Hello,
I’m currently researching into the Auster A2/45 and am looking for anything on the type. From what I have read so far, it was a bit of a disaster, as can be seen from the text below:
The General Service Requirement for the ideal Air O.P. aircraft to succeed the Auster 6 was written by condensing wartime know-how into the A2/45 specifications. Three manufacturers – Auster, Hestons and Miles, built widely different prototypes in attempts to improve the performance of the Auster 6 – they all failed.
Nothing was seen of the Miles product at Middle Wallop, where in May and June 1949 trials of the Heston (a low wing, twin boom pusher monoplane) had proved that this otherwise delightful little aircraft had a totally inadequate take-off performance. Two Auster A2/45s were delivered to Middle Wallop in June 1950. In the meantime, the home of Army Aviation had changed its name from 227 (Air O.P.) O.C.U. to the Air O.P. School.
Trials quickly showed that Auster’s contender for the A2/45 specifications had some very pecuilar habits. It was a tandem seater in which the rear observer faced aft. The overall silhouette was a distinct breakaway from the traditional Auster and owed a lot, to the wartime Fi.156 Storch.
Apart from a 300 yard take-off, the flap handling was most odd. Outsized flaps were wound down by a handwheel at the pilot’s left hand. These flaps, when down, produced a very high drag coupled with a strong downwash on the tailplane.
These combined affects brought the aircraft’s nose up sharply as flap was applied and during the subsequent approach to land, the stick had to be held fully forward against the instrument panel. A three point landing was made by releasing the forward pressure on the stick. The climax of the trials came when, with a rear observer providing maximum aft C of G, the luckless pilot found that a flapped landing was impossible and in the attempt neatly removed the starboard undercarriage leg.
During subsequent investigation it was disclosed that Boscombe Down had forgotten to tell anyone that they considered the aircraft unsafe in this configuration. None of the A2/45 series were accepted.
Excerpt from article first published in the ‘Journal of Army Aviation’ 1966.
I presume that the Miles design was the unbuilt – Miles M66 and that after service use at Middle Wallop the two A2/45s were locally scrapped?
Best wishes,
Martin
By: T6flyer - 5th February 2011 at 13:21
Gentlemen,
Thank you for taking the time to reply, so much appreciated and it all makes interesting reading.
I myself have the Miles Putnam book and now realise that it was my quick scanning of the pages that I made the mistake of referring to the Miles M66. Need to slow down a bit, me thinks!!
The only reference I have ever come across to ‘Miles’ being mentioned with A2/45 was in that Army Journal article. I agree with you that it could be a mistake as believe like yourself only the Heston and the Auster were submitted to the specification. Backing this up is Richard Riding’s article on the A2/45 in Aeroplane Monthly December 1983 which states ‘that Auster and the Heston Aircraft Company, amongst others, began studies for the A2/45 requirement and were the only two companies to produce prototypes’.
What is also interesting was that Auster had use of a Fi.156 Storch from 1946 to the early 1950s. Its identity is not known as the only few photos of it show it to have no serial number painted on the fuselage. It is recorded that this might be the example held by the RAF Museum?
I have in my collection a photo of Aiglet Trainer G-AMMS with a Storch in the background, but this time painted in an overall silver scheme. Perhaps it is the same airframe.
If anyone is interested to see more about what I’m rambling on about, please have a look at the A2/45 gallery at the wonderful Auster Heritage Group website at: http://austerhg.org/
There are hundreds of old Auster photos in their galleries and browsing can take a few hours!!!
Thanks again,
Martin
By: avion ancien - 3rd February 2011 at 18:28
If the information is of help to you, T6flyer, Ambrose Hitchman – ‘The History of the Auster Aeroplane’ – says of the Auster N:
“The specification issued by the Ministry of Supply……the A2/45, indicated a further development of the Auster/Gipsy Major combination and, since other manufacturers had also been invited to submit tenders, the Auster Company made a very modest tender and were granted the contract for the prototype. This aircraft was the subject of many changes in specification during the design and build period so that eventually increases in weight demanded a bigger engine. Finally it became a far larger aircraft with a Gipsy Queen 34 engine of 240 hp. Fortunately, all the meetings between the design team, Ministry officials and military representatives were recorded and a satisfactory price was secured for the many changes in specification. However, only two prototypes were built and no production followed.”
Now where have I heard that sort of story before and since! Perhaps of interest is the reference to “other manufacturers [in the plural] had also been invited to submit tenders…..”. So maybe the Heston was not the only other design in the running for specification A.2/45?
By: Doering - 3rd February 2011 at 18:22
While in Google with your search words, it is sometimes helpful to search within the images section. Clicking the image brings up the website with some good leads more often than not. Good luck!
By: avion ancien - 3rd February 2011 at 17:54
Don Brown – ‘Miles Aircraft since 1925’ – says that a project design for the M.66 was prepared and, whilst the text is not conclusive on the point, one deduces from it that the M.66 was not built. However he says that the M.66 was prepared in response to specification A.4/45 (rather than A.2/45) which called for “a slow three seater communications aircraft for use by Commander and Staff Officers in the field” and that this specification was issued “early in 1945”. So I wonder whether we are looking at two different specifications and, if so, it may be that the M.66 never was a potential competitor against the Auster A2/45 for an AOP role?
Since typing the above, I’ve just done a spot of googling and they were indeed different specifications. They are listed at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Air_Ministry_Specifications. A.4/45 resulted in the Scottish Aviation Pioneer. Only the Auster and the Heston are listed as being produced in response to A.2/45.
Sign In
February 3, 2011 at 4:41 pm