By: Beermat
- 11th January 2018 at 12:29Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The problem was visibility of what happened to an aircraft as it transitioned from the transonic (ie a high speed at which some part of the aircraft was above Mach one - which could begin at anything from 400mph to Mach 0.95 depending on shapes) and the supersonic (when all of it was). No tunnel in the world could do that 1943 to 1946, and this un-testable transition point was also exactly where the perceived 'barrier' was. Hence rockets etc. The Americans persisted with the manned 'suck it and see' approach, possibly largely for PR reasons. It's illustrative of the doubts everyone had that they didn't put one of their top test pilots into the X-1.. and some say it's because one of ours was publicly earmarked for the M-52 that it was cancelled.
It comes down to what those reports - particulary ref. 6, Hutton and Gamble "High-speed wind-tunnel tests on an aircraft designed for supersonic speeds (Miles E.24/43). R. & M. 2404. July, 1945" actually said. I would be very surprised if they categorically stated anything that really justified cancellation, but if they do, that's one less conspiracy theory.
By: alertken
- 11th January 2018 at 14:18Permalink- Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There's always a reason for the axe and often its money - other priorities for finite resources. We are today in a fashion of disparaging "experts", in part because their turgid Reports can be presented to fit their funders' wishes.
M.52 had been funded by B.Lockspeiser (BL), D.Scientific Res.(Chairman, MAP Supersonic Cttee.), 29/12/43: its purposes were: as a flying test bed for Whittle's reheated by-pass W.2/700; to upgrade Miles' razor wing work; to explore the transonic regime. Miles had no distinct qualification for any such work: “very good at biffing out small cardboard (types, hadn’t) produced (subsonic) let alone supersonic ones” M.Morgan,MoS/DCARD,Turnill/Reed,P108
(prototype metal Monitor in Experimental Shop), but MAP Cripps' wife Isobel had been entranced by Blossom Miles on a Woodley Factory visit, 10/43: "unusual and enterprising designs" supportive of what BL saw as "fantastic problems" D.Wood,Project Cancelled, P29.
One of the we wuz robbed books gives us the underlying issue: W.Brown/D.Bancroft, M.52-Gateway to Supersonic Flight,Spellmount,2012,P.85: PM, anticipating VJ Day by end-46, 15/1/45 instructed Munitions industry effort to be confined to projects offering “substantial operational” capability by autumn,’46. MAP officials were thus insubordinate/ultra vires in continuing M.52 from that day. And again from 2/9/45 when Miles became unable to draw any material from the Woodley store of US' Lend/Lease Administration... because the Allies now had no enemy. Supersonics had no civil application.
(By then Sir) Ben., DGSR(A)/MoS 2/46 got round to chopping it a year after PM had instructed, after (incredibly) securing a budget for Aircraft Research (UK was broke and cold). He selected innovations with civil potential - Flying Wing, laminar flow, VG: “funds (to) begin exptl. work” on models (it took until mid-'48 to elicit interest from BOAC's MD, Whitney Straight. J.E.Morpurgo,Barnes Wallis,Longman,72,P313). He separately extracted funds for Brabazon Committee-inspired civil projects. Well done, that man! May I suggest we here are happy with those achievements, while some wish he could have found yet more of our money for M.52 to continue until Miles' 19/11/47 bankruptcy (for unrelated, even non-Aero, reasons).
The "pilot risk" issue can be taken as smoke and spin. A reason for cancellation was needed that did not impugn the 12/43 spending decision made by, ah, BL, and, ah, the now President of the Board of Trade, Cripps.
Posts: 3,447
By: Beermat - 11th January 2018 at 12:29 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
The problem was visibility of what happened to an aircraft as it transitioned from the transonic (ie a high speed at which some part of the aircraft was above Mach one - which could begin at anything from 400mph to Mach 0.95 depending on shapes) and the supersonic (when all of it was). No tunnel in the world could do that 1943 to 1946, and this un-testable transition point was also exactly where the perceived 'barrier' was. Hence rockets etc. The Americans persisted with the manned 'suck it and see' approach, possibly largely for PR reasons. It's illustrative of the doubts everyone had that they didn't put one of their top test pilots into the X-1.. and some say it's because one of ours was publicly earmarked for the M-52 that it was cancelled.
It comes down to what those reports - particulary ref. 6, Hutton and Gamble "High-speed wind-tunnel tests on an aircraft designed for supersonic speeds (Miles E.24/43). R. & M. 2404. July, 1945" actually said. I would be very surprised if they categorically stated anything that really justified cancellation, but if they do, that's one less conspiracy theory.
Posts: 887
By: alertken - 11th January 2018 at 14:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
There's always a reason for the axe and often its money - other priorities for finite resources. We are today in a fashion of disparaging "experts", in part because their turgid Reports can be presented to fit their funders' wishes.
M.52 had been funded by B.Lockspeiser (BL), D.Scientific Res.(Chairman, MAP Supersonic Cttee.), 29/12/43: its purposes were: as a flying test bed for Whittle's reheated by-pass W.2/700; to upgrade Miles' razor wing work; to explore the transonic regime. Miles had no distinct qualification for any such work: “very good at biffing out small cardboard (types, hadn’t) produced (subsonic) let alone supersonic ones” M.Morgan,MoS/DCARD,Turnill/Reed,P108
(prototype metal Monitor in Experimental Shop), but MAP Cripps' wife Isobel had been entranced by Blossom Miles on a Woodley Factory visit, 10/43: "unusual and enterprising designs" supportive of what BL saw as "fantastic problems" D.Wood,Project Cancelled, P29.
One of the we wuz robbed books gives us the underlying issue: W.Brown/D.Bancroft, M.52-Gateway to Supersonic Flight,Spellmount,2012,P.85: PM, anticipating VJ Day by end-46, 15/1/45 instructed Munitions industry effort to be confined to projects offering “substantial operational” capability by autumn,’46. MAP officials were thus insubordinate/ultra vires in continuing M.52 from that day. And again from 2/9/45 when Miles became unable to draw any material from the Woodley store of US' Lend/Lease Administration... because the Allies now had no enemy. Supersonics had no civil application.
(By then Sir) Ben., DGSR(A)/MoS 2/46 got round to chopping it a year after PM had instructed, after (incredibly) securing a budget for Aircraft Research (UK was broke and cold). He selected innovations with civil potential - Flying Wing, laminar flow, VG: “funds (to) begin exptl. work” on models (it took until mid-'48 to elicit interest from BOAC's MD, Whitney Straight. J.E.Morpurgo,Barnes Wallis,Longman,72,P313). He separately extracted funds for Brabazon Committee-inspired civil projects. Well done, that man! May I suggest we here are happy with those achievements, while some wish he could have found yet more of our money for M.52 to continue until Miles' 19/11/47 bankruptcy (for unrelated, even non-Aero, reasons).
The "pilot risk" issue can be taken as smoke and spin. A reason for cancellation was needed that did not impugn the 12/43 spending decision made by, ah, BL, and, ah, the now President of the Board of Trade, Cripps.