FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1957
1957 - 0161.PDF
FLIGHT,! February 1957 163 CORRESPONDENCE . . . make up our export business are based on techniques which havebeen fully understood for many years, and which were within the (limited) capacity of our industry to develop. Admittedly theComet, Viscount and Britannia have something quite new in the way of airline powerplants (achieved by very considerable publicexpenditure on civil engines, a new doctrine), but none of our export machines involves aerodynamic, structural or engineeringresearch on the scale needed for supersonic aircraft. I do not believe that our industry could have achieved success with suchmachines as the DC-8 or the "century-series" fighters—at least, not within a time-scale calculated to give an even chance ofcommercial success. All that the "three hundred million dollar argument" tells usis that, provided we stick to what we can cope with, we can make aeroplanes which are at least as good as those of any othercountry, within a competitive time scale and for a competitive price. (A vital contributing factor is that certain of our companiesenjoy the respect and trust of their customers; selling aeroplanes is a business in which success hinges largely on past performance.) But the fact that one aspect of our industry is at present healthyis no answer to a critic who argues that another aspect is ailing. And we are very definitely ailing in many of the most vitaldepartments. We have very few supersonic aeroplanes (two F.D.2s and two P-ls, to be precise); we have grossly under-estimated the effort required to develop guided weapons; we have little experience of big rocket motors—no doubt owing to theabsence of anything to put them in; our expenditure on research equipment has been pitifully small, by any standard; and, to quoteMr. W. E. W. Petter, we are still spreading our available resources too thinly, with "too many channels for too little water." These facts are not repeated here for spite; they are mostunpalatable. But they are too often glossed over with three- hundred-million-dollar arguments in a manner which createsdespair among all true friends of our industry. There is no need to feel ashamed of our record. We should not need to makeexcuses and no country is perfect. Sir Arnold points out that we had to build houses to replace those destroyed in World War 2, thus diverting effort from, inter alia, aeroplanes. How, then, doeshe explain the fact that Russia, almost entirely shattered by the largest armies the world has yet seen, has nevertheless been ableto rise from aeronautical mediocrity to a position which may well earn her the title of the world's premier air power? As far asI am aware, Russia has enjoyed nothing that has been denied to us; and it is certain that she was technologically several yearsbehind us in 1945. (I have yet, incidentally, to meet the man who would claim that 100,000 men could produce an efficient andusable new aircraft design more quickly than could 1,000.) As far as I am concerned there must be a lot of honest thoughtapplied to our overall aeronautical scene. Half the picture— which can broadly be lumped under the headings of "simpleaeroplanes" and "engines"—is bright and prosperous. The other half—the part which gives us our weapons and export productsof a decade hence—appears to be giving a poor return for the severely limited expenditure which we can afford, and to be thecause of a wholly unreasonable number of personal white hairs and ulcers. Until we can embark on the design of an advancedtransport or weapon system with certainty of success and certainty of on-time delivery, I feel it is inappropriate that we should crowover the fine achievements of what might be termed the "easy" half of the industry. London, W.I. TECHNICIAN. Misplaced HangarsY OUR excellent magazine contains a small error in the report(page 62, January 11) on the closing of the Royal Air Force staging post at Mauripur. The statement that airship hangars are still standing at thisbase is incorrect. I myself spent two years in the Movements Section at Mauripur and I assure you that the hangars in questionare on the boundaries of the present International Airport. I believe they are at present used as a store. The distance betweenMauripur and Karachi civil is nearly twelve miles, and they are on opposite sides of the city. London, S.W.17. M. J. PEARSON. [We thank our correspondent for the correction; the originalinformation was from an official source—Ed.] ONE MORE FOR THE FARMER NOW undergoing certification flight trials in the U.S.A. is theSnow S-2 agricultural aircraft, a low-wing monoplane powered by a 220 h.p. Continental engine. It is the productionversion of the S-l prototype, designed and built by Leland Snow, which first flew in 1953. First flight of the S-2 took place inAugust 1956. The wing section used on both machines, a highly camberedaerofoil with considerable droop at the trailing edge, was chosen to give the maximum downwash and turbulence. With thespreader outlet located only six inches below the wing trailing edge, the S-l's swath was found to be formed "almost imme-diately behind the aircraft, rather than several hundred feet to the rear." Further details of the S-l and S-2 aircraft, as given by thedesigner, are as follows: "The control system in both the S-l and S-2 is frictionless andall surfaces are aerodynamicaUy balanced to reduce pilot fatigue. The amount of longitudinal stability incorporated was enough togive the pilot sufficient feel but not enough to create heavy stick- loads in pull-ups. The lateral stability of the S-l was a littlemore than necessary so l\ deg less dihedral was used in the S-2. "The first consideration in the design of the two aircraft wasthat of pilot safety. Unequalled pilot visibility in all directions will go a long way toward eliminating collisions with wire, trees,standpipes and other airplanes. The high overall performance and wing-section used make the airplane virtually stall-proof.The light stick-loads reduce pilot fatigue and keep him more alert. The low operating speed and high manoeuvrability allow a greatermargin of error in judging pull-ups over obstacles. The hopper location (behind the cockpit) protects the pilot from toxicmaterials. Wire-cutters are installed on the landing gear and a steel cable protects the rudder and fin. "If the pilot goes ahead and gets into trouble anyway, he'sgot a steel-tube structure stronger than either a Stearman or BT-13 structure to keep the cockpit section intact. The longeronsare ljin chrome-moly tubing. For fire prevention the S-2 utilizes an all-metal construction with gas tanks in wings, andhas no electrical system. The seat is mounted so as to place the pilot above the bulk of the load. A 20g overturn structure islocated inside the headrest. "The S-2 fuselage is constructed of welded steel tubing coveredwith a removable metal skin. All steel structures are metalized with zinc to eliminate corrosion, and all dural parts are alodizedand chromated. The airframe is stressed for a Pratt and Whitney engine. "The hopper is within easy reach of a loader on the ground,has no baffles or braces to interfere with loading, has a 36 cu ft (1,500 lb) capacity, and a 36in x 33in loading door. Conversionfrom dusting to spraying (180 gal tank) can be made by two men in five minutes. "Specifications and performance data include the following:span, 38ft; wing area, 285 sq ft; empty weight, 1,943 lb; design gross weight, 3,600 lb; stalling speed (empty), 35 m.p.h., (at grossweight), 49 m.p.h.; cruising speed (empty), 100 m.p.h., (at gross weight), 90 m.p.h." FORTHCOMING EVENTS Feb. 2. British Interplanetary Society: "Accelerations in Flight," by W/C. F. Latham. Feb. 5. Aviation Forum: "Catering on Aircraft" by W. Michel. Feb. 6. Kronfeld Club: "Dis-orientation in the Air," by Dr. G. M. Jones. Feb. 7. R.Ae.S.: Main Lecture, at Halton, "Synthetic Training Methods in Aviation," by W. Makinson. Feb. 11. Institute of Transport: Brancker Memorial Lecture: "Com- petitive Economics of Pure-jet v. Turboprop Aircraft," by Marshal of the Royal Air Force Lord Douglas of Kirtleside, G.C.B., M.C., D.F.C., M.lnst.T. Feb. 12. Joint R.Ae.S. and Helicopter Association Lecture: "Vibra- tion Problems Associated with the Helicopter," by O. L. L. Fitzwilliams, A.F.R.Ae.S. Feb. 13. R.Ae.S.: Graduates and Students Section: "The Area Rule," by W. T. Lord. Feb. 13. Kronfeld Club: Czechoslovakian films. Feb. 14. R.Ae.S.: Main Lecture: "The Fairey Delta," by R. L. Lickley and P. Twiss. Feb. 15. Institute of Navigation: "Navigation and Traffic Control Over the North Atlantic," by D. 0. Fraser. Feb. 16. British Interplanetary Society: Chemical Demonstration by Dr. J. Diederichsen. Feb. 26. R.Ae.S.: Section Lecture: "Recent Advances in the Design of Aircraft Tyres and Brakes," by H. W. Trevoskis, A.F.R.Ae.S. Mar. 7. R.Ae.S.: Tenth Louis Bleriot Lecture: "New Methods in Aircraft Production," by M. Bad re, production director of Sud Aviation. May 24- June 2. Paris Aero Show, Le Bourget. Sept. 2-8. S.B.A.C. Show, Farnborough. -."••: R.Ae.S. Branch Fixtures (to Feb. IS) Feb. 5, Boscombe Down, "Human Limitations of High Performance Flight," by G/C. W. K. Stewart. Feb. 6, Luton, "Production of Light Alloy Forgings," by J. Crowther. Feb. 13, Leicester, "Flight Develop- ment of Modern Prototype Aircraft," by C. F. Bethwaite. Feb. 15, Brough, Annual Dinner and Dance.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
