Sopwith Triplane Tailplane

NeilE · 23 November 2001, 07:07 PM

G'day All from Sunny *:P Melbourne!

I'm doing some reseaech on Sopwith Triplanes for my current model and had a bit of a query (well, better make that queries).

(a) What tailplane did N5493 (Blymp) have? N5493 was part of the initial contract for RNAS Tripehounds (N5420-N5494). The smaller tailplane was introduced in February 1917. Prior to this Tripehounds had a Sopwith Pup like tailplane. So, given all this, in April 1917, when Robert Little was flying Blymp, which tailplane unit was N5493 likely to have? Early or late?. I have looked at the two photos I know of N5493 (Naval Eight line up and post-Little 5493) and both of these are inconclusive. Other Naval Eight Triplanes from around that time seem to show either but then I don't have dates for the photos.

(B) Also when the order for new style tailplanes came in, were already extant triplanes converted or was it only for those produced after the Order?

© Is there any way to find out (or does any one know of) N5493's production date?

Hoping for some clarity

All the best

Neil E.

24 November 2001, 02:10 AM

And hello from sunny Canberra - You beauty! Another Aussie AND he knows how to spell Blymp!

Come on Steve you're the Little expert. Does that pic you showed me when you were here show the tailpane?

Have you seen this Neil?

http://www.australianflyingcorps.org...iles_10963.htm

Royal Naval Aircraft and Serials 1911-1919 has N5493 as being delivered 6 April 1917.

Ross_Moorhouse · 24 November 2001, 10:09 AM

Well done Cam for getting the AFC site back up.

24 November 2001, 10:29 AM

>And hello from sunny Canberra -

Hello from rainy Virginia :)

>http://www.australianflyingcorps.org...iles_10963.htm

I wouldnt trust that profile too hard, I tend to skimp on accuracy to get them finished. The pic it was taken from was the one of four Naval 8 tripehounds on the flightline, Blymp is just visible as the fourth.

cam

MikeW · 24 November 2001, 10:43 AM

Neil,

we have a problem here that goes against the established "accepted" facts. Forget everything you may have read about Blymp.

I'll start off with N5493 - forget the delivery date of 6th April, it had to be made at Kingston on Thames, loaded on a truck and delivered to Brooklands, assembled, test flown, adjusted, re-tested, delivered to Dover, delivered to the Dunkerque depot where it was probably again tested and tinkered with, and finally shipped over to 8(N). I would guess that it was probably delivered with the small tailplane because it probably left the factory after the modified tailplane was introduced. If it was delivered with the large tailplane, it would have been re-fitted with the smaller tailplane fairly rapidly.

Now for Blymp, this was fitted with the early tailplane - because it wasn't N5493, but most probably N5469 which was delivered to 8(N) on the 28/3/17. This machine would of course have been manufactured some considerable time before this, prior to the modded tail.

I can state with a confidence of 99.999% that N5493 was marked as Blymp II which buggers hundreds of profiles that have been drawn up over the last 40 years or so! Most of them couldn't spell Blymp properly anyway, and they also miss off the B Flight colour band around the fuselage, so it's no loss!

So there you are - you have a choice of two aircraft to model, but only one of them has a "definite" serial number!

As for factory production dates, if they exist, they are probably buried in a pile of uncatalogued material at the RAF museum - I can confirm that they are not held by the Kingston Local History Museum, the Brooklands Museum, BAe Systems Heritage, or the Science Museum. All of the curators reckon that when the Farnborough museum was closed, the RAF museum indiscriminately loaded up several trucks worth of documents that have never been seen since. The missing records may well have been in this lot.

Mike

MikeW · 24 November 2001, 10:47 AM

Oops,sorry Cam, no offence intended over your profile, but it's wrong.

25 November 2001, 03:53 AM

Mike,

>Now for Blymp, this was fitted with the early tailplane -
>because it wasn't N5493, but most probably N5469

and

>I can state with a confidence of 99.999% that N5493 was
>marked as Blymp II which buggers hundreds of profiles

How did you come to this conclusion? Where can you get the photo's that show this?

>and they also miss off the B Flight colour band around
>the fuselage, so it's no loss!

Is this shown in a photo or written? Also dont worry about my profile being wrong, mine are amateur attempts and can be shown as wrong in many ways but for anyone looking at the AFC site it gives colour to the photos and stories. If anyone wants highly professional profiles I point them to Bob Pearson's sites.

cam

MikeW · 25 November 2001, 06:03 AM

I knew you were going to say this so:-

Unless I'm very much mistaken, that's a "II" partially hidden by the thoughtful *.* standing in front of N5493. Slightly difficult to see, there is a "B" Flight red band outlined in white behind the cockade. Lots of Naval 8 triplanes had these coloured bands, white for A Flight, Blue for C flight

I'm not going to share my photograph of the earlier Blymp with the original pup sized tailplane. You will have to wait for the book to see that one.

Mike

25 November 2001, 06:55 AM

Mike,

>Unless I'm very much mistaken, that's a "II" partially
>hidden by the thoughtful *.* standing in front of N5493.
>Slightly difficult to see, there is a "B" Flight red band
>outlined in white behind the cockade. Lots of Naval 8
>triplanes had these coloured bands, white for A Flight,
>Blue for C flight

Looks like your spot on. Excellent.

>I'm not going to share my photograph of the earlier Blymp
>with the original pup sized tailplane. You will have to
>wait for the book to see that one.

No worries, sounds good to me. I will expect the book signed though :) Any tentative predictions as to when it will be published?

cam

MikeW · 25 November 2001, 08:32 AM

Cam,

I've been comparing the two Blymps, the first one has the Sopwith "natural" fin, the cowl and side panels are polished aluminium, the cockade is different, and the wheel covers are natural. Oh yes, nearly forgot, large tailplane!

N5493, Blymp II has the cowl and side covers, and wheel covers painted in PC12 (or PC 10 or whatever), can't see the fin, the cockade is different (but they probably got repainted quite regularly.

The book has a long way to go, I'm past 50000 words, and haven't really done much on Naval 1 or Naval 9 yet. I have scores of unpublished photographs, and drawings. Haven't really started the profiles yet either. I'm trying to find details on A Squadron 1 Wing - I know Dallas wasn't the only pilot in that squadron to fly N500. The obvious file at the PRO is missing the dates that I need (July 16 to December 16).

The big problem is what to leave out, as an example, Bell & Collishaw dumped most of Naval 10's formative batch of pilots coz they were basically "rejects" from other squadrons and showed little interest in getting stuck in. Should I include their names or would it upset people? Before you answer, there was an Aussie dumped (Andrew and Steve know who)!!

Any advice gratefully received.

Mike