Talk:Fiat AS.5

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

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

This article is supported by the aircraft engine task force.

Displacement

Bore and stroke yield 25.128 L (1533.4 cu in), not the 25.545 litres (1,589 cu in) given. AMCKen (talk) 18:16, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gunstone (1989) p.57 gives 25.13 litres, so it looks as if 25.545 is a typo. I've changed on this assumption.TSRL (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fiat A.30RA

This was certainly a production engine and was geared down (hence the "R"), but Jane's 1938 says bore 135 mm, not 138 mm as in the racing engine. So were there other significant differences between it and the AS.5 race engnine? There's a more complete description of the A.30RA in Jane's 1937 but I don't have access to it.TSRL (talk) 16:33, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

So far, I cannot find a source that confirms the A.30RA was a production AS.5 as the article claims. Both Gunstone and Jane's mention the A.30RA but neither make any connection to the AS.5. If anything, Gunstone seems to imply two V-12 families, one with the A22/24/25/30 and the other the AS.2/5/6 Schneider engines. "In addition, Schneider racing engines were created, the basis being the AS.2 ..."TSRL (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Almost missed the AS.2 photo caption, where its says this was a racing derivative of the production A14/22 engines. Stll does not link the A.30 and AS.5.TSRL (talk) 17:19, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It is true that Gunston does not mention the relationship, I think what has happened is that fact came from Eves's Schneider Trophy book but I cited the wrong man! That book is back in the library but I could try and loan it again, there is quite a lot more on the Fiat engines from what I remember. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 18:48, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The hazards of ageing! I had completely forgotten this discussion when I did my edits today! BTW, I'm just in the middle of a A.22 article and currently believe there is a misprint in Gunston. He says the A.22 put out 750 hp, whereas both Janes38 and a 1929 article in Flight say 570 hp. The A.22 (they all agree) had a volume of 27.5 L but the 33.3 L A.24 only achieved about 700 hp, another reason for thinking G got it wrong. (27.5/33.3)× 700 = 560, more like it. Any reason to disagree?TSRL (talk) 19:54, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, time flies. The Italian A.22 article [1] says 611 hp (when converted to Imperial bananas), same size as the Merlin (1,000 hp initially) but unsupercharged presumably. When other languages translate WP:EN articles they just copy our sources, no reason why we can't add theirs I suppose (the it:A.22 uses an Italian source). Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 20:15, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 611 hp will be the max power (Flight has 610 hp, well within the rounding errors). The Italian (or other) WPs are a helpful guide on what to look out for but (call me chauvinist or just generally distrustful) I like to check their sources (or ours, for that matter!). Just now I am trying to find support for their A.22 apps list in Thompson and elsewhere; initial findings suggest they are over-inclusive. Currently my sourced list contains only the SM.66 rather than their five aircraft but tomorrow I'll plough through Thompson.TSRL (talk) 23:28, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]