Boulton Paul – Airliner??

Breda Zapati 4x Centauraus?

Breguet 941? Four engined French turboprop, and could you have mistaken Breguet for BP? Then again, much smaller than a Britannia and not really an airliner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breguet_941

We’re off on a bit of a tangent here! So Old Shape, was it the Armagnac of which you were thinking, perhaps? I did consider the Languedoc but discounted that on the bases that (a) it did not have a tricycle undercarriage and (b) it was significantly smaller than the Brittania.

Albeit belatedly, I’ve dug out a decent aerial image of of the Armagnac. Does this ring any bells with you, Old Shape?

The only other British turboprop type of Britannia era was the slightly smaller one off Handley Page Hermes V with Bristol Theseus engines.

Although it was not four engined, what about the Aviation Traders Accountant? It was similar in design to some of the types mentioned here.

We’re off on a bit of a tangent here! So Old Shape, was it the Armagnac of which you were thinking, perhaps? I did consider the Languedoc but discounted that on the bases that (a) it did not have a tricycle undercarriage and (b) it was significantly smaller than the Brittania.

The Victor and Vulcan were still under development with new versions planned…Victor tankers for example

It was a bit of a grey area at times. Also the fact that production was completed did not mean it was out of production just that they had no more to build. Civil airloners are a little more defined there.

The Atlantique and Transall are examples of types that went back into production.

The choice of aircraft in the Observers book of Aircraft was simple.

It had to be under development or in production.

This meant inclusion of many obscure types that didn’t make it while out of production types like the Douglas DC3,4,6,7, Lockheed Constellations and many others were out by the sixties despite still flying around in their hundreds.

I can’t think of anything that would have appeared in the book then…..apart from the usual common types

Ah, then that explains why, in my 1968 edition, an updated version of the Ford Tri-Motor appears but it fails to explain the appearance of the Victor, Vulcan and Belfast, all of which are listed as “production completed”, unless it is on the basis that they are British and in service. Oh the delights of British editorial idiosyncrasy!

The choice of aircraft in the Observers book of Aircraft was simple.

It had to be under development or in production.

This meant inclusion of many obscure types that didn’t make it while out of production types like the Douglas DC3,4,6,7, Lockheed Constellations and many others were out by the sixties despite still flying around in their hundreds.

I can’t think of anything that would have appeared in the book then…..apart from the usual common types

In the mid 60’s, I had the “Observers book of Aircraft” and there was a picture in there. I remember it only because it was an unusual manufacturers name, not one of the common ones. I always swore it was Boulton Paul. I am now thinking it was French.
Size, I also remember it was up there with the Brit.

You don’t say if it was a mid 60s issue of the Observer Book of Aircraft or a copy that you were looking at in the 60s. If the latter, I wonder whether what you saw might have been the S.E.2010 Armagnac? This was about the size of a Brittania (passenger complement 78 to 160; length 39.63 m; wingspan 48.95 m) powered by four P&W Wasp Majors. It wasn’t a great success. Only eight were produced and, I think, none survived the 1950s. But the choice of aircraft featured in the Observer books always was rather eclectic!

Not the Potez 840 you were thinking of? Always makes me think of a 4-engined Jetstream. Nowhere near the size of a Britannia though.

http://www.aviastar.org/air/france/potez-840.php

Thanks for replies all.
No, it wasn’t the Apollo I was thinking of. In the mid 60’s, I had the “Observers book of Aircraft” and there was a picture in there. I remember it only because it was an unusual manufacturers name, not one of the common ones. I always swore it was Boulton Paul. I am now thinking it was French.
Size, I also remember it was up there with the Brit.

I’m allowed off days. Brain is full. New things come along, old things drop out.

I know the feeling. Once I took a wine tasting course and forgot how to drive a car…..:eek:

I think that it was an off day!

As far as I know, the only “airliners” built by Boulton & Paul were pre-war twin engined biplanes. I say “airliners” because the three models in question – the P.8, P.64 and P.71A – were designed/used primarily for mail and freight.

Whether there were any post war projects, that existed on paper and not much more, I cannot say. Maybe Boulton & Paul were considering submitting a proposal to satisfy the 1942 MoAP specification for a post-war transatlantic aeroplane. That specification was issued to the Bristol Aeroplane Company alone and eventually resulted in the Brittania. Both Miles and Short were interested in submitting designs to the specification but it was a “done deal” between the MoAP and Bristol. The Miles design was the X.11 project. Someone with far more knowledge than me about Boulton & Paul might be able to comment on this.

I know that it does not fit your description in terms of size, but perhaps what you had in mind, Old Shape, was the Armstrong Whitworth Apollo – a medium size four engine airliner first flown in 1949. However it was closer in size to original Viscount (not surprising as both were constructed to the Brabazon IIB specification). Judging from the most recent posts, that would seem to be the favourite theory. However if you look at the tail of the Apollo, I’m not sure if it is fair to say that it was prettier than the Viscount!

Thanks for replies all.
No, it wasn’t the Apollo I was thinking of. In the mid 60’s, I had the “Observers book of Aircraft” and there was a picture in there. I remember it only because it was an unusual manufacturers name, not one of the common ones. I always swore it was Boulton Paul. I am now thinking it was French.
Size, I also remember it was up there with the Brit.

I’m allowed off days. Brain is full. New things come along, old things drop out.

I think that it was an off day!

As far as I know, the only “airliners” built by Boulton & Paul were pre-war twin engined biplanes. I say “airliners” because the three models in question – the P.8, P.64 and P.71A – were designed/used primarily for mail and freight.

Whether there were any post war projects, that existed on paper and not much more, I cannot say. Maybe Boulton & Paul were considering submitting a proposal to satisfy the 1942 MoAP specification for a post-war transatlantic aeroplane. That specification was issued to the Bristol Aeroplane Company alone and eventually resulted in the Brittania. Both Miles and Short were interested in submitting designs to the specification but it was a “done deal” between the MoAP and Bristol. The Miles design was the X.11 project. Someone with far more knowledge than me about Boulton & Paul might be able to comment on this.

I know that it does not fit your description in terms of size, but perhaps what you had in mind, Old Shape, was the Armstrong Whitworth Apollo – a medium size four engine airliner first flown in 1949. However it was closer in size to original Viscount (not surprising as both were constructed to the Brabazon IIB specification). Judging from the most recent posts, that would seem to be the favourite theory. However if you look at the tail of the Apollo, I’m not sure if it is fair to say that it was prettier than the Viscount!

I would agree 25DS, sounds like the AW Apollo, a similer, if prettier design to the Viscount. Had 4 x AS Mamba turbo props in slim nacelles.

Possibly not B-P :the Armstrong Whitworth Apollo?

Had a quick look in my refs. All I can see are a couple of pre-war small biplanes.