BUBBLE CANOPIES - 'Pre-Historic' Beginnings...

[nuuumannn]

The early SE-5's had a sort of canopy that surrounded the front of the cockpit, but was open at the rear. Pilots didn't like it either, so it wasn't installed thereafter.

This was known as the 'Greenhouse' and distorted pilots' view through it and 56 Sqn, the first unit to use the SE.5 had the greenhouse removed and its aircraft fitted with flat plate windscreens robbed from Avro trainers. In the SE.5a, the first prototype of which was the third prototype SE.5 A4563, had a lowered seat and faired headrest and the 'Avro' style windscreen.

It should also be mentioned that the SE.4 never flew with its moulded celluloid canopy as no pilot wanted to fly it with it fitted!

 

[nuuumannn]

Thanks Fubar, it's not uncommon (and sadly frustrating) that many publications that present as authoritative aren't nearly as well researched as perhaps they should be. I had previously seen photographs of the final open-top version some time ago but only the drawing of the prior closed-top canopy.

Hm, this is interesting Xylstra, I've not heard this before and would like to know more. I have found a brief mention of the prototype's windshieds by Jack Bruce in The Aeroplanes of the Royal Flying Corps Military Wing (Putnam, 1992), in which he states, "A very large windscreen was fitted and was designed to protect the pilot when he had to deal with a jammed Vickers gun." Later in the same chapter he states that, "[The first production SE.5] resembled the modified A4652, having a windscreen that was, if anything, more voluminous than that of the prototype."

Addenda: I have seen a side view of the prototype with its windshied and it was just that, a triangular shaped shield ahead of the pilot and not fully enclosed, so this is probably what Bruce is referring to.

Is there any possibility of posting a copy of said drawing?

 

[Graeme]

I can only find a poor photo of the large wrap-around windscreen fitted to A4561...

(Classic WWI Aircraft Profiles - 2002)

 

[fubar57]

From the above book...

 

[xylstra]

Hm, this is interesting Xylstra, I've not heard this before and would like to know more. I have found a brief mention of the prototype's windshieds by Jack Bruce in The Aeroplanes of the Royal Flying Corps Military Wing (Putnam, 1992), in which he states, "A very large windscreen was fitted and was designed to protect the pilot when he had to deal with a jammed Vickers gun." Later in the same chapter he states that, "[The first production SE.5] resembled the modified A4652, having a windscreen that was, if anything, more voluminous than that of the prototype."

Addenda: I have seen a side view of the prototype with its windshied and it was just that, a triangular shaped shield ahead of the pilot and not fully enclosed, so this is probably what Bruce is referring to.

Is there any possibility of posting a copy of said drawing?

No problem! Just use your fore-finger to flick back one page and "there she be!" Cheers.

 

[nuuumannn]

But sorry to disappoint: the S.E.5 is still the first. The combat issue version had an open-top wrap-around 'wind-deflector' but prior to this they test-flew a prototype with a fully-enclosed hood. Seen a drawing but would still like to see a photo. Cheers, Xylstra.

This is what specifically I'm referring to. The fully enclosed hood of the SE.5. Where did you see the drawing and can you post it?

 

[xylstra]

This is what specifically I'm referring to. The fully enclosed hood of the SE.5. Where did you see the drawing and can you post it?

Hi, Did you not understand my message? You are currently on page 2. Extend your forefinger and tap on page 1. The drawing is already there. Cheers.

 

[fubar57]

The drawing says SE.4. Looking for the SE.5 drawing you mentioned

 

[xylstra]

The drawing says SE.4. Looking for the SE.5 drawing you mentioned

Probably should have been clearer, other aircraft types i.e. S.E.4 were commandeered as 'test-mules' to investigate ideas used on other models (S.E.5.). In war-time you use whatever is to hand so as not to divert limited manpower/materials away from primary production. Cheers, Xylstra.

 

[tyrodtom]

The S.E.4 first flew July 1914, crashed in August of that year, There isn't a single visible design feather in common with the S.E. 5, other than both are single bay biplanes.
The S.E.4a, was built next, and first flew June of 1915, had almost no commonality with the S.E.4, other than both being rotary powered single bay biplanes.
And about the only visible design element shared between the S.E.4a and the S.E.5 was both are single bay biplanes, and the S.E.4a's vertical tail looks somewhat similar to the S.E.5.

The S.E.5 first flight was Sept 1916.
If the S.E.4's of either model was used in the development of the S.E.5, maybe it was in the area of what not to do.

 

[nuuumannn]

Hi, Did you not understand my message? You are currently on page 2. Extend your forefinger and tap on page 1. The drawing is already there. Cheers.

No, frankly, I didn't, because there is no drawing of the SE.5 on the previous page, as Geo pointed out. The SE.4 and SE.5 are two very different aircraft and as I mentioned in a previous post, the SE.4 never flew with the blown canopy. As for your claim about a photograph of it fitted, there is one, albeit a replica fitted, in Paul Hare's book The Royal Aircraft Factory (Putnam, 1990) on page 277 (go look it up - I'm not gonna post it here). In fact your whole premise has been misleading regarding the SE.5's hood - mention of the SE.4's hood is well known and can even be found on wikipedia, despite your claim that authors regularly miss it.

"The pilot sat in a cockpit under the trailing edge of the upper wing; unusually for the time, a transparent canopy made out of celluloid to fit the cockpit was made, but pilots refused to fly with it fitted and the canopy was never used."

From here: Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.4 - Wikipedia

As for this,

other aircraft types i.e. S.E.4 were commandeered as 'test-mules' to investigate ideas used on other models (S.E.5.). In war-time you use whatever is to hand so as not to divert limited manpower/materials away from primary production.

Do you have any evidence that the hood on SE.4 was intended as a research feature for the SE.5? Or is this another unsubstantiated statement you are leading us to believe?

 

[xylstra]

No, frankly, I didn't, because there is no drawing of the SE.5 on the previous page, as Geo pointed out. The SE.4 and SE.5 are two very different aircraft and as I mentioned in a previous post, the SE.4 never flew with the blown canopy. As for your claim about a photograph of it fitted, there is one, albeit a replica fitted, in Paul Hare's book The Royal Aircraft Factory (Putnam, 1990) on page 277 (go look it up - I'm not gonna post it here). In fact your whole premise has been misleading regarding the SE.5's hood - mention of the SE.4's hood is well known and can even be found on wikipedia, despite your claim that authors regularly miss it.

"The pilot sat in a cockpit under the trailing edge of the upper wing; unusually for the time, a transparent canopy made out of celluloid to fit the cockpit was made, but pilots refused to fly with it fitted and the canopy was never used."

From here: Royal Aircraft Factory S.E.4 - Wikipedia

As for this,



Do you have any evidence that the hood on SE.4 was intended as a research feature for the SE.5? Or is this another unsubstantiated statement you are leading us to believe?

I think you guys are becoming too pedantic on this subject. I don't hink you appreciate how ad-hoc many of these ideas were, fab'd up on a designers whim. i.e. there are no design committees, nor scientists running around wearing white-coats. This is why conducting historical research from this period is so difficult, simply because much was never recoreded, hence, intelligent speculation is sometimes all you're left with. Moreover, multiple authors DO regularly miss development variants.

 

[nuuumannn]

Moreover, multiple authors DO regularly miss development variants.

Nah, you're jumping to conclusions without any credible evidence. There's a difference between authors missing things and connections that simply don't exist. If you have evidence that the SE.4 canopy was intended for the SE.5, produce it, don't just make it up.

 

[Wurger]

SE.5 ...

the pic source: the net.

 

[tyrodtom]

The SE.4 was a very advanced aircraft for it's time, ailerons that lowered as flaps at low speeds, and rose higher to reduce drag at high speeds, had flexible mesh over the control hinge gaps, with every attention to details that had to do with maximum speed exclusively . When it had the double rotary Gnome engine it was the fastest aircraft in the world at the time, I believe. The full bubble canopy was just more of a attempt to help smooth airflow over it, but it distorted vision so much no pilot would fly the SE.4 with it installed.

135 mph in 1914 about a month before WW1 started, and about a year and a half before the specifications to which the SE.5 was built to fulfill were even put forth.

I'm sure the Royal Aircraft Factory learned something from the SE.4, and the later SE.4A, but maybe more in the area of what NOT to do.
Like for instance, don't try to get any pilot to fly a aircraft meant to be a fighting scout with a full cockpit enclosure .

 

[nuuumannn]

SE.5a ...

I hate to say it, Wojtek, but those are SE.5s, not SE.5as. The principal difference between the two were reduced span wings and a headrest aft of the cockpit. Otherywise, the two are almost identical; the hood is a giveaway as no SE.5as had it apart from the first prototype, which was built as an SE.5. That's probably the easiest way to tell them apart, that is until you see a picture of an SE.5 with a headrest and no hood as per Ball's modifications!

SE.5a-2

 

[Wurger]

I hate to say it, Wojtek, but those are SE.5s, not SE.5as.

Oh.. just a typo. I had to hit the "a" key by force of habit and even haven't noticed that . . Edited.. THX for the correction.

Here two shots more ...

the pic source: the Internet.

 

[nuuumannn]

Man, your ability to find images on the net is impressive.

 

[Wurger]

Thank you for your kind words.

Judging by these four images the entire A'89** series of the SE.5 could have had the cockpit canopy fitted.

 

[nuuumannn]

Thank you for your kind words.

My pleasure, Wojtek. You bring it, every time.