FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1944
1944 - 2165.PDF
OCTOBER IO.TH, 1944 FLIGHT 427 , 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. THE FLYING BOMB What is an Atmosphere ? CONGRATULATIONS on your article on the air torpedo. Mr. Shackleton and Mr. Millar did a fine piece of work, but it is a pity that "-Horace" was missing from the press conference. By the way, will you tell a young reader what is an atmosphere in lb./sq. in.? S. A. MATHEWS. [An atmosphere is the pressure exerted on the surface of the earth by a column of air. At ground level it is 14.7 lb./sq. in. —ED.] Its Military Value and Hitler's Moustache THANKS are due for the splendid article on the flying bomb in Flight of October 5th, but Mr. Shackleton has boobed when he says: "Militarily it has been about as useful as the Fuhrer's ridiculous moustache." Thousands of bombers and hundreds of thousands of tons g of bombs were diverted from Germany to the Pas de Calais * area, and valuable aircrews and machines were lost, all because of a device as useful as the Fuhxer's moustache, to say nothing of the fighters patrolling Southern England using up 100- octane fuel, and the employment of the army of gunners, radio-location people, spotters, repair and rescue squads. If a moustache value can do that, we may pray that Hitler does not grow a beard. R. S. HALL. [Our correspondent is, of course, quite right in his argu ment that the flying bomb did divert a great deal of effort that might have been utilised on Germany itself. But has it occurred to him that if Hitler had not wasted so much man power and material on building flying bombs, he would have been able to build very large numbers of fighters ? Some 8,000 flying bombs were launched. It is legitimate to assume that parts for two or three times as many were manufactured. If that effort had been put into fighter production, the Luft waffe might by now have been able to offer serious resistance to our attacks instead of being almost impotent. We hope Hitler will waste much more time on equally futile secret weapons.—ED.] A Word of Praise ANOTHER reader, who wishes to remain anonymous, writes: "May I venture to congratulate the Editor and staff on the article on the flying bomb which appeared in Flight of October 5th. To me, a very lay reader, it came as a very great- surprise that in so short an interview with this too- familiar gadget you should have managed to write such an excellent article, so splendidly illustrated, and I felt that it most certainly merited a word of praise. Having seen one or jftwo of these things about when they were in their heyday, it was most gratifying to see their secrets laid bare. "Hoping that the journal will always prosper and continue to present sueh articles." [We much appreciate our reader's kind remarks. It was through no fault of ours that our representatives had such a short time in which to prepare their description of the flying Hold on a minute sir, another kite coming in to bomb. Months ago we applied to the Ministry of Aircraft Production for permission to examine and describe one, but were put off with vague excuses about M.A.P. experts being busy examining them. What that had to do with our seeing one we are not at all clear. We rather expected that M.A.P. experts would write a learned tome on the flying bomb, and that this would be issued. But apparently the experts are still at work on it. Doubtless the official report will be issued some day—when the flying bomb is ancient history and of no further interest to anyone.—ED.] LET'S RECOLLECT Hendon or Pau ? TN glancing through the advertisements in Flight for Septem- -*- ber 21st, my attention was caught by that on Advertise ment page 20, depicting Hendon, 1910T under the heading "Let's Recollect; One of a series of reminiscences from British Aviation History which will ... it is hoped, prove interesting to readers." The photograph in the advertisement did prove interesting, as I had just seen an identical one in a very interesting book " The Wright Brothers," by Fred. C. Kelly. Underneath were the words: "The Wrights' Plane at Pau, France, 1909," and surely there is a Parisian touch about the pelmet worn by the man on the right? J. M. HENDERSON. C , iK-bi / JET PROPULSION Single- or Multi-engined ? COMPARING the published photCgraphs of the British Gloster jet fighter and the American Bell Aircomet, it appeals as if the latter has thrown away most of the advantages gained by the absence of an airscrew. Having regard to the need for a full-height undercarriage and the increased head resistance, does this twin-engined arrangement justify itself? C. CHARLES. The Question of Balanced Forces T THINK Mr. E. Burke, in Flight of September 28th, is -I insisting upon a distinction without a difference. Originally I likened an unbalanced force to a stick with one end. If you like, the force and its reaction are one entity—like the stick. I agree that "the force required to change the direction of motion of the molecules so that they go through the hole is the gas pressure," but I also say that the sum of all the forces required to change the 'direction of motion of x x ion molecules is the force which accelerates the mass of gas made up by those molecules, and I do not see the need to invoke molecular physics. A pressure and a mass of gas are familiar to every one; molecular motion and bombardment probably are not. My statement that thrust is equal to impeller-pressure x area of jet was rather reckless'. I should have said "about equal," and mentioned that friction would tend to neutralise the effect which the falling pressure gradient along the taper would have in increasing the thrust. I omitted p„ (or as I would prefer to say p], the pressure at the point of ejection) because it is small compared with p0. As to the speed of sound, Mr. Burke may remember that in your issue of June 15th I doubted whether a jet having less than the speed of sound "even in a very hot gas," would give sufficient thrust, though later I withdrew that doubt. While on the subject of the speed of sound, and with par ticular reference to sound waves of high amplitude, may I suggest that "it all depends on what you mean by sound waves"? Is bomb-blast a sound wave? And if not, where does one draw the line? It is>!bnly to be expected that the instantaneous conversion- 'w pounds, or tons, of high explosive into a volume of gas should result in an actual displacement at high speed much larger volume of surrounding air—air through which e true sound waves are travelling. And the steep and shat tering wave-front of compression, mentioned by A. G. in Flight of October 5th, followed by a comparatively long, slow period of recovery and depression, seems -to indicate that the forces at work are much more than the true sound-carrying mechanism of the atmosphere can cope with. L. SHEkFpRD BIDWELL. 5 v it
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
