FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1942
1942 - 0296.PDF
-h FLIGHT FEBRUARY 5TH, 1942 WAS THIS THE FIRST? - An American Patent of 1929 for an Asymmetrical Aircraft : Germany Anticipated by—Theodore P. Wright WE will begin these notes by supplying our own answer to the query in the heading. The first lop sided aircraft was also the first practical aircraft: the Wright brothers' biplane of 1903, which had the engine on one side and the pilot on the other. That was quite a few years before Cy. Caldwell thought of his wisecrack about "built-in headwinds." Thus the Wright biplane was asymmetrical when empty, although not in quite the same way as the different types referred to in Flight during July and August of last year when, it may be recalled, we began the discussion with a suggestion from an officer of the R.A.F., and followed it up with extracts fiom German patents granted to the Hamburger Flugzeugbau. Priority The date of application of the German patent was December, 1937. The well-known American aeronautical engineer, Theodore P. Wright, engineering chief of the •Curtiss-Wright Corporation and at present assistant chief of the aircraft branch of the American Office of Production Management, has written to us about our so-called "Loppy" aircraft correspondence, and sends a photostat •copy of an American patent granted to him. The patent is dated February 7th, 1933 (No. 1,896,270), but the application was filed on September 6th, 1929. In the patent Mr. Wright is described as '' Assignor to Curtiss Aeroplane & Motor Company, Inc., a Corporation of New York." That Was before the amalgamation of the Curtiss .and Wright concerns. From the three-view general arrangement drawings it will be seen that Mr. Theodore P. Wright's scheme related to a single-engined pusher aircraft. He does not, in his letter to us, go into detail as to his reasons for taking out the patent, but, presumably, leaves the patent specification to speak for itself. Nor does he state whether the Curtiss company ever built a machine of this type. One should, of course, bear in mind that the drawings and wording of a patent specification are nearly always deliberately mis leading in that they are designed to cpver the general idea for purposes of patent protection, whilst at the same time giving potential rivals as little information as possible about what it is actually intended to do. By way of-describing the T. P. Wright "Loppy" we -could hardly do better than quote from the patent speci fication, which states: "In general, the airplane selected for illustration of my invention is different from the usual airplane now in use in that one wing is larger than the other wing, being longer and also being thicker. The,single motor is mounted on brackets on the larger wing, and the weight' thereof is counterbalanced by the increased lift of the larger wing. The offset thrust of the motor is counter balanced by the increased drag of the thicker wing and, if desired, by a suitably cambered vertical fin." A Red Herring? Above we referred to the likelihood that the text and illustrations of patent specifications may be deliberately misleading. On reading through the T. P. Wright speci fication we find, a little farther on, the following cautionary paragraph: "It is to be understood that the above- described embodiment of my invention is for the purpose of illustration only, and various changes may be made therein without departing from the spirit and scope of my invention." So we are still left guessing as to what was actually in the mind of Mr. Wright. Perhaps a little more light may be thrown on the subject by referring to the "objects" of the invention. These are stated as follows: " One object of my invention is the provision of increased visibility in airplanes of the single- motored type. A further object is the arrangement of the parts of such an airplane in a way that it is possible to provide a practical airplane of the pusher type using only •a single motor. A further object is the reduction of fuselage vibration in airplanes of the above-described type. A further object is the reduction of the effect of motor fumes upon the occupants of an airplane of the above-described type. A further object is the reduction of the hazards of a crash in airplanes of said type. This is accomplished by reducing the fire hazard and also by reducing the hazard of the weight of the engine falling upon the occupants of the airplane or vice versa." Well, at any rate some quite reasonable objects are dis-. closed in the above. But there must have been some snags somewhere, otherwise we should have seen a number of Curtiss aircraft of the "Loppy" type. It would be interesting to know if these were discovered during the design stages," or if a machine was actually built before they came to light. What does seem to be certain is that Mr. T. P. Wright had the idea of the asymmetrical aircraft long before the Germans thought of it. Rolls-Curtiss P40.F. "jPHE Rolls-Royce Merlin, as made by the Packard Company, -»- is being applied to the Curtiss P40.F. fighter. The per formance of this machine has astounded the critics, the speed given being 400 m.p.h. It is estimated that it has a ceiling of 25,000 feet, "a very real improvement in performance." The fire power of the new Curtiss has not been definitely announced, but an American contemporary says that it is estimated that there are five or six .50 calibre machine guns. in each wing. In a chart issued by the Curtiss Company^P is shown that of the Curtiss Hawk pursuit types, taking the P36 (Mohawk) as 100 per cent., the P40.F. has a striking power of 667 per cent., a speed of T23 per cent , and a high- altitude performance of 170 per cent. It is from these figures that the estimated ceiling quoted above has no doubt been obtained.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
