Bristol Type 92: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
→‎References: alphabetical order
 
(24 intermediate revisions by 21 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2016}}
{{Use British English|date=December 2016}}
<!-- This article is a part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft]]. Please see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content]] for recommended layout. -->
<!-- This article is a part of [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft]]. Please see [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Aircraft/page content]] for recommended layout. -->
{|{{Infobox Aircraft Begin
{|{{Infobox Aircraft Begin
Line 19: Line 21:
}}
}}
|}
|}
The '''Bristol Type 92''', sometimes known as the '''Laboratory [[biplane]]''', was an aircraft built by the [[Bristol Aeroplane Company]] to address the differences between [[wind tunnel]] [[cowling]] models and full scale cowling for [[radial engine]]s and was designed as a scaled-up version of a wind tunnel model aircraft. One was built and flew in the mid-1920s.

The '''Bristol Type 92''', sometimes known as the Laboratory [[biplane]], was an aircraft built by the [[Bristol Aeroplane Company]] to address the differences between [[wind tunnel]] [[cowling]] models and full scale cowling for [[radial engine]]s and was designed as a scaled-up version of a wind tunnel model aircraft. One was built and flew in the mid-1920s.


==Development==
==Development==
In the development of the [[Bristol Badger]] in 1919, Bristol's chief designer [[Frank Barnwell]] had noted discrepancies between wind tunnel model tests and full size aircraft, particularly in the failure to predict the Badger's lateral instability. He had responded by building the [[Bristol Badger|Badger X ]] which had standard Badger wings combined with a very simple fuselage, intended to look like a scaled-up wind tunel model for comparison. The Badger went on to become a testbed for Bristol's radial [[Bristol Jupiter|Jupiter]] engine in a variety of cowlings. Once again it was difficult to extrapolate from wind tunnel measurements on cowling aerodynamics and engine cooling to the full scale, so that the cooling behaviour of cowlings that were aerodynamically efficient was hard to predict. Cooling difficulties were experienced with the Badger and later Jupiter powered Bristol types like the [[Bristol Bullfinch|Bullfinch]] and [[Bristol Ten-seater| Ten-seater]].
In the development of the [[Bristol Badger]] in 1919, Bristol's chief designer [[Frank Barnwell]] had noted discrepancies between wind tunnel model tests and full-size aircraft, particularly in the failure to predict the Badger's lateral instability. He had responded by building the [[Bristol Badger|Badger X]] which had standard Badger wings combined with a very simple fuselage, intended to look like a scaled-up wind tunnel model for comparison. The Badger went on to become a testbed for Bristol's [[Bristol Jupiter|Jupiter]] [[radial engine]] in a variety of cowlings. Once again, it was difficult to extrapolate from wind tunnel measurements on cowling aerodynamics and engine cooling to the full scale, so that the cooling behaviour of cowlings that were aerodynamically efficient was hard to predict. Cooling difficulties were experienced with the Badger and later Jupiter-powered Bristol types like the [[Bristol Bullfinch|Bullfinch]] and [[Bristol Ten-seater|Ten-seater]].<ref name="Barnes">{{Harvnb|Barnes|1970|pp=193–6}}</ref>


Branwell's response was again to design a full scale aircraft which had the simplifications of a typical wind tunnel model, to which could be fitted any of several cowlings over the Jupiter engine; the Type 92<ref>{{Harvnb|Barnes|1964|p=193-6}}</ref> was the result. It was a two bay biplane without [[Stagger (aviation)|stagger]] or sweep on the equal span, square tipped wings. These and the tail unit, which was also very rectangular and simple, were fabric covered steel strip and tube structures. Part of the Type 92's odd appearance came from the wish to minimise wing-fuselage aerodynamic interactions. To achieve this, the vertical gap between the wings was large: at 9&nbsp;ft (2.74&nbsp;m) it was 25% of the span. The undercarriage had a wide track and was a single axle arrangement mounted below the ends of the inner [[interplane strut]]s.
Barnwell's response was again to design a full-scale aircraft which had the simplifications of a typical wind tunnel model, to which could be fitted any of several cowlings over the Jupiter engine; the Type 92 was the result. It was a two-bay biplane without [[Stagger (aviation)|stagger]] or [[Swept wing|sweep]] on the equal span, square-tipped wings. These and the tail unit, which was also very rectangular and simple, were fabric-covered steel strip and tube structures. Part of the Type 92's odd appearance came from the wish to minimise wing-[[fuselage]] aerodynamic interactions. To achieve this, the vertical gap between the wings was large: at {{cvt|9|ft}} it was 25% of the span. The [[Landing gear|undercarriage]] had a wide track and was a single axle arrangement mounted below the ends of the inner [[interplane strut]]s.<ref name="Barnes"/>


The fuselage was also simple, the structural part being a plywood covered box girder about 2&nbsp;ft (61&nbsp;cm) square from the nose to aft of the second cockpit, where it tapered in plan only to an edge at the tail. Two streamlined pylons joined the wings to the box, above and below, carrying the fuselage at mid gap. For the aerodynamic investigations the untapered part of the fuselage could be contained in circular fairings of different diameters; originally a range of five sizes was planned, but to reduce cost only the smallest (3&nbsp;ft/91&nbsp;cm) and largest (5&nbsp;ft/1,52&nbsp;cm) were flown. Since the diameter of the Jupiter was about 4&nbsp;ft 7&nbsp;in (1.40&nbsp;m), the cylinder heads were well exposed with the smaller fairing and enclosed by the larger.
The fuselage was also simple, the structural part being a [[plywood]]-covered box girder about {{cvt|2|ft|cm}} square from the nose to aft of the second cockpit, where it tapered in plan only to an edge at the tail. Two streamlined pylons joined the wings to the box, above and below, carrying the fuselage at mid gap. For the aerodynamic investigations, the untapered part of the fuselage could be contained in circular fairings of different diameters; originally a range of five sizes was planned, but to reduce cost only the smallest ({{cvt|3|ft|cm}}) and largest ({{cvt|5|ft|cm}}) were flown. Since the diameter of the Jupiter was about {{cvt|4|ft|7|in|m}}, the cylinder heads were well exposed with the smaller fairing and enclosed by the larger.<ref name="Barnes"/>


==Operational history==
Powered by a Jupiter V engine the Type 92 first flew from [[Bristol Filton Airport|Filton]] on 13 November 1925<ref>{{Harvnb|Barnes|1964|p=195}}</ref>. It was ungainly in the air, was never registered nor flown far from Filton, but it was in use for more than two years, mostly with the 3 ft fairing. The larger fairing was fitted in 1928, but not long afterward the undercarriage was damaged in a heavy landing and Type 92 did not fly again. By the end of the 1920s, the problem of cowling radial engines was beginning to be mastered, though it is not clear how much the Type 92 contributed ro the solution. In 1929, the [[Townend ring]] appeared, improving the airflow but open enough not to impede cooling; in 1928-9, [[NACA]] was releasing and applying the results of very successful tests on closely cowled engines in the 20&nbsp;ft (6.10&nbsp;m) diameter Propeller Research Tunnel (PRT). The PRT's ability to test full scale cowlings meant they could be developed under ground based laboratory conditions, rather than flying them on a Laboratory aircraft, and the difficult problems of trying to scale low [[Reynolds number]] model data to realistic values were avoided<ref>{{Harvnb|Anderson|1998|p=330-9}}</ref>.
Powered by a Jupiter V engine, the Type 92 first flew from [[Bristol Filton Airport|Filton]] on 13 November 1925. It was ungainly in the air, was never registered nor flown far from Filton, but it was in use for more than two years, mostly with the {{cvt|3|ft}} fairing. The larger fairing was fitted in 1928, but not long after, the undercarriage was damaged in a heavy landing and the Type 92 did not fly again.<ref name="Barnes"/>
<!-- ==Operational history== -->
<!-- ==Variants== -->
<!-- ==Units using this aircraft/Operators (choose)== -->
==Specifications ==


By the end of the 1920s, the problem of cowling radial engines was beginning to be mastered, though it is not clear how much the Type 92 contributed to the solution. In 1929, the [[Townend ring]] appeared, improving the airflow but open enough not to impede cooling; in 1928-9, [[NACA]] was releasing and applying the results of very successful tests on closely cowled engines in the {{cvt|20|ft}} diameter Propeller Research Tunnel (PRT). The PRT's ability to test full scale cowlings meant that they could be developed under ground-based laboratory conditions, rather than flying them on a laboratory aircraft, and the difficult problems of trying to scale low [[Reynolds number]] model data to realistic values were avoided.<ref>{{Harvnb|Anderson|1998|pp=330–9}}</ref>

==Specifications==
<!--Use one OR other of the two specification templates. Delete the template code of the one you do not use. aero-specs is designed to handle the specification of gliders and lighter-than-air craft well. They each have their own documentation. In aircraft-specifications the parameter "xxxx more" allows for the addition of a qualifier to the value eg "at low level", "unladen". -->
<!--Use one OR other of the two specification templates. Delete the template code of the one you do not use. aero-specs is designed to handle the specification of gliders and lighter-than-air craft well. They each have their own documentation. In aircraft-specifications the parameter "xxxx more" allows for the addition of a qualifier to the value eg "at low level", "unladen". -->
{{Aircraft specs

|ref={{harvnb|Barnes|1970|p=196}}
{{aerospecs
|prime units? = imp<!-- eng for US/UK aircraft, met for all others -->
|ref=Barnes 1964 p.196<!-- reference -->
|crew=two
|met or eng?=eng<!-- eng for US/UK aircraft, met for all others. You MUST include one or the other here, or no specifications will show -->

|crew=2
|capacity=
|length m=8.94
|length m=8.94
|length ft=29
|length ft=29
Line 49: Line 47:
|span ft=36
|span ft=36
|span in=0
|span in=0
|swept m=<!-- swing-wings -->
|swept ft=<!-- swing-wings -->
|swept in=<!-- swing-wings -->
|rot number=<!-- helicopters -->
|rot dia m=<!-- helicopters -->
|rot dia ft=<!-- helicopters -->
|rot dia in=<!-- helicopters -->
|dia m=<!-- airships etc -->
|dia ft=<!-- airships etc -->
|dia in=<!-- airships etc -->
|width m=<!-- if applicable -->
|width ft=<!-- if applicable -->
|width in=<!-- if applicable -->
|height m=3.96
|height m=3.96
|height ft=13
|height ft=13
Line 67: Line 52:
|wing area sqm=40.13
|wing area sqm=40.13
|wing area sqft=432
|wing area sqft=432
|swept area sqm=<!-- swing-wings -->
|swept area sqft=<!-- swing-wings -->
|rot area sqm=<!-- helicopters -->
|rot area sqft=<!-- helicopters -->
|volume m3=<!-- lighter-than-air -->
|volume ft3=<!-- lighter-than-air -->
|aspect ratio=<!-- sailplanes -->
|wing profile=<!-- sailplanes -->
|empty weight kg=998
|empty weight kg=998
|empty weight lb=2,200
|empty weight lb=2,200
|gross weight kg=1,542
|gross weight kg=1,542
|gross weight lb=3,400
|gross weight lb=3,400
|lift kg=<!-- lighter-than-air -->
|lift lb=<!-- lighter-than-air -->

|eng1 number=1
|eng1 number=1
|eng1 type=[[Bristol Jupiter]] VI 9-cylinder air cooled radial
|eng1 name=[[Bristol Jupiter]] VI nine-cylinder air cooled radial
|eng1 kw=335<!-- prop engines -->
|eng1 kw=335
|eng1 hp=450<!-- prop engines -->
|eng1 hp=450
|eng1 kn=<!-- jet/rocket engines -->
|eng1 lbf=<!-- jet/rocket engines -->
|eng1 kn-ab=<!-- afterburners -->
|eng1 lbf-ab=<!-- afterburners -->
|eng2 number=
|eng2 type=
|eng2 kw=<!-- prop engines -->
|eng2 hp=<!-- prop engines -->
|eng2 kn=<!-- jet/rocket engines -->
|eng2 lbf=<!-- jet/rocket engines -->
|eng2 kn-ab=<!-- afterburners -->
|eng2 lbf-ab=<!-- afterburners -->

|max speed kmh=212
|max speed kmh=212
|max speed mph=132
|max speed mph=132
|max speed mach=<!-- supersonic aircraft -->
|cruise speed kmh=<!-- if max speed unknown -->
|cruise speed mph=<!-- if max speed unknown -->
|stall speed kmh=<!-- aerobatic and STOL aircraft -->
|stall speed mph=<!-- aerobatic and STOL aircraft -->
|range km=7,925
|range km=7,925
|range miles=
|endurance h=<!-- if range unknown -->
|endurance min=<!-- if range unknown -->
|ceiling m=
|ceiling ft=26,000
|ceiling ft=26,000
|g limits=<!-- aerobatic aircraft -->
|roll rate=<!-- aerobatic aircraft -->
|glide ratio=<!-- sailplanes -->
|climb rate ms=
|climb rate ftmin=
|sink rate ms=<!-- sailplanes -->
|sink rate ftmin=<!-- sailplanes -->

|armament1=
|armament2=
|armament3=
|armament4=
|armament5=
|armament6=
}}
}}

<!-- ==See also== -->
{{aircontent
{{aircontent
<!-- include as many lines are appropriate. additional lines/entries with carriage return. -->
<!-- include as many lines are appropriate. additional lines/entries with carriage return. -->
|see also=
|related=<!-- related developments -->
|similar aircraft=<!-- similar or comparable aircraft -->
|lists=<!-- related lists -->
}}
}}

==References==
==References==

;Notes
===Notes===
{{reflist}}
{{reflist}}
;Bibliography
*{{cite book |title= Bristol Aircraft since 1910|last= Barnes|first=C. H. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1964 |publisher=Putnam Publishing |location=London |isbn= 0 370 00015 6|page= |pages= |url= }}
*{{cite book |title= A History of Aerodynamics|last=Anderson|first=John D. |authorlink= |coauthors= |year=1998 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge |isbn= 0 521 66955 3|page= |pages= |url= }}
{{refbegin}}
{{refend}}


===Bibliography===
<!-- ==External links== -->
*{{cite book|title=A History of Aerodynamics|last=Anderson|first=John D.|year=1998|publisher=Cambridge University Press|location=Cambridge|isbn= 0-521669553}}
*{{cite book|title=Bristol Aircraft since 1910|last=Barnes|first=C. H.|year=1970|publisher=Putnam Publishing|location=London|isbn=0-370000153}}


{{Bristol aircraft}}
{{Bristol aircraft}}

{{Aviation lists}}
[[Category:British experimental aircraft 1920-1929]]
[[Category:1920s British experimental aircraft]]
[[Category:Bristol aircraft|Type 092]]
[[Category:Bristol Aeroplane Company aircraft|Type 092]]
[[Category:Aircraft first flown in 1925]]
[[Category:Biplanes]]

Latest revision as of 16:10, 10 November 2021

Type 92
Role Research
National origin United Kingdom
Manufacturer Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd.
Designer Frank Barnwell
First flight 13 November 1925
Retired 1928
Number built 1

The Bristol Type 92, sometimes known as the Laboratory biplane, was an aircraft built by the Bristol Aeroplane Company to address the differences between wind tunnel cowling models and full scale cowling for radial engines and was designed as a scaled-up version of a wind tunnel model aircraft. One was built and flew in the mid-1920s.

Development[edit]

In the development of the Bristol Badger in 1919, Bristol's chief designer Frank Barnwell had noted discrepancies between wind tunnel model tests and full-size aircraft, particularly in the failure to predict the Badger's lateral instability. He had responded by building the Badger X which had standard Badger wings combined with a very simple fuselage, intended to look like a scaled-up wind tunnel model for comparison. The Badger went on to become a testbed for Bristol's Jupiter radial engine in a variety of cowlings. Once again, it was difficult to extrapolate from wind tunnel measurements on cowling aerodynamics and engine cooling to the full scale, so that the cooling behaviour of cowlings that were aerodynamically efficient was hard to predict. Cooling difficulties were experienced with the Badger and later Jupiter-powered Bristol types like the Bullfinch and Ten-seater.[1]

Barnwell's response was again to design a full-scale aircraft which had the simplifications of a typical wind tunnel model, to which could be fitted any of several cowlings over the Jupiter engine; the Type 92 was the result. It was a two-bay biplane without stagger or sweep on the equal span, square-tipped wings. These and the tail unit, which was also very rectangular and simple, were fabric-covered steel strip and tube structures. Part of the Type 92's odd appearance came from the wish to minimise wing-fuselage aerodynamic interactions. To achieve this, the vertical gap between the wings was large: at 9 ft (2.7 m) it was 25% of the span. The undercarriage had a wide track and was a single axle arrangement mounted below the ends of the inner interplane struts.[1]

The fuselage was also simple, the structural part being a plywood-covered box girder about 2 ft (61 cm) square from the nose to aft of the second cockpit, where it tapered in plan only to an edge at the tail. Two streamlined pylons joined the wings to the box, above and below, carrying the fuselage at mid gap. For the aerodynamic investigations, the untapered part of the fuselage could be contained in circular fairings of different diameters; originally a range of five sizes was planned, but to reduce cost only the smallest (3 ft (91 cm)) and largest (5 ft (150 cm)) were flown. Since the diameter of the Jupiter was about 4 ft 7 in (1.40 m), the cylinder heads were well exposed with the smaller fairing and enclosed by the larger.[1]

Operational history[edit]

Powered by a Jupiter V engine, the Type 92 first flew from Filton on 13 November 1925. It was ungainly in the air, was never registered nor flown far from Filton, but it was in use for more than two years, mostly with the 3 ft (0.91 m) fairing. The larger fairing was fitted in 1928, but not long after, the undercarriage was damaged in a heavy landing and the Type 92 did not fly again.[1]

By the end of the 1920s, the problem of cowling radial engines was beginning to be mastered, though it is not clear how much the Type 92 contributed to the solution. In 1929, the Townend ring appeared, improving the airflow but open enough not to impede cooling; in 1928-9, NACA was releasing and applying the results of very successful tests on closely cowled engines in the 20 ft (6.1 m) diameter Propeller Research Tunnel (PRT). The PRT's ability to test full scale cowlings meant that they could be developed under ground-based laboratory conditions, rather than flying them on a laboratory aircraft, and the difficult problems of trying to scale low Reynolds number model data to realistic values were avoided.[2]

Specifications[edit]

Data from Barnes 1970, p. 196

General characteristics

  • Crew: two
  • Length: 29 ft 4 in (8.94 m)
  • Wingspan: 36 ft 0 in (10.97 m)
  • Height: 13 ft 0 in (3.96 m)
  • Wing area: 432 sq ft (40.13 m2)
  • Empty weight: 2,200 lb (998 kg)
  • Gross weight: 3,400 lb (1,542 kg)
  • Powerplant: 1 × Bristol Jupiter VI nine-cylinder air cooled radial , 450 hp (335 kW)

Performance

  • Maximum speed: 132 mph (212 km/h, 115 kn)
  • Range: 4,924 mi (7,925 km, 4,279 nmi)
  • Service ceiling: 26,000 ft (7,900 m)

References[edit]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ a b c d Barnes 1970, pp. 193–6
  2. ^ Anderson 1998, pp. 330–9

Bibliography[edit]

  • Anderson, John D. (1998). A History of Aerodynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521669553.
  • Barnes, C. H. (1970). Bristol Aircraft since 1910. London: Putnam Publishing. ISBN 0-370000153.