FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1942
1942 - 0307.PDF
FEBRUARY 5TH, 1942 FLIGHT I21 Correspondence The Editor does not hold himself responsible for the views expressed by correspondents. The names and addresses of the writers, not necessarily for publication, must in all cases accompany letters. CONVOY FIGHTERS Retractable Float Idea Criticised A S regards Mr. Lacey's letter on the retractable float-plane fighter, referred to in Flight of January 8th, I wculd like to make a few comments. In order to counteract the severe strain set up on impact of landing, gear of a very heavy and robust construction would have to be employed. If "straight gear" were used, an extremely bulky fuselage would be Tequired to contain the mechanism, whereas, on the other hand, if jointed gear were used it could be more easily accommodated in a streamline fuselage, although the drag stresses set up by a 60-80 m.p.h. landing would distort, if not break, the gear at the joints. Due consideration must also be given to the fact that the floa£, when being lowered, moves forward as well as downward. •figs instance would tend to create longitudinal instability. In order to give the engine and airscrew satisfactory clear ance from spray, the float would have to be projected at least 9ft. from the datum line. This would necessitate " anti-bend " bracing, which amplifies my statement on weight and bulki- ness. Finally, with reference to Mr. Lacey's suggestion for the use of a twin-row radial power unit, it will be noted that the world's fastest radial-engined fighters (American) have a top speed considerably less than 400 m.p.h.; therefore, the speed of the machine under discussion would be still further reduced owing to its cumbersome equipment. • G. BEEKEN. THE TANK-BUSTER 12-Pounder Gun Suggested A FTER hearing of the difficulty of our Hurry-bomber pilots in getting their bombs and a moving tank to get together at the right moment without writing themselves off, or seeing their bombs go off in the blue, I have wondered why the obvious remedy of mounting a gun heavy enough to be effective, say a 12-pounder, has not been adopted. It could be mounted torpedo fashion, or inside the fuselage of a Blenheim type. The recoil could be almost any length to slow down the impact of discharge, and the aiming left to the pilot. The penetration of such a gun would be sufficient to account for even the heaviest tank; and since only about three seconds would elapse from pressing the trigger to the explosion of the shell, a tank would have to be phenomenally swift to avoid it. Against shipping it should be equally effective, and the plane could stay outside the light flak area. A Bofors type feed with the magazine immediately above it *-s?iould look after that end. Aircraft seem to be the only means of getting at tanks before they can do any damage, and the gun-bus seems to be the most effective way of doing it. I should imagine that a flying battery of six guns, with fighter escort, could do quite a lot of damage to a tank column from, say, /i,oooft. to 1,000ft., and one hit would be sufficient for most tanks, or, if in the boiler room of a vessel, quite a lot of good should result. LETUSDO IT FIRST. TOO MANY DIALS? A Naval Pilot Replies I WAS interested to read in the issue of Flight for January 8th, "Kismet's" article on "Too Many Dials." I can only argue with him on the score of fighter aircraft as I do not know much about multi-engined types. But in his drastic reductions for his second smiadron of fighters, he does not even concede a turn and bank indicator or fuel gauges. An aircraft.can fly blind without the directional indicator, artificial horizon and climb and descent indicator, but, in my (pinion, it puts considerably more strain on the pilot. It is imperative to have some indication of turning when blind flying, and -'Kismet" cannot surely argue that this is un- >^Jiecessary, as who can tell when a pilot may not be forced to Wny through cloud ? As regards fuel gauges, surely a pilot cannot be relied upon o guess the probable contents of his tanks, and is it not important that he should know what he has left? I also noted with amusement that, as a parting gesture, he tells of a car he drove at Brooklands which had only three instruments—two of which are of the kind he would like to see abolished in aircraft! Finally, I would be interested to know how many yards farther an aircraft could fly without any instruments and attachments. 1 feel sure that the perecentage weight of these is almost negligible. Hoping this does not arouse a National controversy! S/Lt. (A), R.N.V.R. A Justification of Instruments WITH reference to "Kismet's" article on "Too Many Dials" in your issue of January 8th, his arguments are so weak and show such a surprising lack of technical know ledge that I can only assume he wrote it to provoke a dis cussion. Although everyene deplores the fitting of unnecessary instru ments, it is difficult to select any one which could be left out ot the standard set fitted to all Service types, when their respec tive uses are analysed. It would certainly be impossible to find the odd cwt. and a half which he suggests might be saved by the reduction in the number of instruments. Though I do not doubt "Kismet's" ability to fly an air craft around an airdrome, or even to pull off a cross-country in fine weather by Bradshaw, it is quite evident that he knows nothing about serious cloud flying, and still less of the hazards of operational flying. If he did, he would know that if more pilots understood their instruments, and in particular theii engine instruments, more crews and valuable aircraft would be saved by the pilot's returning to the nearest airdrome when he realised his engine installation was failing. Obviously, the pilot does not study his instruments during a dog-fight, but what after? With an oil or coolant pipe damaged over the Channel, is it better for him, knowing nothing_ as "Kismet" would have it, to throw away his life unnecessarily by attempting to return to his base, or to have some warning and park down by the nearest ship, thus saving his life to fight again? Or, even when operating ov.er friendly country, isn't it better to be warned in time and land on the nearest airdrome rather than crash a good aircraft through a forced landing whilst trying to reach his home base ? How, too, does " Kismet" expect the ground crews to main tain their aircraft and keep them up to concert pitch, which is so essential for fighting? Is it fair or economical for the Engineer Officers and mechanics to receive their first intima tion that all is not well by the pilot's failing to return, or a telephone call from an obscure police station informing them that an aircraft lias crashed whilst forced landing due to an engine failure or to running out of fuel? "Kismet" writes, referring to oil: "Is it really essential to know the pressure, flow, ingoing and outgoing temperatures? " And, later: " Can anyone prove that an analysis of the exhaust gases is indispensable to a returning bomber? " For his information, no aircraft other than experimental ones are fitted with flow-meters or outgoing oil thermometers. Surely, too, he knows that with constant-speed airscrews, if automatic mixture controls are not fitted, the exhaust gas analyser is the only means by which the pilot can adjust his mixture strength to give him maximum range. In any case, these analysers are not fitted to any aircraft with Britisli engines, as the latter are all fitted with automatic mixture controls. It may interest him to know that the approximate weight of all the engine and aircraft instruments in the latest type single-seater fighter is 255 lb., including clock and oxygen regu lator. Even if this weight increased in proportion to the number of engines fitted, which it does not, he would still have a long way to look to find his extra cwt. and a half. With regard to his story with a moral, I am afraid I cannot see the parallel. Are we to understand that because he can drive a car round Brooklands at 180 miles per hour without any instruments, a pilot has no need of instruments to guide him on his way or to warn him that his engine requires vetting before his next trip across the North Sea? P. G. LUCAS.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
