FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1946
1946 - 0585.PDF
by tlyu.j, noi miles. In conclusion I would like to thank the editorial staff of Flight for their excellent data table on new British civil air- craft (Feb. 28th). JOHN LAWSON COVERDALE. LET US BE HONEST Is There Too Much Publicity Consciousness ? BY all means, "let us be honest."But I am shocked that a journal such as Flight should suggest that there is "too much publicity consciousness."Furthermore, that "Indicator," whom I respect for his writ- ings, should say—and not suffer sub-editorial erasion—that'' this country has a growing weakness for the transatlantic habit of ballyhoo," makes me wish that he would stick to hislast and leave advertising and publicity alone. He adds that " public relations experts are only able to stress the obvious "—which may be a good lesson for others as well—but suggests that they are "bullied by publicity-concious directors." Askan advertising manager what, he thinks of that. " Indicator" also, having duly slated us for being too Ameri-can air-transport conscious, proceeds to detail "all kinds of dazzling projects from the other side" himself. What "Presi-dent" can be bullying him'i J. have had the opportunity of meeting many Americanofficers, A.A.F. and others, and the result of their much- condemned publicity is that they just do not believe that theSpitfire was faster than the Mustang, or the Meteor than the Shooting Star, it may have no effect on their technicians, butit does give the rank and file self-confidence and morale. " In- dicator" should not confuse the ballyhoo of politics, in which" the public can be indefinitely fooled, and even, perhaps, mild dishonesty may, after all, be the best policy," with honest,instructive, technical advertising, such as sometimes appears in your journal, and always—of course—in the editorialcolumns. What I do take exception to in British publicity for Britishaviation generally is in the fact that the aircraft automatically receives the bouquets, whereas the engine on which it dependsfor flight is hardly ever mentioned, certainly not as news. Starlights come and go; Meteors, Fireflies, Spitefuls and evenYorks and Tudors put up their records for Britain; but the newspaper stories and broadcast news bulletins never mention .11 1942,. -uuing those in- - peculiar instruments (I. v. took off with 13 " Pezas " (Pz) and cruised at 8) v»ere used by No. 23 Squadron for intruder work. Boston Illsgradually replaced these aircraft for this work. But the insult, dear "Indicator," is this: "... the Havocnever got into its stride as a night-fighter ..." Sheer non- sense! From June, 1941, to June, 1942, Havocs flew, on in-truder work, 40 sorties for 1 enemy aircraft destroyed. The Beaufighter figures were in the region of 138 sorties for onedestroyed. We also dropped bombs on different things; do you know that 23 Squadron really got train-busting going.'Havoc Is gave rich dividends. I disagree with "Indicator" about the take-off. There isnot any need to hold it down to 140 and then to yank it up in the air—just ease the stick back to bring the nose-wheelup and she'll fly off at about ri5. I have tried hard to recall a time when any alteration of trim was necessary on raisingthe undercarriage—and as for sinking after take-off. . . . Havoc Is were ducky affairs and at night I would fly on thePioneer compass in my observer's compartment; we also handed each other things through the hole provided. Although theBoston III did not have this hole, we had a signal light and I could write rude notes and send them to my rear-gunner bythe wire provided. I can recall no Boston III which was not fitted with anemergency device to drop the undercarriage. Both Havoc I and Boston III were beautiful to handle (Inever flew a Bostoii II). But a Boston III, with a belly-set of four 20 mm. cannons and a long-range fuselage tank, wasnot quite so nice. They were officially named "Intruder II" and there was a proviso that a Rate One turn must not beexceeded under 17b A.S.I. R. E. WAKEFORD (W/O.). ["Indicator" replies: "I accept the reproof concerning ti^Havoc's record as a night-fighter—though it all depends on the meaning of the expression 'getting into its stride.' Asfor braking difficulties, these were clearly described in the article as being applicable only ' in our early unfamiliaritywith American-type toe-brakes!' Either W/O. Wakeford had wonderful foot-control or his memory is poor. I didn'tsay anything about ' holding it down to 140 ' on the take-off and the aircraft certainly had a sinking tendency—but maybethis had nothing to do with the undercarriage movement. The early DB-7S, at least, had no final emergency device for under-carriage lowering. Perhaps I didn't sufficiently praise the type—it was very nice indeed as a flying machine, whatever-its virtues or defects as a bomber and fighter."]
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
