LETTERS

We are always pleased to receive your letters and feedback. Please email the editor at ed.hicks@laa.uk.com

Remembering Mignet

Sir: I was concerned to read the letter from Malcolm Rogan on page nine of the November issue of Light Aviation regarding Henri Mignet for, while I am sure it was not his intent, his words may mislead those to whom the full story of post-war home-built aviation is perhaps less than clear.

Nobody disputes the fact that home-built aircraft have always existed in America, and the US regulators have long been both amenable to their existence and tolerant of their presence. Men like Ed Heath were successfully selling plans for aeroplanes in the distant days of the 1920s and equally people were building and flying successful home-made aircraft from Texas to wherever…

However, things in Britain were very different. Apart from the fact that the enthusiasm for home-made aircraft was extremely restricted, more by cultural differences from our transatlantic cousins than anything else, the concept of amateur-built aircraft barely existed here. Not without due cause was the weekly magazine The Aeroplane to write, in the early 1930s, that home-made aircraft were effectively illegal in Great Britain. The birth of a home-building aircraft movement in France in 1934 was thus of some significance. The laissez-faire attitude of the French authorities admitted home-made aircraft unreservedly and the pioneer of that new approach, Henri Mignet, was quickly elevated to international status.

In Britain, our newspapers were quick to report that ‘all over France (possibly an exaggeration) people were building aeroplanes in their attics, garages and gardens’. This lit an unsuspected blue touchpaper in the hearts of enterprising Britons, who had been weaned on the more genteel activities of fretwork and tin-soldering projects so freely promulgated in the pages of popular magazines such as Work (a mid-Victorian launch) and F J Camm’s Practical series.

What was happening in that land of 300 varieties of cheese quickly overspilled into Germany, Belgium, Holland, Italy – and inevitably crossed the Channel to Britain, thanks largely to the enthusiasm of Stephen Appleby.

Henri Mignet’s Flying Flea now sprang up all over the land and our authorities had no alternative but to create legislation to admit the things alongside the Hawker Harts, Avro 504s and Handley Page Hannibals. Of course, Mignet was no more than an amateur. No aerodynamicist, he could not identify that his successful creation was due to his personal experimentation and a deal of luck. So long as others created identical clones of his specification, they were on safe grounds, but the slightest variation could release a cascade of problems, the most dramatic of which was identified (incorrectly) as control-reversal where pulling back on the stick increased the lift on the rear wing and pushed the nose down.

Whereas most aircraft had performance tolerances formed like a broad inverted U, Mignet’s creation was more of an inverted letter V on the peak of which one might balance. But one minor change and you entered the realm of aerodynamic instability.

How should we review Mignet today? The news item on Bill Cole’s HM.293 (October issue) was perhaps over the top a bit, while Malcolm Rogan’s letter was a touch too dismissive. No, Mignet may not have been a great aircraft designer, but his contribution was far, far greater. He did something nobody else had done, he sowed the seed of home-built aviation into the quiescent hearts of Brits who were enterprising enough to want to do their own thing. War years put the brakes on development and risked pushing aside all that progress that men like Erik Addyman and Appleby had built on Mignet’s shoulders pre-war. And when our first

Minister of Civil Aviation, Lord Swanton, took office in 1946, he had to be educated that there was a dormant movement afoot. It would take a decade of stalwart efforts by men including Bert Waterhouse, Ted Felce and Bob Parker before we had a workable Permit to Fly scheme. Which is why those of us in the know see Henri Mignet as a formidable influence behind where we are today. And let’s not forget that the framework for certifying airworthiness for home-built aircraft was created by the French and adopted by us. It’s easy to forget how much we owe to our friends across La Manche!

Yours sincerely, Arthur W J G Ord-Hume (founder member: ULAA).

Oshkosh 2022 anybody?

Hi Brian, I am planning to go to Oshkosh in 2022 and am in contact with a UK travel agent who has organised these trips many times in the past. The agent has an excellent reputation (from LAA members) for arranging flights, ground transport, accommodation… everything.

So, is there anyone else who would like to go to Oshkosh next year? It would make sense to go as a group, if possible, rather than lots of individual solo visits. I’m happy to collect any names and details and present them to the agent for him to work on.

I also intend to visit Old Rhinebeck, and the museum(s) in Washington before coming home. Everyone can plan their own agenda, but it makes sense to optimise the basic travel arrangements for Oshkosh, re flight, ground transport, accommodation etc.

Please feel free to drop me an email if you are interested. bmaviation@hotmail.com

Brian Mellor, Leeds.

Clacton’s RNAS base in WWI

Hi Brian. It was a little surprising that Martin Ferid’s consummate erudition omitted some of the most interesting history of Clacton. The WWI RNAS seaplane base was located between two piers, neither extant, operating as a substation to that of RNAS Grain, from 1914-1916. By the autumn of 1916, the complement was three aircraft and two officers and its HQ occupied a Martello Tower.

Admittedly, there is no visual evidence remaining, except the Martello tower, but in his peripatetics, Martin will have passed the plaque on the seafront (see right), commemorating Churchill’s unplanned arrival by air. Winston’s passion for aviation is well-known, but perhaps less so is the amount of flying training he undertook, at Eastchurch and Sheerness, although he never gained his pilot’s licence.

As his wartime duties increased, he was persuaded to stop, following some pressure, particularly from his wife, Clemmie.

As First Lord of the Admiralty he oversaw the establishment of the Royal Naval Air Service in 1914 and is credited with coining the word ‘seaplane’.

As far as I know, the little aviation museum at Clear Point keeps its focus on WWII. Others may not find this interesting, but I do, and thought it worthy of mention!

Fly safely, fly lots.

Nic Orchard.

Above The famous EAA gateway at Oshkosh, who fancies a trip in 2022?

Above The plaque in Clacton commemorating Sir Winston Churchill’s landing.

Oldest LAA airliners?

After reading the latest LAA magazine I would like to correct the comments made on the transition of two DH 84’s onto the register. Lovely, exotic machines, yes, but I am surprised by your statement that this is the first time the LAA has been responsible for ‘airliners’.

I registered my 1920 three seat Avro 504L, registration G-EASD, and it was displayed at the Rally this year with a great deal of information.

Both the original airframe and engine logbooks confirm all flights except test or positioning were carried out carrying passengers, freight and/or mail.

G-EASD operated continuously from 1920 until Dec 1927 as a commercial aircraft, used initially by Eastbourne Aviation Co. Ltd in U.K. then by George Spaak, Bergvik Anhallit in Sweden. It is thus the UK’s earliest remaining, and we believe, the world’s, oldest commercial aircraft. It represents the tentative beginnings of the airline industry we know today.

Geoffrey New.

I totally agree with Geoffrey. G-EASD is a remarkable project. A true piece of aviation history.

When it flies, the aircraft will represent an important part of our heritage, something which Geoffrey’s display boards at the Rally demonstrated. It was fascinating to see its story of passenger carrying, both here in the UK, and on floats and skis in Sweden.

I have to say though that while the Avro is truly historic, being pedantic I don’t think we can say it is a complete aeroplane just yet, whereas the two DH Dragons are very much going concerns. Additionally, while the Avro was a derivative of the WWI training type, the Dragons were purpose-built people carriers, but it is accepted that both designs served their purpose well as pioneer passenger carriers. The thought of G-EASD, perhaps in formation with G-EBHB, G-ADEV and G-EROE, all on LAA permits, making up an Avro 504 four ship is a dream to savour. I for one can’t wait! (Steve Slater) ■