Jump to content

Westland P7/30


A.A. Barry
 Share

Recommended Posts

Well, another of Petters plans, along with the Wagtail, Wessex, Whirlwind, Welkin and Wyvern is this little pretty biplane. I never got into production as ir was too slow for the hierarchic , but I think it would make a lovely E.P model, around 12/1500mm

2 prototypes where made and first flew in 1934.. there is more info on the web plus pics

Check it out

A drawing to come

Edited By A.A. Barry on 14/06/2015 01:14:34

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Advert


Hi Barry. I think you mean "F7/30", the specification that produced a number of interesting prototypes, including the Supermarine 224 and Bristol 133.

The Westland attempt is very attractive. It's unusual feature is the Airacobra like engine position for the Rolls Royce Goshawk behind the pilot, driving the prop through an extension shaft. Although it didn't meet the performance specifications, it is a nice looking plane and I've never seen it modelled before. Perhaps the difficult bit will be getting the cg right with that very short nose. You wonder how they got it right on the original, unless the extension shaft to the prop was very heavy!

I bet you've already made a start on it, good luck. If you are doing what I tend to do, which is part way through a long build do a diversion on to something simple and "quick", I generally find out that it takes longer than I thought it would, but that's largely because of limited time and I'm slow anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Colin, nup I have only just thought about it, Whirlwind to finish and then the Welkin ... C/G... I thought a 36"/ 42" W/S and the battery underneath the cockpit floor, stringers from "D" backwards, not shown on this drawing ( behind lower wing fixing)... tissue covered, simple box ft fuz with light sheeting around secondary formers.Tail feathers soft sheet

Looking at the full size the engine is directly under the C/G... I think, so they must have done their homework on that

What'd think??

Barry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sounds good to me Barry, you'll need to keep the back end light though. Using a built up structure with tissue covering as you intend makes it possible though, I guess.

I think it's a great idea. There are so many of these prototypes that aren't well known, but make fantastic model projects, there's no doubt about this one having loads of character.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like I got the title wrong, embarrassed it was given proviso name of PV4, the p7/30 is the specification on which it was submitted, see Colin's post a little further back.....maybe a moderator can fix that.... thanks Colin

Barry

Edited By A.A. Barry on 14/06/2015 11:23:28

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Barry, wrong end of stick! I don't know why Westland called it PV4 though, even though they did. It usually means "Private Venture", the Hawker contender (PV3) and the victorious Gladiator were both in that category. The Westland contender was absolutely targeted at F7/30, so doesn't seem to have been a private venture, but a response to a government contract. There must be an answer!

It looks as if you have got Tim interested, so it has to be a good prospect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've crunched a few numbers, starting with the fuz ....side view using the sysbols on the drwg x 7:-

W/S ...( top ) ....1360 mm width 200 mm

A = 80 mm

B = 158 mm

C = 187 mm

D = 155 mm

E = 81 mm

A to B = 84

B to C = 112mm

C to D = 252

D to E = 287

E to rear = 273 mm

there should be enough space behind B to fit a good size 3s, or shift B forward if required, because A is 80 mm (spinner ), this could also be reduced and by making A 70 mm, you could gain an extra 20 mm between A and B

width of B & C 126 mm

" " D = 110 mm, E = 56 mm

So they all look feasible

Barry

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Barry. Sorry I'm a bit slow in replying. I think you've got plenty of scope in the wing section for altering to semi-symmetrical. As I mentioned, I drew it flat bottomed as part of keeping the stalling speed low for hand-launching, it might not have been necessary. The key thing is that the thickness is scale, so to avoid going too thick, you need to reduce the camber on the upper surface and it looks as if you've done this.

By the way I've found a copy of Aviation News from November 1993 on Ebay which has a feature on the PV4. I've bought it and it should arrive tomorrow. Let's see if it tells us something new. If it's any good I will copy it to you. I'm still intrigued why it's called PV when it's not generally considered to have been Private Venture. The previous Westland biplane was the PV3 and it definitely was Private Venture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...