SIZE OF AIRPORTS

Evening Star, Issue 22973, 2 June 1938, Page 14

SIZE OF AIRPORTS

A GROWING PROBLEM THE AUSTRALIAN POSITION So many prominent aviation authorities have criticised Australian air ports during the last few months that it must by now be apparent to the Federal authorities that a major problem has arisen in the development of Australian aviation (says a writer in the ‘ Sydney Morning Herald’). Some action will have to be taken to geji Australia out of the rut, and to ensure that adequate provision is made for the future. There is definite need for a wellreasoned and comprehensive scheme of air port construction and improvement. Intelligent planning and _ a proper measure of unified controls is essential if Australian aviation is to expand unhampered in the future. It is easy to dismiss the continual criticism of Mascot and other Australian airports in the manner of the Minister of Defence (Mr H. V. Thorby), who says : “ There are many worse aerodromes than Mascot in this country.” But that does not alter the fact that what should be Australia’s principal air terminal cannot stand comparison with major airports in other parts of the world. Flying-officer Clouston recently asserted that Mascot was the worst airport he had encountered on his flight from England to New Zealand, and his statement was but one more following a long list of similar complaints. MUST BE ENLARGED. The director of ground organisation of the Australian Civil Aviation Department (Mr A. R. M'Comb), who went to England last year to collaborate with the British Air Ministry in deciding the requirements of the Sin-gapore-Sydney section of the air mail route, stated that the most important aerodromes in Australia required enlarging considerably. Captain T. B. Howe, a senior pilot of one of America’s air lines, said the same thing. Captain C. H. Scott, superintendent of Australian National Airways, also states that bigger airports aro needed. _ He adds that a similar need has arisen in the United States, where they have some of the largest airports in the world, but are now finding that they must have them bigger and longer.” Of all the Australian aerodromes Mascot has come in for the most consistent criticism, and it has even been suggested that it should be abandoned, except for use by school and instructional planes, and that a more suitable site should be developed at Liverpool or near Bankstown. There would seem to be no likelihood, however, of Mascot’s being superseded as Sydney’s chief commercial aerodrome. This was mad© clear following the inquiry held towards the end of last year, when the Commonwealth Standing Orders Committee on Public Works visited the airport to_ inspect the proposed site of a terminal building. At that inquirv the Controller of Civil Aviation (Captain E. C. Johnson) directed attention to the fact that £250,000 bad already been spent in the past on the airport, which could b© made suitable and adeouate for future requirements. It was later announced in the House of Representatives that a terminal building was to be constructed at the airport at a cost of £51,000. LONGER LANDING RUNS. The present criticism of Australian airports raises several important questions which must be answered in the near future. Experts are asking: “ Will the larger and faster airliners now being designed and built find it impossible to operate from airports at present in existence or under construction in Australia?” All over the world to-day it is becoming increasingly apparent that in a few years’ time the present giant Douglas transports will be comparatively small compared with the flying Pullman cars of the future. This trend to build larger machines was first evidenced in the Empire flying boats with their promenade “ decks.” The airliners now being designed will have even greater conveniences, including reading and writing rooms, private cabins, and facilities for business men desirous of continuing their work while in flight. These facilities will increase the size of airliners, which will mean increased speed, with the attendant need for longer and longer runways for takeoff and landing. The task of bringing these giant planes in to a landing on restricted aerodromes will be assisted to some extent by the further development of wing flaps, but unfortunately these flaps, which steepen tho glide without increasing tho landing speed, do not assist in getting a machine off the ground any quicker. It is this need for longer “ take- off ” runs, as was demonstrated vividly by Flying-officer Clouston in tho Comet, that constitutes the major problem to bo faced to-day. Referring to this problem, the Director of the United States Bureau of Air Commerce, Mr P. D. Fagg, jun., recently stressed the fact that modern twin-engined aircraft can fly with full load with one engine out of action ; provided they have reached a certain minimum speed which is somewhat loosely described as “ single-engine speed.” A BRIEF INTERVAL, But this single-engine speed is higher than take-off speed, which means that as the plane gets into the air there is inescapably a brief interval between the “ take-off ” speed and the attainment of the _ “ single-engine ” speed, where safety lies. Should one engine fail at the takeoff the plane would have to descend, afld in order to avert disaster it would have to be able to come down straight ahead and come to a stop within tho limits of the airport. In 1929 the United States Department of Commerce fixed a limitation of I.oooft for take-off runways, and this was considered to be ample for all requirements. To-day many of the giant planes in uso require every foot of such a runway before their powerful engines and variable pitch airscrews are able to lift their weight off the ground. Obviously, the majority of Australian airports do not possess sufficient room to allow the giant airliners of the future to land safely under the circumstances mentioned. It may bo argued that Australia will not need such huge machines for many years to come, but provision should be made for .their arrival, at least at the major terminal airports, and plans should be formulated so that when they do come the airports at Darwin, Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne will be able to cope with them.