CHAPTER XXII. PROBLEMS OF AERIAL FLIGHT.

In a lecture before the Royal Society of Arts, reported in Engineering,

F. W. Lanchester took the position that practical flight was not the

abstract question which some apparently considered it to be, but a

problem in locomotive engineering. The flying machine was a locomotive

appliance, designed not merely to lift a weight, but to transport it

elsewhere, a fact which should be sufficiently obvious. Nevertheless one

of the leading scientific men of the day advocated a type in which

this, the main function of the flying machine, was overlooked. When

the machine was considered as a method of transport, the vertical screw

type, or helicopter, became at once ridiculous. It had, nevertheless,

many advocates who had some vague and ill-defined notion of subsequent

motion through the air after the weight was raised.

Helicopter Type Useless.

When efficiency of transport was demanded, the helicopter type was

entirely out of court. Almost all of its advocates neglected the effect

of the motion of the machine through the air on the efficiency of the

vertical screws. They either assumed that the motion was so slow as not

to matter, or that a patch of still air accompanied the machine in its

flight. Only one form of this type had any possibility of success. In

this there were two screws running on inclined axles--one on each

side of the weight to be lifted. The action of such inclined screw was

curious, and in a previous lecture he had pointed out that it was almost

exactly the same as that of a bird's wing. In high-speed racing craft

such inclined screws were of necessity often used, but it was at

a sacrifice of their efficiency. In any case the efficiency of the

inclined-screw helicopter could not compare with that of an aeroplane,

and that type might be dismissed from consideration so soon as

efficiency became the ruling factor of the design.

Must Compete With Locomotive.

To justify itself the aeroplane must compete, in some regard or other,

with other locomotive appliances, performing one or more of the purposes

of locomotion more efficiently than existing systems. It would be no use

unless able to stem air currents, so that its velocity must be greater

than that of the worst winds liable to be encountered. To illustrate the

limitations imposed on the motion of an aeroplane by wind velocity, Mr.

Lanchester gave the diagrams shown in Figs. 1 to 4. The circle in each

case was, he said, described with a radius equal to the speed of the

aeroplane in still air, from a center placed "down-wind" from the

aeroplane by an amount equal to the velocity of the wind.

Fig. 1 therefore represented the case in which the air was still, and

in this case the aeroplane represented by _A_ had perfect liberty of

movement in any direction

In Fig. 2 the velocity of the wind was half that of the aeroplane, and

the latter could still navigate in any direction, but its speed against

the wind was only one-third of its speed with the wind.

In Fig. 3 the velocity of the wind was equal to that of the aeroplane,

and then motion against the wind was impossible; but it could move to

any point of the circle, but not to any point lying to the left of the

tangent _A_ _B_. Finally, when the wind had a greater speed than the

aeroplane, as in Fig. 4, the machine could move only in directions

limited by the tangents _A_ _C_ and _A_ _D_.

Matter of Fuel Consumption.

Taking the case in which the wind had a speed equal to half that of the

aeroplane, Mr. Lanchester said that for a given journey out and home,

down wind and back, the aeroplane would require 30 per cent more fuel

than if the trip were made in still air; while if the journey was made

at right angles to the direction of the wind the fuel needed would be 15

per cent more than in a calm. This 30 per cent extra was quite a heavy

enough addition to the fuel; and to secure even this figure it was

necessary that the aeroplane should have a speed of twice that of the

maximum wind in which it was desired to operate the machine. Again, as

stated in the last lecture, to insure the automatic stability of the

machine it was necessary that the aeroplane speed should be largely in

excess of that of the gusts of wind liable to be encountered.

Eccentricities of the Wind.

There was, Mr. Lanchester said, a loose connection between the average

velocity of the wind and the maximum speed of the gusts. When the

average speed of the wind was 40 miles per hour, that of the gusts might

be equal or more. At one moment there might be a calm or the direction

of the wind even reversed, followed, the next moment, by a violent gust.

About the same minimum speed was desirable for security against gusts as

was demanded by other considerations. Sixty miles an hour was the least

figure desirable in an aeroplane, and this should be exceeded as much as

possible. Actually, the Wright machine had a speed of 38 miles per hour,

while Farman's Voisin machine flew at 45 miles per hour.

Both machines were extremely sensitive to high winds, and the speaker,

in spite of newspaper reports to the contrary, had never seen either

flown in more than a gentle breeze. The damping out of the oscillations

of the flight path, discussed in the last lecture, increased with the

fourth power of the natural velocity of flight, and rapid damping

formed the easiest, and sometimes the only, defense against dangerous

oscillations. A machine just stable at 35 miles per hour would have

reasonably rapid damping if its speed were increased to 60 miles per

hour.

Thinks Use Is Limited.

It was, the lecturer proceeded, inconceivable that any very extended use

should be made of the aeroplane unless the speed was much greater than

that of the motor car. It might in special cases be of service,

apart from this increase of speed, as in the exploration of countries

destitute of roads, but it would have no general utility. With an

automobile averaging 25 to 35 miles per hour, almost any part of Europe,

Russia excepted, was attainable in a day's journey. A flying machine

of but equal speed would have no advantages, but if the speed could be

raised to 90 or 100 miles per hour, the whole continent of Europe

would become a playground, every part being within a daylight flight of

Berlin. Further, some marine craft now had speeds of 40 miles per hour,

and efficiently to follow up and report movements of such vessels an

aeroplane should travel at 60 miles per hour at least. Hence from

all points of view appeared the imperative desirability of very high

velocities of flight. The difficulties of achievement were, however,

great.

Weight of Lightest Motors.

As shown in the first lecture of his course, the resistance to motion

was nearly independent of the velocity, so that the total work done in

transporting a given weight was nearly constant. Hence the question of

fuel economy was not a bar to high velocities of flight, though should

these become excessive, the body resistance might constitute a large

proportion of the total. The horsepower required varied as the

velocity, so the factor governing the maximum velocity of flight was

the horsepower that could be developed on a given weight. At present the

weight per horsepower of feather-weight motors appeared to range from

2 1/4 pounds up to 7 pounds per brake horsepower, some actual figures

being as follows:

Antoinette........ 5 lbs.

Fiat.............. 3 lbs.

Gnome....... Under 3 lbs.

Metallurgic....... 8 lbs.

Renault........... 7 lbs.

Wright.............6 lbs.

Automobile engines, on the other hand, commonly weighed 12 pounds to 13

pounds per brake horsepower.

For short flights fuel economy was of less importance than a saving

in the weight of the engine. For long flights, however, the case

was different. Thus, if the gasolene consumption was 1/2 pound per

horsepower hour, and the engine weighed 3 pounds per brake horsepower,

the fuel needed for a six-hour flight would weigh as much as the engine,

but for half an hour's flight its weight would be unimportant.

Best Means of Propulsion.

The best method of propulsion was by the screw, which acting in air

was subject to much the same conditions as obtained in marine work.

Its efficiency depended on its diameter and pitch and on its position,

whether in front of or behind the body propelled. From this theory

of dynamic support, Mr. Lanchester proceeded, the efficiency of each

element of a screw propeller could be represented by curves such as were

given in his first lecture before the society, and from these curves the

over-all efficiency of any proposed propeller could be computed, by mere

inspection, with a fair degree of accuracy. These curves showed that the

tips of long-bladed propellers were inefficient, as was also the portion

of the blade near the root. In actual marine practice the blade from

boss to tip was commonly of such a length that the over-all efficiency

was 95 per cent of that of the most efficient element of it.

Advocates Propellers in Rear.

From these curves the diameter and appropriate pitch of a screw could

be calculated, and the number of revolutions was then fixed. Thus, for a

speed of 80 feet per second the pitch might come out as 8 feet, in which

case the revolutions would be 600 per minute, which might, however, be

too low for the motor. It was then necessary either to gear down the

propeller, as was done in the Wright machine, or, if it was decided to

drive it direct, to sacrifice some of the efficiency of the propeller.

An analogous case arose in the application of the steam turbine to the

propulsion of cargo boats, a problem as yet unsolved. The propeller

should always be aft, so that it could abstract energy from the wake

current, and also so that its wash was clear of the body propelled. The

best possible efficiency was about 70 per cent, and it was safe to rely

upon 66 per cent.

Benefits of Soaring Flight.

There was, Mr. Lanchester proceeded, some possibility of the aeronaut

reducing the power needed for transport by his adopting the principle of

soaring flight, as exemplified by some birds. There were, he continued,

two different modes of soaring flight. In the one the bird made use of

the upward current of air often to be found in the neighborhood of steep

vertical cliffs. These cliffs deflected the air upward long before it

actually reached the cliff, a whole region below being thus the seat of

an upward current. Darwin has noted that the condor was only to be found

in the neighborhood of such cliffs. Along the south coast also the gulls

made frequent use of the up currents due to the nearly perpendicular

chalk cliffs along the shore.

In the tropics up currents were also caused by temperature differences.

Cumulus clouds, moreover, were nearly always the terminations of such

up currents of heated air, which, on cooling by expansion in the upper

regions, deposited their moisture as fog. These clouds might, perhaps,

prove useful in the future in showing the aeronaut where up currents

were to be found. Another mode of soaring flight was that adopted by

the albatross, which took advantage of the fact that the air moved

in pulsations, into which the bird fitted itself, being thus able to

extract energy from the wind. Whether it would be possible for the

aeronaut to employ a similar method must be left to the future to

decide.

Main Difficulties in Aviation.

In practical flight difficulties arose in starting and in alighting.

There was a lower limit to the speed at which the machine was stable,

and it was inadvisable to leave the ground till this limit was attained.

Similarly, in alighting it was inexpedient to reduce the speed below the

limit of stability. This fact constituted a difficulty in the adoption

of high speeds, since the length of run needed increased in proportion

to the square of the velocity. This drawback could, however, be

surmounted by forming starting and alighting grounds of ample size.

He thought it quite likely in the future that such grounds would be

considered as essential to the flying machine as a seaport was to an

ocean-going steamer or as a road was to the automobile.

Requisites of Flying Machine.

Flying machines were commonly divided into monoplanes and biplanes,

according as they had one or two supporting surfaces. The distinction

was not, however, fundamental. To get the requisite strength some

form of girder framework was necessary, and it was a mere question of

convenience whether the supporting surface was arranged along both

the top and the bottom of this girder, or along the bottom only. The

framework adopted universally was of wood braced by ties of pianoforte

wire, an arrangement giving the stiffness desired with the least

possible weight. Some kind of chassis was also necessary.

Flying Machines: Construction and Operation A Practical Book Which Shows, in Illustrations, Working Plans and Text, How to Build and Navigate the Modern Airship · 第 15 / 21 章