FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1953
1953 - 0038.PDF
36 FLIGHT DISCUSSING PRODUCTION Papers Presented at the Conference Organized by the Institution of Production Engineers t I T is towards speeding the mass-production of our estab lished designs rather than in developing new aircraft that the attention of the industry is principally focused at the present time. The Institution of Production Engineers have rendered constructors a signal service by their organiza tion of a production conference, which, held shortly before Christmas, was very well attended and has admirably served its purpose—the spreading of ideas for facilitating aircraft construction. All aircraft, whether military or civil, are today built against time to a degree never before experienced in time of peace. This was reflected in every paper presented at the conference. The six speakers were excellently chosen as being representative of each branch of a number of types of manufacturer. It was, perhaps, surprising that so much time was spent in the discussion of methods of initiating design and production from the point of view of organization. Without wishing to belittle the fundamental influence which plant organization has upon ultimate production efficiency, we would have been glad to see more attention paid to the relative merits of the most advanced methods of construction —about which comparatively little was said. We appreciate that, in comparison with his transatlantic opposite number, the aircraft manufacturer in this country cannot afford so much in the way of capital expenditure. Again, in many cases he cannot order the most advanced types of machine tool, heat-treatment plant, or even material, with any hope of early delivery, or even of delivery at all. But there are radically new methods—Mr. R. W. Walker of Glosters listed some at the end of his paper—about which many in British industry have been able to form opinions. Some of these methods involve vast expenditure on tooling and are of no advantage unless really long production-runs are possible. But such production is expected in many British factories and it appears that new methods could be employed with considerable savings in time, money or material. We would welcome a further analysis of what can be achieved in this direction. The conference was opened by Brigadier A. R. W. Low, C.B.E., D.S.O., M.P., Parliamentary Secretary, Ministry of Supply. He said that the British aircraft industry had an unrivalled reputation for quality, but not for early production. In competition with the world, he said, we had a clear lead in prototypes—military and civil. "All of us want to see that lead maintained," he continued, "but how many of us are satisfied that, even with the full main tenance of our lead in research, we can maintain it in future production." Brigadier Low named three essential factors—a wider under standing of the problems of production, a steady flow of produc tion through the arrangement of delivery dates and a measure of stability within the industry. "Competition there will certainly be from overseas," he went on. "There is no reason today to fear competition in quality or cost. The danger is in competition in the date of delivery. It is for you to meet that challenge, as for us in the Government and in Government departments to do what we can to help you and provide conditions in which you can be successful." R. W. WALKER'S PAPER THE first lecture, by R. W. Walker, F.R.Ae.S., chief designer, -*- Gloster Aircraft Co., Ltd., bore the title Designing for Pro duction andj as might be expected from his company's associations the lecturer dealt entirely with the production of fighters. Mr. Walker was clearly no Canute trying to push back the tide: at the outset he said, "we must accept complexity in the interests of survival." He dwelt at great length upon the consequences of the demands for increased performance in fighter aircraft and discussed the effects on the airframe of the introduction of the great range of complex equipment which now had to be carried. He went on to sketch a suggested design organization under the headings of project development, main design office, stress office, aerodynamics department and design office planning. The first- named department worked best if initial layouts were centralized in the hands of a number of selected senior draughtsmen. A far- reaching point occurring in the "main design office" section was that there should not be an experimental drawing office to design the prototype and a production office to "productionize" it. The only profitable course was to design for production from the outset as fully as economically possible. Mr. Walker liked his stressmen to feel they were part of the general production plan by being given a programme linked with that for the drawing office and by encouragement to discuss design in the early scheme stages. In the stress department it was necessary to have a number of mathe matical specialists, but a good department could be built up by transferring young designers from the drawing office, preferably with works experience, who had a flair for calculations. A fairly new method of mould lofting was the use of Astrofoil and contact printing, to which Mr. Walker gave much attention. After discussing the place of the research and development department, the lecturer turned to co-ordination of the design and production sides of the company. The time had gone when we could afford to concentrate entirely on the manufacture of prototypes, irrespective of their future, and so run the risk of extensive redesigning in order to make them readily producible. At the outset of the Javelin programme it was decided to form a permanent Design Production Committee, although it should not be imagined that such collaboration was always conducted in an atmosphere of calm and sweet agreement. The scheme worked and had produced excellent results. The policy of the company to build prototypes in the production shops brought the pre- production departments in close touch with the aircraft from the outset. Through this active participation interest and enthusiasm were displayed throughout prototype building and thereafter. Mr. Walker's treatment of the physical design of the aircraft was rather brief compared with his remarks on planning. In the initial project stage it was advisable to build in a considerable amount of reserve, knowing that the weight, the power and the military load would surely increase during development. After discussing the breakdown of the structure into sub-assemblies came the subject of jointing; the lecturer confined his remarks here to the use of riveting, which is almost universally used by his company. In discussing the choice of materials to be used it became evident that in recent years sizes of forgings had tended to increase and the use of the larger forgings could be limited by manufacturing facilities. [Great importance is being attached in the United States to the manufacture of presses of the largest possible size.—ED.1 Detailed discussion of "systems and instal lations" for modern fighters was obviously impracticable, but it was noteworthy that they were responsible for more drawing- office time than the design of the structure itself. In any case, it was customary to omit operational equipment from the first prototype in order to commence handling and performance trials as early as possible. Mr. Walker also discussed mock-ups and structural testing and pointed out that the greater the accuracy of a mock-up the more valuable it was. If production of the type had been decided upon, it was also advantageous to have an additional metal mock-up made from prototype tools. A review of methods to be adopted in the presentation of drawings was then followed by a discussion of the actual design changes demanded by mass production. This was in effect an extension of the prototype drawings. Some items formerly made by hand tools, such as access doors, would have to be mass- produced by press tools, the more accurate contour control thereby conferred being demanded to ensure consistency in handling characteristics of squadron aircraft. During prototype construction the Air Staff and M.o.S. would have issued a stream of new requirements to improve the aircraft operationally. It was in adapting these to the structure that the bulk of drawing-office time was taken in productionizing the drawings. In conclusion, Mr. Walker said that the delta configuration brought its own peculiar problems of stressing and structural design, but these were perhaps less formidable than those applying to more conventional swept wings. The use of large presses, integral construction, machined contours and the development of new materials were part of a new philosophy which might have a big effect on aircraft designs of the future. DR. RUSSELL'S PAPER THE second speaker was Dr. A. E. Russell, B.Sc, F.R.Ae^S., *- F.I.Ae.S., director and chief designer, Aircraft Division, Bristol Aeroplane Co., Ltd. Although his paper was originally given the same title as that of Mr. Walker, Dr. Russell added a conditioning clause : what he really meant was "designing for production for sale." He referred principally to large civil aircraft, of which the Britannia was clearly foremost in his mind. In designing such aircraft one could be sure that if there were any defects anywhere they would undoubtedly come to light. We should therefore take all possible steps to eliminate trouble at the least embarrassing stage, namely, at the outset. The lecturer began his paper by examining the effects of the call for low structure-weight and high-surface finish. Dealing with the
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
