Breguet's Aircraft ID Challenge #512

[Breguet]

Originally Posted by Rbailey

The Hispano-powered triplane may not be a good example as it was actually a different design than the rotary powered one - different wing span as well as length, etc - and not just the same airframe with a different engine installation. There will be cases where the line is blurred, but I think in this challenge is not in that category.

As different as it was was it ever given another designation?

[shackleton]

Originally Posted by Varese2002

I am of the opinion that #512 of the Breguet Challenge violates one of the rules

•Challenges which depict a machine already earlier presented are disqualified
(always check the list at earlyaviator.com/br.challenge when in doubt !)

In Breguet Challenge #424 the Mercedes engined version was pictured and identified, but much text was written there about this Siemens Halske Sh I rotary engine version.

Probably the rules must be (again) more specified as what defines a machine. Makes a new Mark or engine or substitution of a four-bladed airscrew for a two-blader another machine. In short when is the above rule violated?

The Siemens Halske Sh I was an interesting rotary engine. In German language it was known as a 'Gegenläufer', I know what they mean in German but I cannot translate the technical terms in English though.

Cheers

Kees

I think the best English translation for 'Gegenläufer' in this case would be contrarotation. I'm assuming this is one of the rotary engines where the propellor rotates in the opposite direction to the engine to reduce the torque effect.

[shackleton]

Sorry chaps I didn't read page 2 before posting.

[Rbailey]

Originally Posted by Breguet

As different as it was was it ever given another designation?

A problem with a number of early machines is a lack of official company designation, at least generally known ones. So far as I know, most of the early Sopwiths were referred to only by a descriptive term or nickname. If there were other company designations, they aren't used when we describe any of the machines prior to the 1F "Camel".

Hence, for a particular company,and especially for non-production machines, "Hispano xplane" and "Gnome xplane" might describe the same design with different engines, or quite different designs that happen to share the xplane configuration.

[crankcase]

Originally Posted by YavorD

Hi Marc,
It is a bit more complex issue.
In the Siemens-Halske Sh.3 cylinders and propeller turn in the same direction, but crankshaft turns in opposite direction. The scheme you described is correct for the Siemens-Halske Sh.1.
Regards,
Yavor

Thanks, Yavor, for the precision! Yes, now I recall the crankshaft doing the rotating (in the opposite direction). Would the contra-rotary apply in both cases Sh.1 and 3)?
Next year I have to make a trip down your way so we can have a long detailed discussion -- maybe a first Balkan conference in the spring, including our serbian brothers?
marc