FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1946
1946 - 1515.PDF
and AIRCRAFT ENGINEER Editorial Director Editor Assistant Editor - Art Editor- - G. GEOFFREY SMITH, M.B.E. C. M. POULSEN MAURICE A. SMITH, D.F.C (W/NG CDR., R.A.F.V.R.) JOHN YOXALL FIRST AERONAUTICAL WEEKLY IN THE WORLD .• FOUNDED WO9 Editorial, Advertising and Publishing Offices: DORSET HOUSE, STAMFORD STREET, LONDON, S.E.I Telegrams : Flightpres, Sedist, London. Telephone : Waterloo 3333 (50 lines.) COVENTRY : 8-10, CORPORATION ST. Telegrams : Autocar, Coventry, Telephone; Coventry 5210. BIRMINGHAM, 2: KING EDWARD HOUSE, NEW STREET. Telegram : Autopress, Birmingham. Telephone: Midland 7191 (7 lines). MANCHESTER, 3: 260, DEANSGATE. Telegrams: lltffe, Manchester. Telephone: Blackfriars 4412. GLASGOW, C.2: 2*B, RENFIELD ST. Telegrams: Iliffe, Glsugow. Telephone: Central 4857. No. 1963. Vol. t. SUBSCRIPTION RATES : Home and Abroad : Year, £3 10. t months, £1 10 6. Registered at the C.P.O. as a Newspaper August 8th, 1946 "We Outlook Thursdays, One Shilling. That Little MoreT HERE is something more than feeble about at least one feature of the new fuel allowances for civil aircraft. While those for charter and club flying are very reasonable and are now equivalent to 75 and 60 hours' flying a month respectively, that for the private owner has been increased only in the same proportion, and this citizen now receives the quite muni- ficent allowance of fuel to permit six hours' flying a. month. As we remarked in a leader at the time of the original allocations, the private owner's allowance of fuel is hardly worth the trouble and organization involved in its issue. Presumably the effect of permitting more than a pro- portional increase to the private aircraft owner, while the car owner is still so restricted, might be politically troublesome, and that is undoubtedly why the figure remains more or less where it was before. But when announcing the car drivers' minor increases, the Minis- try of Fuel and Power explained its comparative nig- gardliness as being a means by which the consumption of tyre rubber could, for the time being, be kept down. Although we would not suggest that aircraft do not wear out tyres particularly on runways—this reason can hardly be put forward with auy seriousness to explain the small allowance. Of course, no individual is likely to purchase an air- ciaft with the possibility of so little flying, and the majority of private owners are, in fact, obtaining very fair supplies of fuel for business purposes. The ration- ing authorities are, too, one gathers, extremely reason- able when dealing with aircraft fuel requests, though the department concerned is badly under-staffed. Charter operators find little difficulty in making ends meet, and complain only of the waste of time and the amount of trouble caused by the system. All of which adds up to the obvious conclusion that the ration of aircraft fuel is somewhat pointless and is continued almost solely for political reasons. But are these reasons woith the loss of time, temper and energy concerned in the operation of the system, both by the Ministry and the aircraft owners? Back to Skids?E VER since the Wright brothers discarded their starting rail and fitted wheels on the skids of their biplanes, we have accepted the undercarriage as a necessary evil. The skids have disappeared but the wheels remain. In the early days we took the line of least resistance in design and construction, but the line of greatest resistance aerodynamically, by leaving the undercarriage below the aircraft in flight, thereby prob- ably causing some 15 per cent or more of the total drag. When speeds increased, and we changed from biplanes to monoplanes, designers were compelled to retract the undercarriage. This was not really very difficult with the thick wings and stout bodies which were normal at that time. Now, however, jets and turbines have given us the possibility of even greater speeds, and the ten- dency is towards very thin wings and slender fuselages, in neither of which there is much room for stowing a retracted undercarriage. A contributor states, in an article in this issue, that as we approach sonic speeds it is no great exaggeration to say that the undercarriage may govern the design of the air- craft. He holds that this tendency must be resisted and points out that after all an aircraft is designed chiefly for air performance. It is really rather ridiculous that a piece of equipment which is used for a few minutes only before and after a flight should have to be carted around for hours and hours, wasting some five or six per cent, or even more, of the aircraft's gross weight which might be more profitably devoted to pay load or fuel. There were two primary factors which, until now, forced upon us the necessity for undercarriages: mobility
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
