FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1913
1913 - 0420.PDF
fycrif] armament constitutes an essential item in any national defence programme. If the Lord Mayor's resolution is passed at this meeting, as we have not the least shadow of doubt it will be, the vote will, in effect, be a mandate from the City of London to the Government at Westminster to proceed without delay and at all costs in establishing the aerial supremacy of Britain. It is a mandate that, we trust, will be repeated at similarly convened meetings in the provinces, for having once aroused public interest in this matter it would be well to ensure that the voice of the people is clearly and unmistakably expressed on the point at issue. What is needed in England at the present time is that someone in authority should say " Go ! " It is not clearly recognised as yet that we must spend money very liberally on what is tantamount to experiment. Particularly is this true in the case of developing hydro-aeroplanes, which are essential to the British Navy. As those who read our account of the Monaco meeting in this week's issue will be aware, the hydro-aeroplane is at present in an utterly undeveloped state. England is thus presented with a unique opportunity of starting level in the contest for the evolution of a satisfactory waterplane. It is of more consequence to Britain than to any other country to develop that class of machine, and the nation should thoroughly realise the significance of the present situation. We feel assured that success awaits whosoever is deter mined to succeed in this matter, but we are equally convinced that success is not to be attained save by the liberal expenditure of money. The problem of the water- plane is a really difficult one, that can only be solved by full scale research, involving the wrecking of many a craft. We look upen this feature of the development with a comparatively light heart, because we trust and believe that it may be effected with a minimum risk to life. There isa fundamental difference between falling on water and falling on land, and of this difference it is important to take full advantage by so devising the machine as to provide some permanently buoyant member not readily collapsible, that shall afford a safe refuge for the pilot. There is, indeed, so far as we can see, no reason why the pilot and the engine should fail to emerge intact from the majority of mishaps that are likely to occur in waterplane experiments. We mention waterplanes merely en passant, but there is just as much need to go ahead with the con struction of dirigibles in this country, and with the further development of land aeroplanes. There are essentially two sides to the situation. One relates to experimental progress, the other to the organised use of apparatus that has been well tried. It is a mistake to confuse the two issues, or to suppose that they are identical. A well-organised Royal Fl>ing Corps, using well-tried machines, with which every member of the Corps is thoroughly acquainted, will be a more effective arm in war than the exploitation of latest inventions, the behaviour of which is characterised by uncertainty. But, it is essential that the experimental type should be encouraged and pushed forward with all speed, and when one is dealing with experimental work of this kind it is impossible to consider the question of cost in the same way that it is considered in respect to the purchase or use of an approved and established article. Experience must be gained, and the cost is but of very minor importance. We mention these things now because we have often felt that the whole sphere of aeronautics is an extremely difficult one to explain to the general public, and yet it is on public sympathy towards the cause of aeronautics that we depend so much at the present time. The Mansion House meeting that takes place next month is APRIL 19, 1913. an occasion when prominent public men will have a unique opportunity of voicing their sympathy with and appreciation of the objects just mentioned, and, as we have mentioned already, we look forward with the greatest possible hope to an important and successful issue from the work that the Aerial Defence Committee of the Navy League has inaugurated. • *• • The waterplanes assembled at Monaco Waterpianes jiave verv naturally attracted many visitors Monaco t0 the Principality, and among them a large contingent from England. We in this country have every reason to take a direct and very close interest in the development of this class of machine,. the more so because, for the moment, there is no reason to suppose that we are behind either in its construction or use. Without question, the problem of the waterplane is a problem apart, capable, in our opinion, of affording fresh opportunities for original design. At the present time constructors are very properly avoiding departure from the methods with which they are familiar. The waterplane of to-day is an aeroplane with floats instead of wheels and an undercarriage to suit. A few machines there are that present a different line of thought in a concrete form, such as, for instance, the use of a boat-like foundation for a superstructure of wings. For the most part, however, it is the simple aeroplane with floats that really flies. There are phases of hydro aeroplaning that can only be appreciated on the spot. A swell on the sea and a lee shore close at hand are not in the least comparable with any sort of aerodrome prepared or natural. It is not only the wind, but the sea with which one must contend, for the sea, unlike the land, may upon occasion rise to strike the machine a disabling blow. The more one contemplates the situation, the more does it seem necessary so to develop the waterplane from the bottom upwards as to provide a permanent nucleus capable of withstanding a heavy sea. It is interesting and instructive, for example, that several machines broke their backs in the course of the Monaco meeting, and several also broke their wings. These mishaps must in no sense be regarded as dis couraging. On the contrary, they draw attention to the special nature of the conditions that must be faced,, conditions that English constructors are as well prepared to meet as anyone else, provided that the demand for machines is maintained. Indeed, as things stand at the present moment, England is as far ahead as any other nation in hydro aeroplane construction. It is our chance to lead in the development of the real water flyer; let us hope that we do not prejudice the opportunity. As we have said, the breakages must not be regarded as disheartening, particularly as they were unattended by personal injury of any sort. It is possible that one must always be prepared to sacrifice the wing structure of a waterplane in the event of an emergency landing, and, as we have indicated above, it seems to us proper to originate the design of such machines from the point of view of providing a permanent nucleus capable of saving the passengers and the engine when all else is wreckage. It seems apparent that the backbones of waterplanes are called upon to withstand more serious stresses than those of land machines, and the question arises whether they should be regarded as superstructure to be sacrificed in emergency or should form part of the nucleus of the machine. From the standpoint of the modern tractor machine it is evident that the unoccupied portion of the 176
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
