Geisse, John H.

English

Southern Methodist University

Journal of Air Law and CommerceVolume 7 | Issue 4 Article 151936Probable Aircraft Trends in the Near FutureJohn H. GeisseFollow this and additional works at: https://scholar.smu.edu/jalcThis Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at SMU Scholar. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Air Lawand Commerce by an authorized administrator of SMU Scholar. For more information, please visit http://digitalrepository.smu.edu.Recommended CitationJohn H. Geisse, Probable Aircraft Trends in the Near Future, 7 J. Air L. & Com. 521 (1936)https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol7/iss4/15PROBABLE AIRCRAFT TRENDS IN THENEAR FUTUREJOHN H. GEISSE*Approximately two years ago I had the honor and pleasure ofaddressing your regional meeting at Des Moines. At that time Istated that it was my firm conviction that airplanes for private usewould have to be made easier to fly, safer and more comfortableand that these features should take priority over attainment ofhigh speeds. I also advised you that the Bureau had prepared aspecification outlining the characteristics it believed should be in-corporated in private airplanes and that we had contracted for theconstruction of airplanes to this specification. I advised you thatthe airplane would be unconventional in appearance and appealedto you to not let your prejudices against its appearance stand inthe way of giving this -airplane a chance to prove that it had aplace in private flying.At that time I was entirely convinced that this airplane wouldnot appeal either in performance or appearance to the licensedpilot as to him it would only be an aerial babycarriage. I have thevery pleasant task now of advising you that this conviction waswrong. The first of these airplanes was delivered to the Bureauearly this year and it has been flown almost continuously since thattime, demonstrating to both pilots and prospective pilots; and, con-trary to my expectations, the pilots as well as the non-pilots havebeen almost unanimous in their commendation. The plane hasbeen flown by many people who have never flown an airplane be-fore and a large number of them were permitted to take the air-plane off, fly it and land it on their first trip.In its ease of control this airplane exceeded our expectationsin that it was found perfectly practicable to disconnect the ruddercontrols and lock the rudder in the neutral position. This changewas made shortly after the airplane was- received and all of theflying that has been done since has been done without rudder con-trol. This flying has included taking off and landing 90 degreesacross the wind in winds as high as 25 m.p.h. Before the rudderwas locked it was impossible to put the airplane into a spin underfull load conditions but it was possible to get about a turn and a* Chief, Aeronautics Development Section, Bureau of Air Commerce.[521]JOURNAL OF AIR LAWhalf of a spin under light load conditions with controls fully re-versed following a whip stall. With the rudder locked it is im-possible to put the airplane into a spin under any load condition.The lateral control in the stall is comparatively good but not allthat we would like to have. There is under some stall conditionsa tendency for one wing to drop. However, with the stick heldfull back this wing can be brought up again with only a relativelyslight loss in altitude. Although there is no tendency to whip offsharply, the mere fact that a wing may go down against the wishesof a pilot makes it fall short of the ideal.The airplane can be landed in any attitude and the brakes im-mediately applied and it has been landed over a 35 foot obstacleand brought to a stop within 350 feet of the base of that obstaclewith no wind. In tests of the effectiveness of the brakes, the air-plane was paced by an automobile up to 45 m.p.h. and stoppedfrom that speed in 138 feet, which was just about the best theautomobile could do.The plane is equipped with trailing edge flaps which are un-usually effective as a glide path coptrol. They may be quicklytaken off or put on by means of a lever extending up from thefloor board. When the flaps are all the way down the plane almostpoints at the spot on which it is going to alight and the angle ofdescent is exceptionally steep. It has not actually been measuredbut in flying the airplane it gives the impression of being almost45 degrees with an airspeed of only 70 m.p.h. The effectivenessand quick control of the flaps together with the fact that no changein trim is required when they are used has led to a technique 'intheir use differing from that ordinarily employed. This techniqueconsists essentially of gliding the airplane to the field without flapsintentionally high enough to slightly overshoot the field if the flapsare not used. The flaps are then put into use to steepen the glidethe necessary amount in order to land at the desired spot.These remarks about the performance of one airplane mayappear not altogether in keeping with the subject matter given to mefor this address-"Probable Aircraft Trends in the Near Future."I have taken the time to describe the performance of this airplaneto you because it has many of the characteristics which I feel willbe incorporated in many of the airplanes of the future. Briefly,features in this airplane which I believe should be striven for inall iairplanes for private owners are perfect visibility, completeelimination of the spin, stability in the stall, controllable glide path,braking power equal to that of the automobile and usable at anyN.A.S.A.O. PROCEEDINGStime, the ability to land thruout a wide range of attitudes andspeeds, -and two-control operation.This airplane does not meet two other requirements that Iconsider essential-first, a minimum flying speed of not over 35m.p.h., preferably less; second, the ability to climb out of a verysmall field.The original specifications for the Hammond Airplane calledfor a minimum speed of 35 m.p.h., but the opposition to such a lowminimum speed was so great that we permitted this to be increasedto 40 m.p.h. Now, after a great deal of experience with the Ham-mond, I regret the change in the specifications. My reason forthis regret is not a desire for a lower landing speed but more cor-rectly a desire for a lower crash speed. Reducing the landingspeed does not make the landing appreciably easier and in somecases may make it more difficult. In the Hammond particularly,altho it can be landed at slightly over 40 m.p.h., normal landingsare closer to 55 m.p.h.; and, in tests conducted by the NationalAdvisory Committee for Aeronautics on the Weick Airplane, at-tention was called to the fact that the diffculty of landing is morenearly proportionate to the vertical speed of the airplane than it isto the airplane's landing speed. This is because the vertical speeddetermines the rate at which the ground is approaching and therate at which controls must be maneuvered. There is, however, oneirrefutable fact and that is that if a crash is inevitable in a forcedlanding the crash will be much less serious at a low speed than ata high speed. In fact, it is probably quite possible to so design anairplane that it can be crashed at 35 m.p.h. with excellent chancesof the personnel escaping serious injury. Perhaps it may seem toyou that providing for the very occasional crash would not warrantthe considerable decrease in performance which must be expectedwith any decrease in landing speed. However, a fact that we are aptto overlook is that we unconsciously regulate the altitude at whichwe fly by the hazards associated with a forced landing, and I amsure you will agree that the pleasure of flying is inversely propor-tionate to the altitude of the flight. Not only does the change inscenery from high altitudes become so slow that it is monotonous;but flying at high altitudes deprives one of the pleasure which weassociate with traveling at high speeds, as even the fastest airplanethen appears to be crawling.- One of the greatest arguments thatcan be put forth in favor of seaplane flying over landplane flyingis the fact that the seaplane may be operated at a lower altitudewhere we can observe in detail the country over which we are fly-JOURNAL OF AIR LAWing. Some of this pleasure can be transferred to the airplane, byreducing to a minimum the hazards of forced landings and thisentails a lower crash-speed.If the airplane is not developed to a point where it is safe evenin a forced landing crash, then we may expect to see the privateairplane of the future equipped with an airplane parachute-thatis, a parachute which will bring down the airplane as well as thepassengers. This has already been done experimentally; and, ifthe status of our development funds permit, I expect that theBureau will take a part in the further development of this safetyappliance. I do not expect this development to be incorporated intransport airplanes.The requirement of being able to operate from small fields Ilist as separate from the requirement for low minimum flying speedsbecause the reasons for the requirements are different. In myaddress to you in Des Moines I stated "I sincerely hope that if suchlegislation (referring to a Federal Airport Act) is enacted you willuse your influence to see that many simple airports convenientlylocated rather than a few super air terminals are the immediateresult." What I expected to happen has happened and one terminalairport has now been practically closed to private flying since nooperations are permitted from that airport without radio facilitiesin the airplane. This is the start and I do not believe it would befar wrong to hazard the guess that in another three years all majorairports will be closed to private flying. When these airports areclosed private flying is going to have to transfer its activities to thesmaller airports presently available and as it expands, if the addi-tional airports required are not to be at inconveniently great dis-tances from the centers of the cities, they will be still smaller. Thefuture private airplane must be built to operate from smaller andsmaller fields in direct contrast to the trend of the past few yearstowards the requirement of ever larger fields. Private flying willnot be able to support, on its own, flying fields of the size of ourpresent terminal airports.The subject of flight strips, i.e., landing strips adjacent to high-ways as highway intersections as a part of our highway system,was mentioned in your meeting yesterday. Such strips in com-bination with roadable airplanes offer an excellent solution of theproblem of airports for the private flyer. I feel confident that wemay expect to see the development of such roadable airplanes. Youmay recall that Mr. Ray, of the Autogiro Company of America,was able to return to Philadelphia from the races last year by taxi-N.A.S.A.O. PROCEEDINGSing his plane over the mountains when all others were impatientlychamping at the bit in Cleveland waiting for the weather to clear.He accomplished this feat unheralded and in a plane not designedfor such use. If he were to be faced with a similar situation todayhe could make the trip in an autogiro constructed for road opera-tion. This vehicle, being developed for the -Bureau of Air Com-merce, is about ready for delivery. I have already had the novelexperience and pleasure of riding in this down the highway anddriving it around the field. The conversion from a flying machineto an automobile takes but a few minutes. The roadable featureon this particular plane added only 15 pounds to its weight.In any discussion of the airplane of the future or of roadableplanes, the tailless plane cannot be overlooked. Mr. Waldo Water-man is now engaged in preparing one for the market. The newversion will be roadable and will be powered with a modified auto-mobile engine. It is now operating in its roadable phase on theWest Coast and I understand that it is capable of a high speed onthe road in excess of 50 miles per hour. Of interest is the factthat in California it is licensed as a motorcycle rather than an auto-mobile since it has three wheels instead of four. As a roadablevehicle it must carry a license and a horn and meet all of the otherrequirements for a motorcycle. Because of its advantages in re-spect to cost, storage space, and ease of roadable conversion, theTailless Airplane will become a serious contender for the privatemarket if it can be made to have flying qualities equal to thoseattainable with conventional types.The conventional airplane will also have a serious competitorin the direct control autogiro. The fact that the present direct con-trol autogiro can land and take off from small fields and reduce itsforward speed to almost zero for forced landings gives to thisvehicle the distinct advantage mentioned previously of safe flightat low altitudes. When there is added to this the jump off featurewhich will permit operation from any space large enough to holdthe plane the tremendous advantage it will have must be acknowl-edged. Jumps up to 35 feet have been made in England with powerplants no larger than those regularly used in planes without thejump off feature. The reverse of this procedure, storing energyin the rotor in vertical descent for use in cushioning the groundcontact, appears to be possible but not immediately desirable.There is one development which has received little attentionin this country but which I expect to see incorporated in futureairplanes for private flying. This is the shock absorbing wing. WeJOURNAL *OF AIR LAWnow build into our airplanes that which we call stability, but it isprimarily stability relative to the air. In other words, we try tomake the airplane such that it will maintain a constant attitude andmotion with respect to the air-not the ground. We then, in somecases, superimpose on these built-in forces, an automatic pilot whichdoes its best to maintain the attitude of the ship with respect to theground irrespective of the attitude of the ship to the air. Stabilityrelative to the air requires the airplane to respond to the whims ofair cuIrrents and gives us a roller coaster ride. The automaticpilot tends to keep the keel level but in so doing gives us an elevatoreffect with a greater amplitude of altitude variation. The passengerwould much prefer to ride on an even keel and along a straightpath at constant elevation. Some system of shock absorbing wingwould-go a long way toward providing such a ride and in so doingwould decrease the stresses in the airplane structure and permitit to be lightened accordingly.For fear that no mention of converted automobile engines forthe future private plane may be interpreted as indicating that thisis a dead issue, I desire to assure you that it is still alive andkicking. Altho the particular applications which we fostered havenot come up to our expectations we still have hopes and these hopeswere strongly bolstered a short time ago by the appearance inWashington of the Funk two-place cabin plane powered with amodified Ford Model B engine which had excellent performance-perhaps because it was developed without our interference. I amadvised that the parts for the engine cost $150.The development in transport planes will undoubtedly divergemore and more from the development in private planes. Recentresearches into the effects of altitude on pilot and passengers cer-tainly point toward the development of supercharged cabins notonly for sub-stratosphere flying but for flying at altitudes nowcommonly used. Passenger comfort will probably demand thischange. It is most interesting to note in this connection that oxygendeprivation effects are the same as the effects of alcohol. Theeffect of liquor is to deprive the blood of its normal oxygen supplyand its effect is cumulative with that of altitude. If you start outwith a passenger only half intoxicated he will become completelyso if you fly high enough without a supercharged cabin.Returning to private flying I desire to give credit to the air-plane manufacturers for the progress they have made in improvingthe safety of their airplanes and approaching the goal I have saidwas desirable. A hasty survey of the fatalities in non-scheduledN.A.S.A.O. PROCEEDINGSflying for the first half of this year reveals that the percentage offatal accidents due to stalls and spins is less than 50 for airplanesconstructed in or since 1934, whereas for airplanes of an earliervintage stalls and spins caused 74% of the fatalities. Out of atotal of 94 fatalities for all models, 61 were attributable to stallingcharacteristics, 11 to structural failures, including engine stoppage,and 22 to other causes, 10 of which were chargeable to weather.Of all fatalities 33 occurred in airplanes built in 1934 or laterand of these 16 were chargeable to stalls. In these figures I haveincluded stalls which occurred during forced landings.These figures show a very marked advance in the stability ofairplanes and my only regret is that they show the need of stillfurther improvement and that airplanes of the later class still takea toll of lives thru stalls and spins. And, lest someone assume thatthese have been the result of student flying, let me add that 11 ofthe 16 spin fatalities in the modern airplanes occurred with pilotshaving 50 hours or more flying time.In this connection I should like to appeal to you to use yourbest efforts to modify the all-too-prevalent attitude of aviationpeople toward the "dumb" pilot. Remarks I have seen on accidentreports such as "Ran out of flying speed and brains at the sametime" are not conducive to a widening private airplane market.It is unfortunate that not all of us are so gifted as the author ofthat report but perhaps some of us-like that unfortunate pilot-are potential customers and with suitable equipment perhaps ourdumbness would not be fatal. In our studies of accidents let's notbe so ready to charge it up to the pilot but let's see if there issome change we might make in the airplane to prevent a recurrence.Charging an accident to a forced landing is also not sufficient if achange in the airplane could have made that forced landing safer.In closing I should like to appeal also to the manufacturersthru you to give more consideration to the desires of the man hewould like to sell but can't and less to the man he can sell. Itwould be suicide for any political party to concentrate its attentionon localities where its success is assured and overlook those locali-ties which might be captured with a little effort. Following thisprocedure in aviation may not be suicidal but certainly it is notconducive to growth.Once before I was'accused of trying to force the industry back25 years. It appears now that that effort may have had some justi-fication. Now I suggest that we try to go hack again to the dayswhen airplanes were operated out of baseball diamonds.

Probable Aircraft Trends in the Near Future

https://scholar.smu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3924&amp;context=jalc

Probable Aircraft Trends in the Near Future

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Southern Methodist University