Talk:RAF 1

Applied to S.E.5

With all due respect this MUST be a mistake. The S.E.5 was designed specifically for the Hispano-Suiza, and was only fitted with this engine (in its 150 & 200 hp. versions), and the 200 hp Wolseley Viper. It may be that a few were fitted with Sunbeam Arabs although I cannot find a reference to this offhand; this is just a guess: a number of types designed for the Hispano were either produced with Arabs or experimentally fitted with them.

But the RAF 1 for heaven's sake!!

Logically, it just seems incredibly unlikely - assuming you had an S.E.5 airframe without an engine (and in late 1917 there were quite a few due to the shortage of Hispanos) - why would you want to fit an obsolete air cooled motor with less than half the required power? The result would have been no use as a fighter nor even as an advanced trainer, and could have served no possible experimental purpose. Surely such a strange and pointless experiment would have got into the history of the S.E.5 somewhere? But I can find no trace of its having done so!

With all due respect to Lumsden then I suggest that he must be mistaken (even good sources are now and then). I don't think this really should be included without a corroborating source - if possible a photo of the aircraft concerned. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 13:35, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

SE5as with civil registrations G-EAZT & G-EBTK were purchased after WW1 from the aircraft disposal company (AIRDISCO) and were then fitted with RAF 1A engines. There was also one SE5a retrofitted with a Renault 80 hp engine. The air-cooled Vee engines were fitted to reduce maintenance and fuel consumption. The lower powered engines reduced the speed of the aircraft but this wasn’t a problem as they were only used for short recreational touring flights.

This information is available from a number of sources the most accessible probably being Paul Hare’s 2013 book Mount of Aces - ISBN 9781781554128 Stivushka (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2024 (UTC)

Applied to Avro 504!

This seems almost as unlikely as the S.E.5 - with due respect to Lumsden we need a corroborating source. The 504 was fitted with a number of engines - all were either rotary or radial apart from a single example apparently fitted with a RR Hawk. Fitting a comparatively heavy, much longer "V" type engine like the RAF 1 would have necessitated considerable modification of the airframe if only to maintain centre of gravity, and by normal Avro practice would have had its own type designation. (The Hawk powered prototype for instance was the 504F). --Soundofmusicals (talk) 13:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Just to support Lumsden the Illustrated Encyclopedia of Aircraft page 396 also says that the Avro 504K was fitted with a 90hp RAF 1A engine. MilborneOne (talk) 18:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Great - this is exactly the kind of thing I have been looking for myself! But what exactly does the source say? Anything whatever about the context - like was it an Avro experiment, a service machine, or privately owned, and was there more than one? If so it may well belong in the Avro article as well as the RAF 1 - but I think we do need to be specific - otherwise we run the risk of being misleading - and creating a picture of lots of 504s flying around with RAF 1 engines, which is very obviously not the case. The 504 was essentially a rotary/radial aircraft. A picture would be nice too. The appearance of the aircraft would be drastically changed, and would be very interesting. --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:04, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

The two citations are both of sufficient quality that the 504K should be put as an application for the RAF 1a. The standard followed across other aircraft engine pages is that the number of aircraft powered by the engine and the relative success (or lack of) does not affect inclusion in applications list. Stivushka (talk) 10:59, 24 May 2024 (UTC)