FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1944
1944 - 0388.PDF
198 FLIGHT FEBRUARY 24TH, 1944 THE FLYING BOAT the salvation of the flying boat is to be resolved into such an elaborate <*cheme, I fear the continued decline of the type is assured. The need for unusually high strength factors, generally attained at the expense of performance, is another draw back of the flying boat. In the past criticism has been levelled at the U.S. Navy's predilection for flying boats that were able to land in a choppy sea with four- or five- foot waves. Here the critics have maintained that this consideration unduly impairs the cargo capacity of a boat since it involved too many bulkheads. By way of paren thesis one might add that four-or five-foot waves are no exception to the rule. My final observation adverts to an inherent and, so far, ineradicable failing of the flying boat. It is a generally known fact that al! flying boats are laterally unstable as the result of having a negative metacentric height. To counter this, wing-tip floats and sponsons are used, both of which only serve their purpose when the boat is at rest. During take-off or landing, lateral stability is a function of the beam of the hull, whereas the landplane has an undercarriage whose track may be two or three times this beam. In Fig. 4 I have endeavoured to illustrate this point by showing a flying boat and a landplane, each at the moment of touchdown. When he addressed the London Association of Engineers on February 5th, Mr. Gouge was soberly confident that the major disadvantages of flying boats would diminish as F.A.A. TRAINING IN CANADA ' JNTIL recently air pilots of the '*-' Royal Navy received their ele mentary flying training in England. The Fleet Air Arm now has two ele mentary and one service flying train ing schools in Canada. The S.F.T.S. is at Kingston on the shores of Lake Ontario, and is one of the few schools not situated on the prairies. Kingston was the first R.A.F. training station in Canada under the Commonwealth Air Training Plan. (Right) North Amer.'can Ha/vards from No. 31 S.F.T.S. in sauadron \. formation over the waters pi Lake /">. ^\" Ontario. X/~4Below) The officers of No. * S.F.T.S. N* y^^ at Kingston, Ontajfo. their sizes increased. This is perfectly true and providing improvements appropriate to such increased sizes are duly forthcoming there is good reason to believe that the 100- ton flying boat may draw abreast of a similar landplane. Such refinements as a faired main step may go far towards ensuring this, and retractable steps or chines may be a more commendable enterprise than I am willing to admit. So much depends on the methods employed. Cost of Bases I am afraid I don't see eye to eye with Mr. Gouge in so far as capital outlay for landing facilities is concerned. Whether we use landplanes, flying boats, or amphibians, v^are going to need large and expensive bases: The point which most people miss is that we already have several hundred heavy bomber stations up and down the country, each with long and wide concrete runways. Why incur the additional expense of flying boat bases? Like the rest of us, Mr. Gouge is sceptical of with what degree of safety a landplane could be put down away from its base, where there are no concrete runways. Reflecting on this point, and making convenient assumptions, I have come to the conclusion that a long-range-passenger aircraft of 150,000 lb. gross weight, cruising a£4iot more than 200 m.p.h. for a range of 3,000 miles, aroj*ld be disposing of fuel and oil at the approximate ra|eidi 2,500 lb. per hour. At the conclusion of a 3,000-apfle flight it would be th; lighter by 37,500 ib., and tbjpdughout the flight its weight would be consistently and j^oportionately diminishing. In the light of these forts Jg&iink the chances of a machine safely surviving aAaam^away from its base are evenly divided.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
