During World War I, Felixstowe F 2
and 3 flying-boats had been operated successfully on coastal-reconnaissance
duties, despite their various problems, and they
were replaced after the armistice by the F.5 from the same makers. However, D’Arcy
Greig (later to figure in the Supermarine S.5 story) recorded that:
they were grossly underpowered by two Rolls-Royce Eagle VIII engines, and if there happened to be a flat calm at time of take-off, they frequently refused to unstick. On such occasions the pilot had to taxi frenziedly up and down the Solent and around in circles in order to disturb the surface of the water before trying again, but even then they sometimes failed to get airborne.
These flying-boats had slab-sided
hulls which were prone to leakage and so the Air Ministry was concerned to see if the Linton-Hope type of
hull (see my Blog: "R.
J. Mitchell’s Wooden Hulls – structure and finish"),
which they regarded as a success on the early Supermarine seaplanes,
could be adopted on aircraft of the Felixstowe size.
SCYLLA
The slow process of addressing
this concern by various manufacturers around the country lasted well after
the war, by which time Supermarine came into contention in 1921 with the Scylla, a
triplane with biplane stabilizers. It was to be powered by two main engines and
a much smaller, auxiliary one, sited in the hull to drive a water propeller for
taxiing [and perhaps to assist with take-offs?]. This last feature seems particularly old-fashioned, looking back to
the earlier Pemberton Billing days of the company, in particular, the
P.B.7, and to a proposed Torpedo Carrier triplane of 1921.
Why only the hull of the Scylla was
completed is unknown, as was its final fate. Most likely, Mitchell’s rapidly
developing confidence as a designer was an important factor:
as a new contract was received soon afterwards (Spec. 21/22) for a large commercial
amphibian, his thoughts could turn from the traditional thinking represented by
the Scylla to a more forward-looking aircraft. Also, required
to carry twelve passengers, it would come out at about the same size as the
military Scylla and therefore it might be that the first machine was soon
relegated to merely providing information for the new design – which, as a biplane, Mitchell
must have predicted would be a more efficient aircraft; it could also surely be
easily retro-fitted for such military purposes as might have been envisaged for the Scylla.
Certainly the former machine seems to have been used only for water taxiing
trials and a photograph in Supermarine
Aircraft shows a very basic framework erected on the hull to accommodate
(temporarily?) the two engines for this purpose.
SWAN
When the new machine, to be named the Swan, first appeared in 1924, it was
a considerable re-design, being an equal-span biplane
with a forward-folding wing arrangement like the Sea Eagle of the previous
year. Indeed the Swan might, in some ways, be regarded, rather, as a scaled-up Sea Eagle
although doubling the number of passengers to be carried necessitated
accommodating them in the main body of the hull rather than in the fore
position of the earlier aircraft.
Again, the fuel tanks were placed high enough to provide gravity feed to the
engines which were situated between the wings, as well as to provide unusually
roomy and fume-free accommodation for the passengers. The fin and rudder
outlines also resembled those of the Sea Eagle.
On the other hand, Mitchell’s less
complex use of dihedral only on the outer sections of the lower mainplane was
new and the three vertical tail surfaces anticipated his larger designs of the
next decade. The single plane stabiliser was also new to larger Supermarine
aircraft and was kept well clear of the water by the upward slope of the rear
section of the hull – very unusual for the time although not quite an
innovation in flying-boat design (see the much smaller French Tellier T3 or Latham HB3);
nor was it as graceful as the upward sweep of the future Southampton rear fuselage
but, at least, it represented a bold new step in Mitchell hull design, without there
being previous experimentation with smaller hulls.
Supermarine Swan |
The need to mount three fins had
also led to a reversal of his earlier practice, whereby the tailplane had been supported by the fin (with the aid of numerous
struts). The new feature also anticipated most of Mitchell’s later seaplanes
and was a more elegant configuration than the traditional biplane-tail approach
proposed for the Scylla. On the other hand, the upswept fuselage and the
boat-like prow, flared outwards at the top to counteract spray, were features
in common with the earlier machine which had presumably been proven to be
effective by its taxiing trials.
The raised cockpit superstructure
was also very reminiscent of the unfinished Scylla and it contributed
significantly to the clumsiness of the hull profile. Cozens’ comments:
The Swan had several features which showed improvements on previous designs, and no doubt these led to its success. The keel had an upward curve towards the tail that enabled it to take off more readily and this feature was noticeable in all later flying boat hulls built throughout the flying boat era, even to the Saunders-Roe Princess of the nineteen fifties, and it is very apparent if one compares the pictures of the Swan with that of the [Supermarine] Channel I. The struts of the Swan’s centre section formed large W’s which made for great strength and the large fins and rudders and the considerable spacing between the wings made this aircraft a success from a handling point of view. At any rate, Captain Biard was pleased and so was the Air Ministry, but no-one could say that the Swan was a handsome machine with its rounded bow and strange looking cabin and the pilot’s cockpit at the top.
The “strange looking cabin”, which
housed a crew of two, sat on the top of the main fuselage so as not to interfere
with the passenger space and, as the proposed passenger windows had yet not
been fitted, the offending side-view was unrelieved. The same had been true of
the Scylla and, whilst Supermarine had no doubt chosen the latter’s name to
suit its proposed military role, it might seem to others that the name
reflected its appearance: according to Ovid, the beautiful Scylla was turned into a
thing of terror and in Homer Odysseus manages to sail past her but not before
she catches and devours six of his men. As the new design was to have a more
pacific role, the new aircraft was named ‘Swan” although, despite its size, “ugly duckling” comes
more to mind.
The Swan nearing completion.
|
Be
that as it may, the new aircraft was first flown by Biard on 25 March, 1924
and, at this time, displayed the triangular cut-outs in the leading edges of
the wings to enable them to fold forwards. The Swan also had the sort of
retracting undercarriage arrangement that Mitchell had designed for his
single-engined amphibians but the much increased size of the new machine
necessitated the novelty of some form of servo assistance. Biard described the mechanism
as follows:
it would have been quite impossible to wind down the six-foot wheels and powerful landing-carriage, which had to stand the weight of several tons of aircraft and passengers! So a neat device was fitted to the machine to do the work quickly and efficiently for us. This consisted of a small propeller, which, when not in use, was set sideways to the direction in which we were flying. When we wanted to lower the landing-gear, this propeller was swung round to face the direction of our course, and the whirling propeller was connected by cogs to a handle which wound very rapidly round and lowered the wheels into place; by turning the propeller rearward the wheels were wound up out of our way under the wings, and the machine was then able to descend on water. This gear, after one or two adjustments following minor troubles during tests, when the Swan behaved neither like fish, flesh, nor fowl, proved remarkably efficient, and wound the heavy landing-gear into place in about half a minute or less.
Biard also describes the visit
of the Prince of Wales to Supermarine, and to the Swan in particular, on the
27th of June in the same year. :
By
the time of the Prince’s visit, the Swan’s two 360 hp Rolls-Royce Eagle engines
had been replaced by Napier Lion engines, each developing 90 hp more than the
Rolls-Royce units, which increased the Swan’s top speed by 13 mph; and the
folding of the wings and the leading edge cut-outs had also been dispensed
with. Plans for an RAF version of the Swan were also being actively pursued at
this time – which may also have had some influence on the change to the
fixed-wing layout and possibly throws more light upon the decision to terminate
the development of the military Scylla.
Successful trials at the Marine
Aircraft Experimental Establishment, Felixstowe, followed which were to have
important results for the fortunes of Supermarine (see my Blogpost: “Annus Mirabilis,
Pt.1) and, on its return to Supermarine, it was now fitted out for its
passenger-carrying role. Company publicity pointed out that the machine was not
only the first twin-engined commercial flying-boat/amphibian but that the
provision of accommodation set new standards:
This is the first twin-engined amphibian flying-boat to be built in the world and it may also be fairly claimed to be the first twin-engined commercial flying-boat.An important feature of this machine is that the whole of the hull is devoted to passenger accommodation. There are no internal obstructions of any kind, and the amount of room in the saloon far exceeds that of any commercial landplane. The internal accommodation consists of one large passenger saloon, elaborately furnished and upholstered and with every comfort. Forward of the saloon is the luggage compartment, fitted with racks for the stowage of passenger baggage. Aft of the saloon is the buffet, with all necessary fittings to supply light refreshment during the journey. Still further aft are the lavatories, which are efficiently and fully equipped.
As such it was registered as G-EBJY
and first flew on June the 9th, 1926, carrying a representative of the newly formed Imperial
Airways and eight excited female employees of Supermarine. A slight reduction
in passenger seating had further allowed Supermarine to address the new standards in passenger
accommodation, which The Aeroplane fully confirmed: ‘the
appointments are exquisite’ with ‘a commodious passenger saloon padded
luxuriously and in which there are ten cosy armchairs. An ample porthole is
provided for each chair.’
|
The aircraft was loaned by the
Air Ministry to Imperial Airways in order to supplement the service of
Supermarine’s remaining two Sea Eagles, on their Channel
Isles service. It operated during 1926 and 1927 but, as The Guernsey Evening Press reported, ‘during
the normal rigorous inspection prior to leaving Southampton on April 12, a
structural defect was discovered which necessitated the stripping of the whole
machine’. As a result, the Swan was scrapped; Imperial Airways’ next
long-distance seaplane was not to be the Swan, however, and so its main
significance remained that of providing the prototype for the Royal Air Force’s
next standard maritime reconnaissance aircraft, the far more attractive
Supermarine Southampton of 1925.
* * * * *
For
reference sources, see my Blog: “Source Material and
References. " An extended
bibliography is included in my R.J.Mitchell
at Supermarine; Schneider Trophy to Spitfire which also provides material
for wider reading, grouped according to specific areas of interest. More information, photographs and a three-view drawing of the Swan, as well as a full account of all Mitchell's completed designs and of the man behind them, will be available in a few weeks' time.
No comments:
Post a Comment