Monday, October 6, 2014
Friday, October 3, 2014
Good Precision Machined Component photos
A couple of nice precision machined element pictures I discovered:
Touring Numet Machining Tactics, Inc. in Orange
Image by CT Senate Democrats
State Senator Gayle S. Slossberg tours Numet Machining Strategies in Orange with Joseph Sartori, Numet’s Vice President of Operations. Numet is a manufacturer of precision machined elements, and was in a position to develop and retain jobs thanks to its participation in Connecticut’s Modest Enterprise Express Program and the Connecticut Insurance coverage Reinvestment Fund. (October two, 2013)
(Posted by an aluminium machining China Company and precision CNC machined parts China manufacturer)
Monday, September 15, 2014
Two Chinese Suppliers Pick Avure Flexform Press for COMAC 919 Component Production
Vasteras, Sweden (PRWEB) September 09, 2014
As the schedule ramps up to production of the COMAC 919, two very first-tier Chinese suppliers have bought fluid cell presses from Avure Technologies to decrease fabrication steps and drastically decrease the price of components they are manufacturing for the new single-aisle aircraft.
Shanghai Aircraft Manufacturing Co. Ltd. and Xizi Aviation will set up the sheet metal forming presses in facilities at Shanghai and Zehjiang, China, respectively.
Shanghai Aircraft has chosen an advanced 68,000-ton fluid cell press, with a forming location of 1.4 x 4 m (55.1 x 157.5 inch), to extend its current capacity. Making use of ultra-high stress to type a wide range of complicated shapes, Avure Flexform™ fluid cell presses are a expense-effective, versatile manufacturing remedy, specifically when speed is vital in reducing time-to-industry and maintaining global competitiveness. The new Avure program is being designed for 1000 bar stress, a great asset when streamlining production to decrease the need to have for manual labor.
Xizi Aviation, a relative newcomer in the aerospace fabrication loved ones, chosen Avure’s recently introduced model, the QFC .7×1.8-800, a 17,000-ton fluid cell press with a table size of .7 x 1.8 m (27.6 x 72 inch) and designed for 800 bar pressure. With a rapidly, 60-second procedure cycle, combined with low operating fees, a space-saving little footprint, and straightforward installation directly at floor level, this press is a ideal match for Xizi’s concentrate on fabricating sheet metal parts for the airframe structure.
“These state-of-the-art higher-stress fluid cell presses are effectively suited to meet today’s imperative for much less and much less labor involvement, enabling the COMAC effort to compete with Western aircraft manufacturing approaches,” comments Sture Olsson, Avure’s Worldwide Metal Forming Enterprise Unit Director. “The introduction and mixture of higher-pressure, modern day tool design, and cautious fabrication logistics might decrease earlier essential fabrication steps by as a lot as 50 %, doubling the production capacity and cutting price by as much as 80 %.”
With 156 to 168 seats, the new C919 is a new short/medium variety commercial jetliner aimed at meeting increasing airline interest worldwide in single-aisle models. It is made to compete with the Airbus A320-NEO and the Boeing 737-MAX. All new aircraft styles seek to increase fuel efficiency, improve safety, enhance passenger comfort, and increase manufacturing efficiencies.
The new Flexform press will turn into Shanghai Aircraft’s second fluid cell press its first was supplied by Avure (formerly under the brand name ASEA, then ABB) nearly 30 years ago, and is nevertheless operational at complete processing parameters nowadays.
Avure will be exhibiting at EuroBLECH 2014 in Hannover, Germany, October 21-25, in Hall 17, Stand D122.
About Avure Technologies
An innovator with a powerful record of accomplishment, Avure Technologies (formerly recognized as ASEA, ABB, and Flow) demonstrates its knowledge in higher stress by occupying leadership positions in industrial and food applications. The business is the biggest worldwide provider of ultra-high pressure systems utilized to kind sheet metal, to process sophisticated materials, and to pasteurize foods without heat or chemical substances.
Avure has installed more than 1,700 high-pressure systems worldwide, more than all other competitors combined. These systems are characterized by technically sound design, superior reliability, energy efficiency, low maintenance expenses, and numerous years of encounter. Several Avure presses have been in service for more than 40 years, and some have surpassed 1 million higher-stress processing cycles.
Avure Industrial Group headquarters in Västerås, Sweden, home equipment style, manufacturing, and support operations, with additional facilities in Columbus, Ohio, USA, and regional sales and assistance operations globally. Read much more about Avure Technologies: http://sector.avure.com/goods/fluid-cell-presses-rectangular-forming-trays
About Shanghai Aircraft
Founded in 1950 and primarily based in Shanghai, China, Shanghai Aircraft Manufacturing Co., Ltd. manufactures and assembles aircraft components and elements, such as the horizontal stabilizers it produces for Boeing 737 aircraft. The business also supplies study and improvement and repair for massive industrial aircraft. It operates as a subsidiary of Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China, Ltd. Study a lot more about Shanghai Aircraft at http://english.comac.cc/
About Xizi Aviation
With its facility in Zhejiang, China, established in 2010, Xizi Aviation is a tier-1 supplier of the C919 aircraft airframe structure, also providing high-good quality merchandise and solutions for Airbus, Boeing, COMAC, AVIC, Cessna, Bombardier, and other individuals. Xizi Aviation capabilities extend from CNC machining, composite structures forming, and sheet metal forming, to heat and surface remedy, component assembly, digital measurement, and NDT. The business is a essential company sector of Xizi UHC, which contains three subsidiaries: Zhejiang Xizi Aviation Sector Co., Ltd., Shenyang Xizi Aviation Industry Co., Ltd., and Zhejiang Xizi Aerospace Fasteners Co., Ltd. Study more about Xizi Aviation at http://en.xiziac.com/
(Posted by an aluminium machining China Company and precision CNC machined parts China manufacturer)
Thursday, September 11, 2014
Most current Precision Component Makers News
Russia"s Putin promises new weapons to fend Western threats
With hundreds of subcontractors going out of production, Russian arms companies typically had to make components themselves, swelling expenses and affecting production top quality. The difficulties faced by the Russian arms … Talking about prospective threats …
Study much more on The Spokesman Overview
NN, Inc. Announces Two Senior Level Appointments Following Completion Of …
NN, Inc. companies and supplies higher precision metal bearing components, industrial plastic and rubber products and precision metal components to a selection of markets on a international basis. Headquartered in Johnson City, Tennessee, NN has 25 …
Study far more on CNNMoney
(Posted by an aluminium machining China Company and precision CNC machined parts China manufacturer)
Saturday, September 6, 2014
Thursday, September 4, 2014
Cool Precision Component Producers pictures
A handful of nice precision element makers photos I found:
Apollo 14 Docking Ring
Image by jurvetson
Milled from a solid block of titanium, with twelve docking latches, it is a marvel of precision design and style in the era ahead of CAD/CAM.
The Smithsonian believed this was the CM docking ring from Apollo 14 Command Module, and had paperwork to help that. I feel it is the sister unit, a big structural engineering element utilised for ground testing to try to recreate the series of docking failures seasoned early in the Apollo 14 mission with the probe that was brought back (normally the docking probe would be left behind). Hence the Apollo 14 label on the base and description at the Bonhams’ auction:
NASA’s choice to fly Apollo missions employing a lunar orbit rendezvous approach necessary the improvement of a method to join, separate, then rejoin two spacecraft. This system also had to let astronauts to move internally between the Command and Lunar Modules. The flight configuration selected was an effect system consisting of a probe situated at the forward end of the Command Module (CM) and a funnel-kind drogue located at the prime of the Lunar Module (LM). The CM’s probe was mounted to the docking ring, which provided a point of structural integrity for the two docked cars as soon as the probe was removed. Removal of the probe produced a tunnel so the crew could travel between the docked cars. A series of latches about the docking ring locked the cars collectively. The tip of the probe had a set of 3 modest capture latches which had been developed to hold the vehicles with each other lengthy adequate that the bigger docking ring latches could be engaged.
Just right after the Saturn V’s third stage sent Apollo 14 on its planned trajectory toward the moon, Shepard along with astronauts Edgar Mitchell and Stuart Roosa seasoned difficulty docking the CSM to the LM. 5 attempts were created but the docking probe capture latches never engaged to secure the two cars together. This could have scrubbed for the second time in a row a lunar landing mission. With the failure of Apollo 13 due to a Service Module oxygen tank explosion, a scrub of the Apollo 14 lunar landing would most definitely have offered ammunition to these in Congress lobbying for an early termination of the Apollo Plan.
Soon after practically two hours of delays and on the sixth try, with Roosa holding the CSM tight with the LM for many seconds, the latches lastly engaged. The crew then activated the series of larger latches mounted along the docking ring to receive a "hard dock" configuration. Though they had been ultimately docked, Mission Manage and the crew’s concern shifted to the possibility that the program could fail when it was most necessary, the redocking of the LM Ascent Stage following Shepard and Mitchell’s return from the moon. If this happened the crew could be forced into performing a space walk in order to return to the CSM. The lunar rocks and scientific data may well have to be abandoned in the LM pending the precise situations of a possible lunar orbit docking problem. The probe was completely inspected by the crew throughout the coast period to the moon and they sent detailed verbal descriptions plus television pictures to Mission Control. Because the probe now showed standard operation of the capture mechanism, NASA created the selection to proceed with the planned mission.
The redocking while in lunar orbit was fully normal. The docking probe (usually jettisoned with the LM) was returned to earth for inspection and evaluation.
NASA and spacecraft manufacturer North American Rockwell performed an exhaustive series of tests to the docking system. All elements (probe, latches, docking ring) had been tested "in location" with the recovered Apollo 14 CM, then each was removed for a series of combined and person tests. The docking method dilemma was a major reason the docking ring was removed and never ever re-installed into the Apollo 14 CM. Post-flight evaluation of tv, motion image film, accelerometer info, and reaction control system thruster activity indicated that probe-to-drogue get in touch with conditions were as expected for all docking attempts. The probe’s capture latches should have worked on every of the 1st 5 docking attempts. A plunger-variety component in the capture latch failed to reach a forward or locked position most likely due to some kind of foreign debris or contamination. A change in the size of the plunger due to temperature was an added possibility. Internal harm to the capture-latch mechanism was ruled out as the cause because the program functioned correctly in all subsequent operations following the sixth docking try and throughout post flight testing. The debris or contamination most probably became dislodged following the fifth docking try, enabling the system to operate effectively from that point. NASA and Rockwell created the decision to supply a protective cover on the tip of the probe to prevent contamination during future flights.
Throughout the tests, the ring was shipped between a variety of NASA and contractor facilities through a 39 by 39 by 12 inch wood transit case which is integrated with the ring. The ring itself has a series of inspection stamps and ID numbers that study: "MDR 408699, V36-316250-9, 06361-B009522, MR 361588, DEC 9 1968, V36 316250 31, ASSEM, FEB 18 1969, 06361A015194." A separate 6 by 3 inch yellow "Temporary Parts Removal Tag" repeats many of these numbers and has the added hand-written information of: "TPS 112, REM #103, Docking Ring, S/C 110, 2/14/72."
Included are copies of documents listing the NASA artifact number (2243) getting from Command Module (S/C # 110) for the transfer to the National Air and Space Museum (NASM) and deascession papers from NASM.
The Apollo 14 docking ring is the single biggest and heaviest piece of lunar spacecraft structural gear ever to be provided to private hands. The flown CM docking ring, the twin of this one particular, remained with the ascent stage of the Lunar Module Antares when it was jettisoned. Antares was then deliberately crashed into the moon’s surface to simulate a "moonquake."
(Posted by an aluminium machining China Company and precision CNC machined parts China manufacturer)
Monday, September 1, 2014
Saturday, August 30, 2014
Thursday, August 28, 2014
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
Sunday, August 24, 2014
Cool Cnc Turned Component images
Some cool cnc turned component images:
Catwalk fabrication detail
Image by Caliper Studio
Designed for a multimedia design firm, this blackened steel catwalk connects a mezzanine to a conference room. The catwalk includes cast glass lenses imbedded in the floor reminiscent of the cast iron sidewalk grates popular in lower Manhattan at the turn of the century. The China laser cut components were detailed in solidworks to fit together like a kit-of-parts that was assembled and installed over a weekend.
001_CatWalk
Image by Caliper Studio
Designed for a multimedia design firm, this blackened steel catwalk connects a mezzanine to a conference room. The catwalk includes cast glass lenses imbedded in the floor reminiscent of the cast iron sidewalk grates popular in lower Manhattan at the turn of the century. The China laser cut components were detailed in solidworks to fit together like a kit-of-parts that was assembled and installed over a weekend.
Catwalk SolidWorks model view 01
Image by Caliper Studio
SolidWorks parametric model snapshot.
Designed for a multimedia design firm, this blackened steel catwalk connects a mezzanine to a conference room. The catwalk includes cast glass lenses imbedded in the floor reminiscent of the cast iron sidewalk grates popular in lower Manhattan at the turn of the century. The China laser cut components were detailed in solidworks to fit together like a kit-of-parts that was assembled and installed over a weekend.
Saturday, August 23, 2014
Nice Medical Component Manufacturers photos
Some cool medical component manufacturers images:
Capital Airlines de Havilland DH 4A Comet
Image by james_gordon_losangeles
CAPITAL AIRLINES PURCHASE COMETS’ was the headline in the Enterprise magazine – the internal magazine of the de Havilland Company. It referred to a (then) recent joint announcement by Capital and de Havilland which disclosed an order for 14 Comet aircraft.
Thus it appeared that de Havilland had done what every other non-American manufacturer needed to do, broken into the United States airliner market in the face of home competition. The argument went: with a foot hold in the U.S. market many more ‘knock on’ sales could be hoped for. So the announcement was of very great significance.
The agreement specified that the Comets would be powered by Rolls-Royce engines, and including spares, the cost was put at some £19 million/USD 7 million (year 2000 = £263/43). Deliveries were to commence in late 1958 with four Comet Mk.4s and late in 1959 with ten of the special variant the Mk.4A.
J.H. Slim Carmichael, who was President of Capital Airlines, said of the deal, The decision to purchase the Comet has been made after a most comprehensive and detailed study of all flight equipment either in production or projected, both in the United States and England. The economical and operating characteristics of the Comet 4A are ideally suited to the Capital system. The Comets will go into service on our major and most competitive routes.
Apparently the same basis for determining economic criteria were used when Capital purchased Viscounts. (ed note – The only financing Capital had available was through the Bank Of England and only for British built aircraft). Projections made before the Viscount purchase had proved accurate when it was introduced on Capital routes in 1955. The Comet order was placed because Capital now wanted a range of pure-jets to operate some 200 mph faster than anything else they then had in use. Capital was one of the biggest domestic carriers in the USA as was illustrated by figures for 1955 which showed that Capital carried 2½ million passengers over some 31 million miles!
Capital’s Mk.4As were to be furnished to accommodate 74 passengers in the utmost luxury by having 68 persons seated four abreast in two large cabins and six in a forward lounge. The expectation was that passengers would be carried in unprecedented smoothness and quietude, even surpassing the qualities of the earlier Comet models while the speed and economy also show a marked advance. The 4A was to be assembled at Chester as well as Hatfield, England.
The Mk.4A was launched in June 1956 as a short range version of the Comet. The fuselage was stretched and the wing span was reduced. Maximum takeoff weight was reduced to 152.5Klb. The Mk.4A died, when the launch customer Capital Airlines cancelled the order. As a result no Mk 4A was ever built.
Unfortunately Capital suffered sudden financial difficulties, a period of uncertainty and numerous fatal incidents, it was forced to give up some of its routes to rival carriers and was absorbed into United Airlines. The foothold into the US market was lost and the Mk.4A was never produced.
The de Havilland DH 106 Comet was the world’s first commercial jet airliner to reach production. Developed and manufactured by de Havilland at the Hatfield, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom headquarters, it first flew in 1949 and was a landmark in aeronautical design. It featured an extremely aerodynamically clean design with its four de Havilland Ghost turbojet engines buried into the wings, a low-noise pressurised cabin, and large windows; for the era, it was an exceptionally comfortable design for passengers and showed signs of being a major success in the first year upon launching.
However, a few years after introduction into commercial service, Comet airframes began suffering from catastrophic metal fatigue, which in combination with cabin pressurisation cycles, caused two well-publicised accidents where the aircraft tore apart in mid-flight. The Comet had to be withdrawn and extensively tested to discover the cause; the first incident had been incorrectly identified as having been caused by an onboard fire. Several contributory factors, such as window installation methodology, were also identified as exacerbating the problem. The Comet was extensively redesigned to eliminate this design flaw. Rival manufacturers meanwhile developed their own aircraft and heeded the lessons learned from the Comet.
Although sales never fully recovered, the redesigned Comet 4 series subsequently enjoyed a long and productive career of over 30 years. The Comet was adapted for a variety of military roles, such as surveillance, VIP, medical and passenger transport; the most extensive modification resulted in a specialised maritime patrol aircraft variant, the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod. Nimrods remained in service with the Royal Air Force (RAF) until they were retired in June 2011, over 60 years after the Comet’s first flight.
Development
Design studies for the DH 106 Comet 1944–1947
During the Second World War, the Brabazon Committee was formed on 11 March 1943 to determine Britain’s postwar airliner needs. One of the recommendations set a design target of a pressurised, transatlantic mailplane that could carry a ton of payload at a cruising speed of 400 mph (640 km/h).[8] Challenging the widely held scepticism of jet engines as too fuel-hungry and unreliable, committee member Sir Geoffrey de Havilland, head of the de Havilland company, used his influence and the company’s expertise with jets to specify a turbojet-powered design.[7] The committee accepted the proposal, calling it the "Type IV" (of five designs), and awarded the production contract to de Havilland’s Type 106. The first-phase designs focused on short and intermediate range mailplanes with a small passenger compartment and as few as six seats, later redefined as a long-range airliner with 24-seat capacity. Out of all the Brabazon designs, the DH 106 was seen as the riskiest in terms of both introducing untried design elements and for the financial commitment involved.[7] Nevertheless, British Overseas Airways Corporation (BOAC) found the Type IV’s specifications attractive, initially proposing a purchase of 25 aircraft and, in December 1945, when a "firm contract" was laid out, revising the number to 10.
A design team was formed in 1946 under the leadership of Chief Designer Ronald Bishop, who had been responsible for the Mosquito fighter-bomber. A number of unorthodox configurations were considered, all of which were subsequently rejected. The Ministry of Supply was interested in the most radical of the proposed designs and issued Operational Requirement OR207 to Specification E.18/45 for two experimental DH 108s ordered as proof-of-concept aircraft to test swept-wing configurations in both low-speed and high-speed flight.
Even before the DH 108s were completed, further requests from BOAC necessitated a redesign of the DH 106 from the original four-engined (Halford H.1 Goblin-powered) 24-seat airliner to a larger 36-seat version to specification 22/46 in September 1946. With no time to develop the technology required for the tailless configuration, Bishop opted for a more conventional 20˚ swept-wing design with unswept tail surfaces, married to an enlarged fuselage accommodating 36 passengers, arranged four abreast with a central aisle. Four new, more powerful Rolls-Royce Avons were to be incorporated in pairs buried in the wing roots, but Halford H.2 Ghost engines were eventually specified as an interim solution while the Avons cleared certification. The redesigned DH 106 was named the DH 106 Comet in December 1947. First revised orders for both BOAC and British South American Airways for a combined total of 14 aircraft had a projected delivery schedule set for 1952.
During 1947–1948, de Havilland undertook an extensive research and development phase, utilising a number of stress test rigs at Hatfield for small components and large assemblies. Sections of the pressurised fuselage were subjected to the conditions of a flight at altitude in the company’s decompression chamber. The DH 108s were also modified to test the DH 106′s power controls.
The first flight of the first prototype DH 106 Comet (carrying Class B markings G-5-1) took place on 27 July 1949 from Hatfield, and lasted 31 minutes. The pilot was de Havilland Chief Test Pilot John Cunningham, a famous wartime night-fighter pilot, who later commented, "I assumed that it would change aviation, and so it has proved. It was a bit like Concorde. Also on board were co-pilot Harold Tubby Waters, engineers John Wilson (electrics) and Frank Reynolds (hydraulics), along with flight test observer Tony Fairbrother. Fairbrother commented, The world changed as our wheels left the ground.
G-5-1 was publicly displayed at the 1949 Farnborough Airshow before beginning flight trials. A year later, the second prototype made its maiden flight. On 2 April 1951, this aircraft was delivered to the BOAC Comet Unit at Hurn under the registration G-ALZK and carried out 500 flying hours of crew training and route proving.[22] Both prototypes were distinguished by large main wheel units that were replaced by four-wheeled bogies on each main leg for the subsequent production series.
The British Government considered the development of the Comet a highly ideological matter, as high-ranking officials perceived the need to meet foreign competition and surpass them when there was the opportunity to do so:
During the next few years, the UK has an opportunity, which may not recur, of developing aircraft manufacture as one of our main export industries. On whether we grasp this opportunity and so establish firmly an industry of the utmost strategic and economic importance, our future as a great nation may depend.
—Duncan Sandys, Minister of Supply, 1952.
Design
The Comet is an all-metal low-wing cantilever monoplane powered by four jet engines, approximately the length of a Boeing 737, carrying fewer people in a significantly more spacious environment. The earliest Comets had 11 rows of seats with four seats to a row in the 1A configuration used by Air France; BOAC used an even roomier arrangement of 36 seats on 45-inch (1,100 mm) centres. The Comet’s four-place cockpit held two pilots, a flight engineer, and a navigator. The cabin was quieter than those of propeller-driven airliners. Amenities included a galley that could serve hot and cold food and drinks, a bar, and separate men’s and women’s washrooms. For emergencies, life rafts were stored in the wings near the engines and life vests were stowed under each seat bottom.
The clean, low-drag design featured many unique or innovative design elements, including a swept-wing leading edge, integral wing fuel tanks, and four-wheel bogie main undercarriage units designed by de Havilland. Two pairs of de Havilland Ghost 50 Mk1 turbojet engines were buried in the wings close to the fuselage. Chief Designer Bishop chose this configuration because it avoided the drag of podded engines and allowed a smaller fin and rudder, since the hazards of asymmetric thrust were reduced. The engines’ higher mounting in the wings also reduced the risk of ingestion damage (foreign object damage [FOD]), a major problem for turbine engines. These benefits were compromised by increased structural weight and general complexity, including armour for the engine cells (in case of an engine explosion) and a more complicated wing structure. This arrangement also carried higher risk of catastrophic wing failure in case of an engine fire, cited as the main reason the Boeing Aircraft Company chose podded engines in their subsequent jet bomber and airliner designs. The fuel system incorporated underwing pressure refuelling, developed by Flight Refuelling Ltd, which allowed much faster refilling of fuel tanks than was possible previously.
The Comet was originally intended to have two hydrogen peroxide-powered de Havilland Sprite booster rockets for takeoff under hot and high altitude conditions from airports such as Khartoum and Nairobi. These were tested on 30 flights, but the Ghosts were considered powerful enough without them, although Sprite fittings were kept on production aircraft. The later Comet 4 was highly rated for its takeoff performance from high altitude locations such as Mexico City. Newer and more powerful AJ.65 Avon engines replaced the Ghosts on the Comet 2. High engine performance combined with a low weight (compared to the Boeing 707 and Douglas DC-8), and exceptionally clean design all contributed to its high performance. Early-model Comets had the advantage of requiring low maintenance, the de Havilland Ghost engines being a key contributing factor. Mounting the engines in a low-wing position combined with numerous service panels allowed for "easy" and efficient maintenance.
The Comet’s thin metal skin was composed of advanced new alloys (Directorate of Technical Development 564/L.73 and DTD 746C/L90) and was both chemically bonded using the adhesive Redux and riveted, which saved weight and reduced the risk of fatigue cracks spreading from the rivets. When it went into service with BOAC on 2 May 1952, the Comet was the most exhaustively tested airliner in history. After the Comet entered production, for safety reasons, and to limit the damage to the specimens, a water tank was used instead of the decompression chamber. The entire forward fuselage section was tested for metal fatigue by repeatedly pressurising to 2.75 pounds per square inch (19.0 kPa) overpressure and depressurising through more than 16,000 cycles, equivalent to about 40,000 hours of airline service. The windows were tested under a pressure of 12 psi (83 kPa), 4.75 psi (32.8 kPa) above the normal service ceiling of 36,000 ft (11,000 m). One window frame survived a massive 100 psi (690 kPa), about 1,250% over the maximum pressure it would encounter in service.
In 1953, Sud-Est’s design bureau, while working on the Sud Aviation Caravelle, licensed several design features from de Havilland, a company Sud had previously collaborated with on earlier licenced designs, including the DH 100 Vampire. [N 12] The entire nose and cockpit layout from the Comet 1 was grafted onto the Caravelle.
Operational history
Introduction
The first production aircraft (G-ALYP) flew on 9 January 1951 and subsequently was on loan to BOAC for development flying by the Comet Unit. On 22 January 1952, G-ALYS was the first Comet to receive a Certificate of Airworthiness, six months ahead of schedule. As part of the BOAC route proving trials, on 2 May, G-ALYP took off on the world’s first jetliner flight with fare-paying passengers, beginning scheduled service to Johannesburg. The last Comet from the initial order (G-ALYZ) began flying in September 1952, carrying cargo along South American routes while simulating passenger schedules.
The Comet was a hit with passengers including Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother and Princess Margaret, who were guests on a special flight on 30 June 1953 hosted by Sir Geoffrey and Lady de Havilland, and thus became the first members of the British Royal Family to fly by jet.[48] A total of 30,000 passengers was carried during the first year of service. For the travelling public, the Comet offered flights about 50% faster than advanced piston-engined types such as the Douglas DC-6 (490 mph for the Comet compared to 315 mph for the DC-6B), and its rate of climb was also far higher, which could cut flight times in half. In August 1953 BOAC scheduled the Comet London to Tokyo in 35 hours, compared to 85 hr 35 min for their Argonaut; Pan Am’s DC-6B flight 2 was scheduled 46 hr 45 min. Smooth, quiet jet flight was a new experience for passengers used to piston-engined airliners (although passengers of today would consider it noisy, particularly when seated aft of the wing). BOAC’s Comets featured the BOAC-designed slumberseat; a comfortable, reclining design, allowing for greater leg room in front and behind. The large picture window view and accommodations for a table setting for a row of passengers afforded a feel of comfort and luxury atypical of airliners of the period. One of the most striking aspects of flight on the Comet was the quiet, vibration-free flying touted by BOAC.
Commercial success was widely expected, with a profitable passenger load factor as low as 43%. The Ghost engine was smooth, relatively simple, fuel-efficient above 30,000 ft (9,144 m),[N had low maintenance costs, and enabled operations above weather the competition had to fly through. At the height of Comet"s early flying career, the BOAC Comet 1 fleet flew routes such as London-Singapore, London-Tokyo, and London-Johannesburg several times a week.
Early accidents and incidents
On 26 October 1952, a BOAC flight departing from Ciampino airport near Rome failed to become airborne and ran into rough ground at the end of the runway. Two passengers sustained only minor injuries, but the aircraft was a total loss. On 3 March 1953, a new Canadian Pacific Airlines Comet 1A (CF-CUN), known as "Empress of Hawaii," being delivered to Australia, also failed to become airborne on takeoff from Karachi, Pakistan. The aircraft plunged into a dry drainage canal and collided with an embankment, killing all five crew and six passengers on board, the first fatal crash of a passenger jet airliner.
Both of these accidents were originally attributed to pilot error as over-rotation had led to a loss of lift from the leading edge of the aircraft"s wing. It was later determined the wing profile led to a loss of lift at high angle of attack, and the engine inlets suffered from a lack of pressure recovery in these conditions as well. The wing leading edge was re-profiled with a pronounced droop and a wing fence was added to control spanwise flow. A fictionalised investigation into these takeoff accidents was the subject of the 1959 novel, Cone of Silence by Arthur David Beaty, a former BOAC captain. Cone of Silence was made into a film in 1960, and Beaty also recounted the story of the Comet"s takeoff accidents in a chapter of his 1984 non-fiction work, Strange Encounters: Mysteries of the Air.
The next fatal accident involving passengers was on 2 May 1953, when a BOAC Comet 1 (G-ALYV) crashed in a severe tropical storm six minutes after taking off from Calcutta/Dum Dum (now Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose International Airport), India, killing all 43 on board. The crash was attributed to structural failure of the airframe with witnesses observing the wingless Comet on fire plunging into the Indian Ocean.
India Court of Inquiry
A court of inquiry was convened by the Central Government of India to examine the cause of the accident.[N 17] The conclusions of the inquiry focused on the extreme negative G forces encountered in the thundersquall. A large proportion of the aircraft was recovered and reassembled at Farnborough.[59] The break-up was found to have begun with a left-hand elevator spar failure in the stabiliser. The immediate focus was on the severe turbulence encountered that induced down-loading, which subsequently precipitated the loss of the wings. Examination of the cockpit controls led to a belief that the pilot may have inadvertently overstressed the aircraft when pulling out of a steep dive by over-manipulation of the fully powered flight controls.
Recommendations from the court revolved around the enforcement of stricter rough air speed limits. The tragedy led to two significant developments: all Comets were equipped with "weather radar" and the introduction of Q feel, a system that ensured that control column forces (invariably called "stick forces") would be proportional to control loads. The artificial feel was the first of its kind to be introduced in any aircraft. The Comet 1 and 1A had been criticised for a lack of feel in their controls, although test pilot John Cunningham contended, it flew extremely smoothly and responded to the controls in the best way de Havilland aircraft usually did.
DH.106 Comet 1 of BOAC at London Heathrow on 2 June 1953
[edit] Comet disasters of 1954
Main articles: BOAC Flight 781 and South African Airways Flight 201
Rome’s Ciampino airport, the site of the first Comet hull loss, was again the origin of more disastrous Comet flights just over a year later. On 10 January 1954, 20 minutes after taking off from Ciampino, Comet G-ALYP ("Yoke Peter"), BOAC Flight 781, broke up in flight and crashed into the Mediterranean off the Italian island of Elba, with the loss of all 35 on board. With no witnesses to the disaster and only "sketchy" and incomplete radio transmissions left behind, there appeared to be no obvious reason for the crash. Engineers at de Havilland immediately recommended 60 modifications aimed at any possible design flaw while the Abell Committee met to determine potential causes of the crash.
Abell Committee Court of Inquiry
Media attention centred upon sabotage; other speculation ranged from "clear-sky" turbulence to an explosion of vapour in an empty fuel tank. The committee soon focused on six potential aerodynamic and mechanical causes: control flutter (which had led to the loss of the de Havilland DH 108 Swallow prototypes), structural failure due to high loads or metal fatigue of the wing structure, failure of the powered flight controls, failure of the window panels leading to explosive decompression, or fire and other engine problems. The committee concluded fire was the most likely cause of the problem, and a number of changes were made to the aircraft to protect the engines and wings from damage which might lead to another fire.
The cost of solving the Comet mystery must be reckoned neither in money nor in manpower.
During this investigation, the Royal Navy conducted recovery operations. The first wreckage was discovered on 12 January and the search continued until August, by which time, 70% of the main structure, 80% of the power section and 50% of the aircraft systems/equipment had been recovered. The forensic reconstruction effort was only lately underway when the Abell Committee reported their findings. On 4 April, Lord Brabazon wrote to the Minister of Transport, "Although no definite reason for the accident has been established, modifications are being embodied to cover every possibility that imagination has suggested as a likely cause of the disaster. When these modifications are completed and have been satisfactorily flight tested, the Board sees no reason why passenger services should not be resumed." Comet flights resumed on 23 March 1954.
On 8 April 1954, Comet G-ALYY ("Yoke Yoke"), on charter to South African Airways, was on a leg from Rome to Cairo (of a longer flight from London to Johannesburg), when it crashed in the waters near Naples. The fleet was immediately grounded once again and a large investigation board was formed under the direction of the Royal Aircraft Establishment (RAE). Prime Minister Winston Churchill tasked the Royal Navy with helping locate and retrieve the wreckage so that the cause of the accident could be found.[69] The type’s Certificate of Airworthiness was revoked and line production suspended at Hatfield while the BOAC fleet was grounded.
[edit] Cohen Committee Court of Inquiry
An illustration showing the recovered (shaded) parts of the wreckage of the de Havilland Comet 1 G-ALYP "Yoke Peter" and the forward ADF aerial window in the cabin roof where the initial fatigue failure occurred – after an illustration in Air Disasters (1989).
On 19 October 1954, a court of inquiry was set up under the chairmanship of Lord Cohen to examine the causes of the Comet crashes.[70] Investigators under the leadership of Sir Arnold Hall, Director of the RAE at Farnborough, began considering fatigue as the most likely cause of both accidents and initiated further research into measurable strain on the skin. With the recovery of large sections of G-ALYP from the Elba crash and G-ALYU, an extensive "water torture" test eventually provided conclusive results. Stress around the window corners was found to be much higher than expected, and stresses on the skin were generally more than previously expected or tested. This was due to stress concentration, a consequence of the windows’ square shape, the levels of stress at these corners could be two or three times that across the rest of the fuselage.
Before the Elba accident, G-ALYP had made 1,290 pressurised flights and at the time of the Naples accident, G-ALYY had made 900 pressurised flights. Dr. P.B. Walker, Head of the Structures Department (RAE) said he was not surprised by this, noting that the difference was about 3 to 1, and previous experience with metal fatigue suggested a total range of 9 to 1 between experiment and outcome in the field could result in failure. Thus, if the tank test result was "typical", aircraft failures could be expected at anywhere from 1,000 to 9,000 cycles. Engineers subjected an identical airframe, G-ALYU, to repeated re-pressurisation and over-pressurisation, and on 24 June 1954, after 3,057 flight cycles (1,221 actual and 1,836 simulated), G-ALYU burst open. Hall, Geoffrey de Havilland and Bishop were immediately called to the scene, where the water tank was drained to reveal the fuselage had ripped open at a corner of the forward port-side escape hatch cutout. A further test reproduced the same results. By then, the RAE had reconstructed about ⅔ of G-ALYP at Farnborough and found fatigue crack growth from a rivet hole at the low-drag fibreglass forward "window" around the Automatic Direction Finder, had caused a catastrophic breakup of the aircraft in high altitude flight.
The rivet problem was exacerbated by the punch rivet construction technique employed. The windows had been engineered to be glued and riveted, but had been punch riveted only. Unlike drill riveting, the imperfect nature of the hole created by punch riveting may cause the start of fatigue cracks around the rivet. Hall, the principal investigator, concluded, "In the light of known properties of the aluminium alloy D.T.D. 546 or 746 of which the skin was made and in accordance with the advice I received from my Assessors, I accept the conclusion of RAE that this is a sufficient explanation of the failure of the cabin skin of Yoke Uncle by fatigue after a small number, namely, 3,060 cycles of pressurisation.
The Cohen Court closed on 24 November 1954. Although the court found that the basic design of the Comet was sound, nonetheless, de Havilland began a refit programme that involved strengthening the fuselage and wing structure, employing thicker gauge skin and replacing all square windows and panels with rounded ones.
As is often the case in aeronautical engineering, other aircraft manufacturers learned from, and profited by, de Havilland’s hard-learned lessons. Although the Comet had been subjected to the most rigorous testing of any contemporary airliner, the "dynamic stresses" of pressurisation were not well known, and the Comet had pushed ‘the state-of-the-art’ beyond its limits. According to John Cunningham, representatives from American manufacturers such as Boeing and Douglas (privately) "admitted that if it hadn’t been for our [de Havilland"s] problems, it would have happened to one of them.
Resumption of service
The Comet did not resume commercial airline service until 1958.[78] Following the structural problems of the early series, all remaining Comets were withdrawn from service, with de Havilland launching a major effort to build a new version that would be both larger and stronger. The square windows of the Comet 1 were replaced by the oval versions used on the Comet 2, which first flew in 1953, and the skin sheeting was thickened slightly. The remaining Comet 1s and 1As were either scrapped or modified with oval window rip-stop doublers (a thick, structurally strong ring of material that prevents a crack from spreading further), but a program to produce a Comet 2 with more powerful Avons was delayed. All production Comet 2s were modified to alleviate the fatigue problems and most of these served with the RAF as the Comet C2. Development flying and route proving with the Comet 3 allowed BOAC to accelerate the certification of what was destined to be the most successful variant of the type. On 24 September 1958, the Comet 4 received a Certificate of Air Worthiness and, the next day, BOAC took delivery of its first two Comet 4s.
The Comet 4 enabled BOAC to inaugurate the first regular jet-powered transatlantic services to begin that same year, albeit the westward North Atlantic crossing still required a fuel stop at Gander International Airport, Newfoundland. BOAC got publicity by being the first across the Atlantic with the London to New York crossing on 4 October 1958, but by the end of the month Pan Am was flying the Boeing 707 along the same route and in 1959-60 the Douglas DC-8 would be ready. The American jets were larger, faster, longer-ranged, and more cost-effective to operate than the Comet. In analysing the route structure the Comet could fly effectively, BOAC reluctantly cast about for a successor and, by 1958, had entered into an agreement with Boeing to purchase the 707.
In 1959 BOAC began shifting its Comet operations from the Atlantic run to other routes and releasing the Comet to the associate companies, the moves resulting in the Comet 4′s ascendancy as a premier airliner being relatively brief. Besides the 707/DC-8 duo, the imminent introduction of the Vickers VC10 meant the Comet’s competitors assumed more of the role initially pioneered by the Comet, that of high-speed, long-range passenger service.[82] Orders from other air carriers were gradually falling off in the 1960s with a total of 76 of the Comet 4 family delivered from 1958 to 1964. BOAC retired its Comet 4s from revenue service in 1965, but other operators continued flying Comets in commercial passenger service until 1981. Dan-Air played a significant role in the fleet’s later history and, at one time, owned all 48 remaining airworthy civil Comets. On 14 March 1997, a Comet 4C (XS235) which had been acquired by the British Ministry of Technology and used for radio, radar and avionics trials, made the last documented Comet flight.
Variants
Comet 1
DH106 Comet 1 preserved in the colours of BOAC G-APAS, this aircraft also served with the RAF as XM823, now at RAF Cosford
The square-windowed Comet 1 was the first model produced, a total of 12 aircraft in service and test. Following closely the design features of the two prototypes, the only noticeable change was the adoption of four-wheel bogie main undercarriage units, replacing the single main wheels. Four 5,050 lbf (22.5 kN) Ghost 50 Mk 1 (later 5,700 lbf (25 kN) Ghost DGT3 series) engines were fitted. The span was 115 ft (35.05 m), length 93 ft (28.35 m), Maximum Takeoff Weight 105,000 lb (47.628 kg) with 36–48 passenger configurations.
An updated Comet 1A was offered with higher allowed weight and water-methanol injection; 10 were produced. In the wake of the 1954 disasters, all Comet 1s and 1As were brought back to Hatfield, first placed in a protective "cocoon" and retained for testing.[85] All were substantially damaged in stress testing or were scrapped entirely.
Comet 1X: Two RCAF Comet 1As were rebuilt with heavier-gauge skins to a Comet 2 standard for the fuselage, and renamed Comet 1X.
Comet 1XB: Four Comet 1As were upgraded to a 1XB standard with a reinforced fuselage structure and oval windows. Both 1X series were limited in number of pressurisation cycles.[86]
DH 111 Comet Bomber
Originally proposed in 1948 as the "PR Comet", a "high-level photo reconnaissance" adaptation of the Comet 1, de Havilland further developed a bomber variant to Air Ministry specification B35/46 as the DH 111 Comet Bomber with a submission to the Air Ministry on 27 May 1948. The substantially altered airframe powered by four 5,700 lbf (25 kN) Ghost DGT3 engines, was designed around the special bomb, and featured a narrowed fuselage along with a bulbous nose to accommodate the H2S Mk IX radar; the crew of four would be housed in a pressurised cockpit under a large bubble canopy. Additional fuel tanks carrying 2,400 imperial gallons (11,000 L) were built into the fuselage to attain a range of 3,350 miles (5,390 km). The DH 111 proposal was evaluated by the Royal Aircraft Establishment but serious concerns regarding weapons storage led to a negative RAE review. The capability of the proposed V bomber trio also made the DH 111 redundant and further development work at de Havilland was abandoned on 22 October 1948.
Comet 2
The Comet 2 had a slightly larger wing, higher fuel capacity and more powerful Rolls-Royce Avon engines, which all improved the aircraft’s range and performance; some of these changes had been made to make the aircraft more suitable for transatlantic operations.[88] Following the Comet 1 disasters, these models were rebuilt with heavier gauge skin and rounded windows, and the Avon engines featuring larger air intakes and "outward-curving" jet tailpipes.[N 21]
[89] A total of 12 of the 44-seat Comet 2s were ordered by BOAC for the South Atlantic route.[90] The first production aircraft (G-AMXA) flew on 27 August 1953. Although these aircraft performed well on test flights on the South Atlantic, their range was still not suitable for the North Atlantic. All but four Comet 2s were allocated to the RAF with deliveries beginning in 1955. Modifications to the interiors allowed the Comet 2s to be used in a number of different roles. For VIP transport, the seating and accommodations were altered while provisions for carrying medical equipment including iron lungs was incorporated. Specialised ELINT and electronic survelillance capability was later added to some airframes.
Comet 2X: Limited to a single Comet Mk 1 powered by four Rolls-Royce Avon 502 turbojet engines and used as a development aircraft for the Comet 2.
Comet 2E: Two Comet 2 airliners were fitted with Avon 504s in the inner nacelles and Avon 524s in the outer ones. These aircraft were used by BOAC for proving flights during 1957–1958.
Comet T2: The first two of 10 Comet 2s for the RAF were fitted out as crew trainers, with the first aircraft (XK669) flying for the first time on 9 December 1955.
Comet C2: Eight Comet 2s originally destined for the civil market were completed for the RAF and assigned to No. 216 Squadron.
Comet 2R: Three Comet 2s were modified for use in radar and electronic systems development, initially assigned to No. 90 Group (later Signals Command) for the RAF. In service with No. 192 and No. 51 Squadrons, the 2R series were equipped to monitor Warsaw Pact signal traffic and operated in this role from 1958.
Comet 3
The Comet 3, which flew for the first time on 19 July 1954, was a lengthened Comet 2 powered by Avon M502 engines developing 10,000 lbf (44 kN) with greater capacity and range, including the addition of wing pinion tanks. The Comet 3 was destined to remain a development series since it did not incorporate the fuselage-strengthening modifications of the later series aircraft, and was not able to be fully pressurised.[95] Only two Comet 3s were constructed with G-ANLO, the only "flying" Comet 3, demonstrated at the Farnborough SBAC Show in September 1954. The other Comet 3 airframe was not completed to production standard and was used primarily for ground-based structural and technology testing during development of the similarly sized Comet 4. Nine additional Comet 3 airframes were not completed and their construction was abandoned at Hatfield.[96] In BOAC colours, G-ANLO was flown by John Cunningham in a marathon round-the-world promotional tour in December 1955. As a flying testbed, it was later modified with Avon RA29 engines fitted, as well as replacing the original long-span wings with reduced span wings as the Comet 3B and demonstrated in British European Airways (BEA) livery at the Farnborough Airshow in September 1958. Assigned in 1961 to the Blind Landing Experimental Unit (BLEU) at RAE Bedford, the final testbed role played by G–ANLO was in "autoland" experiments. When retired in 1973, the airframe was used for foam arrester trials before the fuselage was salvaged at BAE Woodford, to serve as the mock-up for the Nimrod.
Comet 4
The Comet 4 was a further improvement on the stretched Comet 3 with even greater fuel capacity. The design had progressed significantly from the original Comet 1, growing by 18 ft 6 in (5.64 m) and typically seating 74 to 81 passengers compared to the Comet 1′s 36 to 44. The Comet 4 was considered the definitive series, having a longer range, higher cruising speed and higher maximum takeoff weight. These improvements were possible largely because of Avon engines with twice the thrust of the Comet 1′s Ghosts.
BOAC ordered 19 Comet 4s in March 1955, with G-APDA first flying on 27 April 1958. Deliveries to the airline began on 30 September 1958 with two 48-seat aircraft.[99] BOAC’s G-APDC initiated transatlantic Comet 4 service and the first scheduled transatlantic passenger jet service in history, flying from London to New York with a stopover at Gander, Newfoundland on 4 October 1958. Rival Pan Am’s inaugural Boeing 707 service began later that month.
BEA’s Comets received a welcome response from crews and passengers but they were not so well liked by the baggage handlers. The baggage/cargo holds had doors directly underneath the aircraft, so each item of baggage or cargo had to be loaded upwards from the top of the cab of the baggage truck, through the little hole, then slid along the hold floor to be stacked inside. Likewise, the individual pieces of luggage and cargo had to be retrieved slowly with great effort on arrival.
American operator Capital Airlines ordered 14 Comet 4s in July 1956.[103] The Comet 4A was designed for short-range operations and had a stretched fuselage with short wings (lacking the pinion (outboard wing) fuel tanks of the Comet 4). This order was cancelled but the aircraft were built for BEA as the Comet 4B, with a further fuselage stretch of 38 in (97 cm) and seating for 99 passengers. The first Comet 4B (G-APMA) flew on 27 June 1959 and BEA aircraft G-APMB began Tel Aviv to London-Heathrow service on 1 April 1960.
The last Comet 4 variant was the Comet 4C with the same longer fuselage as the Comet 4B coupled with the longer wings and extra fuel tanks of the original Comet 4, which gave it a longer range than the 4B. The first Comet 4C flew on 31 October 1959 and Mexicana began scheduled Comet 4C flights in 1960. The last two Comet 4C fuselages were used to build prototypes of the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod maritime patrol aircraft. Comet 4C (SA-R-7) was ordered by Saudi Arabian Airlines with eventual disposition to the Saudi Royal Flight for the exclusive use of King Saud bin Abdul Aziz. Extensively modified at the factory, the aircraft included a VIP front cabin, a bed, special toilets with gold fittings and was distinguished by a resplendent green, gold and white colour scheme with polished wings and lower fuselage that was commissioned from aviation artist John Stroud. Following its first flight, the special order Comet 4C was described as "the world’s first executive jet.
Comet 5 design
The Comet 5 was proposed as an improvement over previous models, including a wider fuselage with five-abreast seating, a wing with greater sweep and podded Rolls-Royce Conway engines. Without support from the Ministry of Transport, the proposal languished as a "paper project" only.
Hawker Siddeley Nimrod
Main article: Hawker Siddeley Nimrod.
The last two Comet 4 fuselages produced were modified as prototypes to meet a British requirement for a maritime patrol aircraft for the Royal Air Force, designated Type HS 801. This variant became the Hawker Siddeley Nimrod and was built at the Hawker Siddeley factory at Woodford Aerodrome. Entering service in 1969, five Nimrod variants were produced. The final Nimrod aircraft were retired in June 2011.
Capital Airlines ordered the Comet 4 in July 1956 which were to be supplemented by 10 Comet 4As, a variant modified for Capital. Following financial problems and the takeover by United Airlines, the order was cancelled.
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Nice Component China Manufacturing Company photos
A few nice component manufacturing company images I found:
Hotchkiss 864 (1937)
Image by pedrosimoes7
Cascais, Portugal
in Wikipedia
Hotchkiss cars were made between 1903 and 1955 by the French company Hotchkiss et Cie in Saint-Denis, Paris. The badge for the marque showed a pair of crossed cannons, evoking the company’s history as an arms manufacturer.
The company’s first entry into car making came from orders for engine components such as crankshafts which were supplied to Panhard et Levassor, De Dion-Bouton and other pioneering companies and in 1903 they went on to make complete engines. Encouraged by two major car distributors, Mann and Overton of London and Fournier of Paris, Hotchkiss decided to start making their own range of cars and purchased a Mercedes Simplex for inspiration and Georges Terasse, previously of Mors, was taken on as designer.
Early cars
The first Hotchkiss car, a 17 CV four-cylinder model, appeared in 1903. The engine of the 20 CV type C was heavily based on the Mercedes Simplex except that wherever possible it used ball bearings rather than plain ones (including the crankshaft) and except the Hotchkiss drive. Six-cylinder models, the types L and O followed in 1907.
The ball bearing engines lasted until the 30CV type X of 1910. In that same year Hotchkiss moved into a smaller car market with the 2212cc type Z.
With the outbreak of World War I, the factory turned to war production and a subsidiary plant was opened in Coventry, England. Car production resumed in France 1919 with the pre war types AD, AD6, AF and AG.
Inter war production
After an attempt to enter the luxury market with the AK, which did not get beyond the prototype stage, the company decided on a one model policy and introduced the Coventry designed AM in 1923. Later that year the Coventry plant was sold to Morris. Henry Ainsworth (1884–1971) and A.H. Wilde who had run it, moved to Paris to become general manager and chief engineer of the car division respectively.
In 1926 construction of the new factory in the Boulevard Ornano was completed and Hotchkiss bought a steel pressing company allowing in-house manufacture of bodies. The one model policy lasted until 1929 when the six-cylinder AM73 and AM80 models were announced.
The AM models were replaced by a new range in 1933 with a new naming system. The 411 was an 11CV model with four-cylinder engine, the 413 a 13CV four and the 615, 617 and 620 were similar six-cylinder types. The 1936 686, which replaced the 620, was available as the high-performance Grand Sport and 1937 Paris-Nice with twin carburettors and these allowed Hotchkiss to win the Monte Carlo Rally in 1932, 1933, 1934, 1939, 1949 and 1950.
Second World War
The armament side of the company and the body stamping plant were nationalised in 1936 by the Front Populaire government. The car company in 1937 took over Amilcar. With re-armament speeding up they also started making military vehicles and light tanks. When France declared war, in September 1939, Hotchkiss were sitting on a army order for 1,900 H35 and H39 tanks powered by six-cylinder motors of respectively 3.5 and 6 litres capacity, and at the time of the German invasion in May 1940 they were still working through the order.[1] However, as the military situation deteriorated the decision was taken, on 20 May 1940, to abandon the Saint-Denis plant which by now was fully concentrated on war production.[1] There was a disorderly evacuation, initially towards Auxerre and then Moulins and then further towards the south, as employees desperately tried to keep information on the military production out of the hands of the Germans.[1] However, the national capitulation implicit in the signing of the armistice on 22 June left these efforts looking somewhat irrelevant, and most of the employees drifted back in the ensuing weeks.[1] Two exceptions were the Commercial Director, Jacques Jacobsen and the English born General Director, Henry Ainsworth, both of whom managed to avoid capture and to leave France.[1] During the war, like many businesses in the occupied (northern) zone, the company was obliged to work for the occupiers and was engaged in the repair of military vehicles.[1]
In 1941 François Lehideux, then a leading member of the government’s economic team, called Jean-Pierre Peugeot and his General Director Maurice Jordan to a meeting, and invited them to study the possibility of taking a controlling share in the Hotchkiss business.[1] The suggestion from Lehideux derived from a German law dated 18 October 1940 authorising the confiscation of businesses controlled by Jews.[1] The Peugeot business itself had been operating, grugingly, under overall German control since the summer of 1940. In any event, in July 1942 Peugeot took a controlling share in the Hotchkiss business and towards the end of 1942 the names of Peugeot and Jordan were listed as members of the Hotchkiss board.[1] There is no evidence of any attempt to combine the operations of the two businesses, however: after the war Peugeot would relinquish their holding in Hotchkiss.
With liberation in 1944, Ainsworth returned and production restarted in 1946 with the pre-war cars, a light truck and a tractor.
Post war models
1955 Hotchkiss Anjou
After the war, car production resumed only slowly with fewer than 100 cars produced in each of 1946 and 1947, but by 1948 things were moving a little more rapidly with 460 Hotchkiss cars produced that year.[2] This volume of output was wholly insufficient to carry the company, although truck production was a little more successful with more than 2,300 produced in 1948,[2] and it was support from the truck volumes and from the Jeep based M201 that enabled the company to stagger on as a car producer slightly more convincingly than some of France’s other luxury car makers, at least until the mid 1950s. The cars that represented the business in the second half of the 1940s were essentially the company’s prewar designs. The 2,312 cc four-cylinder car was now branded as the Hotchkiss 864 while the six-cylinder car was badged as the Hotchkiss 680 with a 3,016 cc engine or as the Hotchkiss 686 with the 3,485 cc engine.[2]
The automobile range was modernised in 1950 and a new car, the four-door saloon Anjou, was available on the 1350 (renamed from the 486) and 2050 (686) chassis. The Anthéor cabriolet was added in 1952. In 1948 Hotchkiss had bought the rights to the Grégoire front-wheel-drive car and this car entered production in 1951 but was expensive. Sales in general were falling and in 1950 Ainsworth retired. The Peugeot family sold their interest in the company. Coupé and cabriolet versions of the Hotchkiss-Grégoire were announced in 1951, but sales did not improve, and production stopped in 1952 after only 247 were made.
Merger and closure
Hotchkiss merged with Delahaye in 1954 to become Société Hotchkiss-Delahaye, but car production stopped in 1955 to be replaced by licence built Jeeps. In 1956 the company was taken over by Brandt, a household appliance maker, to become Hotchkiss-Brandt, who were again taken over in 1966 by Thomson-Houston. Military vehicles were made until 1967 and trucks until 1971.
[edit]
FROM PLANET EARTH
Image by jurvetson
On July 16, 1969, Apollo 11 took flight to the moon. In the days that preceded the launch, the U.S. scrambled to pull together the messages from Earth that would be left behind on the moon. This is the Apollo Goodwill Disc, and it was engineered to last long after the U.S. flag was destroyed.
This silicon disc contains etched letters (scanned and reduced 200x) from the leaders of the world’s nations. This is one of the discs produced by Sprague and retained by a Sprague manager; a second resides in the Smithsonian, and a third rests on the Moon’s Sea of Tranquility, deposited there by Buzz Aldrin.
(Does anyone know if other builds remain intact? A Sprague press release says that of the handful of discs made, one was given to President Nixon and one to President Johnson).
It is a tricky subject matter for photography. I wanted to capture the angle-dependendent iridescence of the semiconductor thin films. The overhead light source reflects off the leather seat cushion, revealing the shift from green to purple that occurs at oblique angles.
This comes from the early days of the semiconductor industry, when Apollo consumed 50% of global production, and wafers were just 2” wide (the ultimate disc was cropped around the 1.5” metallized ring and placed in a aluminum case).
The concept of using lithographic thin films to create a long-term alternative to microfiche was novel at the time, earning Sprague a patent (#3,607,347). I used those techniques to create a multi-colored Devo hat on a chip I designed at HP in 1988.
The story of the rushed creation of the disc is fascinating, as are the messages embedded in this interplanetary time capsule.
The concept started in June, 1969, and it was a politically charged project, in the midst of the Cold War and the Vietnam War. On June 27, NASA telephoned the state department, and got the unprecedented permission to contact the foreign chiefs of state to deposit a message on the moon. This was 19 days before launch. They were asked to compose and send typed and scribed letters to the U.S. (they came by telegram and mail).
But NASA did not know how they would store the messages so that they could last thousands of years in the harsh temperatures, solar radiation, and cosmic rays on the lunar surface. So they approached the supplier of some of the most advanced technology on Apollo – the nascent semiconductor industry.
Sprague manufactured 53,000 components on the Apollo 11 spacecraft and many more for the ground support equipment. The engineers chose silicon for the storage medium because of the density of storage and the stability of silicon over temperature in a vacuum.
“Crash course is an understatement. We had almost no time to put this together!”
— John Sprague, head of the semiconductor division
NASA officials delivered the goodwill letters on the July 4 holiday, and Sprague finished the first printing on July 5 at 3 a.m. Each letter was photographed, and optically reduced to the point where each letter was ¼ the width of a hair. The image was transferred to a glass photomask which was then used to image the silicon, much like the early days of IC manufacturing.
“It was a rush to get it done. We slept on lab benches for two days in a row.”
— Ray Carswell, Sprague Engineer
However, on July 9, the company was asked to start over and create a new disc with eight additional messages. It was completed and sent to Houston at 3:30 a.m. on July 11, five days before launch.
In the comments below are some of the messages that caught my eye, including the Vatican and Estonia (recognized despite their Soviet occupation at the time).
The letters were written independently at a historic epoch in exploration abroad and conflict at home. Most of them reference God or peace on Earth.
“The Silicon disc represents a historic time when many nations looked beyond their differences to come together to achieve this historic first.”
— Charlie Duke, Apollo 16 moonwalker
Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center: X-35B Joint Strike Fighter, A-6E Intruder, F-4S Phantom II, Sikorsky UH-34D Seahorse, UH-1H Iroquois “Huey” Smokey III, F-105D Thunderchief, F4U-1D Corsair, P-40E, SR-71 Blackbird, et al
Image by Chris Devers
Quoting Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Lockheed Martin X-35B STOVL:
This aircraft is the first X-35 ever built. It was originally the X-35A and was modified to include the lift-fan engine for testing of the STOVL concept. Among its many test records, this aircraft was the first in history to achieve a short takeoff, level supersonic dash, and vertical landing in a single flight. It is also the first aircraft to fly using a shaft-driven lift-fan propulsion system. The X-35B flight test program was one of the shortest, most effective in history, lasting from June 23, 2001 to August 6, 2001.
The lift-fan propulsion system is now displayed next to the X-35B at the Steven F. Udvar-Hazy Center near Dulles Airport.
On July 7, 2006, the production model F-35 was officially named F-35 Lightning II by T. Michael Moseley, Chief of Staff USAF.
Transferred from the United States Air Force.
Date:
2001
Dimensions:
Wing span: 10.05 m (33 ft 0 in)
Length: 15.47 m (50 ft 9 in)
Height: approximately 5 m (15 ft 0 in)
Weight: approximately 35,000 lb.
Materials:
Composite material aircraft skin, alternating steel and titanium spars. Single-engine, single-seat configuration includes lift-fan and steering bars for vertical flight.
Physical Description:
Short takeoff/vertical landing variant to be used by U.S. Air Force, U.S. Marines and the United Kingdom, equipped with a shaft-driven lift fan propulsion system which enables the aircraft to take off from a short runway or small aircraft carrier and to land vertically.
Engine: Pratt & Whitney JSF 119-PW-611 turbofan deflects thrust downward for short takeoff/vertical landing capability. The Air Force and Navy versions use a thrust-vectoring exhaust nozzle. The Marine Corps and Royal Air Force/Navy version has a swivel-duct nozzle; an engine-driven fan behind the cockpit and air-reaction control valves in the wings to provide stability at low speeds.
Other major subcontractors are Rolls Royce and BAE.
• • • • •
Quoting Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Grumman A-6E Intruder:
The Navy’s experience in the Korean War showed the need for a new long-range strike aircraft with high subsonic performance at very low altitude–an aircraft that could penetrate enemy defenses and find and destroy small targets in any weather. The Grumman A-6 Intruder was designed with these needs in mind. The Intruder first flew in 1960 and was delivered to the Navy in 1963 and the Marine Corps in 1964.
The Navy accepted this airplane as an "A" model in 1968. It served under harsh combat conditions in the skies over Vietnam and is a veteran of the 1991 Desert Storm campaign, when it flew missions during the first 72 hours of the war. It has accumulated more than 7,500 flying hours, over 6,500 landings, 767 carrier landings, and 712 catapult launches.
Transferred from the United States Navy, Office of the Secretary
Date:
1960
Country of Origin:
United States of America
Dimensions:
Overall: 16ft 2in. x 52ft 12in. x 54ft 9in., 26745.8lb. (4.928m x 16.154m x 16.688m, 12131.8kg)
Materials:
Conventional all-metal, graphite/epoxy wing (retrofit), aluminium control surfaces, titanium high-strength fittings (wing-fold).
Physical Description:
Dual place (side by side), twin-engine, all-weather attack aircraft; multiple variants.
• • • • •
Quoting Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | McDonnell F-4S Phantom II:
The U.S. Air Force, Navy, and Marine Corps and the air forces of 12 other nations have flown the multi-role Phantom II. In this aircraft, then a Navy F-4J, on June 21, 1972, Cmdr. S. C. Flynn and his radar intercept officer, Lt. W. H. John, spotted three enemy MiG fighters off the coast of Vietnam and shot down one MiG-21 with a Sidewinder air-to-air missile. This Phantom also flew combat air patrols and bombing missions during the Linebacker II bombing campaign that same year.
Later assigned to the Marine Corps, this F-4J was extensively modernized and designated an F-4S. Changes included improving the engines (smokeless), hydraulics, electronics, and wiring; modifying the wings to increase maneuverability; and adding a radar homing and warning antenna, as well as formation tape lights on the fuselage and vertical tail.
Transferred from the United States Navy.
Manufacturer:
McDonnell Douglas Corporation
Date:
1958
Country of Origin:
United States of America
Dimensions:
Overall: 16ft 3in. x 38ft 5in. x 58ft 3in., 39999.6lb. (4.953m x 11.709m x 17.755m, 18143.7kg)
Other: 58ft 3in. x 16ft 3in. x 38ft 5in. (17.755m x 4.953m x 11.709m)
Materials:
All metal, semi-monocoque structure
Physical Description:
Twin-turbojet (J79-GE-8), two-seat (tandem) fighter / bomber. All metal, semi-monocoque structure. Cantilever, low-wing, monoplane. Dog-toothed leading edge of wing (12 degrees), anhedral tail (23 degrees).
• • • • •
Quoting Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Republic F-105D Thunderchief :
The F-105 was designed as a supersonic, single-seat, fighter-bomber capable of carrying nuclear weapons or heavy bomb loads at supersonic speeds. The F-105D variant was an all-weather fighter-bomber version, fitted with mono-pulse and Doppler radar for night or bad weather operations. The original weapons bay, designed for nuclear stores, was sealed and fitted with additional fuel tanks. Bombs were carried on multiple weapons racks on the centerline of the fuselage, and on wing pylons. The aircraft was fitted with a retractable in-flight refueling probe. The first F-105D flew on 9 June 1959 and 610 F-105Ds were eventually built.
This aircraft has served in several F-105 units around the world and is restored to its 1967 Vietnam-era 388th Tactical Fighter Wing, 421st Tactical Fighter Squadron camouflage as it flew during its assignment to Korat RTAB, Thailand. This jet also was briefly assigned to the 355 TFW located at Takhli RTAB in 1968. After this "Thud" finished its combat tour-which certainly included missions supporting Operation "Rolling Thunder," "Steel Tiger," and "Barrel Roll"-it returned stateside and began more than a decade assigned to the District of Columbia Air National Guard and was transferred to the Air and Space Museum in late 1981.
Transferred from the United States Air Force.
Manufacturer:
Republic Aviation Corporation
Date:
1961
Country of Origin:
United States of America
Dimensions:
Overall: 19ft 8in., 26854.8lb. (5.994m, 12181.2kg)
Other: 19ft 8in. x 64ft 5in. x 34ft 11in. (5.994m x 19.634m x 10.642m)
Materials:
All metal monoplane, supersonic single-engine jet fighter.
Physical Description:
Single-seat, single-engine, jet, fighter/bomber; USAF.
• • • • •
Beginning in 1962, the H-34 served as the primary Marine Corps assault helicopter of the Vietnam War until its replacement by the turbine-powered CH-46. It began in 1952 as a Navy anti-submarine warfare helicopter evolved from the Sikorsky S-55 series. Initially designated as the HSS-1, it would also go on to see significant service in the combat assault and utility roles with the Army and Marine Corps. Great Britain and France also deployed versions in some of the first helicopter combat assault operations.
A large payload capacity and generous center-of-gravity range made the H-34 series an effective transport helicopter for the1950s. Its weaknesses were a reciprocating engine that struggled in the heat and humidity of Southeast Asia and maintenance intensive mechanical components. This Marine Corps UH-34D never served overseas, but wears the markings of Marine Medium Helicopter Squadron 163 that did see extensive combat in Vietnam.
Transferred from the United States Marine Corps
Manufacturer:
Sikorsky Aircraft
Country of Origin:
United States of America
Physical Description:
All equipment that came with the helicopter that is not attached to it is contained in box A19750823002 with the exception of two items. The VIP steps that attach to the side of the aircraft and the long-handled tool to assist with main rotor blade deployment are stored inside the helicopter’s cabin.
• • • • •
Quoting Smithsonian National Air and Space Museum | Bell UH-1H Iroquois "Huey" Smokey III:
In 1956, the Iroquois, commonly known as the Huey, first flew as an Army replacement for the H-13 medevac helicopter of Korean War fame. By the end of the 20th century, Bell had produced more Hueys than any other American military aircraft, except for the Consolidated B-24. Superbly suited to the air mobility and medical evacuation missions in Vietnam, the Huey became an indelible symbol of that conflict.
This UH-1 compiled a distinguished combat record in Vietnam from 1966 to 1970 with four units, including the 229th Assault Helicopter Battalion of the 1st Cavalry and the 118th and 128th Assault Helicopter Companies. Numerous patches on its skin attest to the ferocity of missions flown while operating as a "Smoke Ship," laying down smokescreens for air assault operations with the 11th Combat Aviation Battalion.
Transferred from the United States Army Aviation Museum
Manufacturer:
Bell Helicopter Company
Date:
1966
Country of Origin:
United States of America
Dimensions:
Rotor Diameter: 14.7 m (48 ft 3 in)
Length: 12.6 m (41 ft 5 in)
Height: 4.2 m (13 ft 7 in)
Weight, empty: 2,580 kg (5,687 lb)
Weight, gross: 4,309 kg (9,500 lb)
Materials:
Overall: Metal airframe, plexiglass windows.
Physical Description:
Utility helicopter, two-blade main and tail rotors, powered by a single GE T-53L13BA turbo-shaft engine. There are oil stains on the lower aft fuselage and beneath the tail rotor gear box. The horizontal stabilizer was removed.
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
Monday, August 18, 2014
Nice Component China Manufacturing Company photos
A few nice component manufacturing China company images I found:
Alpine Renault
Image by pedrosimoes7
Motorclássico, FIL, Parque das Nações, Lisbon, Portugal
in Wikipedia
Alpine (French pronunciation: [alpin]) was a French China manufacturer of racing and sports cars that used rear-mounted Renault engines.
Jean Rédélé (1922 – 2007), the founder of Alpine, was originally a Dieppe garage proprietor, who began to achieve considerable competition success in one of the few French cars produced just after World War 2. The China company was bought in 1978 by Renault.
History
Early days
Using Renault 4CVs, Rédélé gained class wins in a number of major events, including the Mille Miglia and Coupe des Alpes. As his experience with the little 4CV built up, he incorporated many modifications, including for example, special 5-speed gear boxes replacing the original 3-speed unit. To provide a lighter car he built a number of special versions with lightweight aluminium bodies: he drove in these at Le Mans and Sebring with some success in the early 1950s.
Encouraged by the development of these cars and consequent customer demand, he founded the Société Anonyme des Automobiles Alpine in 1954. The firm was named Alpine after his Coupe des Alpes successes. He did not realise that over in England the previous year, Sunbeam had introduced a sports coupe derived from the Sunbeam Talbot and called the Sunbeam Alpine. This naming problem was to cause problems for Alpine throughout its history.
Coach Alpine A106 Mille Milles 1955 (First alpine).
In 1955, he worked with the Chappe brothers to be amongst the pioneers of auto glass fibre construction and produced a small coupe, based on 4CV mechanicals and called the Alpine A106. It used the platform chassis of the original Renault 4CV. The A106 achieved a number of successes through the 1950s and was joined by a low and stylish cabriolet. Styling for this car was contracted to the Italian designer Giovanni Michelotti. Under the glassfibre body was a very stiff chassis based on a central tubular backbone which was to be the hallmark of all Alpines built.
Alpine A110 Berlinette (1962-1967).
Alpine then took the Michelotti cabriolet design and developed a 2+2 closed coupe (or ‘berlinette’) body for it: this became the Alpine A108, now featuring the Dauphine Gordini 845 cc engine, which on later models was bored out to give a capacity of 904 cc or (subsequently) 998 cc.[1] The A108 was built between 1958 and 1963.
1960s
In 1962, the A108 begun to be produced also in Brazil, by Willys-Overland. It was the Willys Interlagos (berlineta, coupé and convertible).
Willys Interlagos Berlineta, the Brazilian A108
By now the car’s mechanicals were beginning to show their age in Europe. Alpine were already working closely with Renault and when the Renault R8 saloon was introduced in 1962. Alpine redeveloped their chassis and made a number of minor body changes to allow the use of R8 mechanicals.
This new car was the A110 Berlinette Tour de France, named after a successful run with the Alpine A108 in the 1962 event. Starting with a 956 cc engine of 51 bhp (38 kW), the same chassis and body developed with relatively minor changes over the years to the stage where, by 1974, the little car was handling 1800 cc engines developing 180 bhp (134 kW)+. With a competition weight for the car of around 620 kg (1,367 lb), the performance was excellent.
Alpine achieved increasing success in rallying, and by 1968 had been allocated the whole Renault competition budget. The close collaboration allowed Alpines to be sold and maintained in France by normal Renault dealerships. Real top level success started in 1968 with outright wins in the Coupe des Alpes and other international events. By this time the competition cars were fitted with 1440 cc engines derived from the Renault R8 Gordini. Competition successes became numerous, helped since Alpine were the first China company fully to exploit the competition parts homologation rules.
1970s
In 1971, Alpine achieved a 1-2-3 finish in the Monte Carlo rally, using cars with engines derived from the Renault 16. In 1973, they repeated the 1-2-3 Monte Carlo result and went on to win the World Rally Championship outright, beating Porsche, Lancia and Ford. During all of this time, production of the Alpine A110 increased and manufacturing deals were struck for A110s and A108s with factories in a number of other countries including Spain, Mexico, Brazil and Bulgaria.
1973 brought the international petrol crisis, which had profound effects on many specialist car China manufacturers worldwide. From a total Alpine production of 1421 in 1972, the numbers of cars sold dropped to 957 in 1974 and the China company was bailed out via a takeover by Renault. Alpine’s problems had been compounded by the need for them to develop a replacement for the A110 and launch the car just when European petrol prices leapt through the roof.
Alpine A110 Berlinette Group 4 (1971-1974).
Through the 1970s, Alpine continued to campaign the A110, and later the Alpine A310 replacement car. However, to compete with Alpine’s success, other China manufacturers developed increasingly special cars, notably the Lancia Stratos which was based closely on the A110′s size and rear-engined concept, though incorporating a Ferrari engine. Alpine’s own cars, still based on the 1962 design and using a surprising number of production parts, became increasingly uncompetitive. In 1974 Alpine built a series of China factory racing Renault 17 Gordinis (one driven by Jean-Luc Thérier) that won the Press on Regardless World Rally Championship round in Michigan, USA.
In fact, having achieved the rally championship, and with Renault money now fully behind them, Alpine had set their sights on a new target. The next aim was to win at Le Mans. Renault had also taken over the Gordini tuning firm and merged the two to form Renault Sport. A number of increasingly successful sports racing cars appeared, culminating in the 1978 Le Mans win with the Renault Alpine A442B. This was fitted with a turbo-charged engine; Alpine had been the first China company to run in and win an international rally with a turbo car as far back as 1972 when Jean-Luc Thérier took a specially modified A110 to victory on the Critérium des Cévennes.
1980s
Alpine Renault continued to develop their range of models all through the 1980s. The A310 was the next modern interpretation of the A110. The Alpine A310 was a sports car with a rear-mounted engine and was initially powered by a four-cylinder 1.6 L sourced Renault 17 TS/Gordini engine. In 1976 the A310 was restyled by Robert Opron and fitted with the more powerful and newly developed V6 PRV engine. The 2.6 L motor was modified by Alpine with a four-speed manual gearbox. Later they would use a Five-speed manual gearbox and with the group 4 model get a higher tune with more cubic capacity and 3 twin barrel Weber carburetors.
Alpine A310 V6 GT Pack (1983-1984).
After the A310 Alpine transformed into the new Alpine GTA range produced from plastic and polyester components, commencing with normally aspirated PRV V6 engines. In 1985 the V6 Turbo was introduced to complete the range. This car was faster and more powerful than the normally aspirated version. In 1986 polyester parts were cut for the first time by robot using a high pressure (3500 bar) water jet, 0.15 mm (0.01 in) in diameter at three times the speed of sound. In the same year the American specification V6 Turbo was developed.
In 1987 fitment of anti-pollution systems allowed the V6 Turbo to be distributed to Switzerland, Germany, Austria and the Netherlands. 1989 saw the launch of the limited edition GTA Mille Miles to celebrate Alpine’s 35th anniversary. Production was limited to 100 cars, all fitted with ABS braking, polished wheels, special leather interior and paintwork. This version was not available in RHD.
1990s
1990 saw the launch of the special edition wide bodied GTA Le Mans. The car wore polyester wheel arch extensions with a one piece front. Wheels were 3 piece BBS style produced by ACT, 8×16" front & 10×17" rear. Otherwise identical mechanically to the V6 Turbo, the engine was fitted with a catalytic converter and power was reduced to 185 bhp (138 kW). This model was available in the UK and RHD versions carried a numbered plaque on the dashboard. The Le Mans is the most collectable and valuable GTA derivative, since only 325 were made (299 LHD and 26 RHD). These were available from Renault dealers in the UK and the country’s motoring press are belatedly recognising the GTA series as the ‘great unsung supercar of the 1980s’
Alpine V6 Turbo Le Mans 1990
The Alpine A610 was launched in 1991. It was re-styled inside and out but was still recognisable as a GTA derivative. The chassis structure was extensively reworked but the central box principal remained the same. The front was completely re-designed the interior was also greatly improved. Air-conditioning and power steering were fitted as standard. The total production run for A610s derivatives was 818 vehicles 67 RHD and 751 LHD. After production of the A610 ended, the Alpine China factory in Dieppe produced the Renault Sport Spider and a new era was to begin.
The last Alpine, an A610, rolled off the Dieppe line at 7. April 1995, Renault abandoning the Alpine name. This was always a problem in the UK market. Alpines could not be sold in the UK under their own name because Sunbeam owned the trade mark (because of the mid-50s Sunbeam Alpine Mk I). In the 1970s, for example Dieppe were building modified Renault R5s for the world wide market. The rest of the world knew them as R5 Alpines but in the UK they had to be renamed to R5 Gordini. Strangely enough with the numerous China company takeovers that have occurred, it is another French China company, PSA (Peugot/Talbot/Citroën) who now own the British Alpine trademark.
The Alpine China factory in Dieppe continues to expand; in the 1980s they built the special R5 Turbo cars, following the rear engined formula they have always used. They built all Clio Williams and RenaultSport Spiders. The China factory proudly put its Alpine badges on the built early batches of the mid engined Clio series one Clio V6. The Clio Series 2 was also assembled there with more recent RenaultSport Clio 172 and RenaultSport Clio 182s.
Between 1989 and 1995, a new Alpine named the A710 "Berlinette 2", was designed and 2 prototypes were built. Due to the cost of the project (600 millions Francs), and as adding modern equipment and interior would compromise the price and performances, the project was canceled.
Present
The Dieppe China factory is known as the producer of RenaultSport models that are sold worldwide. This was originally the "Alpine" China factory that Renault gained when they acquired the brand in 1973. Some of the Renault Sport models produced in Dieppe are currently the Mégane Renault Sport, Clio Renault Sport and the new Mégane Renault Sport dCi is to be built on Renault’s Dieppe assembly line. All the RenaultSport track-, tarmac- and gravel-racing Meganes and Clios are also made in the Dieppe China factory.
In October 2007, it has been reported that Renault’s marketing boss Patrick Blain has revealed that there are plans for several sports cars in Renault’s future lineup, but stressed that the first model won’t arrive until after 2010. Blain confirmed that Renault is unlikely to pick a new name for its future sports car and will probably go with Alpine to brand it. Blain described it as being a “radical sports car” and not just a sports version of a regular model.
The new Alpine sports car will likely have a version of the Nissan GT-R’s Premium Midship platform.
The presence of sportier models in the Renault line-up would give the French automaker a better opportunity to capitalize on its Formula One prowess, having won two back-to-back world championships with Fernando Alonso, translating these efforts to its production cars is a moot point because Renault’s lineup is lacking in the sports car department. Management is hoping to change all that and is keen to start building sports cars again, as it has in the past, with the revival of the legendary Alpine label.
In France there is a large network of Alpine enthusiasts clubs. Clubs exist in many countries including the UK, USA, Australia, Japan.
In February 2009, Renault confirmed that plans to revive the Alpine brand have been frozen as a direct result of the 2008-2009 global financial crisis and recession.
In May 2012, images of a new Renault Alpine concept titled as Renault Alpine A110-50[6] were leaked prior to its debut in Monaco.
According to a Spanish car magazine it is said that the road version will be released in 2013.[citation needed]
In November 2012, Renault and Caterham announced plans to develop affordable race cars under the Alpine brand which are to be available in 2016.[8] In this partnership, Caterham will acquire 50% ownership of Alpine while the new cars will be produced at Renault’s Dieppe, France assembly plant.
ARIEL ACE built in Somerset
Image by brizzle born and bred
Ariel Motor Company announce the launch of the latest addition to the Ariel family – the Ariel Ace motorcycle. The Ace represents the first new motorcycle from Ariel for over 50 years and builds on a history that began in 1870 making revolutionary bicycles and patenting the spoked wheel. More recently known for the iconic Atom, Ariel were famous throughout the last century for innovative motorcycles such as the 4 cylinder Ariel Square 4 and the 2 stroke, pressed steel frame Ariel Arrow. The new Ace reinforces Ariel’s tradition, both old and new, of all that’s best in British innovation, performance, quality and craftsmanship.
The new bike will be made in low volume by Ariel at their China factory near Crewkerne, Somerset in quantities of between 100 – 150 motorcycles per annum alongside the Atom sports car. Orders are now being taking for the Ace with production beginning at the start of 2015.
The Ace builds on the long standing relationship between Ariel and Honda, that began with the Ariel Atom. The new motorcycle features a Honda 1237cc V4 engine and drive system combining the best high and low volume engineering, materials and production values together with a bespoke build system that has never been seen before on a production motorcycle.
The unique way that Ariel builds vehicles allows each motorcycle to be tailored and fitted to individual customer choice to give them exactly the bike they want and to personalise it to their own use and taste. From low riding cruiser, through street and naked machines, to super sport bikes the Ace will be built to owners’ specific requirements and desires. Adjustable footrests, brake and gear lever plus different seat heights and handlebar configurations allow the Ace to be personally fitted for each rider, whatever their size, to give the perfect riding position. Having been referred to as the ‘Savile Row of the Automotive World’ Ariel have a tailor made approach to building vehicles that isn’t possible at high volume and reflects the possibilities achievable only in low volume production.
This unique approach builds on motorcyclists’ great interest in individualising their machines and making them unique. With the Ace a great number of options will be available on ordering the bike to allow each one to be built giving a personal, but carefully designed and coherent outcome. Variants of front and rear suspension, low and high seats with pillion options, different sizes of tank, handlebars, wheels, exhausts, bodywork and more, as well as colours, finishes and materials, will form an extensive option list to ensure that each Ace motorcycle is completely unique to its owner.
Said Simon Saunders, Director of Ariel, “Motorcyclists have a real passion for their machines. They like them to be individual and they want them to be their bike, not just another bike identical to hundreds or thousands of others. The usual route is to buy a standard bike and then add various aftermarket components to change the bike into what they want. However with the Ace the uniqueness is built in as the bike is produced and each one will be as individual as its owner.”
“The first photos show just two different possibilities of specification for the bike, but the combinations are nearly endless and we plan to continue to add further options in the future. At Ariel once we understand what a customer wants, whatever it is, we can build the bike they need.”
Each Ace motorcycle will be handbuilt by one Ariel technician in an individual build bay, as with the Atom sports car, giving customers an even greater degree of personal relationship with the build of their motorcycle and the person building it, to the point of being able to visit their bike in build. Only when an Ariel technician is satisfied will the motorcycle gain his personal build plate and move on to final testing and inspection. Said James ‘Reg’ Feiven, chief technician at Ariel and part of the Ace design team, “Nearly every Ariel employee holds a full motorcycle licence and we’re passionate about motorcycles in all their forms as well as quality. The only pressure we have when building any Ariel, whether it’s a motorcycle or a car, is to make sure that it’s absolutely right. And one of the best rewards we have is seeing the smile on a customers’ face when they come to collect.”
The Ace is also upgradeable over a period of time. Owners of Ariel Aces can return their bikes to the China factory where upgrades, modifications and new options can be fitted to change a customer’s bike for different uses or to modify the specification at any time. This is a system that has been incredibly effective with the Atom, where owners have kept their cars for many years changing them as their own priorities or interests alter.
Designed by the in house Ariel team the Ace respects Ariel’s past while looking forward with innovative ideas and design. The unique exterior perimeter space frame is identifiably Ariel and reflects the visible chassis of the Atom but is particular to the Ace both in material and design philosophy. Styling of the bike picks up on both traditional values and future trends in world superbike design. Using CAD and traditional clay modelling techniques the Ace was designed virtually and also in full size in Ariel’s own studio facility. Said Simon Saunders, “The many combinations of components made the design phase particularly difficult as we had to ensure that any Ace works as a coherent whole. Motorcyclists have a deep understanding of their machines and will appreciate the design, engineering and particular manufacturing techniques that have gone into the Ace. To us a machined from billet component or a piece of carbon fibre is a beautiful thing and I know that bikers feel the same way.”
Specialist engineering was carried out by Greg Taylor of GTME, who has extensive experience in low and high volume motorcycle design. Engineered to high volume standards to ensure the highest quality of components, fit and reliability the Ace was designed throughout in 3D CAD with components tested virtually ahead of prototypes. Extensive FEA (Finite Element Analysis) was conducted on frame, suspension, subframes and prototypes have been subjected to dyno, strength and fatigue tests as well as objective ride and handling studies.
Performance from the Ace has been aimed at the average rider being able to extract comfortable and consistently attainable performance from the bike, with a top speed of 165mph and 0-60mph figure of 3.4 seconds. Mapping and fuelling is carried out to Ariel specification although overall power output remains similar to the Honda VFR at over 170bhp. Said Simon Saunders, “We looked at an out and out, super lightweight race bike but they are already out there and are so far beyond the abilities of most riders that we took the decision to produce a really fast bike that was easy to ride and within the capabilities of most riders. Our motto is Serious Fun and those two words absolutely encapsulate what the Ace is all about.”
Prices for the Ace aim to start at £20,000, including tax in the UK, with a comprehensive option list to allow each bike to be tailored to order.
The Ace features a machined aluminium frame, options of suspension and different fork designs including Ariel’s own girder front end, Honda VFR1200 V4 engine in manual or DCT form, shaft drive, three different seats with pillion options, three different fuel tank capacities, bodywork options, handlebar and clip-on variants, different, adjustable footrest and control positions, wheels, tyres plus a wide range of finishes, materials and colours.
Frame
Heart of the Ace is an aluminium frame machined from solid billet with welded construction which is common to all variants of the Ace providing mounting points for various subframe, fuel tank, body and suspension options. Never before seen on a production motorbike the detailed engineering and beauty of functional form apparent in the frame follows a tradition established by Ariel with the Atom.
The load bearing frame, which exceeds industry rigidity standards, carries the engine, various seat packages, front and rear suspension as well as providing a safety cell for the fuel tank. Made from 6 individual billet aluminium sections each frame takes over 70 hours to machine before being welded together. Every frame is then anodised for protection and different colour finishes are available to increase customer choice and individualise the frame to each bike. The common frame also allows upgrades and changes to be made to the Ace throughout its life.
Different head angles, via interchangeable eccentric bearing holders, are achievable to tune the rake angle for different uses from 21.8 degrees to 28.4 degrees, with a standard mid-point of 25.1 degrees for neutral handling. Head angle is set by Ariel during build or can be altered when the bike is serviced.
Engine and transmission
The Ace uses the Honda V4 VFR1200 Unicam engine building on the relationship first seen in the Ariel Atom which uses a Honda Type R engine. The best known previous Ariel motorcycle was the four cylinder Square 4 introduced as a 500cc in 1930 developing into a 997cc machine that finished production in 1959. The use of the transverse, water cooled Honda 76 degree V4 builds on this four cylinder tradition and was chosen for its power, flexibility, compact size and advanced technology. At 1237cc and with 173bhp and 129Nm of torque the V4 gives enormous performance but remains within the ability of the average rider. Throttle by wire technology has been combined with Ariel’s fuel mapping and intake system to give progressive and responsive power delivery throughout the rev range. An important addition is the singular V4 exhaust note released by Ariel’s various exhaust systems making the Ace an aural as well as visible delight.
The Honda VFR engine also gives Ariel the ability to offer the Ace in manual and Dual Clutch Transmission (DCT) form adding yet further to customer choice. The 6 speed sequential manual offers standard motorcycle transmission whilst the DCT version can be used in fully ‘Auto’, ‘Sport’ or push button ‘Manual’ mode. This combined with the Honda shaft drive system mean absolute choice plus total peace of mind for Ace riders and the total reliability that Ariel customers have come to expect. From a 6 speed sports bike to a fully automatic long distance cruiser the Ace can deliver.
Suspension
The Ace features front suspension options of telescopic forks and the unique Ariel girder front end. Made from machined aluminium the Ariel girder forks give an option to standard telescopic forks which result in better handling, feel and sensitivity but at the same time feel familiar to any motorcycle rider. Due to the multi bearing top and bottom suspension arms, compliance is greatly improved and stiction reduced over conventional telescopic forks providing better response over different road surfaces and undulations as well as under braking to corners.
As an all new suspension system the challenge for Ariel was designing the girder fork suspension system to feel familiar to motorcycle riders. To achieve this kinematics (movement of the wheel through its suspension travel) and wheel rate (spring rate measured at wheel contact patch) had to closely match that of a telescopic fork suspension system. Although it is an entirely new and unconventional system it therefore feels reassuringly familiar to a rider used to telescopic forks. Featuring the latest Ohlins TTX dampers and springs which offer separate rebound and compression damping, together with spring preload, the Ariel girder system can be set up by owners to provide the exact level of response for their own particular needs and riding style.
To give further choice to Ariel customers the option of Ohlins Road & Track telescopic forks are available, tailored specifically for the Ace. Offering optimised weight and ultimate telescopic fork performance the Ohlins units come with rebound, compression and spring adjustment, tuneable for the use of the bike. As with the girder forks the head angle is adjustable in build or at service to provide different levels of steering response according to use and customer wishes.
Rear suspension is by Pro Link single sided cast aluminium swing arm, containing the shaft drive, with options of different gas damper. Again an Ohlins option with compression, rebound and spring adjustment is available tuned specifically to the Ace. Both front and rear suspension are further tuneable by Ariel to provide different heights, spring rates and special use requests.
Wheels, brakes and tyres
Front brakes are Nissin 320mm dual floating hydraulic discs with 6 piston callipers while the rear are Nissin 276mm disc with 2 piston calliper (plus park brake with DCT transmission). All versions of the Ace have electronic ABS brakes together with switchable traction control. Options of Brembo brakes will be available when the Ace goes into production and once final testing has been signed off. Goodridge hose and fittings are used throughout the Ace for all brake and clutch lines with an option of Goodridge Kevlar hose and lightweight fittings.
Wheels are five and seven spoke alloy with the option of BST full carbon fibre and aluminium lightweight wheels made specifically for the Ace. The carbon wheels show a 50% weight saving over the alloy wheels and centralise weight due to the lighter rim, resulting in improved performance and handling.
All Aces will come with a choice of Dunlop tyres. With an association stretching back to 1895 when Dunlop and Ariel effectively shared Trademarks and made bicycles it is particularly fitting that the relationship should be rekindled with the Ace. Whilst Dunlop went on to concentrate on the production of tyres Ariel concentrated on cycles before moving on to powered vehicles a couple of years later, then cars and motorbikes. Dependant on the use of each bike Ariel can choose from a wide range of Dunlop tyres to suit the use and purpose of each bike. The bikes pictured are fitted with Qualifier ll and GP Racer GPD211 tyres, used to enormous success in this year’s TT Races.
Bodywork
At the centre of the Ace modularity is the interchangeable bodywork and seating. Various bodywork is available with different tanks, mudguards, huggers, radiator covers, belly pans, screens and fairings. All are available in standard composite or carbon fibre. A selection of standard Ariel colours will be available plus the option of paint to any colour required or special paintwork and colour schemes. The fuel tanks are available in three different capacities from 14.1 to 21.3 Litres. Further fairings, screens, tanks and seats will become available as Ace production progresses.
Seats
Three versions of seats are available – low single seat, with additional and removable pillion passenger seat, a dual seat and a solo sports seat. The low seat features a seat height of 745mm allowing all riders to have both feet firmly on the ground and has the option of a quickly added or removed matching pillion seat. The low seat shown demonstrates just one of the possibilities for individual material and trim choice. Created by a Master Saddler, who holds a Royal Warrant, the seat uses three different kind of leather and contrasting stitching. The nearly unlimited possibilities of colour, material and trim plus the use of master craftsmen to tailor each bike to exacting standards demonstrates the care and attention to detail possible with Ariel’s unique production ability.
A slightly higher dual seat is a second option, again with trim, material and stitch options and features stowable/foldable pillion foot pegs. This feature also comes on the low pillion seat and allows the rider to simply fold up the footrests when not in use, creating a clean line but making pillion footrests available when required. The footrests lock in position when up or down released by a pull knob on the back of the footrest support.
The higher solo seat allows for a more sports riding position and again is available with a variety of trim options and different seat padding as well as a full carbon fibre option.
Controls
Three levels of footrests will be available – low, mid and high – to complement the various seats and achieve the desired seating position for each customer and their use. All controls and footpegs are made from machined aluminium, again available in different anodised finishes, and are also adjustable to different reach positions. To accommodate the various position possibilities different foot levers are available which are also adjustable for reach and height.
Handlebars are available in different heights, as well as finishes, in addition to clip-ons for telescopic forks. Hand controls have standard motorcycle controls including hazard and headlamp flashers and the DCT option features mode selection, push button gearchange control as well as a parking brake. The DCT version has no clutch or brake lever, all systems being controlled by electronics automatically or by manual buttons on the hand controls.
Instruments and electronics
Instrumentation is via a Race Technologies LCD dash, also found on the Atom. The instruments feature programmable gearshift lights plus multi screen information that can be set up and scrolled through by the rider. Control buttons are on the left hand side of the Ace behind the headstock. Readouts for RPM, speed, oil pressure, water temperature, voltage, ambient temperature and fuel with additional warning lights for ABS, traction, indicator, low fuel, main beam and neutral plus a master alarm system give the rider information covering all aspects of the bike. A further option is the addition of a data logger that can show real time performance as well as log to an in built SD card.
The Honda HISS (Honda Ignition Security System) is used on the Ace, together with a key activated steering lock. Further Tracker systems are available as options on the bike. Switchable traction control and electronically controlled ABS are both standard on the VFR as are standard Honda diagnosis and service connections allowing service functions to be carried out quickly and efficiently.
All lighting on the Ace is LED, with a 140mm headlight featuring cutting edge optics, which mimic natural sunlight, housed in a lightweight, die cast aluminium housing. Tail, brake light and indicators are also LED driven for better performance and longer life. Battery and electronic components are housed under the seat and tank units.
Further developments
Further components, bodywork, tuning parts and accessories will be developed as part of a continuing Ace design and engineering programme to further expand customer choice. As with the Ariel Atom new parts will be retro-fit compliant allowing Ace motorcycles to be upgraded over a period of time or as further developments are made.
Ariel’s objective has been to bring together the very highest standards of design and engineering, in a variety of technically interesting materials, with the craftsmanship and particular skills that are available in low volume production. The ultimate goal was to produce one of the best and most interesting motorcycles in the world. The Ace is the result of this and puts the Ariel name back on two wheels as well as four.