This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation articles
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Coventry, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.CoventryWikipedia:WikiProject CoventryTemplate:WikiProject CoventryCoventry articles
Queer that they switched from big cat names to -hound names for that pair, was there something special about them, or did they just run out of cats? :-) on reading that link, they are inline rather than radial, I presume that is it. EmoscopesTalk 19:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure - I seem to remember reading the Deerhound was a multi-row radial, i.e., a radial with four or five inline rows but I may be mistaken. I know that a pair of Deerhounds were installed in a Whitley testbed, but that's about all I know ATM. Ian Dunster 12:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[2] looks like an interesting 3-row 21-cylinder radial to me, and looks particularly compact too. EmoscopesTalk 12:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's also the name of a booster-rocket on the Mark II Sea Slug missile. I think dog and bird names were used for rockets by the MoS. EmoscopesTalk 12:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes that looks like it - the photo I most remember is of the engine installation of the Deerhound Whitley. The engine was quite closely-cowled and the propeller had a large spinner fairing it into the cowling.
Actually the engines were either named by the manufacturer themselves or were possibly allocated one by the MoS when the manufacturer didn't have a naming scheme, and were based on series - Bristol engines used heavenly bodies/mythology (Olympus, Thor, Odin, etc), Metrovick gemstones, (e.g. Beryl, Sapphire, etc.) Armstrong Siddeley snakes, (e.g., Viper, Adder etc.).
I have always found the naming schemes most useful for remembering the originators of engine designs, especially when they get passed-on to other manufacturers. Once you know them then it's easy to remember that, for instance, the Sapphire was originally a Metrovick engine!, so the Sea Slug engine/motor may possibly originally have been an Armstrong Siddeley design. Ian Dunster 16:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Without anything apart from a "hunch", I think that rockets are the exception to the case here. there's a great list of rockets here; Skomer.u-net.com The liquid-fuelled rocket "engines" seem to use "S" names; Armstrong Siddeley Snarler, AS Spartan, AS Stentor, de Havilland Scorpion (ex-Napier), dH Spectre, dH Sprite. Bristol Siddeley produced a (non-military) series named Alpha through Gamma. The solid-fuelled motors seem to be using either dogs or birds. Because this system "seems" to hold across all manufacturers and most rockets that at least reached testing, I was presuming there had to be a higher authority on naming, i.e the MoS. EmoscopesTalk 17:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think you may be right, but I have a feeling the MoS may have named some though. Apparently that Skomer site is somewhat out-of-date now, as a friend of mine who has now left Wikipedia knows the site-author and he no-longer has access to the site so he's unable to update the site with corrected information that has since been declassified. As-is, it contains a number of errors apparently. BTW, in my 'travels' searching for that plans-link I found this: [3] which may interest you. Ian Dunster 11:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I have found in a book, mention of a plane with an Armstrong Siddeley Puma engine. I have included it in the winning list of the King's Cup Race. Does anyone know if this is a mistake or a proto-engine that was later renamed? Thanks for any future help.--FruitMonkey 19:29, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
