FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1963
1963 - 1858.PDF
FLIGHT International, 17 October 1963 665 and it is nobody's business then to consider whether these are sufficient." In an extreme case, an instrument approach chart of a hilly area may be produced with scarcely any sign of relief appearing on it at all. The insufficiency of some surveys is not, therefore, a reason for avoiding contour envelopes, but the reverse. (4) Expense Whenever improvements are discussed in anything already in use, the question of increased costs always has to be considered; and it is only natural that those responsible for chart production should shrink from adopting something that may make their costs go up. This increase should be judged, however, in the light of what is gained. Apart from the issue of safety—which must, of course, be our main concern—it is in fact doubtful whether the cheaper chart is in the long run any real economy. The cost of even the most elaborate charts will always be a mere drop compared with the total costs of a flight; and an extra two or three minutes of flying, necessitated by inadequate terrain information having held up the descent, can cost more in fuel than a new set of charts all in many colours. Having said that, let us then look at the nature of the cost increase that contour envelopes would involve. In an earlier paragraph I mentioned that it would mean the adoption of layer-tinting, which immediately brings to mind the expensive processes of high-class cartography; and these are undesirable for charts that need frequent revision. Such ideal processes, however, are for our purposes unnecessary; there are perfectly adequate ways of printing layers at very small cost, and as soon as the need is fully recognized the technical solutions can be expected to follow quite easily. Summing-up Will a better portrayal of the terrain make any difference, ultimately, in the number of mountain accidents? If the real trouble is that the pilot is not always where he thinks he is, then better portrayal of the terrain is no answer. Yet isn't it—at IT is a great pity that Gabriel Voisin ever decided to publish his • autobiography,* the French original (with the less snappy title Mes Dix Mille Cerfs Volants) having appeared in 1961, when he was already over eighty: for it can only be a great disappointment to historians. This fine old pioneer first arrived on the aviation scene in 1904, when he became assistant and glider-pilot to Ernest Archdeacon. Thereafter, with his box-kite machines of 1905-09, he made a valuable contribution to aviation by helping to establish the stable European biplane, initiated by Ferber in 1904. It was Ferber who said he introduced Gabriel to aviation. But, like his fellow Europ eans, Gabriel and his brother Charles made slow going, and Voisin machines only became practical vehicles in 1908; even then, the Voisin brothers stubbornly refused to pay any attention to lateral control and, as a result, nearly suffered eclipse during 1909-10. One of the curious problems of early aviation history is the amount of credit due to Gabriel Voisin in the machines he pro duced. It is virtually certain, for example, that the first Voisin to achieve success in 1908 (Henri Farman's machine) owed much of that success to the modifications Farman himself had made. Colliex, too, is believed to have played a large part in later Voisin designs. These and many other questions would, one hoped, have had light thrown upon them; and one also looked forward to fasci nating sidelights on that great period of flying history. But the autobiography which has come from Gabriel's pen is the worst monument to his reputation that could have been devised. Apart from the regular reports—often vulgar and seldom funny— on the ladies whose favours he and his friends often shared, his account of aeronautical life and work is so full of demonstrable inaccuracies and obscurities that one feels unable to trust even his recollection of events in his personal life. The reader may take a little time before he tumbles to the leitmotiv in the book: put quite simply, it is that Gabriel Voisin was the inventor of the modern aeroplane! "The first aeroplane officially observed to leave the ground under its own power, to manoeuvre in pitch and azimuth, and then to return safely to the "Men, Women and 10,000 Kites," by Gabriel Voisin. Translated by Oliver Stewart. Putnam, London; price 30s. least in part ? If a good portrayal can be provided on the charts that pilots are always using regularly, there will be a greater hope of their cultivating a permanent awareness of the possibility of hitting something, instead of taking things for granted. In addition to the immediate value in the handling of any particular situation, contour envelopes will therefore have also an educational value of far-reaching effect. Acknowledgment is made to British European Airways for permission to publish this article, but the opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the corporation. Some References "Instrument Approach and Landing Charts." Journal of the Institute of Navigation, Vol V, Jan 1952. ' 'A New Aeronautical Plotting Chart." Journal of the Institute of Navigation, Vol VI, Oct 1953. "Contour Envelopes." Journal of the Guild of Air Pilots and Air Navigators, Aug 1953 and Oct 1953. ' Instrument Approach and Landing Charts." Report of the Inter' national Meeting held in Berlin by the Ausschuss fur Funkortung, May 19-24, 1958. "Aircraft Accidents and High Ground." Journal of the Institute of Navigation, Vol 15, July 1962. "Thinking topographically." The Aeroplane and Commercial Aviation News, July 26, 1962, page 6. "Safety Height?", by the present author, Flight International, November 15, 1962, pages 792-794. "Safety Height?", by J. M. R., Flight International, November 29, 1962, page 841. "Safety Height," by Capt R. McDougall. Flight International, January 3, 1963, pages 12-14. "The 1962 Accident Record." Flight International, January 10, 1963, pages 40-41. "The 1963 Accident Record." Flight International, January, 1964. ground, was a Voisin, piloted by Henri Farman (on January 13 1908)." It is a melancholy fact that no Voisin aeroplane could stay in the air for 60 consecutive seconds until November 1907. Gabriel denigrates one after another of his contemporaries, or omits them altogether. Perhaps because the Wrights must always have loomed as his worst obstacle, the unfortunate boys from Dayton are treated, in the final chapter, to a 33-page farrago of such nonsense that Edward Lear seems sober truth by comparison. But just in case someone exists who believes whatever he sees in print, I cannot avoid mentioning a few points, typical of many, presented by Gabriel. (1) He says that the No 1 Flyer of 1903 was the "same machine" flown by Wilbur in France in 1908! No comment. (2) Speaking of the Wrights' No 3 Flyer of 1905, the first practical aeroplane of history, Gabriel writes: "it could have flown, and it did fly, with the engine stopped, by means of favourable upcurrents." This is surely one of the most egregious statements of history. (3) "No technician of real standing can admit that the Wrights inspired anything at all." No comment. (4) "Wilbur Wright made his first flight in France on 8 August 1908. On 24 July 1909 he packed his bags and went back to America. The Wright aeroplane was dead and contributed not a tittle to future designs." Gabriel may have forgotten that Wilbur, in 1908 alone, was airborne for over 25 hours, with seven flights of over an hour, and one of 2hr 20min, to say nothing of 60 passenger flights; that he taught aviators how to control an aeroplane; and that Gabriel's old friend and Voisin-pilot Delagrange cried amidst the general acclaim: "Nous sommes battus! Nous n'existons pas!" (5) "The Wright aircraft was never able to leave the ground under its own power until the 1908 period when it was fitted with a French engine, built in France by the firm of Bariquand and Marre of Paris." Leaving aside the first absurdity, Gabriel was evidently never informed that this triumphant "French engine" was the excellent standard Wright 30 h.p. engine built under licence in France by the firm in question! "Truth," says old Gabriel piously on page 237, "is the objective." C. H. GIBBS-SMITH A PIONEER'S CURIOUS AUTOBIOGRAPHY
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
