What is it? - 02.jpg (1/1) [87K]

Here are a couple of photographs of an early Royal Naval Air Service seaplane
at Tain, not too far from the Royal Navy base at Invergordon.

Can anyone identify the type of aircraft?

The only additional information I have is a description of it as a two-seater
reconnaissance aircraft, No 129 of the RNAS. The main writing on the second
photograph says "Waterplane leaving Tain".

I assume both photographs show the same aircraft although Photo 01 has an
estimated date of 1916 whereas Photo 02 has been estimated as 1910. I'm sure
1910 is simply wrong; it's just too early for a seaplane of this relative
sophistication.

Personally, I'm inclined to think it's a Wight Pusher seaplane but I'd
welcome a positive ID.

"Netko" wrote in message
...

Here are a couple of photographs of an early Royal Naval Air Service seaplane
at Tain, not too far from the Royal Navy base at Invergordon.

Can anyone identify the type of aircraft?

The only additional information I have is a description of it as a two-seater
reconnaissance aircraft, No 129 of the RNAS. The main writing on the second
photograph says "Waterplane leaving Tain".

I assume both photographs show the same aircraft although Photo 01 has an
estimated date of 1916 whereas Photo 02 has been estimated as 1910. I'm sure
1910 is simply wrong; it's just too early for a seaplane of this relative
sophistication.

Personally, I'm inclined to think it's a Wight Pusher seaplane but I'd
welcome a positive ID.



According to my copy of British Military Aircraft Serials 1912-1966, the Royal Navy allocated 1-200
retrospectively to aircraft already in service and numbers 128 and 129 are said to be "Wright Pusher
Seaplane, 135 h.p. Canton Unné".

I hope this helps.

--
Andrew B (Cheshire, England)

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
(Lord Kelvin, president Royal Society, 1895.)

Reading further through the listings with my mind a little clearer this morning it would seem that
the numbering system took effect in November 1912 and the naval wing had 16 aircraft that were
re-numbered and the others in the sequence were taken up in numerical/chronological sequence as
aircraft were ordered although deliveries were not necessarily in the same sequence. The 1-200
numbers were taken up in full by midsummer 1914.

This would tend to imply that number 129 would be from 1913 or early 1914.

--
Andrew B (Cheshire, England)

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
(Lord Kelvin, president Royal Society, 1895.)

On Fri, 18 May 2012 09:21:09 +0100, Andrew B wrote
(in article ) :

Reading further through the listings with my mind a little clearer this
morning it would seem that
the numbering system took effect in November 1912 and the naval wing had 16
aircraft that were
re-numbered and the others in the sequence were taken up in
numerical/chronological sequence as
aircraft were ordered although deliveries were not necessarily in the same
sequence. The 1-200
numbers were taken up in full by midsummer 1914.

This would tend to imply that number 129 would be from 1913 or early 1914.

My thanks to both you and Savageduck for confirming and extending what I
suspected.

Also, for purposes of clarification and correction, the aircraft was designed
by a Mr Wright, built by a Mr White but named Wight after the island where it
was built.

I assume this was because the names Wright and White were already established
in the world of early aviation.

"Netko" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 May 2012 09:21:09 +0100, Andrew B wrote
(in article ) :


My thanks to both you and Savageduck for confirming and extending what I
suspected.

Also, for purposes of clarification and correction, the aircraft was designed
by a Mr Wright, built by a Mr White but named Wight after the island where it
was built.

I assume this was because the names Wright and White were already established
in the world of early aviation.


Thanks for the interesting correction Netko.

I read and re-read the name in the book several times and it's clearly there in black and white and
yet my mind still tricked me into seeing what it wrongly expected to see.

--
Andrew B (Cheshire, England)

"Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible."
(Lord Kelvin, president Royal Society, 1895.)