FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1961
1961 - 0589.PDF
GHTA May 1961 Oorrespondence f. , £(///cr of "Flight" is not necessarily in agreement with the viewsg'.nressed by correspondents in these columns. Names and addresses of K ,ters, not for publication in detail, must in all cases accompany letters. How Dense is Dense ? THE table on page 455 of your April 6 issue attracted my atten-: tion. It seems to me to point up once again the fallacy of the oppressive restrictions placed on any civil aviation other than thea; lines by the Ministry of Aviation. Rules that bar others from airports, and from various parts of the airspace, must be presumedUi be intended to keep aircraft from colliding. If this premise is correct, then the primary factor to be considered is traffic density—how many aircraft of all types are trying to use the same piece of airspace at the same time. Your table has served as the basis for a table of my own com-position, which follows. It should be obvious that the hazard implied by the various MoA restrictions doesn't even begin to existin the U.K. Either that is true, or the American philosophy is such that the public is being subjected to an almost continuous rain ofaircraft wreckage and bodies. Airport Heathrow Souchend Gatwick Manchester FerryfieldBlackpool Birmingham Luton Prestwick Stansted Totalmove- ments146,506 69,991 35,848 34.029 33,71632,460 31,190 29,23224,671 24,049 Comparable US airportSacramento, Calif Flint, Mich Brownsville, Tex Hilo, Hawaii Hilo, HawaiiMuslcegon, Mich Muskegon, Mich Pendleton, OreWheeling, W Va Wheeling, W Va Totalmove- ments'147,309 70,086 37,644 34,548 34,54832,534 32,534 29,33524,822 24,822 US rankf 55 165 216 217 217 218 218 219 222 222 • For calendar year I960 t Among 229 control towers operated by FAA Washington, DC MAX KARANT Vice-President, AOPA RAF and Advisory Direct RoutesF LYING regular schedules on ADR 160 and having experiencednumerous near-misses and recently one very near-miss I should like to draw readers' attention to an interview I had with the RAF.This concerned a near-miss which would have been fatal if visibility had not been two to three miles as both aircraft were "head on" atthe same height. 1 learned at the interview that the RAF pilot i/c of ihe aircraft concerned with mine knew about ADRs but as theRAF neither print them on their maps nor officially recognize them he was content to fly down the ADR, at a height, I may add, thatwas not quandrantal, in IMC. That this state of control, or lack of it, should continue to existis unpardonable and either the RAF should recognize an ADR or the MoA make them Airways before a fatal accident occurs. Iunderstand the MoA are considering an Airway to run to the West of ADR 160 but no doubt they will not act until a fatal accidentoccurs. Like your recent Editorial I agree that a genuine near-miss incident should be classed as an accident and the appropriateaction taken immediately. Jersey, CI AIRLINE CAPTAIN The Space Race A LTHOUGH in light of the recent outstanding Soviet spaceii achievement this may not be the most propitious moment to offer additions to the remarks made in my article "The Space Race"Might, March 16), I feel that Mr Smith's comments (Corre- spondence, March 30) justify some brief rejoinder. Mr Smith's views and my own do not differ greatly in the main,but only in detail. I do not, however, agree with the proposition that instrumentation and telemetry cannot be fully exploited untilbooster "bridge" has been crossed. The scientific purpose in ;-ace is to acquire a given amount of data, the more the better.horn an abstract scientific viewpoint, therefore, the size of the booster used in any experiment is really inconsequential, provideduiat the desired information is obtained. And if, as I contend, the ! S possesses instrumentation and telemetry equipment of a muchwer unit weight than does the Soviet Union, it is perfectly possible : America to acquire more data per flight than can the Russians,•^spective of the size of the boosters involved. ' or example, the unit size of batteries ordinarily used in aircraftappreciably larger than that of the batteries which the US now ploys in her satellites. Yet the smaller "space" batteries have'ormance identical to the larger, less efficient aircraft counter- 's- If the Russians were behind in the electronics field and hadutilize aircraft batteries, they would accordingly lose a percentage 'he payload which might otherwise contain scientific instru-nation. A point to remember is that the Soviet ICBM, designed exactly the same mission as the Atlas/Titan missiles, is nearly-e as heavy as the American equivalents. Why, except for the that Russian equipments are heavier? 599 A second point which can be debated further is Mr Smith'sconclusion that Russia has a lead in the scientific aspect of space. In this connection, the possibility was raised that the Soviets mightactually have accumulated a wealth of data, but have not released any of it lest America close the gap. As is freely admitted by nearlyeveryone, the difference between the two countries is in booster size, nothing else. Nothing that the Soviets might release in the wayof satellite data will change the rate of development of America's big boosters. A much more likely reason for their secrecy, as has been con-tended on several occasions, is that Russia hopes, by being secretive, to let the public's imagination roam to the point where all kinds offalse rewards are credited to them. For example, many people in America have the erroneous impression that the Russians, becauseof their Venus probe, have obtained worthwhile data about the mysterious planet. Few average persons are aware that contactwith the probe was lost not many days after it was launched from a "parking" orbit. In an absolute scientific sense, the probe may havebeen an almost complete failure—at least, it probably did not gather much data about Venus. The booster and guidance systemworked, of course, but the Soviets have already proven on many occasions that they possess these facilities. Just because thebooster worked again is no reason for scientific rejoicing; nor should the world necessarily believe that the desired data wasobtained but is being concealed from America's view. Apart from Mr Smith's comments, it will be interesting to seewhether or not a premise of mine (and, of course, of many others) —that the Soviets are exploiting space for propaganda, rather thanfor scientific purposes—holds true in the case of their manned spaceflight. Maj Gagarin's name will be, and certainly it deservedlyshould be, inscribed in history alongside those of the world's great explorers. Nothing that America or anyone else will ever subse-quently do in the way of orbiting spaceflight can diminish the major's or Russia's triumph in any way. But I am slightly disap-pointed that the pilot's report is lean on technical details and heavy on the aspect that it demonstrates the superiority of onesociety over another. I may be very unaverage, but 1 much prefer the "I was scared as hell" type of post-flight report as given by theX-15 pilot during his most recent speed/altitude record run. New York DON ADAMS Parnall Panther Remembered THE letter from Mr J. M. Bruce on the Parnall Panther in yourissue of April 20 stirs my memory. In the summer of 1918, I was one of the very few RFC pilots stationed at the Isle of Grain,then under the command of Gp Capt Harry Busteed; I had been posted there because it was hoped that my very considerableflying experience on rotary-engined aeroplanes would assist the authorities in developing "land" aeroplanes in such a manner aswould enable them to alight on the sea without the usual conse- quences of much damage to the aircraft, not to mention theinjuries usually inflicted on the pilot because of the very rapid nosing-over. The nature of the research was (1) the placing of a hydrovane infront of the undercarriage (and it was really quite remarkable how such a surface with a very narrow chord inhibited any propensityto nosing-over); (2) the premeditated dropping of the landing wheels; and (3) as the requirement was, generally speaking, for ship-borne aircraft, the fitting of skids in place of wheels. To enable experimental flying to take place on dry land a wooden deck struc-ture was erected on Grain aerodrome. Now to the Parnall Panther, and my memory on some aspects is alittle hazy and on others very clear. The number of people, includ- ing Harold Bolas, attending this test flight makes me think thatthe aircraft involved was a prototype of a particular version of the Panther. It was certainly fitted with a hydrovane and landingwheels that could be dropped at the will of the pilot. I think it had an arrester hook or a tail-skid designed for the dual purpose. I wasinstructed to test the handling qualities, and it was urged upon me not to press or pull knob "A" or whatever it was that jettisoned thewheels. I found the Panther delightful to handle and I was enjoy- ing myself when I realized that something untoward had happenedby an airman on the landing deck holding two wheels up aloft, and it then dawned upon me that they were my wheels, whereupon Igingerly landed the aircraft on the wooden deck as slowly and gently as possible, and I was very relieved when it equally gentlycame to a halt with only very very minor damage to the under- carriage structure and one wing tip. As I rather expected, all the brass hats, etc, were kind enough toask me why 1 couldn't leave knob "A" alone, to which I replied with some heat that I hadn't touched the wretched thing, andluckily an examination quite conclusively proved my point. But it was fun while it lasted. If anyone can jog my memory as to details, etc, of the Panther I would be delighted. Heston, Middx - G. A. LINGHAM
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
