FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1912
1912 - 0095.PDF
JANUARY 27, 1912. be accurate for the simple reason that our needs, which Lord Haldane was at so much pains to prove, are not those of our neigh bours, therefore our policy cannot be, while the development of the aeroplane must depend to a certain extent on the demand for them, therefore directly upon the policy of our own Government. To state that our need of aerial armament is less because our army is small is the reverse of accurate, its very smallness demands that our aerial fleet should be sufficient to deal, unaided, with that of any other power. We must not overlook the fact that an aeroplane's base—to-day—may be a ship, and that their comparatively small cost permits, if necessary, of their being abandoned after the success ful accomplishment of their mission. This defines our strength. After Lord Haldane's confession and admissions it cannot be considered pre sumptuous on our part to offer him every assistance, not only in settling the aerial policy, but in directing his attention to several obvious mistakes, or misstatements contained in his reply to the Earl of Hardwick, which are undoubtedly the root and cause of his, let us say, strange position with regard to aeronautical matters. The one of greatest importance, perhaps, seeing that the aeroplane has so far failed to develop a commercial side, is the analogy of the motor car, the French Government have recognised this fact and treated the aeroplane industry as a purely armament one, for they have arrived at the common sense conclusion that if the Government *• will never lavish money in the hope that something may come of it " in a matter of armament, a private firm is not in a position to do so. Another is that "practical British genius" cannot afford to undertake expensive experimental work for the Government without hope of adequate return for brains, time, labour and material, while if the policy is to be that indicated, the matter is a purely armament one, and demands instant attention, the failure of recognising it as such rests entirely with the Government and the blame can only fall in one place. To prevent further waste of public money and precious time, it is essential that the aerial policy of the country should be at once settled and as far as possible made public, that policy at least so far as it effects type cannot be so difficult to settle, the factors which govern it are the same to-day as they were yesterday and will be to morrow, we had—have—and I presume will retain, " our small Army and great Navy," in addition we are an island kingdom, and an Empire divided by the sea ; over the sea comes our food supply, and over the sea must come our enemies, so that it is difficult to reasonably expect our aerial policy to be other than that indicated, at least, eventually. But whatever that policy be, it is obvious, or it should be, that the prize now offered, would be better utilised in building up the British industry. We cannot but appreciate the thought that would obtain for the nation the best in the world for the smallest possible outlay, but we cannot appreciate the action of offering prize money to foreign armament industry for a type of machine we professedly do not require, and at the same time state we expect British industry to carry out the necessary experiments, and evolve the type we do require, without even a definite specification being given them. In conclusion I would point out the fallacy of attempting to give any prizes before the aerial policy is settled, the urgency of settling that policy, seeing we are admittedly so far behind other nations, the stupidity of expecting to obtain the same efficiency and strength as our neighbours in matters of armament, with less expenditure of money—and of attempting to separate the aeroplane from the aeroplane industry. Even in the distribution of prizes they are inseparable, and the prizes must be sufficient to build up, not only the aeroplane, but the aeroplane industry in this country, no matter what type the machine. To obtain these things I would suggest a stated policy, bold and untrammelled by what other nations are doing, except as regards strength ; immediate action ; a series of progressive competitions as soon as bttt not before the aerial policy is settled. The prizes in these competitions should be numerous and adequate, but not necessarily large. The winning qualities in the first become essentials to those who entered the second competition, and so on until we have obtained what we require. This does not prevent the rules governing them being such that the machines are not only equal, but better than those of our neighbours. The Government could not do better than place the whole matter, or so much of it as they were inclined, in the hands of those gentlemen who so ably held the discussion under the Aeronautical Society, assisted by any others they saw fit to add. Under these conditions, providing the points considered essential were asked for gradually but not slowly, and immediate action is taken, we shall obtain, for the least possible expenditure, in the shortest space of time, all those things inseparable from the manufacture of armament, i.e., skilled labour, erected plant, stock of raw materials, and inventiveness, while last but not least, capital and organisation will be at the disposal of the con structors of the British War Aeroplane. FRANK W. B. HAMBLING. Automatic Stability, [1476] I should like some reader to give his opinion of the following device for stability. In the sketch shown, A is a cylinder of mercury fitted with pistons at each end, which are connected to the levers of fulcra, E and F ; these two levers are connected and work the valves of B, a compressed air cylinder, which o]>en into cylinders, C and C, which are connected to the control wires. The apparatus can be used for lateral or longitudinal balance. Supposing it is used for lateral balance and the right wing is raised, then the left-hand piston of A is pushed out by the weight of the mercury, TO CONTROLS while the right one fills up the vacuum ; the two connected levers working together open the left-hand valve, and so the compressed air passes to C, and the control wire is moved to the left, thereby depressing the right aileron (as in a Farman) and righting the machine. The mechanical details are not shown ; the valve at B is an arc of a circle working over a slit (shown dotted), which when opening one side keeps the other closed. Courichan, B.C. ' D. TOWNESEND. Soaring in Horizontal Wind. [1477] I remember seeing some years ago in one of the magazines a description of a small boat, which was propelled by means of a species of fork fitted to the keel. The prongs of the fork consisted of flat-steel strips pointing aft. The constant flexing of these steel strips by the motion of the waves, and their recovery, due to their natural springiness, drove the boat, and, if I remember rightly, a speed of 4 knots an hour was obtained on trial. Is it possible that soaring in puffy horizontal winds by birds is due in a similar manner to the constant flexing and recovery of the wing feathers by the gusts ? This idea seems to be further borne out by the fact that a bird cannot soar in a steady horizontal wind. Lincoln's Inn Fields. JOHN V. L. HALL. [The reason why a bird cannot soar in a steady horizontal wind is because the bird has no abutment by means of which it can extract energy from the wind. Consequently, the bird and its orbit, sup posing it to be making a variety of manoeuvres in an attempt to extract energy from the air, is ultimately blown along at the speed of the wind. A steady horizontal wind is virtually still air, as may be more readily understood by the analogy of the fly in the railway carriage of a moving train. In a pulsating horizontal wind the inertia of the bird resists the greater gusts, while its momentum continues the forward motion during the lesser gusts. In our recent article on soaring, Lanchester's experiment with the switchback model was described in explanation of this theory. Wave motion of the kind described in the above letter is known to exert a propulsive effect, and has formed the subject of several experiments. Brearey, the first secretary of the Aeronautical Society, was, we believe, one of those who devoted a considerable amount of attention to this phenomenon, while Laurence Hargrave in Australia might almost be said to have made it the basis of some of his investigations. To our mind, the waving-prong is somewhat analogous to the propeller, in which the blade is continued into a complete helix. Arguing on Laurence Hargrave's work, elements in the waving-prong form instantaneous trochoided planes, and the cycle of their operations produces what is in efiect a wing beat. The wing is, therefore, a curtailed form of the prong, just as the propeller-blade is a curtail, d form of the helix; like it, too, the wing is probably the more efficient instrument. We do not think that there i< any evidence to show that the wing flexes in the manner suggested, nor is there any reason to assume the hypothesis in order to explain forward motion in soaring flight. In the case of soaring flight taking place in a wind with a slightly upward trend, it is very easy to see how the resultant force on the wing is inclined forward of the vertical, thus producing a horizontal component of propulsion in the forward direction. Lilienthal, experimenting on cambered sections of circular arc shape, showed
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
