FlightGlobal.com
Home
Premium
Archive
Video
Images
Forum
Atlas
Blogs
Jobs
Shop
RSS
Email Newsletters
You are in:
Home
Aviation History
1966
1966 - 0082.PDF
56 Letters Letters for these columns are welcomed, though "Flight International" does not necessarily endorse the views expressed. Name and address should be given, not necessarily for publication, in full. Brief letters will have a better chance of early publication. FLIGHT International, 13 January 1966 5:1) flying would be at least £2 per hour more without the social activities; neither would we be able to provide such excellent facilities for private owners. I do not think for one moment that Government or Ministry circles hold Mr White's opinion; but if they do, let them first set the example by removing their own bars from the House of Commons, Service establishments and the like. They could then give some more practical assis- tance to flying clubs to enable them to operate without having to run a business on the side to help expenses. St Brelade, *• w- SPEARS Jersey, CI (private pilot) Admiral's Case Contested SIR,—I have read and re-read the article "The Case For Maritime Air" (page 744, October 28) and with regret I must recommend that Admiral Gick be discouraged from publishing any such item again—for fear of losing the remaining friend he has in the RAF (that is, of course, if he has one left after the publication of this first public offering). Realising that the original offering was only meant for the eyes of the RN and FAA (it is, therefore, not surprising that he managed to retain a few RAF friends) and was obviously a sop to declining morale, one can then go ahead and analyse what he has written. The first thing that strikes one is the hypocrisy of the article; the Admiral purports to have "pleaded and preached" for inter-Service co-operation and then goes on to show just how bigoted his views are. What I really enjoyed was the statement in italics to the effect that he would like to see the RN provide floating bases for "all" aircraft This choice piece of Quixotism can best be appreciated by picking an aircraft at random—say a Beverley—and then picturing the aposiopesis on the bridge when one attempts to land-on. I agree with the Admiral when he says that the FAA has something that the other forces do not have; and without going into a great diatribe it is for this reason that we require its services; but not, Admiral, in the way that you envisage. Bases we must have; floating bases can be only of very limited usefulness, and though I dislike hitting below the belt it is appropriate to remind the Admiral that ships have a nasty habit of sinking. Should he require convincing further, then a visit to the area between Kuantan and Pulau Tioman should convince him. The keyword, Sir, is "co-operation"—the one thing that Admiral Gick seems (regretfully) least qualified to express himself on. It must be co-operation between all Services and not the least between allied Services if we are to survive at all. I fear that with such misguided ideas this thought goes down like a lead ballon (or ought I to say, an aircraft carrier?). Singapore E. H. DAVBES, Flight Lieutenant, RAF In Defence of the Club Bar SIR,—I must protest at Mr White's inference (Letters, December 30) that club pilots drink to excess and that money for flying training is used to finance bars and bar stocks. In my experience the majority of club pilots, in com- mon with both commercial and Service flying personnel, only use the bar for alcoholic drinks after they have finished flying for the day; and such refreshment is most welcome and well deserved. The great majority of club members to be seen using the bar are either in this category or are non-flying social members. Bar profits are invariably used to subsidise flying, and in the case of my own club (ratio of social members, Parachutes, 1914-18 SIR,—While so far as I recall there were no parachutes available during the 1914-18 war apart from those used by balloon observers, there was, however, quite a lot of development work. Mr E. R. Calthrop invented a parachute which he named the Guardian Angel, and much of the testing of this parachute was carried out at the Royal Naval Air Station, Chingford. I am sure my old friend Ben Travers could tell of his experience there when he endeavoured to release a Guardian Angel parachute, with a dummy attached, from a B.E.2C aircraft. Most of the parachute came out of the container, but not all of it The result was a vast expanse of parachute with a trailing dummy billowing out under the aircraft—in spite of which Ben managed to put it down on the aerodrome without hurt to himself, though with quite considerable damage to the aircraft Incidentally, the photograph appearing on page 1079 of your issue of December 23 was taken around 1913 and the pilot was Walter L. Brock, an American who flew a lot at Hendon in the pre-1914 days. Coventry R. E. Nicoix, Sales Manager, Aero Division, Alvis Ltd SIR,—In your December 30 issue, E. D. Ayre stated that pilots in the 1914-18 conflict—British, American, French or German—did not wear parachutes "because there were no such things," though William Saunders in the following letter mentioned that "many Germans were escaping by this means." In the current volume of the Cross and Cockade Journal, the editor, W. R. Puglisi, writes "Only Germany took the initiative to equip their front line squadrons, [with parachutes] during the last two years of the war" (my italics) and concludes by listing 26 recorded combat jumps between April 1918 and the end of hostilities. Of this total, 19 pilots landed safely, the failures being due in part to faulty deployment, parachute burning, combat wounds and other causes; but the success ratio was about 3:1. The parachutes were of a seat type and appeared to have pilot chutes. Two falls terminated our side of the lines and one, on April 1, specifies the British line—so the device could have been copied, if desired. Wonersh, Surrey z. H. LATIMER-NEEDHAM, (Member, "Cross and Cockade"/ SIR,—As a teenager I cannot claim to have been a member of the RFC. However, having just read Sholto- Douglas's book and T. W. Willans's Parachuting and Skydiving, which contains an excellent history of the parachute, I cannot help but feel that it was the fault of the Air Staff that parachutes were not issued to airmen. E. R. Calthrop had drawn up comprehensive plans for a very efficient "soaring" parachute whereby the canopy was ejected in a tube by compressed air from the air- craft, thus pulling the pilot from his seat (can you imagine it?)—a very suitable device in case of fire. The use of parachutes by the Germans was not uncom- mon, and this is borne out by the fact that Udet himself was forced to bale out from his damaged D.VII after art encounter with a Breguet aircraft. Sutton, Surrey NICHOLAS CLIFFE
Sign up to
Flight Digital Magazine
Flight Print Magazine
Airline Business Magazine
E-newsletters
RSS
Events
