FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1936
1936 - 0315.PDF
FEBRUARY 6, 1936. FLIGHT. 137 The Outlooks A Running Commentary on Air Topics Landing Fees r HE subject of landing fees occupied a good deal of the time of the Aerodrome Owners' Association's meeting last Thursday. Not landing fees charged to commercial operating companies, but those charged— or not charged—to the private owner. There was con siderable diversity of opinion, some of the representatives being in favour of offering free landings to all private owners, others (and they were not all Scotsmen !) consider ing it perfectly legitimate to charge everybody a fee. On the one hand, it was argued that usually the visitor bv air spent a good deal of money in the town served by the aerodrome, and that therefore he should not be charged for landing his machine. The other side pointed out that 111 most cases there was very good reason for charging a landing fee, as the visitor by air was nearly always sup plied with weather forecasts and a course to his next port of call; not infrequently men were sent out to hold his wing tips while he taxied in ; and he might or might not require refuelling. A reasonable view seems to be that where an aero drome is the property of a municipality, it may consider it good policy to forgo the landing fee from a private owner visiting the town. After all, it is the formality rather than the actual cash which is likely to be annoy ing. And; anyway, as one delegate pointed out amid considerable amusement, the air tourist may not happen to have any small change on him, and then it may take months to collect the bill for a couple of shillings! Where an aerodrome is owned by an individual or by a private company there does not appear to be any very good reason why a landing fee should not be charged. After all, if a motorist decides to leave his car in a garage, he expects to pay a small sum for the privilege. The municipal aerodrome is, in a way, the equivalent cf the car park, and the private aerodrome corresponds simi larly to the garage. Getting Down to It r O the not-too-technically-minded the great merit of the paper read by Dr. Watts to the Royal Aero nautical Society last Monday was that, for the first tone, a fairly simple picture was presented of the para meters of airscrew design. As Dr. Watts pointed out, there are a large number of permutations and combinations in airscrew design, but the set of curves he presented did in a remarkably simple manner show when a variable-pitch airscrew is worth while and when it is not. For that he deserves the thanks of those who do not readily follow complicated and tedious calculations. Technicians may argue that by making the comparisons ori static thrust, keeping the top-speed efficiency the same, he fixed-pitch airscrew is made to look worse than it is. Ihe lecturer admitted that point near the end of his paper. fus system did show extreme values, and any change in asis 01 comparison can only bring upper and lower values oser together resulting in a smaller gain of one type er 'he other. It ^is well to have a clear picture of what 18 the maximum one can hope for, and Dr. Watts did Provide that picture. ncidentally, it may^foej^gpinted out that the curves not y gave the justification for variable pitch, but also •plained its somewhat belated arrival in this country. uthe pitch equalled or slightly exceeded the diameter e was little to be gained from the variable-pitch air screw. Dr. Watts has, on occasion, been accused of being anti-v.p , to com a new expression. His curves showed that at the time when this accusation was aimed at rim there was, in truth, insufficient gain to be obtained to make the v.p. airscrew worth while. With modern high-speed aircraft it is a different matter. Making Your Airport Pay A FRIEND of ours—one whose distinctly exalted posi- ^J tion in the aeronautical world makes him feel it necessary to remain anonymous in connection with what follows—puts forward a suggestion on that ever- topical subject of " How to make municipal aerodromes pay." He seems inclined to regard his brain-wave as frivolous and heretical," presumably because it might shock the Official Mind—which is probably a recommenda tion in its favour straight away. Nevertheless, similar suggestions were made at last week's airport conference. Here are his ideas: " The first reason for the aerodrome is to be a port at which aircraft can call. But is there any reason why it should not be turned to other uses in order to secure revenue? " In America the experiment has been tried of making the airport an amusement centre as well as a port of call for aircraft, and the experiment has been successful in that it has secured considerable extra revenue for the airport owner. If this question is looked at dispassionately and if certain classes of people will only sink their prejudices against the factor of amusement, much might be done to make airports and aerodromes attractive centres to which people would go and spend their money." Why Not Brighten It Up? " f^RIEFLY " (continues our friend) "the proposal I /j would like to expound is the following: Every muni cipality which owns an aerodrome should plan to make that aerodrome a good amusement centre. By amuse ment I do not mean roundabouts, coconut shies, and so on, but amusement in the sense of relaxation and sport. For instance, there could be, as already exists at at least one aerodrome in this country, a really pleasant swimming pool. There could also be a good restaurant where people could be certain of securing a pleasant dinner or lunch or other meals of a kind which would be different from the average roast beef and tinned fruit- salad type of meal. •"Included in the restaurant there should, of course, be a bar. To the restaurant could be attached a dance hall and concert hall. There might be room on the surrounding land (which must, in any event, be kept free of buildings) for a municipal golf course. Again, what is to prevent the laying out of hard and lawn tennis courts? In the airport section of the aerodrome buildings, too, there could be a series of small shops which could probably be let at a good rental. An essential part of the organisation of this amusement centre would have to be a frequent and comfort able service of buses." He sums up by pointing out the obvious moral—that you will attract people to your airport, that they will become interested in flying, and that they will then start to use the airport as passengers. Continental countries—notably Germany—have worked on these lines for years. Why cannot we? More than once Flight has lamented the English tendency to treat an aero drome, so far as the general public are concerned, as a cross between a powder magazine and a fever hospital.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
