• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Heads up! Ted Cook releases another quirky British design

Sschweeet!

Thanks for the heads up Pete.

Nice looking bird, and again, one I have never seen or heard about...




Bill
 
Ed = Ted

True, his name is Edward but it's often shortened to Ted in this fair isle.
I'm sure he won't have taken offence at the familiarity. :)
Cheers
Dave (David) M(oly)
 
I feel a mixture of sorrow and anger towards the British. Often, they had such innovative and brilliant aircraft ideas, yet their govt was short sighted and heavy-handed which led to the demise of many of their aircraft products.
 
Mick said:
Cool!

That system was used by mail planes in the US back in the Golden Age.

It was also used for glider pickups by the Air Commandos in WW2.
Thanks for posting this. :ernae:
Click to expand...

The concept goes back a long way. RPO (Railway Post Office) catcher systems date to the late 1800's and were picked up by the aviation industry but all along there have been problems. The concept is still in use today for aerial banners
http://www.advertisingairforce.com/sites/advertisingairforce/faqs/howitworks/howitworks.asp
www.faa.gov/library/manuals/aviation/media/faa-fs.pdf

The Aerocar system was designed for packages and was an integrated part of the aircraft design (unlike most others that were simply an add-on) but still had the drawbacks in spite of the "good idea"
-there is a strain on the aircraft - both at pickup and in flight. Constant use of high power settings is common.
-use requires low-altitude, slow-speed operation (always a risk)
-there are hazards to surrounding people and structures (esp. at pick-up and drop points)
-a ground crew is required which adds cost and complexity (and injury! Been there, lost the t-shirt, but that would be another thread)

Likely the epitome of such systems was the Fulton surface-to-air recovery system
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fulton_surface-to-air_recovery_system

which was designed for human "packages". Even it had 'risks' - during testing they used a pig...
"as pigs have nervous systems close to humans. Lifted off the ground, the pig began to spin as it flew through the air at 125 mph (200 km/h). It arrived on board uninjured but in a disoriented state. Once it recovered, it attacked the crew.":icon_eek:

As far as I have found, the Aerocar was the only civilian aircraft designed for production with such a system as a factory option. As with many "good ideas" the application produced so many obstacles that it proved to be uneconomical or impractical. Nonetheless, Plymouth deserves some credit for planning and developing the concept commercially.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top