Fig. 72c.—Aeroplanes experimented with by Mr. Horatio Philipps. In the published account which is before me, the angles at which these planes were placed are not given, but, by comparing the lift with the drift, we may assume that it was about 1 in 10.
Fig. 5 seems to have been the best shape, and I find that this plane would have given a lifting effect of 2·2 lbs. per square foot at a velocity of 40 miles per hour.
Philipps’ Experiments.
| Description of Form. | Speed of Air Current. | Dimensions of Aeroplanes. | Lift. | Drift. | Lift divided by Drift. | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feet per sec. | Miles per hour. | Whole Plane. Ozs. | Lbs. per sq. ft. | Whole Plane. Ozs. | Lbs. per sq. ft. | ||||||
| Plane surfaces, | 39 | 26·59 | 16" × 5" | 9 | 1 | ·013 | 2 | 0·225 | 4 | ·5 | |
| Fig. 1, | 60 | 40·91 | 16" × 1·25" | 9 | 4 | ·05 | 0 | ·87 | 0·392 | 10 | ·3 |
| F„g 2, | 48 | 32·73 | 16" × 3" | 9 | 1 | ·688 | 0 | ·87 | 0·163 | 10 | ·3 |
| F„g 3, | 44 | 30 | 16" × 3" | 9 | 1 | ·688 | 0 | ·87 | 0·163 | 10 | ·3 |
| F„g 4, | 44 | 30 | 16" × 5" | 9 | 1 | ·013 | 0 | ·87 | 0·098 | 10 | ·3 |
| F„g 5, | 39 | 26·59 | 16" × 5" | 9 | 1 | ·013 | 0 | ·87 | 0·098 | 10 | ·3 |
| F„g 6, | 27 | 18·41 | 16" × 5" | 9 | 1 | ·013 | 2 | ·25 | 0·253 | 4 | |
| Rook’s wing, | 39 | 26·59 | Area sq. ft. 0·5 | 8 | 1 | ·0 | 1 | ·0 | 0·125 | 8 | |
CHAPTER VIII.
BALLOONS.
As far as the actual navigation of the air is concerned, balloonists have had everything to themselves until quite recently, but we find that at the present moment, experimenters are dividing their attention about equally between balloons or machines lighter than the air, and true flying machines or machines heavier than the air. In all Nature, we do not find any bird or insect that does not fly by dynamic energy alone, and I do not believe that the time is far distant when those now advocating machines lighter than the air, will join the party advocating machines heavier than the air, and, eventually, balloons will be abandoned altogether. No matter from what standpoint we examine the subject, the balloon is unsuitable for the service, and it is not susceptible of much improvement. On the other hand, the flying machine is susceptible of a good deal of improvement; there is plenty of scope for the employment of a great deal of skill, both mechanical and scientific, for a good many years to come.
I do not know that I can express myself better now than I did when I wrote an article for the Engineering Supplement of the Times, from which I quote the following:—
“The result of recent experiments must have convinced every thinking man that the day of the balloon is past. A balloon, from the very nature of things, must be extremely bulky and fragile.