Proposed Airliner ID?

[Mark Nankivil]

Hi All -

The Boston Public Library has an extensive Flickr stream with a fair amount of aviation imagery on it. One of the images is of a proposed 4 engine airliner - most of the images are lacking in specific information/detail and what's with the photo is suspect at the least. See:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/boston_public_library/7314237266/sizes/o/in/set-72157626899741411/

The photo is also attached. Anyone have info on the design? It seems to have a Vickers style in the shape of the cockpit area and possibly the fuselage and vertical fin.

Thanks in advance! Mark

 

[Stargazer]

This screams "ENGLISH"!!!

 

[hesham]

Vickers Viscount ?.

 

[Stargazer]

Vickers Viscount ?.

Oh, come on hesham, you of all people should know better than that!

Look at the shape of the tail. Look at the rounded top. Doesn't look like a Viscount at all!

After following different trails (and provided it is English, which I'm really not sure about) I came up with two possible candidates, none of which is quite right unfortunately:

• General Aircraft G.A.L.40B, a four-engined transport aircraft project with pressure cabin, tricycle undercarriage and four 4700 hp Bristol Hercules engines (submitted to Spec. 15/38 against the Fairey F.C.1). Problem is the G.A.L.40 as we know it was twin fin... but there are a lot of similarities otherwise.
• Saunders-Roe P.132, a 1948-49 four-engine low-wing landplane airliner project developed jointly with Folland (as the Fo.134); the second scheme employed DH Gipsy Queen II engines and accommodated 17 passengers and pilot. AUW 12,500 lb. However the engines in the picture look more like Bristol Hercules than Gipsy Queens...

So I guess we'll have to keep digging!

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

Radial engines.
Square windows.

Could be anything, my gut feel is British, Brabazon specs, 1946-48 period. Might even be some Viscount ancestor. Here's some early VC-2 config (Source: Malcolm Hill, Vickers Viscount & Vanguard, Crowood & Robin McRae Dunn, Airlinertech 11 Vickers Viscount, Specialty Press). Design was stretched (24 to 28 seats) and the double-bubble removed - here's a mixed power version.


I don't particularly think its a Viscount as no drawings of VC-2 evolution show square windows.

 

[Stargazer]

Thanks Paul. At least you too think it has that British flair to it...

Thought of the VC-2 too, but I didn't have the stretched version, so the first one looked too short to me. Still, the tail definitely doesn't look Vickers... and if it were some stage in the VC- series development (advanced enough to grant a promotional painting) we would likely have seen another depiction of it before.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

My point really was that I couldn't rule out anything, even some early Viscount version. Mind you, 40's civil designs all look the same to me.

 

[Maveric]

I think this aircraft had a bit of similarity with with the Aviation Traders "Accountant". Not the powerplants, but the body...
This airliner looks like the big brother of the "Accountant" B)

But definitely british design...

 

[Hood]

Like Maverick, I too was drawn to the idea of a larger Aviation Traders Accountant, but there radials and the general backdrop and style of image seem to be a late 40s project, not a 1950s. Also, given its in the Boston library I feel this is a proposal from an American manufacturer. Just because the cockpit area reminds us of the Viscount doesn't mean this is British. The tail reminds me of a DC-3, so perhaps a Douglas product? The photo description "Try Stratoliner Northwest Airlines" indicates an American design as the most logical choice too. Of course its possible its just an unpainted advertising model for the airline (coinciding with the introduction of the DC-4?).

 

[Stargazer]

Like Maverick, I too was drawn to the idea of a larger Aviation Traders Accountant, but there radials and the general backdrop and style of image seem to be a late 40s project, not a 1950s. Also, given its in the Boston library I feel this is a proposal from an American manufacturer. Just because the cockpit area reminds us of the Viscount doesn't mean this is British. The tail reminds me of a DC-3, so perhaps a Douglas product? The photo description "Try Stratoliner Northwest Airlines" indicates an American design as the most logical choice too. Of course its possible its just an unpainted advertising model for the airline (coinciding with the introduction of the DC-4?).

Yeah, the Accountant was a tempting solution, but I discarded it because it definitely looks older.

I could be wrong, but the engines don't look American (can't think of an American aircraft having engines of that shape). Also I'm trying to think of something American that would have these two round windows at the rear of a series of rectangular ones... looks so British an idea to me! But anyway, as you rightly said, its presence in an American library, as well as the captiion (which had previously escaped me) are definitely elements to take into consideration.

Wasn't "Stratoliner" a trademark Boeing brand anyway? In that case, "Stratoliner Northwest Airlines" would be pretty simiilar to "Mainliner Delta Airlines" for the DC- series, and would indicate something from Boeing, although it doesn't look one bit like a Boeing design to me...

 

[robunos]

How about this...

A.W.57 - A four engined passenger transport similar in appearance to the A.W.55 Apollo, but larger. 4 x Bristol Centaurus 57 engines. Length 99 feet...

from here :-
http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,9673.msg181868.html#msg181868

What got me thinking along these lines, the curved fuselage shape is characteristic of the AW Apollo, and the fin is broad, also like the Apollo, although I have to say, the fin shape says 'Airspeed' to me.

I have no idea why the image is in an American museum, or indeed, about the caption, but as we know, it's not unusual for photos to be be mis-captioned...


cheers,
Robin.

 

[Stargazer]

How about this...
A.W.57 - A four engined passenger transport similar in appearance to the A.W.55 Apollo, but larger. 4 x Bristol Centaurus 57 engines. Length 99 feet...

Interesting. However, until a picture can be produced it's all guess work. In that topic, Cy-27 talks about a picture being in "the book" but what book is he talking about? I've browsed through the Putnam book and didn't see it there... :-\

 

[Hood]

Richard Payne's 'Stuck on the Drawing Board' has info on the A.W.57 was a low-wing four-Centaurus 57 powered (with contra-rotating props) design to Spec 2/47 for a Medium-Range Empire Aircraft (MRE). There is a cross-section plan of the A.W.57, indeed its very similar to the A.W.55 but its not the aircraft in the model photo. Interestingly it has square windows and the first two and last three on each side are smaller and higher than the main cabin windows.
There was an Armstrong Whitworth tender for the original Brabazon Type 3 Specification 6/45 but Payne had no details for it. Given the other contenders (Avro, Miles, Airspeed) had large designs with bunk sleepers etc. (though one had Hercules radials) I doubt the windows would match the layout on the model and it would be unlikely that a design which had not won a home tender would be offered overseas.

There is something odd about that model. The cabin goes far too aft, look how lower fuselage tapers upwards sharply yet the window line carries on. Generally, the window line seems to curve downward slightly, making the top fuselage hump look more bulbous. The windows are obviously stuck on/ painted but they are not level and don't make a straight line (even allowing for the negative/photo to have been bent). For a better explanation of what I mean compare the angles and lines on that model with a photo of a DC-6 from a similar angle; http://withfriendship.com/images/i/44432/Douglas-DC-6-picture.gif
Also, as Stargazer pointed out, those engine nacelles are odd, barely enough clearance for the propellers given how short those hubs are. I think we're looking at a crude model of a fictional aircraft, not a real project or proposal. Some background info on where the photo was obtained and when would be helpful though.

 

[Stargazer]

Meanwhile, I must admit that the Apollo comparison was tempting enough. And design-wise the closest yet.

Here is an comparative view I made of the Apollo and the mystery design. You'll have to forgive the total lack of coherence in the lighting here, it's not meant to look realistic as I usually do in my photo-montages.

As you can see there are undoubtedly great similarities in design, as well as notable differences, such as the wing's shape.

 

[overscan (PaulMM)]

I had already noted the AW.55 Apollo as being close in overall appearance, based on this model shot from Flight, 1946. AW.57 has different window arrangement, more constant section fuselage, and different nacelles.

 

[Silencer1]

Hello!


Please, see the entire page from Boston Public library, that has been dedicated to aviation and contains photo of the 4-engined airliner. There were at least two photos of Boeing Stratoliner (and one of them even didn't named as Boeing). There were some photos with a quite famous aircraft, like DC-3 or Beech 18 - without proper or detailed names...
IMHO the inscription to the photo is just incorrect, and has been provided by Mr. leslie Jones (contributor of the negative) - see the information about it in attachement.


Photo has been demonstrated the model of very "general" 4-engined type, perhaps not connected to any actual design.


And one more thing: most of photos in this Flickr page have been pictured US aircraft or real aircraft from other countries. So, I don't think, that any British' designs has been included in this photo collection, at least intentionally.


Although, I agree, that airliner reminds me British designs

 

[robunos]

I didn't have my copy of 'Stuck on the Drawing Board' to hand when I posted above, now I've looked I can see that the mystery aircraft is not the A.W.57...From Silencer1's post I saw that the image is part of the 'Leslie Jones Collection'. I googled this to see if Leslie Jones had any British connection, but there doesn't appear to be one. I'm now beginning to think that this is just a generic airliner model, too...

cheers,
Robin.

 

[Stargazer]

I'm now beginning to think that this is just a generic airliner model, too...

I'm still of the opinion it is an industry project.

1°) The image is a montage made from the photo of a desktop model pasted onto a cloudy background. Nobody would go as far as building a model, then taking a photo of it just to depict a generic airliner. They'd simply get the thing drawn.

2°) A generic design is by essence something that is unremarkable. If they wanted a generic design, why not make a straight fuselage instead of this rounded airframe and bulbous cockpit? Why would they have those crazy rounded windows aft of the fuselage side on a generic design?

3°) The fact that the only picture ever published of the A.W.57 does not correspond to this image doesn't preclude the possibility of there having been several iteracies of the project. After all, we have countless examples on this forum of totally different designs falling under the same generic project number...

4°) Even if it were a British aircraft, it could have winded up in a U.S. library for a number of reasons. Documents that once belonged to a bygone U.S. airline's archives could very well have been disseminated and some of them saved along the way. It wasn't unusual for companies to submit designs to various airlines. In the late 1940s it might not have seemed far-fetched for a British company to try their luck overseas. Even more so it this was for a Canadian airline for instance.

 

[robunos]

Star, good points, well made...
Looking at this again, I keep coming back to that pre-war spec.(C15/38) that produced the Fairey F.C.1. Can't really say why, just the look of the aeroplane, large rectangular windows, large protruding cockpit glazing, all say 'unpressurised', as does the non-cylindrical fuselage. The wings seem to taper too much for a post-war design, likewise the rounded tips say pre-war. Thirdly, the engines don't seem that large/powerful, certainly not the Centaurus, as I suggested previously. Finally, the aircraft itself, does not seem to be that large, which again suggests a pre-war design.
Now the problem with this theory is that all the designs tendered to this specification are well known and documented, except the Folland design, of which I myself know nothing, apart from what's posted here :-

http://www.secretprojects.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,849.msg117016.html#msg117016


cheers,
Robin.

 

[CJGibson]

Perhaps you're all barking up the wrong tree.

Could this be an airliner powered by an engine under development? We all know how little grasp engine designers have on aircraft design qv Griffith's designs for Rolls-Royce.

How does this grab you?

Could it be a type intended to be powered by the Fedden Cotswold? After he left Bristol Engines, Fedden designed a turboprop called the Cotswold. This was in the same 1500shp class as the R-R Dart and shared the cowling configuration of the aircraft in the image.

See here

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1946/1946%20-%201342.html

By ignoring/not including the propeller blades, perhaps the intention was to show how modern the beast was. Or perhaps it was a ducted fan / turbofan version of the Cotswold.

Chris

 

[royabulgaf]

Early development of the Reindeer?

 

[Stargazer]

PHEW!!!!!! Finding this topic in the search engine was TOUGH to say the least but I'm finally here...

Well, I think I have FINALLY identified the mysterious airliner in the picture and it's NOT a British project (as I and others assumed at some point) but indeed an AMERICAN one! (hence its presence in an American library).

Here is a three-view arrangement of a little-known landplane airliner project by Sikorsky. As you will see, the two designs are so remarkably similar in nearly every aspect that it can't be just a coincidence... right?

I'm moving the topic to the "Early Projects" sections as we know Sikorsky only did rotorcraft designs after 1940.

 

[Mark Nankivil]

I'm impressed with your tenacity - guess you can sleep again now eh?! I would agree this appears to be the closest match yet and makes sense too. Thanks for hunting this down!

Enjoy the Day! Mark

 

[Grey Havoc]

Nice work!

 

[Maveric]

Very cool find Star. Perfect... :-*

 

[lark]

Strong searchwork...amazing result. Thanks!

 

[Arjen]

Congratulations, Stéphane. Very nice to have these bits connected.

 

[hesham]

Excellent my dear Stargazer.