FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1945
1945 - 1932.PDF
SEPTEMBER 27TH, 1945 FLIGHT 351 CORRESPONDENCE Th 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. GLOSTER METEOR IN ACTION Smoke Trails Always Present y tj\YE read in more than one report that the abovementioned 1 aircraft does not normally leave smoke trails in its wake and I rim rather interested to know why this statement isocrsisted in. Many times I have watched Meteors traversing the sky on'doodle-bug" patrol, etc., and the trails always seem to have been present to a certain degree.The hatched line trail effect, which appeared to occur when the guns were opened up, was rather amusing and may havebeen caused by the recoil retarding the aircraft and having a temporary limiting effect on the expansion of the gasesemitted. I might add that when these aircraft start their run to takeoff quilt- a pall of what appears to be black smoke is left around the starting point. H. M. ABSOLON. WHAT'S IN A NAME ? " Vampire " Not the Happiest Choice TI7ITHOUT full information it is impossible to appreciate VV the system adopted in naming aircraft. If, however, aptness be a criterion, I suggest, with all due apologies to the makers and selectors of the name Vampire, that a happier choice was open. Perhaps the following few lines will illustrate the point. I would stress that this criticism is not to detract from admira- tion of a fine display of airmanship, and a magnificent per- formance by a lovely aircraft. HYDE PARK. Sunday, September 16. Who named thee "Vampire," As thy swift beautyNamed thee not well; Shears Victory sky. No terror are thou Rather attribute thee from nethermost Pit, Angelic scion, Creature of Hell. Hell to defy. . Breath of thy passingLike sword of flame That guarded Eden,Thy watchword Duty, "Falchion" thy name. S. L. QUINE, Group Capt. THE TUNE HAS CHANGED Air Ministry and the A.T.C.W ITH reference to your leading article in Flight of Septem-ber 6th, there is nothing "priceless" about the Chief Commandant's appeal for officers for the A.T.C. It was inevit-able that the victorious conclusion of the war should leave a surplus of aircrew and of potential aircrew. To haveattempted in 1942 or 1944 to adjust the A.T.C. entry to the precise demands of 1944 would have been utterly impossible,since no one could foresee what the losses might be. in war */ft tne duty of the Government to build up its strength in"\Jferial and man-power to the utmost to meet possible reverses or protracted campaigns. Victory will inevitably leave asurplus. It is, of course, hard to justify the acceptance in the R.A.F.of men who were not cadets after cadet entries had been stopped, and quite impossible to justify the selection of cadetsfor mining by lottery. But the directing of cadets into the Army, though hard on the individual, was a national necessitythat the best type of cadet accepted with good grace. Many ex-cadets have stated that the Army treated them very well.There may, however, be differences of opinion about this, t there can be no doubt that although for the moment theremay not be enough jobs in the R.A.F. and civil aviation for all who want them, it is still essential that the British Empireshould have a large reserve of young men with some training jn air matters who would be ready in case they were wanted,fhen- ls n0 doubt, either, that the. young men are willing.* hough they are not prepared to spend five nights a .week Swotting at maths., as they were under the stress of war inlf'4i. there are many thousands anxious to give a reasonable amount of time to voluntary air training without calculatinglll<" possible reward-in the form of jobs in aviation. The appeal to demobilised personnel to become officers andinstructors is an attempt to ensure that the training of these young men shall be in the capable hands of those who havebrought us victory in the war. L. TAYLOR (Editor. A.T.C. Gazette). CAMPAIGN AWARDS Fleet Air Arm " Left Oat " "VTOW that the war is over and there are so many campaign-*- ' stars and medals being awarded, may I point out that once again the Fleet Air Arm has been left out? During the war so much publicity (well earned, I agree)has been given to the R.A.F. and so little to the F.A.A. tnat a lot of people are under the impression that the R.A.F. arethe only people who have flown against the enemy. May I suggest that the "Europe" be deleted from the new star"Air Crew Europe Star," and qualification based on a certain number of operational hours flown, regardless of the theatreof ops. ? The great majority of our Service do not qualify for thisstar though they may have flown in utiacks in all parts of the world. The squadrons that operated over Norway,because they flew, from carriers, are debarred from claiming the award—though R.A.F. personnel doing the same job, butflying from land bases, are entitled to it. To my knowledge only one or two F.A.A. squadrons will be eligible for it—themine-laying squadrons working from a southern airfield. I do think that there should be some recognition of the fact thatwe also did a bit of flying during the war. " POTAG." DEFLEX-REACTION PROPULSION A Fallacious ArgumentI SHOULD like to offer the following comments on Mr.Umpleby's article in Flight, September 13th. It is a fundamental truth that the thrust of a jet engine isgiven by the overall increase in the momentum of the air handled by the unit, i.e.: Thrust =- (V;-V) owhere M = mass flow per unit time V = forvvard velocity relative to surroundingatmosphere V/ = jet velocity at exit nozzle relative to power unitThis equation must hold good irrespective of what path the air follows in its passage through the engine. Mr. Umpleby's argument is therefore fallacious, one reasonbeing that momentum considerations will only give the total reaction due to any process provided the pressure of the work-ing fluid is the same at the end as at the beginning of the process. D. R. NEWMAN, A.F.R.Ae.S. Half the Facts Ignored THE article in Flight of September 13th, 1945, on " Deflex-Reaction Propulsion " is not really controversial; it ranks as pure fallacy. At its best, it is an attempt to assess thedistribution of propulsive thrust between different points on a particular type of engine, and even then it ignores completelyall the forces due to different pressures occurring at different stages in the engine. If allowance is made for these pressure forces integrated overthe whole of the surfaces on which they act, in addition to the forces due to change of momentum, it is possible to estimatewith a fair degree of accuracy the resultant thrusts taken by the various components of a gas turbine engine. But nomatter how the path of the gas twists and twines, the algebraic sum of the axial components of these forces will equal thepropulsive force of the engine defined in the normal way as equal to the rate of change of momentum of the gas passingthrough the engine. Useful thrust = mass of gas per sec. (component of jet velocity in line of flight — aircraft velocity)and unless bending the flow-path of gas is going to result ultimately in a higher jet velocity—which is most unlikelysince every bend results in losses due to friction and turbulence —it will produce no improvement in thrust. No amount otcalculation which ignoies half the facts can provide a basis for serious controversy. D H. MALLINSON, B.Sc. (Messrs. Power Jets (R & D), Ltd.).
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
