FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1963
1963 - 0464.PDF
442 FLIGHT International, 28 March 1261 Letters The Editor of "Flight International is not necessarily in agreement with the views expressed by correspondents in these columns. Names and addresses of writers, not for publication in detail, must in all cases accompany letters. Brief letters will have a better chance of early publication. Comet Utilization SIR,—It does my heart good to see my favourite aviation magazine reaching into the States, sufficiently well to elicit comment from Mr Haxthausen (Letters, March 7). I agree with his implication on the remarks of Sir Arthur Vere Harvey regarding the 707, but would like to answer his implied slur on the Comet. Being relegated to "secondary" routes by BOAC is merely putting it back on routes for which it was originally designed. The fact that it was able to fly London - New York surely points to the versatility of the aircraft's design, It is perhaps no wonder that United Arab find Comets unsatisfactory for North Atlantic operations. I recommend for Mr Haxthausen's perusal the eye-open ing article on MEA Comet operations Flight International, February 14). Here is an operator who has used the Comet in the role for which it was intended. Thetford, Norfolk DEREK PENNINGTON The Mignet Formula SIR,—Due to having been abroad it was only recently that I read the comments of Messrs Wills and Curtis on the Mignet formula in your issue of January 24. First, I would like to assure both of your correspondents that there was no intention in my letter of either praising or condemning the Pou du Ciel; my aim was purely to present fact. Secondly, Mr Wills states that no Mignet design has ever been fitted with ailerons. In fairness, I must qualify my original remarks that the latest two-seater Pou ended up with ailerons fitted by saying that this modification was only made after Mignet had left the company. However, the H.M.8, a parasol monoplane built by Mignet, had ailerons. Regarding control in the rolling plane I would like to reply to both Messrs Wills and Curtis together. At its simplest, Mignet designs have a cross-wind landing problem; this problem was equally apparent in the Ercoupe, an air craft which proved that a great deal of enjoyable flying can be had from aircraft with restricted controls. Statistics being what they are, it is inevitable that a situation arises such as a cross-wind precautionary or forced landing where these type of aircraft are at a disadvantage. Equally one should consider the question of becoming inverted in a gust at low height; is a half-loop or a half-Toll the answer ? The restricted- control aircraft leave no choice—these examples are purely possibilities and not necessarily a condemnation of simplified flying. Mignet was smart enough to fit cross-wind landing- gear to his H.M.350, so he has obviously appreciated the point. At a recent rally in France this problem was illustrated in my presence by a two-seater Mignet variant which was badly damaged in a cross-wind gust purely because the pilot had no answer for such a situation. Henri Mignet has continued his work and is now at the age of just on 70 setting up a new organization to produce his brainchildren commercially, such is the spirit of this dynamic personality. Many of the original problems are now better understood and a great deal of progress has been made since the ill-fated H.M.14. Despite protestation that there was nothing wrong with this aircraft there is now properly established and co-related evidence on the unhappy aerodynamic properties of this device which became so near to being the answer to the impecunious amateur's dream. Mr Curtis is right when he condemns the tinkerers who fitted all sorts of odd motors, a most valid point in any consideration of this design. There remains the problem in the H.M.14 that within the limits of the designer's recom mendations there can still be reversal of pitch control in a dive, coupled with the tendency for the aircraft to pitch smartly on to its back should the angle of attack of the front wing be increased abruptly. Once on its back the H.M.14 is stable. All this has been acknowledged by Mignet himself by the redesign of the H.M.14 in the 1936 edition of his famous book, and the modifications included in subsequent designs. Mignet supporters in France are looking forward rather than backwards. The H.M.14 was a tragedy for more reasons than one, but later types built following the results of wind- tunnel tests and professional design work show that the killer problem as it was is now overcome. Be that as it may, I would still say (as I did in my first letter in the hope of being objective) that the modern light aeroplane has now been developed into such an easy and safe device to fly that the original advantages claimed by Mignet over conventional aircraft of the time have been caught up with. This is in no way a criticism of Mignet or his formula; he had a fantastic dream and, as so many pioneers have been in aviation, he was unlucky. I am in the process of writing a factual book on the Mignet story and Messrs Wills and Curtis may be assured that they will receive copies with my compliments. Panshanger Airport, Herts H. BEST-DEVEREUX Going to the Fair SIR,—Surely recent correspondence on the cancellation of Shackleton's Sales Weekend evades the issue. The whole purpose of this weekend, as its title implies, is to sell aircraft to what must be a relatively small section of the community— not to provide a display for the general public. The Biggin Hill Air Fair, as I understand it, is an attempt to combine the function of a sales weekend with a public display. It would thus seem that if the Shackleton Weekend were held only two weeks after the Air Fair, sales and attendance at the former would be cut considerably—and after all, Shackleton are in the business to buy and sell aircraft, not to provide a paradise for the enthusiast. Regarding the plea for more displays in the North, is it not reasonable to have displays in that part of the country where aviation is most active, i.e., around London? Also, since all trunk road, rail and air routes converge on London it is much easier to reach than, say, Sywell. As one Northerner who is certainly not "show starved" I suggest Mr Haigh contacts one of the groups in Northern England which often arrange visits, sometimes by air, to various displays. Corbridge-on-Tyne J. w. BROWNE SIR,—It is with astonishment that I read the letter from Mr G. A. Jenks (March 7) regarding the cancellation of the Sywell display. Mr Jenks says "that many people in the North will only be able to witness one aviation function this year" (Coventry Air Races) and that "Biggin Hill is out of the question." I beg to differ. We of the Merseyside Society of Aviation Enthusiasts, of which I am chairman, are running a coach down to Biggin Hill for the International Air Fair. There is of course the financial angle, but we don't think that the £2 we are charging is excessive. This is borne out by the fact that some of our younger members have already made arrangements to go. I am being bombarded with questions from people I have never set eyes on before about the excursion. I would suggest that if Liverpool can do it, so can some of the other cities and towns. Bootle 20 K. FIELDING Biackbushe Aviation SIR,—It was indeed cheerful news that the Minister of Housing and Local Government has allowed the continued use of Biackbushe Airport as an aerodrome for club and private flying, and the erection of hangars is more than welcome, as recent weather conditions have clearly shown.
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
