SLIGHT LEAD

Waihi Daily Telegraph, Volume XXXI, Issue 8839, 2 November 1942, Page 3

SLIGHT LEAD

TECHNICAL QUALITY NEW AIRCRAFT IN USE FINE MACHINES IN SERVICE Technical quality as much as any other factor is going to influence air operations this. summer. Numbers are not enough, as we proved to the Germans in the Battle of Britain. . In more than two years of war we have held a slight but undoubted technical lead over the Luftwaffe, thanks to the combined efforts of the British aircraft industry, and the Air Ministry before the war. In training we are consolidating the lead we have always had (writes Peter Masefield, air cor-

respondent of the Sunday Times). We know that the enemy has already amassed numbers of new and formidable aeroplanes, which are yet to be seen in action. Advancements in technique are limited by the dictates of production, so that aeronautical designs appears to go forward in a series of steps, each separated by about five years. It is a background struggle which determines the whole course of war in the air.

During the past five years the Spitfire, the Hurricane, the Blenheim and the Wellington have represented about two years’ lead in design over their German counterparts, which were put into production earlier. Our technical advantage has stood us in good stead. Performance alone is not the criterion; tactical design to fit in with the planned strategy is equally important. Recently we have enhanced the lead in heavy bombers by the changeover to the Halifax, the Stirling, and the Lancaster. But in fighters we have been slipping back a little and to-day the Spitfire, designed in 1934, greatly improved since, and with still more improvements to come, is being hard pressed at medium heights by the Focke-Wulf Fw 190, designed in 1939.

The success of a fighter or a bomber depends fundamentally upon its power-unit. The new German fighter has a motor of 1600 h.p. against the Spitfire’s 1300 h.p. It is designed to take an engine of more than 2000 h.p. so that it may become more formidable still.

Our reply to this is the Hawker Typhoon, soon to be in action. The Typhoon has the new Napier Sabre motor of 2350 h.p.—the power and extraordinary compactness of which make it an ideal type for the job. A new engine in a new airframe is always liable to teething troubles and doubtless the Typhoon has had its share, but it is certain to prove master of the Fw 190. What is required is a courageous development programme with both engine and air frame. Inspired and dogged development such as the evolution of the Beaufighter from the Beaufort bomber is likely to do more to produce high quality more quickly than any other method. The Napier Sabre . probably holds out promises of achieving greater triumphs than any other conventional engine in the world to-day, though outside co-opera-tion may be needed for its development.

We have in service two other fine motors which must be pressed forward on parallel lines —the Bristol Hercules radial and the Rolls-Royce Merlin. They are two of the most vital links in our war effort and fortunately their production is spread far and wide.

In Germany development has not been neglected—either in engines oi air frames. In particular, the new Me 210, evolved from the Me HO, is believed to be in service in numbers, although not yet in action. With a top speed of more than 350 m.p.h. and a bomb load of around 40001 b., it is likely to be a formidable type . An interesting factis that the enemy appears to have deserted the dive-bomber for the fast low-level bomber—no doubt conscious of his need to conserve his aircraft.

But the most important factor of all is American aircraft, because they are likely to be in service in the greatest numbers. The Americans make fine aeroplanes, but they are still better flying than fighting machines. Shortcomings in armament have been rectified recently and the newer types are as heavily armed as any. They are now deficient chiefly in the little things that only war’ can teach. In fact, the need is for a pool of experience between the United Nations. There are some things we can teach, there is much we can learn. From the Russians, for instance, there is the rocket bomb, which appears to combine some of the advantages of the dive-bomber with none of its manifest shortcomings.