FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1953
1953 - 0026.PDF
2h FLIGHT 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. The F.E.2 Series FromAICdre. Sir Vernon Brown, C.B., O.B.E., R.A.F. (Retd.). I N his excellent article in your December 12th issue, Mr. Bruce has erred in saying that the nearest approach to a real attack on a Zeppelin was on March 18th, 1918, when 2nd Lt. Morris and 2nd Lt. Lindford failed to achieve any visible result In the spring or early summer of 1917, Lt Holder in a FE.2B shared with Lt. Saundby (now Sir Robert) in, I think, a D.H.2 the destruction of the Leiston Zeppelin. Both were stationed at Orfordness and the action took place in the early dawn. Each received the Military Cross. London, W.C.i. VERNON BROWN. T HANK you for the most interesting series entitled " Historic Military Aircraft." With reference to the article on the F.E.2 series you may be interested to hear of an earlier attack on a German Zeppelin, an account of which appeared in the September 1951 issue of the East Anglian Magazine. On the night of June 16th-17th, 1917, the L.48 (according to the article) was driven away from Harwich and engaged by anti aircraft fire to the north of Felixstowe. An R.F.C. biplane took off from Orfordness Aerodrome, apparently without permission, and shot the Zeppelin down, where she crashed in flames near Theberton, in Suffolk. The whole of the crew, sixteen in all, were killed, or died later, and were buried in the local churchyard. There is some doubt as to on whom the credit should be placed for the destruction of the enemy raider as there were four different awards for bringing down a Zeppelin soon afterwards. A framed record of the incident, hanging in Theberton Church, claims that the L.48 was brought down by a pilot of No. 37 Squadron, R.F.C. After the wreckage had lain for two weeks the airship was dis mantled by the R.N.A.S. In a letter which appeared in a later issue of the East Anglian Magazine it was stated that the aircraft concerned was an F.E.2. It was the first one of its type to be made in Ipswich, at Ransomes, Sims and JefTeries Ltd. They have a drawing (which was repro duced) by Leonard R. Squirrell. The aircraft appears to be an F.E.2B without the small forward wheel and there are a pilot and observer in the cockpits. The serial number appears to be B.401. Clacton-on-Sea, Essex. C. BROWN. Was it the B.A.T. ? M AY I express my appreciation of your truly excellent new series of "historic military aircraft" articles and also of the new "Aircraft Intelligence" feature? Some more articles of his torical nature like the recent "Light Fighters" would also be most welcome. In connection with this article Mr. Bruce's letter on page 680 of the November 28th issue of Flight recalled a forgotten incident to mind. In, as far as I can remember, late 1938 or early 1939 a flying film was being shown at the then Orpheum Cinema, Golders Green. As a schoolboy enthusiast I went to see this film, ihe title of which I unfortunately forget. However, on display in the cinema car park was a small radial-engined biplane. I believe that the colour was dark green overall. On the fuselage sides were the large letters B.A.T. in white, the full height of the tapering fuselage. As far as I can recall, the fuselage was of circular section, ply-covered. I gather that the machine may have been the B.A.T. Bantam. I know that I inquired at the cinema at the time for particulars but they apparently knew nothing of the history of the aircraft or its owner. The engine, I think I am right in saying, was a seven-cylinder radial and the wings were of parallel chord and were unstaggered. This description, from memory, seems to agree with illustrations which I possess but to which I have no access for the time being. South Mimms, Herts. P. M. H. LEWIS. Air Displays and the North A COMPLAINT made by Lord De LTsle and Dudley in a *»- recent speech was of a shortage of recruits (15-17I) from the North and Midlands. May I, as a member of the Air Training Corps and a Northerner, suggest a remedy? The Northern and Midlands public should be offered better attractions to the world of aviation. We should be taken into con sideration when choosing the locality of the big air shows— S.B.A.C. Displays and R.A.F. reviews, for example. Such meet ings could be held at, say, Leeds or Newcastle. The Southerner has every opportunity to view, at Farnborough, the products of the S.B.A.C. and the equipment of the R.A.F. We in the North, unfortunately, have to make do with Battle of Britain displays which are usually far from encouraging to prospec tive members of the R.A.F. Coronation year offers to the R.A.F. a golden opportunity to show the public its first line of defence. If there is to be a review, let us hope then that the organizers will take into consideration the above situation. Middlesbrough. A.T.C. [It was with this aspect in mind that the National Air Races and Display were held at Newcastle last summer. The S.S.A.F.A. likewise makes a point of holding its air displays at various provincial centres.—ED.] Veteran Transports THE very-well-informed letter by John Stroud in your issue of October 31st reminds me of another well-known old de Havil- land aircraft, the D.H.6 G-EAUT, which was operated in 1920, and for many years after, by Blackpool Air Services, and was a familiar object to the pleasure flyers of those days around the North Wales, Lancashire, and Cumberland Coast. It operated from Blackpool, Morecambe and other seaside towns on charter, and when pleasure flying was undertaken during the holiday seasons. In 1947 Blackpool Air Services was formed into the Air Naviga tion and Trading Co., Ltd., but the company still strongly upheld the pleasure-flying policy and it may be of interest to note that they still have in their fleet the only remaining D.H.84S on the British Register, G.ACIT and G-ADDI, which are in regular use and in condition that would do credit to many post-war aircraft. These fine old Dragons are still a familiar sight to thousands of Blackpool holiday-makers, and they are equally familiar to the crofters on some of the remote islands of the Hebrides, where they operate on demand to carry trawler replacement crews from Fleet wood. Looking through the journey log-books of these aircraft recently I saw the names of several famous pilots who, I am sure, will remember the D.H.84 with more than a little affection. A.N.T. claim that there is no twin-engined replacement for the Dragon available in this country and that so long as airframe spares can be economically manufactured they will have work for the Dragons to do. It would be interesting to hear of other really old aircraft which are still doing public transport service. Carlisle. ARTHUR DRINKWATER. Feasible Flying Saucers IN tracing the possible generic development of a flying saucer, we must first evaluate from observations of its flying charac teristics. Capabilities include an ability to hover, to move forward, sideways or vertically upwards. There is only one type of aero dynamic design which possesses these characteristics—the helicopter/Autogiro type. The original Autogiro had blades which were free to rotate and acted as a moving aerofoil. The next step was to increase the efficiency of the lifting vanes—this was done in two ways, firstly by increasing the number of blades and, secondly, by applying power to the blades and thus increasing the speed. However, the size and shape of the blades depend on the power available from the engine. A limiting factor is also the speed of rotation of the blades. If the blade speed exceeds the speed of sound with orthodox aerofoil sections, the blades tend to "slip" in the air. However, if a supersonic section were used, the speed of rotation could be increased. With the present-day helicopters we have a rotating wing above an orthodox fuselage. If we wish to turn a modern helicopter we have to swing the fuselage by means of a servo propeller so that the fuselage will proceed axially along the line of flight. This requires a time-lag—as to proceed in a direction at right angles to the axis of the fuselage would be impracticable, due to high profile-drag—unless the craft presented the same profile from any point at right angles to its vertical axis. The present layout of the helicopter is analogous .to the early days of orthodox aircraft, i.e., the positioning of wings on struts above and away from the fuselage. The closest analogy is a parasol-wing aircraft. The trend has been a low-wing monoplane with adequate streamlining. If we now bring these conclusions forward to visualize the possible trend of future development and also postulate a source
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
