The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926, and one of the main successes of Savoia-Marchetti. It developed from the SM.59, which first flew in 1925. A wooden single-spar biplane, it was powered by one Isotta Fraschini Asso 500 engine of 373 kW mounted between the wings and driving a pusher propeller, and it had a wingspan of 15.5 metres and a maximum take-off weight of 3,000 kg with a crew of four. It competed in the 1926 New York to Buenos Aires air race and set speed and load records. It was the most successful Italian flying boat outside Italy, bought by Japan, Romania and Spain, and the Soviet Union built the SM.62bis under licence as the MBR-4.
Facts
EngineIsotta Fraschini Asso 500 R.I. 1 Comparison
Body StyleAircraft (no road body style) 1 Connections
Exemplifies
Source Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 (Wikipedia)
Of Make
Source Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 (Wikipedia)
In the Other Atlases
Manufactured By
Also in Business Atlas: the manufacturer of this subject.
Source Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 (Wikipedia)Lead, makerQuote, Lead, maker
The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926.
Originated In
Also in Geography Atlas: where this subject originated.
Source Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 (Wikipedia)Lead, nationalityQuote, Lead, nationality
The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926.
Sources
1. Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 (Wikipedia)
Lead
produced from 1926
Lead, body style
The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926.
Design and development
powered by a single Isotta Fraschini Asso 500 R.I., 373 kW (500 hp) engine
Lead, maker
The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926.
Lead, nationality
The Savoia-Marchetti SM.62 was an Italian single-engine maritime patrol flying boat produced from 1926.
View the SourceReader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.