FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1955
1955 - 1582.PDF
and AIRCRAFT ENGINEER First Aeronautical Weekly in the World Founded 1909 No. 2441 Vol. 68. FRIDAY, 4 NOVEMBER 1955 EDITOR MAURICE A. SMITH, D.F.C. and Bar ASSOCIATE EDITOR H. F. KING, M.B.E. TECHNICAL EDITOR W. T. GUNSTON ART EDITOR JOHN YOXALL Editorial, Advertising and Publishing Offices: DORSET HOUSE, STAMFORD STREET, LONDON, S.E.1. Telegrams, Flightpres, Sedist, London. Telephone, Waterloo 3333 (60 lines). Branch Offices: COVENTRY 8-10, Corporation Street. Telegrams, Autocar, Coventry. Telephone, Coventry 5210. BIRMINGHAM, 2 King Edward House, New Street. Telegrams, Autopress, Birmingham. Telephone, Midland 7191 (7 lines). MANCHESTER, 3 260, Deansgate. Telegrams, Iliffe, Manchester. Telephone, Blackfriars 4412 (3 lines). Deansgate 3595 (2 lines). GLASGOW, C.2. 26b, Renfield Street. Telegrams, Iliffe, Glasgow. Telephone, Central 1265 (2 lines). SUBSCRIPTION RATES Home and Overseas: Twelve months £4 10s. U.S.A. and Canada, $14.00. IN THIS ISSUE : Ceremony at Benson - 702 Otters in the Philippines 705 Tug and Glider ... 707 Coast-to-Coast by 707 - 709 Helicopter Autopilot - 710 Lockheed Electro - - - 712 Fair Weather or Foul - 717 Midlands Survey - - - 718 Heron in Full Feather - 720 Aero Commander Evolu- tion ------ 721 P.R. Mosquitoes Work Again 728 The Higher CommandN OTHING but satisfaction can be felt at the two key appointments announced last week: Sir William Dickson to be independent chairman of the Chiefs of Staff Committee; Sir Dermot Boyle to succeed him as Chief of the Air Staff. The creation of Sir William's new post, though only recently decided, has been advocated for some years, principally by Field Marshal Lord Montgomery, and follows the examples of the United States, Canada and France. There will be little disagreement with the military correspondent of the Daily Telegraph that in these days it is fitting that the first incumbent of the appointment should be an airman—an airman, it might be added, who has served not only with the Royal Naval Air Service but with R.A.F. squadrons in the field, as a Farnborough test pilot, as commander of the Desert Air Force in Italy, and latterly in the very highest appointment and rank the Service can bestow. Sir Dermot will take over without Air Council experience but with an excellent record and reputation as a practical airman and leader. That he has himself flown a Canberra throughout a 24,000-mile Latin-American tour is not the least of his qualifications. P.I versus F-104T HE spotlight is on two contenders—an American and a British fighter destined for champion status in the same class but amazingly contrasted in weight and build. So much interest and importance attaches to both that some commentary is due. On our right, then, the English Electric P.I at x tons. On our left, the Lockheed F-104, at x-y tons. Hardly a precise weighing-in, but under the Gilbert and Sullivan rules now applying, the nearest possible. Certainly the value of y is considerable (indeed, the F-104 has occasionally been called a light fighter), and in physique the pair diverge even more remarkably. Whereas the F-104 is credited with a 22-foot wing resembling a trapezoidal razor blade, the P.I design is based upon the most heavily swept surfaces on any fighter extant—and is of generous area. We have heard it suggested that although the F-104 might in the ultimate prove the faster machine (though this is by no means certain) it charges through Mach 1 like a bull. The P.I, on the other hand, handles with lamb-like docility through the range M=0.9-l.l. This in itself is a consideration of major consequence, for bombers for some years hence will be over target at M = 0.9-1; and, though the F-104 was originally announced as an air superiority fighter (that is, one designed to clear the air of die enemy and to surpass the performance of any type of fighter which he could put up), it has lately been announced that the U.S.A.F.'s Air Defense Command is planning to use the type as its inner-defence intercepter. A two-seat version already exists and a fighter/bomber development is supposedly on the stocks. If available reports can be credited (for photographs remairj immured in the Pentagon after eighteen months of air-testing and the completion of several prototypes), the F-104 fuselage is of needle-nosed streamline form, whereas the body of the P.I has all the shapeliness of a suitcase. As for area rule, it is questionable whether the Lockheed designers were aware of, or even cared about, its benefits; and it may yet be proved that the P.I type of fuselage is one of the best compromises between form and function. The matter of power plant is simply stated: the F-104 has one reheat Sapphire and the P.I has two. It is this fact which has caused more surprised comment and inquiry than any other, for it is widely implied that to do a similar job the British machine needs twice as much power as the American. Here comparison becomes an even more delicate process, involving armament in particular. There is good reason to suppose that the P.I should have the advantage in this respect, for its size and ground clearance should admit heavier and more varied loads of guns, R.P.s, missiles and associated fire-control gear. All of which considerations are symptomatic of the continuing lack of unanimity among weapons-conceivers and designers.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
