FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1913
1913 - 0554.PDF
f/TJG^ MAY 24, 1913. Edited by V. E. Sport v. Science. WE have received the following communication from Mr. N. V. Iirasnett, King's College, Strand, which we publish verbatim, together with some comments, the matters referred to being, in our opinion, of considerable interest and importance :— " I am fully convinced that all the lessons of any value to the science of aviation that can be learnt from the present twin- screw distance and duration model, whether hand-launched or fitted with an elementary chassis, have been learnt. Its improvement can only be effected on the lines of cutting down weight and of producing propellers more efficient for use with a rubber motor, but of no value as the predecessors of full-size propellers. Even plane shapes can be tested more accurately on a small single-screw model, for these twin-screw machines fly so well with any reasonable plane that it is hard to decide whether any slight increase in distance or stability is due to a new plane or to any chance circumstance. " This type of model must be abandoned to the toy shops ; it has done its work and done it well, and I appeal to all serious model -enthusiasts to give it up. " Surely we wish to have the model recognised by full-sized aero plane makers as it has not been recognised yet. Whether this will •come to pass or not depends upon the leading body in the model world ; I refer, of course, to the Kite and Model Aeroplane Associa tion. Hand-launched and r.o.g. duration and distance competitions have become not only useless but harmful to the scientific side of model aviation. They relate purely to the sporting side, and surely this should be a very secondary side in models, whatever may be its position in the full-size world. Why waste money on prizes for machines which are undoubtedly clever, but which are developing into splendid pieces of workmanship which are not models in that they bear no possible relation to full-sized machines ? " Let us rather work on lines which will be of some use to man- carrying aeroplanes, and remember that the model is not the end, but a means to an end. A too-second flight is of no more value than a. 20-second one ! "lam certain that there are many to whom a move of the Kite and Model Aeroplane Association against the present line of development, and for a more useful and scientific one, would be welcome. If such a move is not made, many people will become convinced that model aeroplanes are merely toys, and full-size makers will never recognise their use. In fact, the sins of the ' record breaking ' machines will be visited on all models without distinction, and what is now a possible powerful adjunct to the new science will become simply and entirely a child's toy." Commenting on the above, the view taken by our correspondent is, we think, a somewhat extreme one, but perhaps in a case of this kind such is necessary, or at any rate the most profitable course to take with a view to leading to some useful result. Incidentally, Mr. Brasnett's letter is, or might be, taken to be an attack on the •work of the Kite and Model Aeroplane Association to which he specifically refers. Now, the writer does not hold any brief for that or any other society, but this opportunity may perhaps be taken to put certain matters before the readers of FLIGHT relative JOHNSON, M.A. to the work of the above with which the writer has been more or less intimately connected. We do not think that anyone would dispute that the programme of the K. and M.A.A.'s aviation meetings for 1912 was a great advance (even in a scientific sense) on that of 1911. What was the result ? Save in the two hydro-aeroplane competitions, what may be termed the more scientific contests were very poorly patronised indeed. In the steering competition for r.o.g. machines (if we remember correctly) scarcely half a dozen competitors entered ; the single-screw tractor competition attracted only a few, and so on. For about the last eighteen months the society has been endeavouring to obtain a >mall sum of ^10 in order to assist in the carrying out of some research work of a strictly scientific character ; up 10 a fortnight ago, at any rate, the money had not been forthcoming. If, then, competitors will not enter, and subscribers and donors will not give prizes for competitions which (from our correspondent's point of view) are strictly scientific, and since competitions cannot be held without them, then the K. and M.A.A. has no choice in the matter. We should only be too glad to think with Mr. Brasnett that there are many to whom a move along more scientific lines would be welcome, but the writer has perforce had to come to the conclusion that amongst every 100 interested in model aviation, 93 per cent, are for sport and but 7 per cent, for science. If this is incorrect, then all we can say is that the " scientifics " do not come forward as com petitors, which is exactly what they must do if they really wish the scientific side to be recognised. Neither talking nor writing will accomplish the end they have in view ; but if at a competition of a purely scientific character 50 competitors turned up, such an event would do more to further the cause of scientific model aviation than all the writing and criticism in the world. Until they do this, we are afraid matters will remain very much as they are. Challenge Trophies and Gold Medals. The following paragraph is in reality but continuous of the fore going : When model aviation first became popular a few years ago, the two chief prizes offered for competition (apart from monetary ones) were challenge trophies usually accompanied by a medal, which latter the winner retained. You cannot have a competition of any kind unless it be accompanied by certain rules for the carrying out of the same. Now in a subject like model aviation, which, like its full-sized prototype, has made enormous strides in the last few years, not only may the rules originally drawn up require revision, but the whole idea with which the trophy was offered may become, practi cally speaking, more or less obsolete, and the actual competitions for the same cease in succeeding years to do anything to advance the art ; not only so, but rratters might become so changed as to go further than this and become actually a drag or hindrance to further progress. It is only fair to add that the donors of such challenge trophies have, generally speaking, been quite agreeable to the rules of the competitions being brought up to date as far as possible, but when everything is done in this way that can be done, the nature of the original competition must remain. The K. and M.A.A. is certainly blessed with a plethora of such mmw/M////& F1G.1 no. 2 Twin-winder used by W.H.Norton , Fig. 1 is a top view of the winder showing method of attachment of rubber hooks, also position of books when winding. Fig. 2 shows position of hooks with elastic wound, locked over bearing by torque of elastic. A'shows two pinion wheels taken from eggbeater, worked by right-angle cog from same. B shows the brass bearings on the nose of the model turned at right angles and inserted between the longitudinals. 576
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
