FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1948
1948 - 0154.PDF
FLIGHT JANUARY 20/rH, 1948 C orrespondence the case ol public figures whose opinions may be taken as re-presenting those officially held by, say, a Government Depart- ment, statements must be suitably controlled and qualified. There are, however, a huge number ol employees of concerns who are at least discouraged from expressing opinions and more ilten actually forbidden to do so by their superiors. Neither the Services nor airline corporations are guiltless in this respect, ••ind man's basic freedom and rights are threatened if, for fear of dismissal or disciplinary action, he may not, within reason, express his personal opinions in print. To say that in some cases there is machinery tor submitting his letter to higher authority for approval is merely to evade the issue. All too frequently delays, duplication of copies, lack of someone with the knowledge and authority to give a decision, and possibly the "loss" without trace of both material and application nullify the effect of this " concession " to would-be correspondents. The individual opinions of scientists, airline pilots, adminis- trators and others are of great value, and one of the chief uses of the Press is to disseminate knowledge of their experiences MIKI requirements. Let,those with an opinion and honest conviction fight for •he right to express them boldlv under their own name. H. JOHN JA.RVIS. "DAFT" FACING SEATS Chances of Accident Very Small I RECENTLY came across an article dealing with aft-facingseats, and unfortunately I read it. I read it with the feeling that here at last were the claims of a single individual who must advance the theories of common sense and psycho- logical exactitudes to prove that passengers facing aft in an aircraft are doing something quite usual and quite natural. As one of many pilots who has spent hundreds of hours as a passenger as well as member of a crew, I can claim that my point of view is a much more open one, and one more like that of the casual passenger. In other words, 1 am pointing out the other side of the argument. As a matter of interest, I have flown thousands of miles in almost every position that one can humanly imagine: lying liat on the metal floor of a Liberator; crammed like a sardine, head to feet, with other passengers for fifteen hours on end; sitting vertically facing sideways; packed inside bomb-bays; squeezed between auxiliary petrol tanks looking aft through a small section of a window; sitting in the blister of a Catalina mid scanning the horizon; up in the pilot's seat of most types of aircraft; lying prone, facing both forward and aft; lying supine, ditto. I have also flown as passenger in most of Trans- port Command's V.I.P. aircraft and in the American A.T.C.'s Civilian Skymasters. I have crossed the Atlantic in B.O.A.C.'s luxurious Clippers, and as they were usually flown with many vacant seats, owing to the weight of important freight- and fuel, jt was only too easy to wander about the aircraft and try sitting in their forward- and aft-facing seats alternately as a change from the monotony of flying long distances over large expanses of ocean in the same seat. To come down to earth at last, and to examine the points put forward in support of aft-facing seats, I can only say that, surely the essence of these points is entirely against all prin- ciples for making passengers feel safe in aircraft. Suppose, in the future, passengers were all to be seated in seats facing backwards, then they must of necessity be briefed as to why they face backwards. They are told it is for their safety in case of accident. They must be told the reason for it because it is a natural tendency to face forward and to see where one is going, and not from where one has come. If all air passengers are to be reminded of the danger of accidents, why not brief all travellers on the undergrounds, trains, buses and trams? They are not briefed for their short or long trips, but they take the same chances as passengers do in aircraft. To-day, whether the trip is made by land, sea or air, the chances of being involved in an accident are very small; in fact, they are infinitesimally small. Take one glance at the figures of road deaths: those people never thought that their end was coming. Is it not better that way? Is it worth that additional safety to enforce passengers to face backwards so that if by chance they were involved in a crash, their necks would not be broken quite so neatly? It offers no guarantee that the passenger will survive, but offers a slightly better chance of survival. I detest facing backwards, but that is merely my opinion, and that of all the people with whom I have ever flown. THE INFORMAL LIGHT AIRCRAFT COMMITTEE A Protest from the Society of LicensedAircraft Engineers UPON the ionnation of the Informal Light Aircraft Com-mittee, it was apparent that the responsible authorities assumed that the representation of the Society of Licensed Aircraft Engineers could serve no useful purpose. Whether this was due to deliberate intent or to a lack of appreciation of the controversial subjects to be discussed is beside the point, but the Society considered at that time that its best policy would be quietly to await results. Subsequently, the Committee's report has appeared in recent copies of the technical Press and makes admittedly interesting reading. As may be assumed, we do not consider ourselves competent to judge the merits of the Committee's findings upon the characteristics of the ideal aircraft destined for flying-training operations, but on the other hand, we do feel justified in registering a criticism insofar as the report concerns the licensed aircraft engineer, and in this. resp«ywfc is the Society's opinion that the Committee has clearly'T^P played a profound ignorance of current conditions. To cite a typical example, the suggested salaries of a chief instructor/ secretary, first assistant instructor and second assist- ant instructor are /900, ^700 and -£650 respectively, whilst the ability, qualifications and experience of a chief engineer is cheerfully assessed at ^500. True, under certain conditions he would magnanimously be allowed the assistance of a junior licensed engineer at ^400 or an "unlicensed mechanic/ cleaner" at £156, or both, but these generous concessions do not alter the atrocious lack of regard for the engineer as displayed in the feport We have on the one hand a small fleet of three aircraft valued at ^1,000 each (this figure is itself obviously mislead- ing) and the chief engineer and instructors would be expected to be quite satisfied to see a /156 per annum mechanic let loose upon their maintenance! Anyway, perhaps the Com- mittee would enlighten us as to the manner in which this underpaid 'Admirable Crichton" and his family may exist upon /3-odd per week. The profession, and it is a profession, of the licensed aircraft engineer is one entailing considerable study, coupled with long periods of practical experience, and in recognition ot this, we are more than surprised to discover that otherwise responsible members of the industry still appear to labour under the old delusion that the engineer must of necessity be the " grease rag " tc the pilot. Both of these men are respon- sible people in their own right, and each has his own exacting duties to perform and they must work as a team if the organization is to be economic and efficient. Such a desirable state of affairs simply cannot exist if those responsible persist in trying to enforce such a clearly marked difference of status between the two. It is a great pity that this Society was not invited to contri- bute to the Committee's deliberations fewn the outset and so to have been instrumental in avoiding the waste of time and energy that must have been put into the preparetkHiJ|f such a series of misinformed conclusions. ^S .•jjgQtk. London. ,/ W.J.ANDREWS, ~\" Chairman, Society of Licensed Aircraft Engineers. of Incidentally, are experiments still going on on the subject backward-facing seats? Does anyone know? Wokingham. ROBERT KKSSELL.V FORTHCOMING EVENTS Jan. 29th.—R.Ae.S. (Manchester) : " Pressurization," G. Beardshall. . Jan. 29th.—R.Ae.S. (Preston) : " Photographic interpretation of Bomber Offensive Against Germany." S/Ldr. G. A. Morris, O.B.E. Jan. 29th.—Royal Aeronautical Society : " Flight Testing of Helicopters." W. Stewart, B.Sc. Feb. 3rd.—R.Ae.S. (Belfast) : " High-Speed Flight." Dr. Hilton. Feb. -4th.—R.Ae.S. (Gloucester and Cheltenham) : " Air Operations in the Battle of Britain." Feb 4th.—R.Ae.S. (Luton) : " Some Problems in Civil Aviation." N, E. Rowe, C.B.E., B.Sc., D.I.C., F.R.Ae.S. Feb. 4th.—R.Ae.S. (Southampton) : " Structure Testing." P.B.Walker, M.A., Ph.D., F.R.Ae.S. Fab. 6th.—Institute of Navigation : " A New System of Compass Cor- rection." Dr. G. N. Harvey, O.B.E. Feb. 10th.—R.Ae.S. (Graduates and Students) : " Stability and Control Problems." D. J. Lyons. Feb. 12th.—Royal Aeronautical Society : " The Aerodynamics of the Gas Turbine." A. R. Howell. Feb. Mth,—Fair Oaks Aero Club : St. Valentine's Day Dance. Feb 18th.—Royal United Service Institution : "The Strategic Offensive Against Germany." Air Chief Marshal Sir Norman Bottomley, K.C.B., C.I.E., D.S.O.. A.F.C. Feb. 23rd.—R.Ae.S. (Bristol): "Accidents and Their Investigation." Air Commodore Vernon Brown, C.B., O.B.E., M.A., F.R.Ae.S. Feb. 25th.—Royal United Service Institution : "The Home Fleet in the War." Vice-Admiral Sir Patrick Brind, K.C.B., C.B.E. Feb. 25th.—R.Ae.S. (Graduates and Students): "Suction Aerofoils." B. Thwaites. Feb. 2tth.—Royal Aeronautical Society : " Evolution of the Design of an Aeroplane." Prof. R. L. Lickley, B.Sc., D.I.C., F.R.Ae.S. Feb. 26th.—R.Ae.S. (Manchaster) : " Nival Aircraft." Capt. Fancourt. R.N. Mar. 3rd.—R.Ae.S. (Bristol) : Prize-winning Papers by Junior Members.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
