Airdrop

Flight Journal, Dec 2003

"THE CONTRADICTIONS undoubtedly ARE DUE TO massive confusion IN the Philippines AND LOW PRIORITY OF RECORD KEEPING IN THOSE dark days WHEN survival HAD PRIORITY..."

Keep them coming

The October issue has another great article by Warren Thompson on Korea. I really enjoy his writing, and he certainly comes up with some interesting photos. Keep them coming.

In relating to his "Classics" in the same issue on the Russian Bear, I'm sending along my favorite picture of the Tu-95. While transiting the Pacific on USS Kittyhawk, we had a Bear overflight. Whereas the F-4s were the primary interceptors, I was launched in an RA-5C for additional, higher-quality coverage than the handheld cameras the Phantom RIOs used. A second sooner or later, and it would have been a perfect photograph instead of having the nose chopped.

The Tupolev is indeed a monster of an airplane.

ROBERT R. "BOOM" POWELL

VIRGINIA BEACH, VA

Gee Bee info

In your February 2003 issue's "Airdrop," Scott Brener's "Truth vs. Myth" makes a good case that the Granville brothers' Gee Bees have been given an undeserved reputation through inaccurate reporting and sensational journalism.

I feel Bill Turner's comments are a case in point. Mr. Turner stated that, "In fact, the Granvilles, like every other air-racer designer I have researched, never drew an airplane blueprint. Their designs were chalked on the production-room floor."

I do not know about the other designers Mr. Turner refers to, but the Granville brothers were very diligent in their engineering and produced very comprehensive drawings. The Granvilles' first aircraft, a biplane known as the model A, had three engineers to work out any kinks in the Granville design: Robert Hall, with a degree from the University of Michigan; Robert Dexter, with a degree from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Robert Ayer. Eight of these little biplanes were produced. Paperwork for an Approved Type Certificate was submitted to the Department of Commerce in 1929. This paperwork also included a set of engineering drawings.

The next Gee Bee to be built in numbers was the Model E/D (depending on engine configuration). Two replica Model Es were built and flown by Scott Crosby and Jim Jenkins, using original drawings. I had the good fortune to see Scott's airplane during a recent rebuild after an accident a couple of years ago and was able to obtain a set of drawings for the Model E and partial drawings for the Model Y Gee Bees. The drawings have the Granville title blocks and signatures of the engineers and drafters.

The R-1 and R-2 were built with the engineering expertise of Pete Miller, a graduate of New York University with an aeronautical degree. Two replicas exist. The first was built by the New England Air Museum and based on original drawings found in 1962 by Tomas Tumicki. The second R-2, and perhaps the most famous, is the Delmar Benjamin and Steve Wolf replica. This replica is based on the New England Air Museum's aircraft and other sources.

Bill Turner also stated that "... the current Gee Bee restoration that has been entertaining airshow crowds for the past few years-without pilot difficulties-does not use the original design's Clark-Y airfoil."

This statement is also incorrect. The Gee Bee models E/D, Z, Y, R-1 and R-2 all used the M-6 airfoil, not the Clark Y. (See Henry Haffke's "Gee Bee: The real story of the Granville Brothers and their Marvelous Airplanes"). Delmar Benjamin in his book "Gee Bee" also states that he used the M-6 airfoil.

I have enjoyed seeing the replicas Bill Turner produced through the years and hope to see his latest creation, the Laird Turner Meteor. But I also feel that a person of Bill Turner's reputation should not make erroneous statements that the public might accept as gospel.

STEVE ROBINSON

SUNNYVALE, CA

D.VII news

Regarding the article about the Fokker D.VII in your August 2003 issue: I built that plane and have a comprehensive spread on the Internet that contains 43 pictures and seven pages of written material about its construction, testing and flying history. Please notify your readers that they can find the Internet article at www.fokkerd7.com or www.fokker-d7.com.

FRED BERG

LONG ISLAND, NY

Loved it

The "Flying Wings" composite of stories by various authors in your October issue is the best article I've ever seen on this subject in a magazine!

As a person with a BS in aeronautical engineering, who later became a Navy carrier pilot, I greatly appreciate the way the whole story of flying wings is crisply and properly presented from various points of view. A truly outstanding composite!

HARRY D. HAMILTON, CDR, USN (RET.)

MONTEREY, CA

Kawanishi not Nakajima

In October's "Books of Note" review of "Genda's Blade: Japan's Squadron of Aces343 Kokutai" on page 92, it states that the Shiden-Kai fighter (U.S. name "George") is a Nakajima. As an enthusiast of all kinds of aviation, especially WW II military aircraft and, in particular, Japanese WW II aircraft, I must inform you that the manufacturer of the Shiden-Kai fighter is Kawanishi and not Nakajima. It was, however, powered by Homare engines built by Nakajima. I am a Japanese subscriber from the initial issue.