FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1943
1943 - 1717.PDF
JULY IST, 1943 FLIGHT CORRESPONDENCE chute, not because he loves his passengers, but because pas-senger aircraft do not have accidents on principle (transport pilot's bow) . . . it's bad for business! The other sort of individual, who does not recognise fear, is unable to appreciate the cause ot fear in a crisis, and in my humble opinion, passes into a sort of trance, or what may be described as a reactive psychological amnesia, from which he emerges only when the danger is past. This, I teel sure, accounts foi the failure of pilots to take the correct action in dangerous circumstances I remember sitting beside a pupil doing an approach at.night. The flare path was on a. plateau several hundred feet above sea le\ el It was one ot those cross-country "find thebeacon then the flare path " approaches. It started with an emotional reaction at finding the flare path so far away,gradually passing to a "throttle-arm" paralysis. The pupil then discovered that the control column wouldn't work either.It would produce speed or diminution of rate of descent . . . but not both . . . the flare path got flatter and flatterand finally disappeared altogether. At this point the emotion so induced became too much for him, and he appeared to passinto the trance, described above. Physical responses remained active, and when the altimeter showed zero feet a hand movedlethargically and closed the throttles. Fortunately the instru- ment had been set a airdrome level, and in a few moments,Off-full throttle, the flare path appeared below. The pupil recovered from his amnesia, reassured by these manifestationsof safety, and carried on. Fear is useful in flying only in relation to an ability toappreciate the causes of it, but at the same time it is a powerful emotion capable of destroying initiative. In thepresence of danger, the mind is filled and hampered with an unreasoning desire to save or rather preserve life. Thisusually takes the form of a desire to maintain a status quo— an old lady will iemain in a burning building rather than move"because it has always been safe there." Similarly otherwise sane pilots will attempt a landing in bad visibility or if lost atnight, even if the aircraft is flying well and with enough petrol to carry on until morning or until the weather clears. As fear is an emotion and, therefore, reactive, it may bedirected, but not eliminated. A fear reaction at the prospect of loss of life can be reduced by a decision that life, or any-other item, is not of great value. But such decisions are not spontaneous, and cannot be achieved without careful thoughtand adjustment. In non-operational flying a resolute sublima- tion of fear appears to be a definite advantage, as it removesthe hazard of impediment in judgment and action at the times when the latter are urgently required. It is worth referring to the fact that fear prior to a crashaggravates the condition of shock which is usually the "priority" medical condition immediately after a crash andimpairs the capacity to recover from injuries received. In conclusion I should like to state that the above are my ownimpressions and as such are probably only approximately true. NOEL JACKSON, M.B., B.S. BOMBER ARMAMENT Something Heavier than 0-303 Guns Needed ON seeing the photographs of the new Halifax bomber I wasvery surprised to see that it was fitted with a four-gun Boulton Paul turret in tail and dorsal positions. The guns in these are of only 0.303 cal. Surely the obvious choice should have been two 0.5 cal. machine guns. The latter would give a weight of fire of 196 lb. /min. compared with the no lb. /min. of the former. On the other hand, the rate of fire on the former is greater, but the striking power less. We are well to the fore in fighter armament, but we seem to be behind in the question of bomber armament. It was British ingenuity that gave us the power-operated gun turret; let us not be left behind now. Our bombers were designed to carry large loads long dis- tances, and this policy has pioved itself to be wise. If our "heavies" had larger calibre guns, the bomb load would suffer. A good example of this is the Fortress. It is heavily armed with thirteen guns, twelve of them being of 0.5 calibre, but the bomb load is only about a third of that on the Lan- caster, Reports that the Fortress can carry ten tons of bombs are untrue. The best solution is to use our heavy bombers at night and the American types during the day, but why do the Americans bomb from high levels? Surely success could be obtained atlow-level bombing after the style of the Lancaster daylight raid on Le Creusot, when only one aircraft was lost. Admit-tedly this attack was over less heavily defended territory than the Fortresses generally operate, but it would, in my opinion,be worth trying. Low-level attacks by aircraft like the Mos- quito have also proved successful and can be carried out onmany more days of the year than can the high-level attacks. I think that the Mosquito is the most valuable weapon turnedout in this war and is a fine piece of work. Another form of attack is the fighter/ bomber, which is best used against air-fields and communications targets. In this way it can cause a great deal of disorganisation. Let us hope that when detailsof another heavy bomber are released it will mount something heavier than the 0.303 calibre machine gun in its armament.A. T. HENSHAW (536 Flight, A.T.C.). REVERSE PITCH AIRSCREWS Their Possible Use as Dive Brakes AFTER reading recent articles on the dive bomber I havebeen considering the problem of air braking, and would like to hear the views of fellow readers upon an idea which, on the surface, appears to me to be potentially the most effec- tive method of braking aircraft, either when diving or landing. The idea is to use a V.P. airscrew capable of turning its blades past fine pitch and, theoretically, into reverse, so that it would screw backwards without altering its rotational direction. Mechanically, this would be a comparatively simple proposi- tion, but, aerodynamically, it becomes rather complicated, and it is upon this point that the views of wiser and more learned readers than myself would be greatly appreciated. K. V. P. SAILPLANE EFFICIENCY Weathercock Stability : Puzzle, Find the Rudder I I WOULD like to thank Mr. Palmer for his trouble in calcu-lating out the efficiency of my glider. Actually, what 1 desired was a reply from an experienced gilder builder, butMr. Palmer's reply is very welcome. I confess not to have known what "Jones Efficiency" is. He complains of a lack of information. I purposely keptback any really useful information in my reliance on man's inquisitiveness to learn more. My "first objective being captured," I would like to advancea little farther. The accompanying sketch is not to scale, but gives the main outline of the sailplane. The rudder is notshown, but is actually in the sketch. Where it is or how it works, I prefer to keep to myself meantime. All I will sayis that the sailplane as per sketch has weathercock stability. Here are some of the main figures and facts: — Wings: Elliptical; aspect ratio 20:1; section R.A.F.38;loading 4 lb./sq. ft.; Reynolds number (mean) appro*. 1,100,000. Body: Fitted with retractable undercarriage; pilot sits back at 45 deg. Head vertical. Tailplane is pendulum and haa dihedral. J. R. LAWSON.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
