FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1940
1940 - 1780.PDF
552 by utilising the wing for stowage. The first steps towards the all-wing aeroplane were taken in a most notable German aeroplane, the Junkers G.38, which, with its wing loading of 16 1b./sq. ft., and with a stowed load of about 13 per cent, of the all-up weight, fits well into Fig. 6. The transition is illustrated pictorially in Figs. 10 and 11. Fig. 12 shows possible layouts for the smaller transatlantic aeroplane, based on these data: structure, 92,500 1b. (33 per cent.); fuel, 107,500 (38.5); power units, 56,000 (20); 50 passengers, baggage, mail, eight crew, equipment, 24,000 (8.5); making an all-up weight of 280,000 lb. Total power is 28,000 h.p. Cruising speed, range and take-off vary slightly for the two layouts, but are approximately 300 m.p.h., 5,000 miles and 1,000 yards. Landplane or Seaplane There does not appear to be any fundamental difficulty 'in building an aeroplane of this size. Probably the most contentious matter is whether it should be seaplane or land- plane. In small sizes there is little doubt that the land- plane is the more efficient craft, but in large sizes the issue is less clear-cut. If the question were merely one of per- formance, there is a good case for the flying boat. Sikorsky concludes that the performance of the large flying boat is superior to that of the large landplane because of the advantage it achieves in structural economy, due to the hull combining the duties of accommodation and sus- tentation. A further advantage of the flying boat is its independ- ence of aerodromes, though it will need relatively sheltered waters, which are available. Perhaps the most powerful argument against the flying boat is its susceptibility to damage from flotsam. Repair of such damage is usually impossible unless the craft is brought on to the slipway. Also, routine maintenance is much more difficult at moor- ings than in a shed. Taking on passengers and fuel is a more elaborate business, comparing unfavourably with the taxi-ing of the landplane to the apron. In this argument the landplane seems to score heavily, but the problem is fundamentally one of economy, for the inconveniences of the flying boat can be neutralised by expenditure on JUNE 20, 1940 A WING-LOADING FIG. 12 B. WINS-LOAQING 55Le/FT? Possible plan forms fortransatlantic aeroplane. apparatus. The problems of running and maintenance cannot be separated from the vast problem of overall economy of operation, which needs close study by account- ants, mathematicians and operators. Finally, there is the question of safety in forced alight- ing ; in all other respects there is no difference. Supporters of the flying boat sometimes claim that it will stand a better chance. In examining this proposition, I think that we should first realise that, with four engines and improved safety equipment, the chances of forced alighting should soon be negligible. My summary of the landplane versus flying boat con- troversy seems to favour the flying boat. I should like,J therefore, to make clear that I do not regard the con- troversy as settled, that the superior performance of the large flying boat is only probable and not proved, that the paramount problem of overall economy has not even been tackled, and that the forced alighting argument may be the challenge the landplane designer needs to produce a light Seaworthy fuselage. It would be premature at this stage to attempt a summing-up. (To be continued.) THE FIGHTING HUDSONS—Flying only fifty feet above the sea in the Heligoland Bight area these Lockheed Hudsons of theCoastal Command belong to a formation of five which ran foul of a German " Flack " ship recently. The Hudsons, although reconnaissance aircraft, have acquitted themselves outstandingly well against enemy fighters and bombers.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
