RAF Flying Wing Strategic Recon Idea

[Rheged]

What about the Westland Pterodactyl?   I understand it was  pterrifying tofly.

[Doc Yo]

 Which Pterodactyl? There were four or five of them as I recall. I don't think Professor Hill ever scaled them up
in quite the same way Northrop and the Hortens did, though.

[Rheged]

Which Pterodactyl? There were four or five of them as I recall. I don't think Professor Hill ever scaled them up
in quite the same way Northrop and the Hortens did, though.

Ah!  I'd forgotten there was quite a flock of them!

[jcf]

Which Pterodactyl? There were four or five of them as I recall. I don't think Professor Hill ever scaled them up
in quite the same way Northrop and the Hortens did, though.

Aah, but he did, the unbuilt Short Bros.-Hill Mk. VIII:



Also the sections on the Westland-Hill Pterodactyls in Westland Aircraft since 1915 make no
mention of any particular flight difficulties, aside from the Goshawk problems in the V, but
that's down to the engine, not the airframe.

[Doc Yo]

 Thats a new one on me-Thankee Kindly, Jon! When does that date from? I had the impression that Hill wasn't
active in aviation much past the 'thirties, but my knowledge of the man is scanty at best.

[jcf]

1944 with five Griffon, a 'quilted' pressure cabin and transverse seating. Shorts proposed it to the Brabazon Committee in
the trans-atlantic airliner role.

[PR19_Kit]

That's an interesting device, and presumably quite large too.

I wonder why he went for transverse seating though? I can see the logic of RAF Transport Command's rear facing seats, also adopted by BEA on some Tridents, but can't figure out what advantage having them sideways would have.

[NARSES2]

Also the sections on the Westland-Hill Pterodactyls in Westland Aircraft since 1915 make no
mention of any particular flight difficulties, aside from the Goshawk problems in the V, but
that's down to the engine, not the airframe.

Beat me to it Jon - checked that out when I got back from Sunderland (where they have a Flying Flea suspended from the shopping centre roof 

[Weaver]

Thats a new one on me-Thankee Kindly, Jon! When does that date from? I had the impression that Hill wasn't
active in aviation much past the 'thirties, but my knowledge of the man is scanty at best.

Hill worked into the early 1950s, designing the aero-isoclinic wing that was tested on the Short SB.4 Sherpa. He died in 1955.

Geoff Hill: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geoffrey_T._R._Hill
SB.4 Sherpa: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Short_SB.4_Sherpa

Somewhat off-topic, but I would have loved to see an operational aircraft with the aero-isoclinic wing. Shorts proposed one, the PD.13,  for the NA.39 (Buccaneer) requirement that had a projected roll rate of 720 deg/second!!!  Needless to say, it was judged "intriguing, but more suitable to a fighter requirement".


from here: http://sd2cx1.webring.org/l/rd?ring=luftwaffering;id=1;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebspace%2Ewebring%2Ecom%2Fpeople%2Fdu%2Fum_5166%2Fbrit%2Fodd_air%2Ehtm

[jcf]

That's an interesting device, and presumably quite large too.

I wonder why he went for transverse seating though? I can see the logic of RAF Transport Command's rear facing seats, also adopted by BEA on some Tridents, but can't figure out what advantage having them sideways would have.

Inflight films via rear-projection screens mounted at the join between the main body and outer planes.

[jcf]

A bit more on the Shorts - Hill project from Stuck on the Drawing Board:
Centaurus or Griffon; 176' span; 185,000 lb GW; 287 mph cruise at 20,000'
altitude.

A bomber version was also proposed, no details to hand.

[RussC]

That's an interesting device, and presumably quite large too.

I wonder why he went for transverse seating though? I can see the logic of RAF Transport Command's rear facing seats, also adopted by BEA on some Tridents, but can't figure out what advantage having them sideways would have.

The quilted structure was for pressurization, easier to do than a flat box room. The seating is maybe because of the G forces of turns and banks with passengers so far from the center of motion. Both of these problems are being tackled anew in the Boeing BWB designs and the intermeshed tubes/quilts has surfaced again and likely the seats will too, although they face the center of the craft now, in some designs.

Imagine being in the outermost rows and getting up to walk just as your captain enters a steep bank with turn. The turns would have to be approached gently. The sideways seating means that there will be left - right forces versus being pushed forward or back. From my rides at the hands of Chicago bus drivers and sideways seats, it is possible to be dumped into an aisle, without a seat belt.

[PR19_Kit]

If the pilot, or auto-pilot, are doing their job right there won't be any lateral forces.

The bank angles applied should exactly compensate for any lateral acceleration. As a result of that the pax may feel an increased VERTICAL acceleration, just like fighter pilots do, but they'll feel that no matter which way the seats are facing.

Think motorcycles going round bends, or tilting trains, my own particular specialty. 

[James]

Somewhat off-topic, but I would have loved to see an operational aircraft with the aero-isoclinic wing. Shorts proposed one, the PD.13,  for the NA.39 (Buccaneer) requirement that had a projected roll rate of 720 deg/second!!!  Needless to say, it was judged "intriguing, but more suitable to a fighter requirement".


from here: http://sd2cx1.webring.org/l/rd?ring=luftwaffering;id=1;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwebspace%2Ewebring%2Ecom%2Fpeople%2Fdu%2Fum_5166%2Fbrit%2Fodd_air%2Ehtm

I love that design! IIRC it had engine exhausts that could be decreased a fair number of degrees to reduce TO run?

[rickshaw]

I think the sideways facing seating is to get a higher seat density than would normally be achieved with the fore-aft orientation.  The problem with the flying wing would be that because of the curvature of the wing, the usable space would be limited to essentially mid-chord.  Sideways facing seating however is less than optimal from the perspective of acceleration forces.  Lateral forces would be quite low in a transport aircraft (or should be!).