Where did this float come from?

Right, I’ve now found the pic that made me think of this thread again.

This was labelled as a Grahame White float plane. What struck me were the number of struts on the float and, for a WWI era float, the long streamlined design.

Also, the Wight Type 840, which has a multiple stepped hull but again more struts than normal on a seaplane.

There is also an article on the Wight Seaplane in Flight: http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1914/1914%20-%200336.html

These are the closest that I’ve seen to anything resembling the mystery float. I don’t think they are conclusive by any means but intriguing.

Allan

Blast, I had hoped I was on to something there. I had almost convinced myself it was plausable.

Thank you Allan, for the info and marvelous picture. The mystery remains.

Regards,
Alan

That’s funny, I was just thinking about this again a couple of weeks ago.

Sorry to disappoint but it is not from the Falcon glider. It was built as a flying boat with the fuselage of the glider modified to the boat hull and only tiny wing tip floats. The glider survives with the Steamboat Museum (still closed :()

Glider in flight:

Another thread on flying boat gliders developed a discussion about the Falcon Glider here: http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=67030

I’ll dig out some other pics in a little while

Allan

Float origin.

I have come across an interesting lead to my float origins. The following link should explain, go to ‘History’. I would hope someone could enlarge on the Slingsby Falcon with it’s float.

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

Where did this float come from

DH Queen Bee? Wooden Tiger Moth full scale target.

Hi Dave That is not a Tiger Moth its a De.H. mungrel & it has metal floats but it is a fine photo though. Thanks.

Cheers TASSE

Where did this float come from

Any ideas where this float (see attachments) may have originated? It is 21 feet long and about 4 feet at its widest point. It is made of wood and covered in fabric. It has four mounting points on the top and has brass caps on the bow and stern.

Hi Fellas. This is fascinating. I think the first clue is that it was found in N.Yorkshire. This brings to mind the Blackburn Aircraft Co.,who in 1928 designed the Iris. The shape of the float is almost identical to the wing-tip floats on later marks. At the time Blackburn had a water tank for testing such things. The fact that the step is far back sugests that it is for a wing of a flying-boat. From the 1930s on “boat” hulls & floatplanes had the step in the correct position i.e. : between 1 & 2 feet behind the aircrafts centre of gravity, but this dose not apply to wing-tip floats. So the float in question might be a water tank test rig. Another indication is the mounting holes.these are in pairs, posibly for the test rig.
But on the other hand i might be totaly wrong.

Cheers TASSE (president: British Waterplane Association).

Thanks Allan, I look forward to anything you can turn up. The info you give is interesting but keeps the intrigue going. I was beginning to think the trend was moving towards a boat accessory as the keel does not seem to follow the seaplane form. I have no information as to where it was made. The chap looking after this float speaks occasionally to the owner when he makes contact and he is to get what information he can next time.

“This is one of Churchill’s riddles wrapped in an enigma isn’t it?” – isn’t it just!

Good Luck with your searching.

Windermere – fascinating – that’s the lake I drive past every day.

The reason the phone wasn’t answered is that the Steamboat Museum in Windermere has just changed hands. The Windermere Nautical Trust has effectively handed it over to the Lakeland Arts Trust who are about to start a major project to lift the boats out of the water and restore them, as well as raising money to create new facilities to display them. A huge, and worthwhile project and one which will take some time. The museum is currently closed. See: http://www.steamboat.co.uk/

I have a few excellent reference books on Windermere aircraft and will speak to a few people locally as well. But was it originally made in Windermere?

The odd thing is though, the lake was very busy with aircraft from 1911 (first flight from water in the UK) through to about 1916. Then nothing apart from a chap who operated an Avro 504 to the Isle of Man delivering newspapers in about 1919. In the 20s and 30s there was no aviation activity on the lake. The next phase was Short Brothers factory in WWII.

This is one of Churchill’s riddles wrapped in an enigma isn’t it?

Allan

Some more information has come my way. The man I assumed was the owner is in fact the keeper. The owner lives in New Zealand. However, the float was apparently purchased from “a water museum on Windermere” that sold it to “make way for other things”.

I am aware of a steam boat museum on Windermere but have not been able to get an answer on their phone yet. If anyone knows of any others they may hold the key to the origin of this curious float.

I cannot add much to the topic, but I can support JDK in stating that for a main float that step looks too far back. If you draw a line through the center of gravity and the step it should be between 10 and 20 degrees from vertical (or at least that’s what I teach people here 😀 ). Now it may of course be a very early type float on which some of the principles that we now know were not used yet.

Mmm. If the float does indeed come from an aircraft, we should be careful here and not assume that it comes from a traditional two-float design. If the float comes from a three-float design (third smaller float under the rear fuselage), then the step may well be in the correct position. Shorts added fairings to the back ends of the floats of several of their early seaplanes which resulted in floats with a step roughly in the position of the one under discussion. These were, however, slab-sided floats. Refining the design by adding a keel would not have been rocket science.

Whatever the float arrangement, this float must have come from a substantial aircraft. In the early 1920, Shorts considered producing a hydroplane. Did anything come of this?

Best wishes
Steve P

I cannot add much to the topic, but I can support JDK in stating that for a main float that step looks too far back. If you draw a line through the center of gravity and the step it should be between 10 and 20 degrees from vertical (or at least that’s what I teach people here 😀 ). Now it may of course be a very early type float on which some of the principles that we now know were not used yet.

JDK: Apart from there not being a lot of jobs in that field, I guess that if you can’t spell it, you can’t be one! :diablo: I’m sure it’s hydrodyna… hydrodyno… hydra… aaaahhhhhh!!!!! 🙁 🙁

I’m no hydrodynamacist (too few jobs… 😀 ) but I’m reasonably sure it can’t be for an aircraft because I don’t think it’ll work. Crudely, aircraft floats require a ‘step’ to allow air to break the suction so the aircraft can take off; without this, you’ll trundle up and down all day without getting off the water. Due to the centre of pressure and gravity of the aircraft, and the dynamics of moving from static water support to being supported in the air, the step is almost* always near the centre of the float’s length, which itself has a location dependant on mass at rest and dynamic take-off etc. Secondly, the ‘fin’ is something I’ve never seen on an aircraft float, and I think that would interfere with the effect of the float for an aircraft. The flare spotted by Pondskater is also unusual in a float, although similar flares etc. have been sometimes seen on unusual flying boats.

*I can’t think of any step that isn’t. Anyone? Some types, the Stranraer for instance have a two step hull, but the first step confirms to the ‘rule’ AFAIK. Again, anyone know better?

I dont think it does rule out it being from a boat, if it was to be used as an outrigger it could be supported from above…

It does seem to have four pickup points to enable it being fitted underneath a wing. That would rule out a hydroplane.

Cees

I was thinking about this again on the way to work this morning. Driving past the lake looking at a speedboat (it’s a tough commute;) ) I began to wonder if this had more in common with boats than aircraft.

Three things led to that:
The step is a long, long way back for an aircraft, but not necessarily for a boat
The chines seem to flare out just before the step – I’ve never seen that on an aircraft float, unless I’ve not looked from the right angle.
The vertical fin from the step to the tail.

The fin would provide some lateral stability, but an aircraft on “the step” would have enough air over the fin to generate its own, without needing this.

It is clearly designed and built to a high standard, which might rule out a model for testing. That leads us back to a one-off design or, as JDK said earlier, perhaps from a boat?

Allan

There’s one thing we do know for certain. It is a strange device whatever its purpose.

Hi All,

I have taken more pictures of the float. The overall length is 21 feet, the distance aft of the step to stern is 4 feet 3 inches and the maximum depth of the rear keel below the tail section is 6.5 inches. There are in fact eight attachment openings on the top surface equally spaced in pairs; the distances from the nose are (approx. centres) 57″, 91″, 134.5″ and 168.5″. The openings measure 4″ square and are approximately 13″ at the centres, apart.

I attempted an internal shot to hopefully show the intricate construction. There appeared to be at least three bulkheads.

I just cannot make my mind up whether this is an aircraft float. I include an early hydroplane I found on a web site, type unknown.

.

I think it is one of a pair, ie handed, there is a clear a symetrical “step” towards the rear mounting points as seen in picture #3

The keel then continues on in reduced section towards the flaired tail where it is clearly seen to have a assymetrical “stern” seen in picture #5

Implying this is the “right handed” float of a pair? I would vote for either a 1930’s hydroplane, or a unique pair of aircraft floats.

I dont think the plywood/timber construction should be used to rule out aircraft, while most commercial floats had become aluminium by the 1930’s this could be from the late 1920’s or custom made?

Its size and length and streamlining both of hull and of top would seem to suggest it is built for speed.

regards

Mark Pilkington

For example the underwing floats on a Supermarine Southampton (similar wooden hull construction – not sure about floats) are only about 12 feet long.

Subject to a check of the measurements I think that’s a good shout..

Photo from martinphotos…on the Tigris, Iraq.

Another one from www.britishaircraft.co.uk

[

Just a thought – perhaps a hydrodynamic water tank test-model of a racing yacht rather than an float-plane float.