I'm a lifelong wannabe general aviation pilot. Having said that, a number of these earlier funky little planes look like they would have been a blast to fly over a local region on good, clear, calm days.
What a great little aircraft. Just what is needed for my 1937 adventure story set on/in the Gobi desert. The only difference I'll make to the Mk II is a tandem cabin, instead of the side by side.
Many thanks for that- it's a plane I have always wanted to model. Got the plans drawn up years ago, now have the radio gear ready- 2025 might see it! According to Arthur Ord-Hume, with whom I corresponded, the registration letters were in red. That 3/4 rear view showing the exhausts was a useful pic I had not seen before. It was a tandem two seater, stated by Ord-Hume in "British Light Aeroplanes"
@@talesfromthehutandhangar Do you have a reference for that, please? I am afraid I assumed it was silver. I've dug the drawings out- I seem to have everything I need for the build, apart from the wheels. The motor, radio gear and battery come to a mere 16 grammes, from Aerographics.. Will send you pics, probably about two months time.
As to the reason for the Arpin being rejected for the AOP role. According to an article in the April 1987 edition of Aeroplane Monthly, 5 aircraft were evaluated for the role; The Arpin A-1, General Aircraft GA33 "Cagnet", Dutch de Schelde Scheldemusch, Taylorcraft Plus-D and Stinson 105 Voyager. The Taylorcraft and Stinson entries were then selected for further trials in France, but in turn, both of these were rejected. The Army instead thought it needed a larger aircraft to carry two crew and a heavy radio, so they ordered the Stinson Vigilant from the USA. But deliveries of these were very slow and there were concerns about their price (this was before lend-lease). That made them look again at the British-made Taylorcraft which then went into production as the Auster.
@@johndell3642 Thanks very much for the info - great timing. Any chance you could send me the a copy/screenshot of the artical? This would be handy for one l am currently working on. talesfromthehutandhangar@gmail.com
Looks like a good design that would fit recreational aviation
"Unsuitable" is perhaps code for "the other guy pays kick backs better"....
I'm a lifelong wannabe general aviation pilot. Having said that, a number of these earlier funky little planes look like they would have been a blast to fly over a local region on good, clear, calm days.
What a great little aircraft. Just what is needed for my 1937 adventure story set on/in the Gobi desert. The only difference I'll make to the Mk II is a tandem cabin, instead of the side by side.
@@marktucker7454 Sounds good.
It looks like a nice little aircraft.
Cannot tell you hw much I enjoy these glimpses into obscure aircraft and their history. Thanks so much !
Thank you.
Many thanks for that- it's a plane I have always wanted to model. Got the plans drawn up years ago, now have the radio gear ready- 2025 might see it!
According to Arthur Ord-Hume, with whom I corresponded, the registration letters were in red. That 3/4 rear view showing the exhausts was a useful pic I had not seen before. It was a tandem two seater, stated by Ord-Hume in "British Light Aeroplanes"
@@PhilipSiddall Please send me a photo when it is finished & l can share . I think it was painted yellow?
@@talesfromthehutandhangar Do you have a reference for that, please? I am afraid I assumed it was silver.
I've dug the drawings out- I seem to have everything I need for the build, apart from the wheels. The motor, radio gear and battery come to a mere 16 grammes, from Aerographics.. Will send you pics, probably about two months time.
@@PhilipSiddall www.aviastar.org/air/england/arpin_a-1.php see in the comments. Hope this helps?
As to the reason for the Arpin being rejected for the AOP role. According to an article in the April 1987 edition of Aeroplane Monthly, 5 aircraft were evaluated for the role; The Arpin A-1, General Aircraft GA33 "Cagnet", Dutch de Schelde Scheldemusch, Taylorcraft Plus-D and Stinson 105 Voyager. The Taylorcraft and Stinson entries were then selected for further trials in France, but in turn, both of these were rejected. The Army instead thought it needed a larger aircraft to carry two crew and a heavy radio, so they ordered the Stinson Vigilant from the USA. But deliveries of these were very slow and there were concerns about their price (this was before lend-lease). That made them look again at the British-made Taylorcraft which then went into production as the Auster.
@@johndell3642 Thanks very much for the info - great timing. Any chance you could send me the a copy/screenshot of the artical? This would be handy for one l am currently working on. talesfromthehutandhangar@gmail.com
@@talesfromthehutandhangar Will do. The article itself is all about Taylorcraft pre-war. - Look out for it late today or tomorrow.
@johndell3642 Thanks.
@johndell3642 Thanks for the email. I like the website and will have good read 👍
This must be one of the most well designed and futuristic planes for it's time.
@briansteffmagnussen9078 Yes, l agree.
Another great video.
@@dhroman4564 Cheers!
Looks a little bit like the Fokker F.25
I bet that there will be some Salmsons not pronouncing the "l".
One day I will complete a video with no errors with pronunciations. 🤣Maybe AI is a good thing?
@talesfromthehutandhangar think of it as a Hyacinth Bucket situation, not a criticism.
@@neiloflongbeck5705 🤭