Talk:Shackleton-Murray SM.1

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft project.

Build location

Seems strange if the aircraft finished build in Southampton they would move it back to Yorkshire to fly it? Jackson 1974 says it was built at York. MilborneOne (talk) 11:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, though it started life in Yorkshire, as you imply. I had the feeling it may have travelled further by road than in the air, though Ord-Hume speaks quite kindly about it. Given it was built by two Aussies, maybe it was going walkabout? Why did it later go to Hanworth; well, Shackleton's office was in London. Don't know anything about Airspeed's moves or facilities; perhaps the Putnam Airspeed book (don't have) would shed some light. It did have an Airspeed c/n (8).TSRL (talk) 12:08, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems Sherburn-in-Elmet was Airspeed's aerodrome in the early thirties, when they were York based. Airspeed Ferry says that aircraft was first flown from there. Maybe when they first moved to Southampton (or Portsmouth, as some say), they had not yet found/developed a test ground nearby? Folded, the SM.1 would have been quite easy to transport.TSRL (talk) 12:22, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK understood, I havent got the Airspeed book but as you say it was roadable and if they had facilities at Sherburn it may have been easier. MilborneOne (talk) 12:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.ab-ix.co.uk/airspeed%20prewar.pdf This has a bit of history on the SM1 including the crash into the sea which damaged it beyond repair. MilborneOne (talk) 12:46, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Offered for sale

http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/view/1933/1933%20-%200983.html (9 November 1933) has an advert for the sale of the SM.1 and as Murray had become general manager of DHC. It also offered the manufacturing right and mentions they also designed the S.M.2 ? I will work it into the article later when I have time but do we know what the S.M.2 was ? no goggle hits except for this advert. MilborneOne (talk) 12:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great ad. I'd have been more inclined to buy if there had been a few long flights as well as 350 short ones! But it certainly adds to what we know. Wonder if the Airspeeed list, also very interesting, comes from the Putnam book. Xmas list?

There is nothing called SM2 in OrdHume, so far as I can see. Wondered about Miles Pusher, "inspired by the SM1", but there's nothing to say that Miles used this unMiles like nomenclature. Could it have been the proposed Pobjoy R powered version? Ord-Hume does not mention a type number, and you'd have thought it might have been SM.1A or sonesuch, but it's the only other machine (AFAIK) associated with both Shackleton and Murray.

I'm about to change Southampton into Portsmouth Airprt; my error, can't think how. O-H is very clear.TSRL (talk) 16:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]