FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1951
1951 - 0526.PDF
326 FLIGHT, 16 March 1951 CORRESPONDENCE The Editor of "Flight" does not hold himself responsible for the views expressed by correspondents in these columns. The names and addresses of the writers, not necessarily for publication, must in all cases accompany letters. Each-way-facing SeatsT HE current interest in rearward-facing seats for commercialairliners prompts me to suggest a way of overcoming the "rearward-facing phobia" of some passengers during the mainpart of the flight. If each seat were fixed to withstand the proposed 2Og force, theback-rest part could be pivoted to swing backwards and forwards (as in some tramcars) so that during take-offs and landings, passengerswould sit facing to the rear of the aircraft. When level flight was reached, and the steward's blessing given, they could swing overtheir back-rests and face forwards. In either forward or backward position, the back-rests would be locked to prevent involuntarymovement. May I add that either-way facing seats would also be useful ifpassengers wished to converse or play cards ? Birmingham, 2. . PETER F. WRIGHT. Stall Warning ON page 280 of Flight for March 9th a description is given ofa simple stall-warning device, the action of which is based on the effect of dynamic air pressure on a "pressure-plate." I feel that it should be pointed out that devices of this kind—the common, fallacious A.S.I, included—may be potentially dangerous so far as stall-warning is concerned. The stall of an aerofoil depends solely upon its angle of incidence, and not upon the velocity of flight. Most stalling and spinning incidents happen when the critical incidence is inadvert- ently exceeded during a turn—for instance, when turning in for the approach-glide to land. In a turn, the stalling speed is sub- stantially higher than that in straight flight, and a device dependent on dynamic air pressure would not register a warning. A stall-warning indicator must either be related to the aero- dynamic incidence of the wing, i.e., must refer to the direction of the undisturbed airflow ("wind-vane" type) or to the change in airflow over the wing (which is the origin of the stalling phenomena). Dunstable, Beds. A. R. WEYL, A.F.R.Ae.S. Airspeed DesignationsI GREET with much approval the "new-look" Flight. The newstyle makes for much easier reading, and provides far better presentation of photographs. However, my real reason of writing is to make some commentson the very useful Airspeed article (February 23rd), particularly as regards the Oxford. In the descriptive paragraphs on theOxford you quote various mark numbers which were generally accepted during the War and thereafter. However, I should liketo quote the following, to which I am indebted to the Airspeed Company. "Airspeed AS. 10 Oxford Marks 3 and 4 were both projects.The Mk 3 reached the mock-up stage. It was designed to use the Cheetah 15 engine, and to carry increased equipment in order totake advantage of the increased power, and at the same time re- arranged to take advantage of the forward movement of the e.g.,caused by ths use of heavier engines. The mock-up included an improved view for the pilots; easier access to the pilots' seats andredesigned instrument-panel lighting; a modernized electrical supply panel; a re-arranged cabin, with more legroom attainableby deleting the bomb-bay; W/T. position with installations imme- diately behind the pilot; and navigator's position with chart board,drift recorder, etc., at the rear of the cabin. The type was to be used as a navigational trainer. The Mk 4 was to have been a pilot-training version of the Mk 3." From the above you will observe differences from your text.Actually, the Oxford with Cheetah 15 engines (P. 1864—a photo- graph of which appears on page 225, captioned wrongly as a Mk 5)was an Oxford Mk 2 experimental, being a testbed for the Mk 3 engine installation. Similarly, the Gipsy-Queen-engined version(AS.504) was an Oxford Mk 2 experimental. On checking further, I see on page 228 that part of what I sayabove is borne out. However, you list the Cheetah 15 version as being a Mk 2 experimental, but list the same machine againas Mk 3 ! It is all, I am afraid, a little confusing. Whilst still on the subject of Oxfords, I was delighted to seethe photograph of the twin-fin Oxford. I have made exhaustive enquiries for photographs of this machine, but have had no success. To go a little deeper, this time into the Ambassador's history,it may be of interest to note that the design number AS. 14 had two variations as follows : 14A Ambassador project: twin fins and rudders; retractable tricycle undercarriage; two 920 h.p. BristolPegasus ioc. 14B Ambassador project: single fin and rudder; retractable tailwheel undercarriage; two 920 h.p. Bristol Pegasusioc. A mock-up of the AS.14B was built. Finally, I should like to say how much I appreciate these"history" articles, as they always provide that extra bit of informa- tion for which one is looking. Grimsby, Lines. P. H. T. GREEN. [The Airspeed Company writes : "One of the curious thingsabout any form of recorded history is that it can never, never be entirely correct. Memories are faulty and records are misleadingwhen taken from their contexts. The late Mr. George Orwell showed us, in his Nineteen-Eighty-Four, how records could evenbe deliberately falsified by ingenious people. "We can take some of the blame for the minor, but certainlynot deliberate, errors which have somehow crept into the Airspeed type descriptions and designation list, since we provided much ofthe information and checked the original form of the list. "We failed, for instance, to spot the mention of Cheetah IXsin relation to the Oxford series. In fact, no Oxford was fitted with this mark of Cheetah, which, unlike the Cheetah X, had nohydraulic pump. The Oxford III proper never got beyond the project stage, but, as its main feature was the use of Cheetah XVengines and constant-speed airscrews, the version of the Oxford II, so experimentally equipped, tended later to be referred to asthe Mark III type; hence the nominal error. In the text on page 225 the Oxford IV (which was a projected crew-training versionof the Oxford III) has somehow got itself fitted with Gipsy Six engines, and the caption, at the foot of the same page, describesthe Oxford II with Cheetah XVs and Rotol airscrews as a Wasp- engined Oxford V. "Your correspondent's suggestion that there was a tricycleundercarriage version of the AS-14 cannot be confirmed by any of the members of the staff who were then with the firm. It seems,on the face of it, to be unlikely, since the tricycle idea was not, at that time, seen even as a proverbial glint in any designer's eye."] Early Days of Aircraft Radio FROM your report of the Ninth Brancker Memorial Lecture,I was disappointed to see that Mr. Masefield's valuable references to the history of civil aviation development included no details of the parallel development of wireless communication and navigational aids without which there could have been no civil aviation as we know it today. I had the good fortune to live through some of those early years as an Air Ministry wireless officer at the Croydon airport, and I think it must always stand to the great credit of the Marconi Company that their faith in the future of civil aviation, in its dependence upon wireless aids and in their ability to develop those aids was so strong that they were "in" from the very start at Cricklewood and Hounslow and went doggedly on as civil aviation flickered into and out of existence. Experimenting and developing, scrapping and replacing, installing and servicing, bonding and screening—the first company to possess its own experimental aircraft—here was private enter- prise at its best, for their reward could have been nothing but loss. The full story would warrant a lecture of its own, but those famous pioneers so deservedly named by Mr. Masefield are incomplete without such additions as J. M. Furnival, H. C. Van de Velde, A. W. Whistlecroft, H. T. Sayer, and C. J. Strother, all of the Marconi Company and some, I believe, still in high office with them today. F. S, Mockford, who was in charge of the Air Ministry wireless services at Croydon in my day and had started at Hounslow in 1919, is now commercial manager of the Marconi Company. L. A. Sweny, now the company's Aeronautical Division manager, was with us, too, but even earlier was with that very first airline, Aircraft Transport and Travel, Ltd. Another "Airco" wireless man was B. N. MacLarty, now deputy engineer-in-chief of Marconi's. Pioneering by a Ministry is less credit-worthy, for it is not their own money they hazard, but let us not forget the work of the Air Ministry Signals Branch and, in particular, of their first "visionary," Noel Hamilton. Let us remember the world's first civil aviation radio station specially designed for the purpose to the A;r Ministry's requirements by P. P. Eckersley, then of the Marconi Company, but later to become famous as the B.B.C.'s chief engineer. Sudbury, Suffolk. ' A. J. K. JANAWAY.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
