RAF Bomber/Transport designs vs commercial transports

[PMN1]

If they had been offered for commercial sale as dedicated transport aircraft prior to WW2, how would the various RAF bomber/transport designs - Armstrong Whitworth AW23, Bristol Bombay, Handley Page Harrow - have compared to the commercial aircraft being offered by other countries?

[ChrisMcD]

Not sure about the AW design since they moved to the Ensign.

The other two look like they had been optimised for rough field operation with very sturdy undercarriage, not to mention turrets.

Also, since Bristol were still mastering the art of the monoplane wing, I have a suspicion that the airframe weight was dire (7 wing spars!)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bristol_Bombay

The Harrow was a rewinged biplane design so probably not 'cutting edge' either.

The sheer ubiquity of the DC3 speaks for itself.

[Ricky]

My gut feeling is that they would possibly do quite well against aircraft like the Ju-52 - but not against the DC-3.

Mind you, a few comparative stats would be interesting...

[PMN1]

Well, here's the wiki article on the AW23. It does have a better 'tarnsport' appearance than the other two (almost Wellington in appearance).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armstrong_Whitworth_AW.23

The sole example was fitted out for AAR before being destroyed along with other tankers in a raid in 1940.

Here are some piccies of it refueling a flying boat

http://www.jaapteeuwen.com/ww2aircraft/html%20pages/armstrong%20whitworth%20aw23.htm

http://www.unrealaircraft.com/forever/long_range_fliers.php