FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1942
1942 - 1154.PDF
544 FLIGHT MAY 28TH, 1942 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. IDENTIFICATION FOR H.G. Lectures on Recognition Wanted I BELIEVE many members of the Home Guard will agree with me that the study of aircraft identification is a very much neglected subject. We get quite a lot of lectures on a variety of important and less important topics but we do not get a proper course in the recognition of Allied and enemy planes. Surely, this is an important subject. Perhaps you would be good enough to bring this matter to the attention of those concerned with our training, so that this drawback should be rectified. SURREY. HOME GUARD AIR ARM Privately Owned Aircraft Available RE H.G.A.A., I am the owner of a Wicko, reg. 1938, last C. of A. taken out August 17th, 1939- I am willing to do anything to support the above; I have done 45 hours' dual and could have taken my " A " licence at any time, but left it too late. I also know of eight other machines, some of which could be put in flying condition in a matter of a few days. For my own part I could spare three or four days a week, and I am only one of hundreds who would be willing to give their time. I should be pleased to hear of any further developments. W. H. LEADBETTER. Local Purchasing Croups Suggested I WAS very interested in the correspondence re Home Guard Air Arm in your issue of May 14th. I hold an " A " licence and am a Home Guard, and would be very interested in the development of such a scheme. Might I put forward the suggestion, if the " Powers that be " accept the idea, and also if there are enough aircraft avail able, that those sufficiently interested get together to form " groups " from each town to purchase a machine from private owners or firms and so alleviate to a certain extent the rather high initial expense. With every good wish for the continuance of your excellent journal. D. C. FENN. Maintenance Problem of Many Types WITH reference to the suggestion of forming a '' Home Guard Air Arm," and the utilisation of stored or privately owned aircraft; would this not produce a variety of types all requiring different types of spares and maintenance. Would it not be better if the Government or H.G. Com manders drew up a census of pilots and G.E.'s available and, should the number be sufficient and the Government willing, to manufacture a single type of machine (i.e., a type already existing such as the Percival "Gull," in its 3-seater form) in the necessary numbers. This would make the position of spares, maintenance and identification elementary. The machine could be modified to suit the requirements of the H.G. for such duties as the dropping of supplies, messages, light anti-personnel bombs, the spotting of enemy paratroop concentrations'etc. Should the parent company of the aircraft chosen for use" not be able to produce them quickly enough, all the small aircraft companies'could help by producing parts and/or sub assemblies, this is assuming of course that the machine would be of wooden construction. GEMINI. AIR POLICY Bombers Show a Profit I WOULD like to answer R. J. Brookes' letter published in your issue of May 7th. He suggests that we stop building bombers and concentrate on building fighter aircraft only. Does Mr. Brookes realise that if we were to stop building bombers it would also mean that we would stop bombing Germany and occupied countries, and if that were the case, the enemy would be at their leisure in building huge stocks of aircraft, etc., unmolested. As it is at present we lose on the average eight to ten aircraft on a large-scale raid. On these raids we destroy factories, etc., building, as in the case of Rostock, large numbers of aircraft, and put the plant out of action for many months. Now, if he were to weigh up the profit and loss, he would find that we were definitely on the profit side. J. LEVY. ARMY SQUARE PEGS Another Case of Hope Deferred I WAS very interested in the letter from " 1516246," in Flight of May 7th, as my case is very similar. I also was provisionally accepted as a Flight Mechanic in June, 1941, duly enlisted in October, 1941, and told I would be recalled in four to six weeks. Under the assumptioi3.J^at this was more or less correct, I made certain private and domestic arrangements; thirty-two weeks have now passed and I have in consequence been put to considerable inconvenience. I find it is not possible to remuster for another trade whilst on deferred service, and am interested to learn from your corre spondent's letter that he has been given the option of joining another Service. I would be prepared to consider that course. My wife is also liable for National Service and wishes to join the W.A.A.F. Naturally, I object to her being called up whilst I am still at home. " 1516515." POWER UNITS OF THE FUTURE Better, Not Bigger, Engines Wanted I HAVE read with mixed feelings your article entitled " Power Units of the Future." The terrific American pre ponderance is undoubtedly due to the American attitude of "Tell the World." Our inherent trait to hush everything up has led to the present belief of the man in the street that every American aircraft is better than its British opposite—or thoughts to that effect. From the older firms these tales of 2,000-3,000 h.p. engines can be accepted; such things are _on the way, but can a firm which has never built an aircraft engine previously come out with a new design of 2,000 h.p. and have it in service within five years? Of course, we shall soon know, but when one thinks of the development put in on the "Sabre," that the "Merlin" was only a larger " Kestrel, "*and that the first Bristol sleeve valve ran long before we had heard of Hitler, then one wonders for how much experience counts. It is interesting to know that the rated altitude of the Ford engine is 32,500ft.—but has this been found in flight? Now one other thing I must protest about. I cannot see the power unit of the future fighter, even in 1945, weighing 4,2001b. (bare) and developing 4,800 b.h.p. In a year's time we shall have some idea of the success of the latest-type fighter —the type with the 2,000 b.h.p. motor. Up to now we h&ve fought with r,3oo b.h.p. or thereabouts in an aircraft weiJ^jSt approximately 6,5oolb. Due to supercharger development and the use of higher boost pressures, considerable increases in speed and additions to armament have been possible. Just how much faster are the 2,000 h.p. types going to be? Their motors, with full equipment (cowl, exhaust, etc.), will prob ably weigh nearly 4,0001b., pushing the aircraft up to 8,000 or g.ooolb., allowing for increased armament, armour, fuel tanks, etc. This means a larger aircraft and corresponding loss of speed and manoeuvrability. The larger engine is the motive power of a very vicious circle! Well, my guess is a gain in speed, at the same operational height, of from 15 to 20 m.p.h., and the factor that makes it worth while, in the face of the added intricacy and loss of manoeuvrability, is undoubtedly the in creased weight of fire, the necessity for which is urgent. However, I think with horror of a fighter with an engine weighing (bare) 4,2001b. ; the engine and equipment alone would scale more than a Spitfire f ; What we really want is increased power from the same bore and stroke and weight—that's progress. Buildup a larger engine is just the same as hitching on another hor»pit invari ably costs more, relatively, than the original, due cO increased organisation required. It is only done because there is no alternative. In this war we are unavoidably carrying on the bad habit taught us in the last—bigger engines at all costs, better engines if there is time. R. P. G.-J-
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
