PhilB Posted 10 November , 2009 Share Posted 10 November , 2009 The caption says Albert Ball with airplane spinner and prop. Could these be from a shot down plane - eagle eyed air enthusiasts will know? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Adrian Roberts Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 The German types most likely to have had spinners this size would have been an Albatros or a Roland. I would have thought the propellor would have been more damaged if the aircraft had crashed; maybe it was "forced to land". Several of his victories are described as aeroplanes of these types "FTL". I can't think of a British aircraft that would have had a spinner that size, except the Bristol M1B/C, and it is unlikely that he would have had the opportunity to have flown one of these before his death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 suspect it's prop & cone de penetration from an early Nieuport 17. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 Ball did experiment with a spinner and some prop refinements - possibly these are they. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 Ball did fly at least one Nieuport with a spinner http://albertball.homestead.com/Albert18.JPG but the prop is different. He experimented with a spinner on an SE5. The original caption on an uncropped version of the photo was 'Albert Ball with his red spinner and propellor.' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 QUOTE (Phil_B @ Nov 10 2009, 04:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> The caption says Albert Ball with airplane spinner and prop. Could these be from a shot down plane - eagle eyed air enthusiasts will know? Another shot that looks very similar The caption reads " Balls famous "red spinner" later mounted in the foyer of the Ball family home" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 11 November , 2009 Share Posted 11 November , 2009 The spinner (cone de penetration) shown on the Nieuport photo wasn't experimental; it was a factory fitment to early Nieuport 17s. The photos of Ball must have been taken before his final posting to 56 Sqn and the spinner would, therefore, be most likely to have come from a Nieuport (note that it's much more hemi-spherical than spinner from Albatros machines). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 The spinner (cone de penetration) shown on the Nieuport photo wasn't experimental; it was a factory fitment to early Nieuport 17s. The photos of Ball must have been taken before his final posting to 56 Sqn and the spinner would, therefore, be most likely to have come from a Nieuport (note that it's much more hemi-spherical than spinner from Albatros machines). No but as I made clear in my earlier posts Ball experimented with a spinner on an SE5! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Russell Smith Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 Like MickDavis, I've always understood that these photos do, in fact, show Ball with the cone-de-penetration from his Nieuport just prior to his assignment with 56. The cone-de-penetration was not technically a "spinner" as it didn't actually spin, but was still an attempt to improve the aerodynamics of the Nieuport. In Saggitarius Rising Cecil Lewis mentions Ball's SE as having a red nose. Its the only mention of that that I've ever come across. RFC likely would not have allowed Ball to paint his aircraft and the photos of Ball's SE certainly don't indicate any additional paint, so I've often wondered if, perhaps for a short time, Ball tried to mount this same cone on his SE like McCudden did (I'm pretty sure it was McCudden ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Soul Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 I've tried "Googling" to educate myself on this subject but to no avail Please can someone explain what a "spinner" was and what purpose it served Was it for aerodynamics or did it act as a sort of flywheel? Cheers. Andy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RobL Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 The spinner is the object which is fixed to the propeller and helps to make it more streamlined and therefore more aerodynamically efficient. Most British aircraft weren't fitted with one - they also generally make the aircraft more attractive too Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 I've tried "Googling" to educate myself on this subject but to no avail Please can someone explain what a "spinner" was and what purpose it served Was it for aerodynamics or did it act as a sort of flywheel? Cheers. Andy. A good shot of Balls Nieuport with the red "cone de penetration" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilB Posted 12 November , 2009 Author Share Posted 12 November , 2009 Did the cone/spinner prove aerodynamically effective? Didn't affect cooling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 QUOTE (Phil_B @ Nov 12 2009, 03:50 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Did the cone/spinner prove aerodynamically effective? Didn't affect cooling? I am also curious how a "cone de penetration" was attached to the cowling? Fitzee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 I am also curious, as Russell pointed out it didn't actually spin, how a "cone de penetration" was attached to the cowling? Fitzee On a rotary the engine revolved round a stationary shaft. It might be possible to run a support through the engine and the prop centre. However it would be simpler to use a spinner. The prop in the photo certainly couldn't have been used with a stationary cone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 12 November , 2009 Share Posted 12 November , 2009 Having got home and checked - the Cone d P was as I surmised fitted to the stationary crankshaft via an extension that ran through a hole in the centre of the airscrew. Given that the prop in the photo has no such hole it would seem fair to assume that it was not used with a C d P. It would seem that very few French or RFC Nieuport 17s were fitted with a C d P and most of these were quickly removed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 Although I did a lot of checking for the CCI Nieuport book, I didn't discover how the cone de penetration actuially worked. However, 110hp Le Rhones were fitted with a variety of nose pieces (i.e. extensions, bolted to the crankcase, to accept the propeller) and so my logic suggests a left hand threaded one that screwed into the backplate of the cone in order to counteract the effect of the prop spinning clockwise (from the pilot's view). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 " The red Spinner had been presented to Ball by Air Mechanic Charles Simpkin, and was probably an old Morane "Bullet" Spinner, refurnished and doped bright red by Simpkin. Ball was delighted with this personal "fighting mark" and used the spinner on many of his Nieuports, particularly A201 whilst with 60 Squadron [he revived the habit in 1917 after his posting with 56 Squadron] This, his first spinner, he brought home with him in October 1916,and it was mounted in the hall of the family home later. Such was the fame of the spinner that Roderic Hill featured it in the 1916 Christmas card he designed for the squadron depicting a line of Nieuports at dawn." April 15, 1917, 56 Squadron, Vert Galand Aerodrome [from a letter] "I have got another red cowl on my machine" "This reference to a red cowl is not entirely clear, in that he might have been referring to having the nose of his SE5 A4850 doped in the same colour-red-as his wheel disks; the 'A' flight markings. Equally, though less likely on available evidence, he could have been referring to the red spinner on his Nieuport B1522 or even a spinner on his SE5, though photographic evidence would seem to nullify the latter." from Albert Ball V.C by Chaz Bowers Fitzee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 Although I did a lot of checking for the CCI Nieuport book, I didn't discover how the cone de penetration actuially worked. However, 110hp Le Rhones were fitted with a variety of nose pieces (i.e. extensions, bolted to the crankcase, to accept the propeller) and so my logic suggests a left hand threaded one that screwed into the backplate of the cone in order to counteract the effect of the prop spinning clockwise (from the pilot's view). No according to the patent it bolted to the Crank shaft (as I said) which, unlike the crankcase, did not revolve. Much simpler than a gearing system to counter rotate the cone. However to reiterate this required the extension to the crank shaft to pass through a hole in the propeller boss. The prop in the photo does not have such a hole and therefore could not have been used with a CdP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 " The red Spinner had been presented to Ball by Air Mechanic Charles Simpkin, and was probably an old Morane "Bullet" Spinner, refurnished and doped bright red by Simpkin. Ball was delighted with this personal "fighting mark" and used the spinner on many of his Nieuports, particularly A201 whilst with 60 Squadron [he revived the habit in 1917 after his posting with 56 Squadron] This, his first spinner, he brought home with him in October 1916,and it was mounted in the hall of the family home later. Such was the fame of the spinner that Roderic Hill featured it in the 1916 Christmas card he designed for the squadron depicting a line of Nieuports at dawn." The Moranes were fitted with proper spinners and not C d Ps. So this would suggest that Ball's Nieuport was not fitted with a C d P. However photos of Moranes show the spinners had cutouts for the prop blades whilst the one in the photo does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 No according to the patent it bolted to the Crank shaft (as I said) which, unlike the crankcase, did not revolve. Much simpler than a gearing system to counter rotate the cone. However to reiterate this required the extension to the crank shaft to pass through a hole in the propeller boss. The prop in the photo does not have such a hole and therefore could not have been used with a CdP It's hard to tell as I can't enlarge the photo, but it looks like Ball's hand is holding onto what appears to be a shaft in the center of the propeller. Fitzee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centurion Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 It's hard to tell as I can't enlarge the photo, but it looks like Ball's hand is holding onto what appears to be a shaft in the center of the propeller. Fitzee A shaft in the centre of the prop would revolve with the prop - what there has to be is a HOLE in the centre of the prop Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fitzee Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 I presumed the "shaft " to be hollow Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maxsparky Posted 13 November , 2009 Share Posted 13 November , 2009 Just noticed the following book which is to be published on the 18th March 2010. "Albert Ball VC: The Fighter Pilot Hero of the World War I" Author: Colin Pengelly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mickdavis Posted 14 November , 2009 Share Posted 14 November , 2009 No according to the patent it bolted to the Crank shaft (as I said) which, unlike the crankcase, did not revolve. Much simpler than a gearing system to counter rotate the cone. However to reiterate this required the extension to the crank shaft to pass through a hole in the propeller boss. The prop in the photo does not have such a hole and therefore could not have been used with a CdP The 110-hp Le Rhone (and the smaller 80hp Le Rhone) had the propeller mounted on a nosing piece that was integral with the faceplate to the crankcase. The crankshaft terminated in a ball race at the front of the crankcase. This would mean that the cone could have fitted onto the threaded end of the nosing piece and therefore revolve with the engine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.29d4195f801e5a5004f52840449366a7.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now