Britten Norman Trislander (Study Level) AVAILABLE NOW

Something only a mother or a hard core aviation enthusiasts would love

2 Likes

Having flown the Trislander for a few years, the following points may be of interest. It was not as noisy for the driver, you were further ahead of the propellor arc. The number of doors was very good for short haul work when most of your Pax were familiar with the aircraft, very quick turnarounds. The centre engine took a bit of getting used to, if it failed on take off, something that never happened for real to me, but when training for type ratings, if the centre engine was failed during take/off took a little while to sink in to the trainees, just a lack of performance but no swing into the dead engine. All in all, a very good aircraft for what it was designed for.

4 Likes

The rear prop looks like it was behind where the pax would sit. Is that correct? (I can’t imagine sitting underneath that thing!)

Affirmative, from memory, was a long time ago!

1 Like

Technically still producing A/C, but I’m not sure how many they’ve actually built recently - seem to do a good line in refurbishing & reselling though ( I guess there’s no fatigue life on an Islander? ). Managing to saturate your market sounds quite an accomplishment.

1 Like

I don’t see the mixture or condition levers in this video screen shot


Guernsey airport is now fully Trislander compliant

2 Likes

Mixture are the bulbs at the top, prop pitch is the blue levers, hand is on the throttles.

2 Likes

I thought you might like to see these shots 

W I P But getting a lot closer now, and more functionality than ever before!






More to come soon
 With feature list

17 Likes

External model looks really good. I still find the dashboard on these planes to be low poly looking but maybe that is how it looks IRL? Only thing that catches my eye is the sharp angles on the dashboard. I still kind of want an Islander though and with your continued support I am glad to see them flying. I love unique planes. I don’t think I’ve ever seen a prop on the tail before. Hope it sounds as gnarly as it looks.

1 Like

Thanks yes we think all the modelling is the best we have produced 

However if you consider the 650,000 Polygons used so far on the Internal model alone as “Low Poly” then I don’t know what we can do to please you :wink:


9 Likes

the aircraft in all iterations has those angles on the dash over the panel
it is not rounded off or in any way different to the BBS model.
If you want more of a used appearance that’s a different subject - but I think texture artists could render that look as a free download


2 Likes

If you look at the real aircraft, you’ll see that the “sharp angles” of the glare shield/dashboard are there too. I guess real life is low poly sometimes :slightly_smiling_face:

Come to papa. She is looking good

2 Likes

Graham, looks great! Also, I am in the minority - I don’t think the aircraft is all that ugly! It’s QUIRKY! :wink: The inner hipster in me enjoys that.

7 Likes

Only just noticed, but why three blade props for the wing engines & a two blade on the rear?

I have no recollection of where I heard this, but I believe Aurigny started using three blades on the wing props first. With that said, I found this on a forum which reads - “Trislander uses 3 bladers on the wing engines as they are a smaller diameter. This allows them to run at full chat without the tips of the props going supersonic which causes inefficiency and a terrible mashing noise in the cabin. The tail engine’s noise doesn’t penetrate the cabin (as much) and doesn’t justify the extra cost of the 3 blade prop.”
Another suggestion is it increased the maximum take off weight? But I’m not entirely sure what the original reasoning is. Hope this helps!

2 Likes

as far as my information tells me, Aurigny decided that 3 bladed props on the wings would reduce noise in the cabin as the slightly smaller diameter would mean less speed and noise generated at the tips 
 the Big ol 2 blader was left on the tail as it was too high to get the spanners to reach
:slight_smile:

1 Like

Yeah, I understood the reasons for 3-bladers ( supersonic blade tips in turbofans aren’t any quieter! ) but the wierdness of not using the same prop everywhere got me. I guess if you’ve only got a small fleet there’s no real saving in maintenance anyway.

Aurigny should just have hired taller mechanics!

1 Like

Graham
Would it be possible that you will produce 2 bladed engines 1&3 as well, to match specific colour schemes appropriately?