The Santos-Dumont “Demoiselle”
(From The Aeroplane, by Hubbard, Ledeboer and Turner)
Practically all of the accidents occur to those who are flying; but spectators may endanger themselves. During one of the flights of Mauvais at Madrid, in March of the present year, the bystanders rushed through the barriers and out on the field before the machine had well started. A woman was decapitated by the propeller, and four other persons were seriously injured.
Nearly all accidents result from one of three causes: bad design, inferior mechanical construction, and the taking of unnecessary risks by the operator. Scientific design at the present writing is perhaps impossible. Our knowledge of the laws of air resistance and sustention is neither accurate nor complete. Much additional study and experiment must be carried on; and some better method of experimenting must be devised than that which sends a man up in the air and waits to see what happens. A thorough scientific analysis will not only make aviation safer, it will aid toward making it commercially important. Further data on propeller proportions and efficiencies, and on strains in the material of screws under aerial conditions, will do much to standardize power plant equipment. The excessive number of engine breakdowns is obviously related to the extremely light weight of the engines employed: better design may actually increase these weights over those customary at present. Great weight reduction is no longer regarded as essential at present speeds in aerial navigation: we have perhaps already gone too far in this respect.
Bad workmanship has been more or less unavoidable, since no one has yet had ten years’ experience in building aeroplanes. The men who have developed the art have usually been sportsmen rather than mechanics, and only time is necessary to show the impropriety of using “safety pins” and bent wire nails for connections.
The taking of risks has been an essential feature. When one man earns $100,000 in a year by dare-devil flights, when the public flocks in hordes—and pays good prices—to see a man risk his neck, he will usually aim to satisfy it. This is not developing aerial navigation: this is circus riding—looping-the-loop performances which appeal to some savage instinct in us but lead us nowhere. Men have climbed two miles into the clouds, for no good purpose whatever. All that we need to know of high altitude conditions is already known or may be learned by ascents in anchored balloons. Records up to heights of sixteen miles have been obtained by sounding balloons.
If these high altitudes may under certain conditions be desirable for particular types of balloon, they are essentially undesirable for the aeroplane. The supporting power of a heavier-than-air machine decreases in precisely inverse ratio with the altitude. To fly high will then involve either more supporting surface and therefore a structurally weaker machine, or greater speed and consequently a larger motor. It is true that the resistance to propulsion decreases at high altitudes, just as the supporting power decreases: and on this account, given only a sufficient margin of supporting power, we might expect a standard machine to work about as well at a two-mile elevation as at a height of 200 feet; but rarefaction of the air at the higher altitudes decreases the weight of carbureted mixture drawn into the motor, and consequently its output. Any air-man who attempts to reach great heights in a machine not built for such purpose is courting disaster.
Flights over cities, spectacular as they are, and popular as they are likely to remain, are doubly dangerous on account of the irregular air currents and absence of safe landing places. They have at last been officially discountenanced as not likely to advance the sport.