Gloster Goods-carrying aeroplane of 1922

[hesham]

Hi,

it is the first time in my life,that the Gloster (Gloucestershire) designed
aircraft like this.
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1922/1922%20-%200087.html?search=aircraft

 

[Stargazer]

Could this be the Gloster Goodwood project, a Freight Landplane submitted to Specification 34/24?

 

[Apophenia]

Good find Hesham! Would this be the first swing-tail design for commercial cargo aircraft?

[BTW, Harold Bolas' US patent 1,304,652 (27 May 1919) for the swingtail Parnall Panther is available online, does anyone know where to find details of his 1917 British patent?]

 

[hesham]

Could this be the Gloster Goodwood project, a Freight Landplane submitted to Specification 34/24?

My dear Skyblazer,


I think that project was designed before Goodwood,that's because the Goodwood appeared
in 1925,and this aircraft was in 1922,so maybe Goodwood was based on it.

 

[Stargazer]

I think that project was designed before Goodwood,that's because the Goodwood appeared
in 1925,and this aircraft was in 1922,so maybe Goodwood was based on it.

No hesham, I thought that too at first, but I did "my homework" at the time I redrew this plan, and I believe the "Goods-type" and the Goodwood to be one and the same.
The type appeared in 1922 but received its name and a designation later, hence the date "1925" found in some sources.
I have seen no evidence anywhere that the Goodwood could be anything but this design. Perhaps our distinguished member Schneiderman, who got access to some rare Gloster-related archives, could shed a little more light on the Goodwood? Unless he or someone else comes up with proof that there was a distinct 1925 project from the 1922 one, I'll stick to this interpretation, based on all the Gloster-related sources I could find.

 

[hesham]

OK my dear Skyblazer,


I confess.

 

[airman]

always from flightglobal page 87-88 : i have rename file gloster goods

 

[Schneiderman]

Stephane,
The only information I have on this project comes from James' Putnam volume Gloster Aircraft since 1917. All other sources seem to be based on this.

James says that original project, in 1922, was called the Mars VIII designed to carry nine passengers and powered by a 450hp Napier Lion. The Mars IX, also 1922, was a slightly smaller version of the Mars VIII to carry seven passengers and powered by a 360hp R-R Eagle IX. There is a 3-view of this project. The Goods-Type illustrated in Flight is basically the Mars IX with a modified radiator installation (in front of the engine rather than under the nose). The Goodwood was larger than either of these projects as the total weight is quoted as 10,000lb (6820lb for the VIII and 5615lb for the IX) and the engine an unspecified 460hp. The only British engines with that power available in 1925 would have been the Napier Lion of Bristol Jupiter.

 

[Schneiderman]

From Aeroplane Feb 15th 1922

 

[robunos]

Now the plot thickens...
I've just looked at Putnam's 'Gloster', and the description of the Mars VIII says this :-

"The pilot had an outstanding view from a cockpit on top of the fuselage in front of the upper mainplane..." (my bold)

The drawing of the Mars IX, see below, also has the cockpit in this position, whereas the cockpit of the 'Goods Type' is in the traditional position behind the cabin. Also, the fuselage of the Mars XI ,and by inference, the Mars VIII, completely fills the gap between the mainplanes, whereas the fuselage of the 'Goods Type' doesn't.
I'm with Skyblazer on this one, the aircraft illustrated upthread is IMHO, not the Mars VIII...
But I could be wrong... :

cheers,
Robin.

 

[Stargazer]

Very interesting contributions to the discussion, thanks to you all.

As for robunos's remark about the placement of the cockpit, I think there is still a lot more likeness between the two designs than differences, so chances are it DID belong in the Mars lineage after all.

I'm puzzled by Schneiderman's comment that the Goodwood would have been a larger aircraft. I can't recall reading this in the Putnam book at the time but since I added it to my collection some time ago (which is better than the copies I had) I will go back to it and dig deeper.

If so, then the Goods-Type CAN'T be the Goodwood, indeed. Still, I recall reading that the G.21 designation had been assigned to the Goodwood retrospectively, and that it didn't quite fit chronologically. Darn, I wish I could remember the source for this comment!

 

[robunos]

The inference that the Goodwood is larger than the Mars VIII and Mars IX is from the weight, 10,000lbs for the Goodwood, 6,820lbs for the Mars VIII, and 5,615lbs for the Mars IX, see Schneiderman's post above.
Regarding the Mars lineage, the Mars series was very heterogeneous, covering everything from single-seat fighters and racers, up to these transport aircraft. The only common factor seems to be the aerodynamic arrangement, most of the Mars series using the Gloster H.L.B, High Lift Biplane, configuration.

cheers,
Robin

 

[Lottie]

Sorry a bit late but have copy of early panther folding patent.


Regards

 

[hesham]

Sorry a bit late but have copy of early panther folding patent.


Regards

Wow,nice find Lottie.

 

[Schneiderman]

Sorry a bit late but have copy of early panther folding patent.
Regards

Pemberton Billing/Supermarine incorporated this into a flying boat design, also to facilitate storage, in 1916. They should have moved quicker and patented the idea.