,

in British Spec. 26/28 for Short Take Off Five-Seat Civil Aircraft,Boulton Paul submitted P-55 and Fairey also proposed a Project,is there any idea ?.