Armstrong Whitworth AW23

[The wooksta V2.0]

I found this aircraft a few weeks back, a competitor to the Bombay and Harrow.  It looks doable using a Novo Whitley as a basis.  However, I've tried scaling up the three view I found online (below) and the onscreen result looks way too small for 72nd. All the photos I could find online indicate that it was a big aircraft.

 

 

Has anyone more info on the type than I can find online?  I did find a fair few photos but ideally some sections would be handy. Even the diameter of a 72nd Tiger cowling would help to try and scale this drawing up a bit better!

 

Edit:  It's possible that my monitor is the culprit and it could be screen resolution or software issues.

Edited April 16, 2017 by The wooksta V2.0
Joyless fascism

[RJP]

The inevitable Wikipedia reference says the machine spanned 88' 0" and had a length of 80' 9".  The AW23 used a Tiger VI but Wiki quotes the Tiger VIII with a diameter of  50.8" and notes that "The engine was built in a number of different versions but performance and dimensions stayed relatively unchanged". Are those numbers proportional to the drawing?

 

Probably best to print the drawing and use a ruler.  

[rossm]

Those look like the drawings from the Putnam book on Armstrong Whitworth Aircraft and the dimensions quoted by RJP match those in the book. PM me an email address and I'll copy the relevant pages for you.

[rossm]

An extra note, which may alter the course of your undoubtedly planned WHIF, is that the AW23 was involved in early in-flight refuelling trials, especially with C Class flying boats. AW23 / Sunderland to plug the mid-Atlantic gap???

[Guest]

I was thinking more of a developed transport, as I was planning on using a Novo Whitley as a basis.  Looking at the aircraft, it looks to be a missed opportunity, as it looks to have a fair bit of internal capacity, more so than the Harrow and Bombay.  Certainly more useful for dropping paras than a Whitley!

[rossm]

6 hours ago, The Wooksta! said:

I was thinking more of a developed transport, as I was planning on using a Novo Whitley as a basis.  Looking at the aircraft, it looks to be a missed opportunity, as it looks to have a fair bit of internal capacity, more so than the Harrow and Bombay.  Certainly more useful for dropping paras than a Whitley!

 

The Putnam says it only narrowly missed out to the Bombay in the competition for the C.26/31 bomber transport contract for which it was designed. The other contender was the HP.51 which later became the Harrow and the favourable impression created by the AW23 led to a decision it should be further developed - which resulted in the Whitley. I would guess AW wanted to put their effort into the Ensign at the time.

 

If you want the Putnam pages copied just let me know.

[Admiral Puff]

I looked at this conversion about twelve months ago. It would involve a scratchbuilt fuselage - about all the Frog/Novo fuselage could be used for is the wing mounts. The wings and tail are essentially the same as the Whitley's though.

[rossm]

8 hours ago, Admiral Puff said:

I looked at this conversion about twelve months ago. It would involve a scratchbuilt fuselage - about all the Frog/Novo fuselage could be used for is the wing mounts. The wings and tail are essentially the same as the Whitley's though.

 

Just an impression, I've not looked at measurements or photos, but is the fuselage similar to any of the 1930's French bombers that came from Heller/KP like the Amiot 143 or MB210 ?

[Admiral Puff]

Can't help there - I haven't looked at that. It may be possible, but I suspect that it would probably be easier to start with a clean sheet of plastic card and go from there. It's mostly slab sides, and it shouldn't be difficult to develop the shape from the three-view.