SARO A.33

[dogsbody]

From the February 1994 FlyPast.






Chris

[JMSmith]

is that what you call variable incidences

[keithwwalker]

Jesus, no center pylon, that was just asking for it!

[WhyMe]

If this flying boat received an individual model name, what could it be?

Would it be named after a place that starts with "L" (like London or Lerwick) or with "S" (like Sunderland or Shetland)? Or perhaps something else entirely? Any thoughts?

[schneiderman]

It did not necessarily have to start with either letter. Also the 'rule' that flying boats had to be named after British coastal towns, rivers, estuaries etc had become more relaxed and companies could submit other names for approval. Hence Rangoon, Iris, Valkyrie, Sarafand and Sydney.
If it had not proven to be structurally weak maybe the A.33 would have been named Lerwick and with a substantial production contract for that aircraft confirmed the actual Lerwick would never have been designed and built.

[longshot]

Surprising that Saro were allowed to give up without trying a fix on the wing attachments, but I suppose the Sunderland appeared a better bet by then

[schneiderman]

Development had been so delayed, a whole year behind the Sunderland, it was probably out of the running even before the wing collapse

[longshot]

Oh dear!

[dogsbody]

Nice addition.


Chris

[schneiderman]

Unless there had been a serious, very serious, error in stress calculation, this may well suggest that the limits of the scaling-up of the monospar principal had been well and truly met. Which I guess comes to the same thing really.