Transport Atlas

How The World Moves
Sign In
Text size
100%
Theme
Vehicle

De Havilland DH.83 Fox Moth

General Aviation and Light Aircraft

The de Havilland DH.83 Fox Moth was a small single-engined biplane passenger aircraft of the 1930s, designed late in 1931 as a low-cost light transport. De Havilland reused many parts of the Tiger Moth, including the engine, tailplane, fin, rudder and wings, and fitted them to a new fuselage with a small enclosed cabin, usually seating three passengers, while the pilot sat in a raised cockpit behind it. The wings could be folded for storage. The prototype first flew on 29 January 1932 and went to Canada, where seven were assembled at the company plant in Toronto. British-built aircraft were split evenly between the home register and export, mostly flown on short joyrides or feeder services. Total production was 153, of which 98 were built in England, two in Australia and 53 in Canada after the Second World War.

Facts
Year
1932 1
Engine Class
Piston 1
Units Built
153 1
Top Speed (km/h)
171 1
Mass (kg)
486 1
Maximum Mass (kg)
907 1
Engine
de Havilland Gipsy III 1
Comparison
Body Style
Aircraft (no road body style) 1
Connections

Exemplifies

Aviation, Modes
Source De Havilland DH.83 Fox Moth (Wikipedia)

Of Make

Source De Havilland DH.83 Fox Moth (Wikipedia)
Sources
1. De Havilland DH.83 Fox Moth (Wikipedia)
  • Operational history, prototype
    The prototype first flew on 29 January 1932
  • Specifications, powerplant
    Powerplant: 1 × de Havilland Gipsy III 4-cylinder air-cooled inverted in-line piston engine, 120 hp (89 kW)
  • Specifications, empty weight
    Empty weight: 1,071 lb (486 kg)
  • Specifications, maximum takeoff weight
    Max takeoff weight: 2,000 lb (907 kg)
  • Specifications, maximum speed
    Maximum speed: 106 mph (171 km/h, 92 kn)
  • Operational history, production
    Total production of the DH.83/DHC.83C Fox Moth was 153
  • Lead
    manufactured by the de Havilland Aircraft Company
  • Lead, country of origin
    98 built in the United Kingdom
View the Source
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.