Potez 88 and 89

[hesham]

Hi,

the Potez 880 was low wing light transport and freight aircraft,it was
powered by four 930 hp Turbomeca Bastan 4 turboprop engines as
civil aircraft and the military was type-881 and also used as close-support
aircarft against Spriale 3,MS-915 and Breguet 945;

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,441.msg5340.html#msg5340

The Potez 89 was developed from type-840 with shorter fusealge to
accommodate 9-passengers.

http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1962/1962%20-%200116.html?search=potez%2089%20aircraft%20OF%201963
http://www.flightglobal.com/PDFArchive/View/1963/1963%20-%200937.html?search=potez%2089%20aircraft%20OF%201963

 

[Caravellarella]

Dear Hesham, how fabulous; a mini Potez 841! I've never seen anything on twin-engined Potez 841 derivatives before; this Potez 89 is a little like a French HP Jetstream don't you agree?

All best, Terry, (Caravellarella).

 

[Jemiba]

Well, quite similar to the HP Jetstream, that's right, I think.
Here's a 3-view from Flugwelt-1963

 

[hesham]

Hi,

here is the Potez-881.

 

[thebig C]

Nice pics! I would be a little dubious about the 880/881. Going for a low-wing design inevitably means much higher ground clearance to protect the propellors/air intakes. Consequently, this means a rather steep cargo ramp as shown in the illustrations.

The Potez 89 looks like a nice little design though

 

[Stargazer]

I would be a little dubious about the 880/881.

What do you mean here? That these are fakes? No they're not. They are from respected magazines published at the time, there is no reason to believe they would be invented!

 

[cluttonfred]

I suspect that by "dubious" he meant that a low-wing design is of dubious utility in an assault transport, not that he doubted the authenticity of the reference.

 

[thebig C]

LOL The poster above is right...by dubious I meant that the choice of a low-wing design compromised its primary role.

 

[Stargazer]

Sorry for misunderstanding you!!! :-[

 

[Jemiba]

"by dubious I meant that the choice of a low-wing design compromised its primary role."

You're quite right, but the low wing of the 881 was just a heritage of the 880 airliner, itself
basically an enlarged 840. Maybe it was proposed as an aircraft, which required minimal
changes from the basic configuration. Actually, if it was a direct contender for the "Avions de
coopération", I'm not quite sure, as Potez had already proposed the 870 for that contest
(see http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3677.0/highlight,potez+870.html),
a much more specialised aircraft. But as the procurement of such an aircraft seems not to have been
without a fair share of trouble (in the end there wasn't a winner), maybe Potez tried to offer a
cheaper solution.
Two pictures of the Potez 880 and 881
(from the french magazine "Les Ailes" ? In any case, thank you Toura ! )

 

[Stargazer]

I have a feeling the captions for these two have been inverted, as the first one clearly has "Potez 881" written on the fuselage...

 

[Jemiba]

Indeed, good clue, never noticed that, although using my glasses ! :-[
Even the caption of the pictures clearly states, that 880 was the military
version and the 881 the civil derivative. Sorry, my fault.
Nevertheless, I think, this transport was derived from the 840 to 843 series,
so retaining the low wing.

BTW, as we are back at those "Avions de coopération" again and several
new members have gathered since the first appearance of this thread:
Has anybody heard of the mentioned MS.915 ?
Just for curiosity ... :

 

[Stargazer]

Has anybody heard of the mentioned MS.915 ?
Just for curiosity ... :

Check here...

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,441.msg5340.html

 

[Jemiba]

Check here...

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,441.msg5340.html

Ok, ok, have anybody SEEN something about the MS.900/902/915 (3-views,
artist impressions, models, ..)

 

[Petrus]

What the Flight magazine wrote on the French competition:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961%20-%200076.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1961/1961%20-%200077.html

Piotr

 

[thebig C]

Hey

Stargazer, no problemo regarding the misunderstanding

Jemiba many thanks for posting those illustrations! I think you are correct. The 880/881 was a single design which was possibly meant to perform a number of roles both civilian and military. Its clear from some of the pictures that it is based on the 840, some images looking like a simply like a lengthened 840 fuselage.

There are complications however. Even looking at your two pictures its clear the cockpits are very very different. Likewise, I have heard of the 880/881 being entered in the French competition, I have heard the 870 was entered also. As you state the 870 was a smaller high-wing (I think?) altogether more militarily specialised aircraft. I will try to find some links to support this statement.

Petrus, thanks for those links. Is it possible there were two competitions or a cancellation/restart. I seem to recall a Breguet light cargo aircraft being produced in tiny numbers in the late 1960s which would fit the criteria.

As an aside, I live about 1 mile from Potez ill-fated Dublin aircraft plant at Baldonnell. It was built 1961-1964 with alot of money directly from the Potez family and the Irish Government. It was supposed to churn out about 3-6 Potez 840s per month but closed in 1967/68 without producing anything. I always thought it was a shame, the Government helped build the factory but ordered no aircraft to support production. Potez had committed to a pre-production batch of 25 aircraft and also recieved 13 orders from JC Bamford, a German Regional airline, a few Continental based individuals along with the French Customs Service. If they had got the plant running....870s, 880/881s and maybe even Potez Fouga CM.195s could have been flying over my house)

C

 

[thebig C]

EDIT: I was thinking of the Breguet 941 of which 5 were built in a couple of different specs. Their competition entry was the 945 which was a shortened version.

Here is another reference to the Potez 880 which mentions a high-wing design:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1962/1962%20-%200003.html

C

 

[Petrus]

Here is another reference to the Potez 880 which mentions a high-wing design:

There also was (or rather was to be) the Potez 870 (eigth seven zero), whose wings beyond any doubt were (or were to be) high-mounted. Its drawing has already been posted in our forum (http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,3677.msg28879).

So I wouldn't be surprised that both projects, the 870 and the 880, could be mistaken.

Piotr

 

[Jemiba]

This change from low to high wing happened, too for the Dassault Spirale III.
Maybe a change of official requirements ?

 

[Petrus]

As for the Dassault Communauté/Spirale take a look at http://www.dassault-aviation.com/en/passion/aircraft/military-dassault-aircraft/md-410-spirale.html?L=1 as weel as at an article in Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dassault_Communaut%C3%A9. Also a webpage in French: http://avions-de-la-guerre-d-algerie.over-blog.com/article-marcel-dassault-md-410-spirale-58941320.html

Piotr

 

[thebig C]

Thanks for the links guys

I think I agree with Piotr that either Potez "completely" changed their designs or that their designs were misrepresentes.

The Pics of the Potez 881 posted by Hesham are much more akin to the Potez 870, which was posted on the other secretproject thread. The only differences being the glazing of the nose and the position of the wing.

The pics of the Potez 881 posted by Jemiba clearly show an aircraft which is obviously jusy a stretched Potez 840. In the same way that the Potez is obviously just a shorted 840 fuselage.

In fact looking at Jemibas pics its clear just by counting the windows and by looking at the streamlined cockpit versus raised cockpit positions that the pics that are supposedly of the same aircraft are very different. Is it possible that Potez used the 880 designation for a lengthened 840 study and then reassigned it when that project was cancelled?

As to the competition, if I recall correctly it was for a twin engine ac that could operate from short unpaved runways lifting a relatively small 1500kg payload. So, this is not going to feature some of the larger aircraft which were aparently entered. The Spirale looks about right, but alot of the Potez/Breguet entries look far too large. Is it possible that there was another AdA requirement?

C

 

[Jemiba]

I think, the 880 used at least the same wing as the 881. Looking at the
perspective drawing of the 880, I'm not sure, that the fuselage would have
had a larger diameter, although the 3-view and the cutaway seem to show
a fatter fuselage and the negines raised highre above the wingn, with the
wheel wells deeper. The 881 looks a little bit too large, to be just an elongated
840, but more a scaled up derivative. With a straked in cockpit and the glazed
nose deleted, the 880 would make quite a "standard" airliner, I think, just like
the 881.

 

[thebig C]

I think, the 880 used at least the same wing as the 881. Looking at the
perspective drawing of the 880, I'm not sure, that the fuselage would have
had a larger diameter, although the 3-view and the cutaway seem to show
a fatter fuselage and the negines raised highre above the wingn, with the
wheel wells deeper. The 881 looks a little bit too large, to be just an elongated
840, but more a scaled up derivative. With a straked in cockpit and the glazed
nose deleted, the 880 would make quite a "standard" airliner, I think, just like
the 881.

Actually, I think you could be correct. Here is a very close up shot of the 840 from a similar angle to your pic of the 881:

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1962/1962%20-%202537.html

Looking at both pics, the 840 and 880 share a window/windsreen design. However, the 881 has a much less rakish nose, which could as you say be achieved by covering the glazing.

 

[Jemiba]

The nose of an aircraft is a part, that can be changed in appearance quite easily.
With regards to the perhaps changed cross section of the fuselage, in the moment
only the example of the Convair B-36/C-99 comes to my mind. What surprises
me more, is that the role of fire support would have to be fulfilled by the 880,
too, if this requirement was still valid then. To me it looks, as if roles had slightly
changed for the "Avions de coopération", but probably that's no real surprise,
as the search for this airacraft seem to have lasted for about 8 years.

 

[Stargazer]

With regards to the perhaps changed cross section of the fuselage, in the moment
only the example of the Convair B-36/C-99 comes to my mind.

There is also the Boeing 377 Stratofreighter/Stratotanker (vs. the Boeing 367 Stratocruiser) and the Boeing 707/Stratoliner vs. Boeing 717/739 Stratotanker family.

 

[Jemiba]

Indeed ! Probably my original thought was, that in the case of the B-36/C-99 the
cockpit layout, too, changed from raised with glazed nose to straked in for the
transport/civil version.

 

[Jemiba]

In "L'Air et l'espace", December 1961 I found a 3-view of the 881, an internal arrangement drawing
and another artist impression of the 880. A comparison shows, that the fuselage width of the 880
and 881 actually was the same, but the 880 had a much shorter fuselage.

 

[thebig C]

Nice find jemiba

Obviously the rear cargo doors have been dispensed with also. Actually going by the drawings 880/881 differences seem to be fairly stark, apart from sharing the same fuselage. I had read somewhere that 881 was simply a civilianised variant but it appears that Potez put alot more work into the 881 then merely changing a few details.

C

 

[Jemiba]

Not sure, a shortened fuselage with a straked in cockpit, but empennage, wings,
landing gear and the even size of the windows seems to be same.

 

[hesham]

From 29/12/1961.

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 5/1/1962.

 

[hesham]

From Ailes 9/2/1962.

 

[hesham]

From Aviation magazine 1963.