The Sage Type 2...

[Hauksbee 103]

While searching for one obscure airplane (the Sablatnig) I found another: The Sage Type 2

 

Designed by Clifford W. Tinson for Frederick Sage & Company, the Type 2 two-seat fighting scout was of original concept. Considerable care was taken to reduce aerodynamic drag, the 100hp Gnome Monosoupape nine-cylinder rotary engine being fully cowled, a large propeller spinner being provided and the crew being accommodated in a fully-glazed cabin. Of conventional wire-braced wooden construction, the Type 2 was a single-bay biplane with considerable gap, the upper wing being supported by the cabin structure and having an aperture above the observer's seat. When standing to fire his 7.7mm machine gun,the observer had a wide and clear field of fire. Remarkably small, the Type 2 had rod-activated ailerons in the upper wing only. First flown on 10 August 1916, it proved to possess a very good performance, but gunsynchronization had meanwhile become available, and after the sole prototype had been wrecked in a forced landing on 20 September 1916, no attempt was made to rebuild the aircraft or develop it.

.

Clifford Tinson's grandson, David, added some notes:

.

Just in case anyone re-looks at this thread I may be able to shed some light. In my grandfathers memoirs, he talks of the Sage 2 aircraft. The Sage 1 crashed due to the pilot at the time turning on the wrong petrol cock, i.e. the reserve one and they ran out of fuel. Sage 2 crashed because of a weak rudder post. A quote from his words:

"My next design known as Sage 2, was a two seat fighter fitted with a 100hp Gnome engine and was built in 1916. It was not yet possible to fire straight ahead if the gun was mounted on the cowling in front of the pilot because of the propeller and I thought it best to mount a Lewis gun on a scarf ring on top of the centre plane, firing above the propeller and permitting a wide angle of fire as well. I hoped for a speed of 100 mph and at that speed the battering of the slipstream on a gunner standing up to fire would have made it difficult to aim accurately; therefore he must be protected. So I enclosed both pilot and gunner in a glazed structure filling the space between the top of the fuselage and the underside of the upper centre plane, many years before pilots had anything other than a windscreen to protect them...............in any case the introduction of synchronized gun firming gear soon after made such a design as mine unnecessary." He goes on to say: "This machine came to grief through the fracture of the tube forming the rudder post.........We were flying at about 1,000 feet when this happened to us and there were high trees ahead which, with height being lost all the time because of the broken rudder, it was not possible to avoid. We hit the top of one tree swiping off the starboard wings, then another demolished the port wings leaving the rest of the machine to fall down breaking the fuselage in two and finishing it off........We clambered out of the remains..............with no more damage than a graze and the odd bruise or two.......". I'm not sure where the broken back incident you mention Pete came in, but it was not in this one...."

Edited February 26, 2013 by Hauksbee

[JFM 18]

Here, here's a better photo:

 

[rjw 47]

Very interesting find! Somewhat ahead of it's time with the closed cockpit. I wonder if the high upper wing had any interesting effect on the flight performance. Were there any references to performance?

 

Best Regards

[Hauksbee 103]

Only what's in the text above. Tinson says that he was hoping for 100 mph. I get the impression that while there weren't many flights before both planes were wrecked, the team was pleased with performance. (I went back and highlighted those parts of text in red.)

Edited February 26, 2013 by Hauksbee