FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1930
UNTITLED0 - 0098.PDF
FLIGHT, JANUARY 10, 1930 SPAN 108-4' LENGTH 53-9* * WING AREA 2.367 Sa.Fr. CAPRONI Ca.79. BOMBER 4-500 h.p. I50TTA FRASCHINI "ASSO*ENGINES The principal Caproni Ca.79 are :— Span (maximum) Chord Gap Overall length .. Height Wing area Area of tail plane Area of fin Area of elevators Area of rudder . . Weight empty . . Useful load Total weight Weight per h.p. Wing loading Speed range Climb in 40 mins. Ceiling characteristics of the 108 ft. 4 ins. (33 m). 13 ft. 2 ins. (4 m). 13 ft. 2 ins. (4 m). 53ft.9ins.(16-40m). 23 ft. (7-01 m). 2,367 sq. ft. (220m2). 170 sq. ft. (15-79 m!). 110 sq. ft. (10-22 m2). 70 sq. ft. (6-50 m2). 55 sq.ft. (5-llm2). 14,332-5 lbs. (6,500 kgs.). 9,922-5 lbs. (4,500 kgs.). 24,255 lbs. (11,000 kgs.) 12-12 lbs. (5-50 kgs.). 10-25 lbs./sq ft.. (50kg./m«). 56-118 m.p.h. (90-190 k.p.h.). 13,100 ft. (4,000 m.). 15,100 ft. (4,600 m.). <$> THE CAPRONI CA.79 : This view shows the arrangement of the four Isotta-Fraschini engines, and the under-carriage. THE GUGGENHEIM SAFE AIRCRAFT COMPETITION THE outcome of the Guggenheim Competition is that theCurtiss " Tanager " has been awarded the prize of£20,000. There is dissatisfaction over this result as the Curtiss machine gained the prize by virtue of the Handley Page slots, with which it was fitted but for which no licence had been granted. The rules wereivery elastic and machines which arrived, even as late as November 18, were admitted, and during the progress of the test alterations were made which improved the chances of certain machines which would not otherwise have stood a chance of qualifying. The Handley Pageentry, the " Gugnunc," failed on the slow glide, without engine. The maximum speed for this was set at 38 m.p.h., a figure which was reached during tests at Martlesham Heath, but during the competition a figure of 39 • 7 was quoted as the best achieved. In this machine the slots and the flaps were all automatic in action, whereas the Curtiss entry had positively operated flaps and automatic slots. Mr. Handley Page has instituted an action against the Curtiss Co. for infringement of his patents, and as a counter-action the Curtiss Co. have served a writ upon Maj. Cordes, Mr. Handley Page's representative, restraining him from dis- mantling the " Gugnunc," because they assert that the Handley Page Co. was, by a Court order granted in 1921, prohibited from importing aeroplanes into the U.S., and in stopping the dismantling they are preventing the destruction of evidence that the order has been violated. Their defence in the original action is that they fitted slots for experi- mental purposes, and, when the question of producing the machine commercially arises, they would apply for a licence. The competition was a duel of these two machines, as none of the others passed the preliminary tests. Mr. Handley Page expressed regret on this point as he said that at the outset they had announced that they were not willing to issue licences for any competitors to use slots, as in their opinion the competition should be between different types and not between different applications of one patent. Whatever iw the outcome of the actions it has been a triumph for the Handley Page slotted wing, and both machines have 8hoWn that the slotted wing can be designed as a means of obtaining lift and not merely as a means of retaining control after the stall. The "Gugnunc,' with a wing loading of 7 4 lbs./sq. ft. and a power loading of 13-8 lbs./h.p., achieved almost the same performance as the " Tanager." whose figures were 8-4 lbs./sq. ft. and 15-6 lbs./h.p.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
