(Don Rogers was AVRO'S Chief Test Pilot on the Jetliner)
This was a very interesting and very exciting time for me,
and for all of us who were associated with the Jetliner. I was
asked to look up some of the details and give a few reminiscent
facts from my log book about the many happy and exciting experiences.
Unfortunately the story had a sad ending; I can't imagine anything
more unpleasant than seeing an airplane that you have lived with
for seven years and enjoyed flying - a really beautiful machine
- being cut up with saws, axes and hammers, with pieces falling
on the hangar floor. I couldn't go in the hangar for a couple
of days while they were doing this job because it was a heart-rending
experience.
However, before we came to that sad ending we had some very
interesting programs and flights and, since I have my log book
with dates of historical interest to me and perhaps to you, I
am going to give you some background history of the Jetliner.
At this time, I would like to pay particular tribute to Tommy
Thompson, who was one of the flight engineers on the Jetliner
during its career and was largely responsible for putting this
outline together tonight. He has done a lot of work preparing
the board displaying photographs and diagrams with newspaper
reports, etc. He deserves all the credit for his work in putting
this program together.
Next, I would like to introduce Michael Cooper-Slipper, who
was my co-pilot and very soon became captain on the airplane
also. Mike since then has been with Field Aviation and is now
with Bannock Aerospace Sales.
Also, Bill Baker, who is now Vice-President Operations at Douglas,
back in the same factory where he was flight engineer on the
first flights of the Jetliner. He flew in it throughout most
of the initial flying for some period of time.
And with us tonight is Bob Johnson, who is in the production
department at Douglas Aircraft. He was, in the early days, involved
with the production and flight program of the Jetliner.
Let us first go briefly into the Jetliner background. Originally
the facility at Malton Airport, as it was called in those days,
had rather an odd name. It was the Aircraft Division of National
Steel Car, which actually builds railroad cars in Hamilton. I
guess they saw the 'writing on the wall' that the aircraft industry
was the thing to be in rather than railroads, because in 1939
they set up a factory at Malton.
Initially they were building and assembling other people's airplanes
- English Lysanders and Ansons. Also they had a contract to assemble
a number of Yales, which some of you will remember were the fixed
undercarriage version of the North American Harvard. These had
been sitting in crates on a wharf in New York to be shipped to
the French Air Force. When France capitulated, the Yales were
sent to Malton for assembly. They were somewhat peculiar in that
the throttle and mixture controls all operated backwards. I don't
know why the French thought that this was the way they should
be, but they were a bit of a trick to fly until you got accustomed
to it. Eventually, of course, they were changed over to operate
in the ordinary sense, or what we considered correct anyway.
I joined the company in January 1942 and at that time we were
building airplanes from scratch rather than assembling them,
and during the next two or three years we built about 840 Ansons
(Mk.II's) and 150 Lysanders. Then the company became a Crown
Company in November 1942, which some of you will recall as Victory
Aircraft. The main object of this company was to build the Avro
Lancaster.
I well remember when the first Lancaster taxied in. It was flown
by Clyde Pangborn from England to the factory at Malton. We were
flying Ansons and Lysanders then, and I looked up at this huge
machine taxiing in and wondered to myself if I would ever be
able to fly such a big aircraft. Now, of course, while the Lancaster
is a good-sized, four-engined airplane, it isn't all that big
anymore. Everything is relative.
Going back a bit further, I remember when I was an instructor
at the Hamilton Acre Club. Ernie Taylor and I flew a Tiger Moth
from Hamilton to Downsview airport - the old sod field where
de Havilland Canada started originally - to have a look at an
Avro Anson that had been imported and was to be flown there.
I thought that this was a big airplane then, too. So you grow
up with the size of the airplane.
In any case, during the war Victory Aircraft built approximately
432 Lancasters, seven of which were converted into the semi-civil
version, called Lancastrians, for Trans-Canada Air Lines. With
these aircraft, TCA introduced their transatlantic service during
the war for VIP's and high priority material between Canada and
the U.K.
In the summer of 1945 the European war wound up and it became
obvious that the end was in sight for the production of the Lancasters.
As a matter of fact, at this time we built one Lincoln because
we thought that the Japanese war was going to continue. Also
we built one Avro York, which some of you will remember used
the same wings and engines, etc., as the Lancaster, but with
a very large, deep fuselage. It was converted into a high wing
airplane. We tooled up for 30 of those aircraft, I think, and
actually built parts for five with one ultimately being completed
about the time the war came to an end.
When it became apparent that this was going to happen Sir Roy
Dobson, who was the Managing Director of Avro in England, made
several trips between Canada and the U.K. Sir Roy and C.D. Howe
in Ottawa had discussed the possibilities of not abandoning this
facility at Malton, since by this time it was quite a large organization.
Dobson wanted to use the facilities to produce some type of civil
airplane and thus keep the Canadian company going.
A general agreement was reached in the Fall of 1945 for A.V.
Roe and Co., in England to take over the plant. The original
idea was to produce a four-engined airliner for use by TCA. The
thought at that time was to make an airplane much like the Viscount
- a fourengined, propeller-driven turboprops Meetings were held
with Jim Bain and Gord Dyment, of TCA's engineering and financing
departments, regarding the operation and production of an airplane
of that type.
However it happened that Jim Bain went to England in the Fall
of 1945 and, during a visit at Rolls-Royce, had a chance to see
the R-R Avon engines which were in an early production stage
for military use. He became so enthralled with the potential
possibilities of this jet engine for commercial use that he decided
on the pure jet rather than the turboprop for TCA.
The result of this was that on his return from England, he discussed
with C.D. Howe, and with some of the other people in TCA, the
possibility of building such an airplane for the airline. Toward
the end of 1945, a gentleman by the name of Stewart Davis (called
'Cock' Davis) who was, I think, chief engineer of Avro in England,
came over along with Jim Floyd who eventually became the chief
designer of the Jetliner. They got into a discussion with TCA
and also with the Canadian Government. In conclusion, Mr. Symington,
who was President of TCA at that time, sent a letter of intent
to A.V. Roe of Canada Ltd., as it became known in 1945, with
the intention of building the Jetliner, not with the engines
it eventually had but with two Avon engines. The design progressed
along those lines and was almost completed - in fact, parts were
beginning to be built when Lord Hives of Rolls-Royce became very
concerned that the Avon engine wasn't going to achieve civil
certification in time for installation in the Jetliner when it
was ready to fly. The result was that the design team at the
eleventh hour did a lot of redesigning, changing the aircraft
to a four-engined version using Rolls-Royce Derwent engines.
The Derwent was a very good engine. It was a good substitute
for the Avon for the time being but, because it was an older-style,
centrifugal flow compressor rather than axial flow, its specific
fuel consumption was not as good. Also it meant four engines
for the Jetliner rather than two, in order to provide sufficient
thrust. This meant some added complications, of course.
However, this installation did have one advantage from the early
certification point of view. Being a four-engined airplane, the
loss of one engine meant losing only one-quarter rather than
half the power, thus simplifying the certification requirements
of the FAA and the DOT. In fact this resulted in a change in
the rudder configuration. The original plan of the Jetliner had
a dual rudder arrangement. The rear section was operated by the
rudder pedals manually, but then maximum application of the normal
manual rudder introduced a powered 'follow up' to the system
that would move the forward section of the rudder as well and
give additional directional control. This design was to meet
the 'engine out' control requirements of the twin-engined, Avon-powered
aircraft.
As it happened, with the engines located as close to the fuselage
as they were in the four-engined configuration, the 'engine out'
handling was so satisfactory that in the cockpit you would hardly
be aware of an engine cut as far as yawing was concerned. You
could cut a throttle on the plane and, with your feet on the
floor, it would go along with a very small adjustment of the
trim. Eventually the powered portion of the rudder was locked
out as only the manual portion was required.
During this time we were having an interesting period at Avro
in the test pilot department. Mike was with me at the time and
we had such a variety of airplanes to fly that it kept you on
your toes. We had everything from Lancasters - on which we were
doing conversion work for the RCAF - to B-25's, Venturas, DC-3's
and even some Hawker Sea Furies for the Canadian Navy. I was
doing some flying on Vampires also, so we had an infinite variety
of airplanes.
Also at this time I had a chance to go to England with Des Murphy,
who was the Department of Transport's chief test pilot - in fact,
he was their only test pilot at that time. While in England and
at Avro's, we flew the jet-engined version of the Avro Tudor,
which was a funny kind of airplane because again it was a conversion
of the Lancaster using a commercial type of fuselage, still with
a tail wheel undercarriage. They had converted this to take four
jet engines - Avons, I believe. I flew with Jimmy Orrell, who
was the chief test pilot at Avro in England in 1948, prior to
our flying the Jetliner.
Finally in 1949 the Jetliner reached a point where it was getting
ready to be flown and Jimmy Orrell came over from England. We
went over the details of the airplane together and eventually
the great day arrived on August 10th, just a little over three-and-a-half
years from when the design started, which was pretty good. I
should also mention that this was also an exciting time for the
engineers, designers, production people and everybody else at
Avro, because here was Canada - which hadn't done very much initial
design at all before designing the first jet transport on the
North American continent. At the same time Avro was designing
pure jet engines since we started out with the Chinook as a sort
of trial run and then built the Orenda engine which, by the standard
of those days, was a very modern design. Then there was the twin-jet,
two-place fighter airplane - the CF-100. All these projects were
going on together and you can imagine what a very interesting
time it was.
The first flight of the Jetliner took place on 10 August 1949
and was a very successful flight. We flew for an hour and five
minutes with Jimmy Orrell as captain, Bill Baker as flight engineer,
and myself as copilot. This flight occurred during the plant
shut-down and management, in their wisdom, decided it would be
a good idea to have the second flight with all the plant employees
out along the fence to watch the flying as soon as they returned
from vacation.
The second flight occurred on 16 August. That was the flight
where we ran into a little bit of a problem and the demonstration
became more exciting than we had intended. Before we came back
to do some flying across the field, we had some test work to
do on stalls. We did our tests and the airplane shook and buffeted
as it does in the stall. We went through the test program followed
by our flight across the field to show the fine performance of
the airplane to the employees. We then circled the field and
selected the button that lowers the undercarriage, but the main
wheels did not come down - only the nosewheel. So we selected
the gear up again, but nothing happened at this point. This became
discouraging. However, we had three methods of getting the undercarriage
down so we were not too concerned as yet. We had the push button
(the regular way), an auxiliary hydraulic pump that you could
switch on, with another system to operate the foregoing, a hand
pump (also hydraulic), and in the main cabin under a panel in
the floor was a neat little handle that said 'emergency release'.
Bill Baker probably wouldn't tell you this, but I will. He actually
broke a rib pulling and yanking on that handle and, in fact,
eventually broke the cable trying to release the undercarriage.
But none of this would avail and finally, in spite of the pleas
of the airport manager that we go over the lake and ditch the
airplane there rather than on the airport, we eventually landed
the craft on the field with no problem at all.
The nosewheel was down, which people thought was pretty hazardous
with the main wheels up, but actually this turned out to be the
best situation we could have, because the aircraft rolled along
on its nosewheel and the end of the tail-pipes, much like an
ordinary landing. There was almost no damage at all. We ran across
a taxi-strip as we were coming to a stop which caused some scraping
on the bottom of the jet pipes, flaps, and so on. It was a very
smooth landing and we suffered no discomfort in the airplane.
Afterward people came crowding around wondering if everything
was OK, but there was no problem at all as far as we were concerned.
The reason that the undercarriage would not come down was pretty
simple. In the course of our stalls, with the nose up and the
aircraft shaking in the pre-stall buffet, the undercarriage oleos
had shortened and allowed the undercarriage lugs to come back
into the up locks to the point where pulling the emergency, or
anything else, just wouldn't withdraw the locks enough to free
the gear. The remedy to this was so simple that you wonder why
you didn't think of it beforehand.
What the engineers did was put a little cam-shaped fitting in
the up lock so that, as it came up, the undercarriage pin rode
ahead of this cam and couldn't come back too far to prevent the
up lock from releasing. It was just that simple, but it caused
a lot of heartrending to the people on the ground watching us
fly around with the gear half down.
However, the airplane was very little damaged. This happened
on the sixteenth of August, and about a month later, on the twentieth
of September, we flew the airplane again and the test program
began seriously.
On the fourth of October, which was less than a month later,
we had the first public demonstration of the Jetliner and we
have quite a few pictures of this occasion. We had officials
from the government, the Air Force and the airlines come to look
at the airplane and see it fly.
By the middle of October, I had done quite a bit of flying on
the Jetliner with Jimmy Orrell and Mike Cooper-Slipper. Jimmy
returned to England to continue flying for a number of years
there. He is now retired and is still living in a beautiful little
cottage right on the edge of Woodford aerodrome where he spent
so many years as chief test pilot. We correspond occasionally
although I haven't seen him for quite a few years.
One interesting flight that occurred during the airplane's life
was on the eighteenth of April, 1950. We made the first international
air mail flight in North America in a jet transport when we carried
air mail from Toronto to New York. Gordon McGregor, who at that
time was president of Trans-Canada Air Lines, flew along with
us. The mayor of Toronto sent, among other things, a peace pipe
that we were to take to the mayor of New York. I don't know which
one of us was supposed to puff on the thing to keep it going.
I think Bill lighted it just before we landed. Anyway we took
this peace pipe along, lots of pictures were taken, air mail
letters were carried back and forth and some of you may still
have some of the covers that were on that flight. This flight
was interesting from an historical point of view, not only because
air mail was carried but it was also the first flight in the
United States of a jet transport.
During 1950 and 1951 the test and demonstration program continued.
We did demonstrations for the RCAF at Ottawa and St. Hubert,
the USAF at Dayton, Ohio, and also some flights for the air force
and for other officials at Washington, D.C.; and down to Miami
for the airlines there, as well as Chicago.
On the tenth of January 1951, we had an interesting flight that
attracted considerable interest in the press. This was a triangular
operation from Toronto to Chicago to La Guardia to Toronto. Toronto
to Chicago took an hour and thirty minutes, Chicago to New York
was an hour and fifty-five, and New York to Toronto was an hour
and ten which, by today's standards, is not unusual. But in those
days, when they were still flying DC-3's and -4's, this was considered
quite spectacular.
While we were happily flying along on our way from Chicago to
New York, we didn't realize the commotion that was happening.
The airport manager at La Guardia said that he wouldn't have
this fire-spitting jet aircraft landing on his fine airport.
Our representative at La Guardia was having a terrible time arguing
that we weren't going to burn down the terminal and the other
aircraft but, fortunately, we didn't know all this arguing was
going on. Finally he did get an approval for us to land, with
the understanding that we would not taxi anywhere but on the
runway. We would stop on the taxi-strip and they would send out
a tractor to tow us in if necessary and they'd monitor the burning
up of their tarmac. If there was any danger we were to shut down
right away! Of course we know now that we can taxi a jet around
without causing all this damage. The airport manager didn't know,
but fortunately we were able to show him that all was well. It
is interesting to think back now to the misunderstandings that
existed in those times about the advent of jet transports.
A couple of days later, on the twelfth of January, we flew to
Winnipeg and back with Ron Baker who was TCA's chief test pilot.
We went out in two hours and forty minutes and back in two hours
and thirty-five minutes, which again, is no problem today, but
at that time it was quite interesting.
Those of you who are pilots will appreciate the fun it was flying
cross-country in this airplane because most of the transports
operated in the five thousand to fifteen thousand foot level.
We were cruising at thirty thousand feet at 420 or 430 miles
an hour. Every time we reported over a radio fix and gave our
altitude as 30,000 feet and our estimate to the next fix, the
ground controller would come back and say "Do you mean three
thousand?"... "No, thirty thousand!" And then
they would say "We've checked your estimate; there must
be a mistake here somewhere ..." The folks in Air Traffic
Control were not accustomed to those speeds. So this was all
quite fun for us sitting in the cockpit in pressurized comfort
flying on autopilot and working the computer across the countryside.
Of course this sort of thing is all 'old hat' now, but in those
days it was new and exciting.
On the twenty-second of January - we had a busy January that
year - we flew to Tampa with Garth Edward of TCA. That was a
three-hour flight and we did some demonstrations for the airlines
down there. And from there to La Guardia in two hours and twenty
minutes and then to Toronto.
We had one of our few mechanical delays on that landing at La
Guardia. The nosewheel anti-shimmy hydraulic jack failed so we
had to stay there a day while awaiting a replacement from Toronto.
The airplane was fantastically reliable. I can never remember
having an engine failure in the air. We had one foreign object
damage to an engine on the ground in Chicago while on demonstration
there. We made a three-engine ferry flight to Toronto. (The speaker
enquired of Michael Cooper-Slipper if he recalled any in-flight
engine failures.) I guess that there may have been one - I know
we had fire warnings, but they were false alarms. Anyway, in
total we did 425 hours and the aircraft's reliability was outstanding.
In July of 1951 we flew to Washington again and did some more
demonstrations for the United States Air Force and the Navy.
At about this time there was enough interest on the part of several
of the air lines that they were getting serious about writing
orders for the Jetliner. United Aircraft in Chicago, C.R. Smith,
who was the president of American Airlines, Eddie Rickenbaker,
for Eastern, and so on - these folk had all flown with me in
the airplane as well as with Mike. Some had come to the point
where they were ready to sign a production order for the airplane.
Now this is where the rot set in for the poor old Jetliner and,
personally, I think for Avro Canada's future. The Jetliner, of
course, was a Government-funded project, as was the CF-100 and
Orenda engine. Unfortunately for the Jetliner program, the Korean
uproar got going at the wrong time. We were having teething problems
at that time getting the new jet fighter and jet engine into
production. Since all three programs were government funded,
Ottawa decreed that we should stop work on the Jetliner until
we got the two military projects underway.
This sounded the death knell of the Jetliner. We couldn't give
a production schedule to National Airlines and the whole program
was set aside. I personally feel that the company made a very
bad decision at that point because, rather than resurrecting
this program or keeping it trickling along gently, the lure of
military orders for the CF-100 and Orenda, with the possibility
of continuing military orders, resulted in the company stopping
Jetliner development, and never putting it into production.
Now you must realize that this all happened in 1951 and '52.
This was some seven years before the 707 and the DC-8 flew with
the airlines in commercial use, and many years before the DC-9.
If the Jetliner had gone through its normal development, with
a thinner wing using some sweepback and with more powerful engines
such as the developed Orenda, perhaps - if it had once got into
production, it was such a fine flying airplane and had such good
performance and handling that, in its normal course of development,
I am sure it would have been a DC-9 type aircraft about ten years
before that aircraft eventually arrived on the scene.
It was not in direct competition with the 707 and DC-8. They
were intended for transcontinental and transatlantic routes,
but the Jetliner was designed as an intercity transport, and
it would have been ideal in this service. I think that if Avro
Canada had retained the Jetliner program until their military
production was going smoothly, Avro might very well still be
in business today in the commercial field. When the basket containing
all the military eggs was dropped, the loss of the Arrow program
eventually broke the company's back. This is something that I
would rather not go into at this or any other time.
Another blow happened to the Jetliner at this time and, oddly
enough, this was the result of another airplane which was in
Canadian production - the North Star. Some of you will probably
remember the tremendous newspaper noise that was going on and
the criticism of the Government and Trans-Canada Air Lines over
the North Star program. The North Star was a combination DC-4/
DC-6 converted to take Rolls-Royce engines, similar to the Merlin
engines that had been in the Lancaster. Now these were very good
engines and did a fine job; actually a very fine job for TCA.
But the aircraft did have some teething problems, the engines
were very noisy, and the old political problem reared its head.
The opposition made a tremendous 'song and dance' about TCA having
taken on this new project instead of buying DC-6s and '7s. TCA's
engineers had been involved in a 11 of the original design specifications
and operational characteristics of the Jetliner, but they decided
they couldn't face up to introducing such a radical aircraft
as a jet transport into their airline at that time. This precluded
the prospect of a sale to ICA and I'm sure contributed to the
company's decision at that time not to continue into production.
This was about 1951 and from then on the aircraft was in a stateof
decline, but one of the most interesting programs for the crew
actually happened in 1952. We took the airplane down to Hughes
Aircraft at Culver City near Los Angeles, with the idea of Hughes
using it for the development of the MG 2 Fire-Control System.
As you will probably recall, the CF-100 that we were building
was to have the MG 2 system and Hughes Aircraft was designing
and building this new project. When you think back to the new
ground that Canada was getting into and exploring with the development
of all these projects at the same time, it really is remarkable.
It's a pity to think of all the engineering skills that eventually
had to leave the company and the country, when some of the projects
fell through.
Anyway, to get back to the story. We took the Jetliner to Hughes
Aircraft in California with the idea of their using the aircraft
as a test bed, because of course they could pop up to thirty
thousand feet in a few minutes in pressurized comfort - a very
fine test bed for them. Bill Wildfong was the engineer on that
flight, and a chap named Syd Howland was the co-pilot. Mike we
left at home to look after the shop, flying the production aircraft
at Toronto.
The second day we were there I gave Howard Hughes a flight in
the airplane. He was so intrigued with it that he, in his usual
unique manner, had the airplane moved away from Hughes Aircraft
over to the far side of the field with guards put around it.
Then no one, including the crew, could get to the airplane without
his say so. He did this with various other airplanes, too. He
had a Lockheed Constellation, a Boeing Stratocruiser, a Convair
and a Martin 404 parked here and there around the countryside
under guard. Occasionally he would go and fly them. We went down
with the idea of being there for ten days or so, but we were
there for six months and only flew thirteen-and-a-half hours
total time during that six-month period.
Most of the time we stayed in a hotel. My wife and the engineer's
wife were brought down. Later they returned home, but still later
all my family was brought to California and we were put up in
a beautiful house in Beverley Hills. However, you were seldom
really free because Howard Hughes' office would phone us in the
mornings and say "Mr. Hughes will probably want to fly this
afternoon." After sitting by the phone all day, the office
would finally call and say "Very sorry, but Mr. Hughes wasn't
able to get away today but perhaps he will fly tomorrow." So
we were never off the hook. All of a sudden held decide that
he wanted to go over to Palm Springs and would come out and climb
aboard.
When I had checked him out on the Jetliner, which took only
a short time, he went around and did, I think, nine takeoffs
and landings in a row on his beautiful nine-thousand-foot grass
strip. Ile was a perfectionist on takeoffs and landings, although
he tended to come in a little fast in order to make a nice smooth
landing. When we taxied in, I mentioned to a Hughes Aircraft
pilot that we'd done nine landings and takeoffs. He said, "That's
nothing! When he got his Boeing Stratocruiser, he did thirty-seven!" I
guess he figured the Jetliner was pretty easy to fly, which it
was.
After I checked Mr. Hughes out, I was immediately relegated
to co-pilot duties because he did all the flying from then on,
with a complete and utter disregard for air traffic control.
We would climb up VFR through the fog and smog of Los Angeles
and out of the area, and he'd say "Don't worry about that."
Mr. Hughes kept the airplane in California with the idea of
selling it to TWA, since I think at the time he was chairman
of the airline. But no TWA people ever flew the aircraft. This
was a funny habit he had; he'd lock an airplane and put it under
guard just as if it was his own personal property. Eventually
Fred Smye got fed up with this procrastination and, after many
phone calls and visits to Hughes, the airplane was recalled.
Only the engineer and myself were in California by this time
since all the other staff had gone home long before. This had
been an interesting interlude for me as I had met and flown with
a most outstanding man who was an expert pilot, and had seen
something of a way of life much different than that to which
I was accustomed.
Once the Jetliner was back in Toronto in late 1952, all serious
work on the aircraft ended, but I was surprised when I looked
in my log book to find out how long it went on flying. It was
actually the Fall of 1956 when the last flight took place. In
other words, for another four years the airplane did a little
bit of test flying once in a while, primarily as a photographic
platform for observing rocket firing and other development work
on the CF-100. We did a few demonstration flights; we flew in
the Toronto air show for two years, and we took the Jetliner
to Ottawa for an RCAF show there.
All these flights were made to keep the Jetliner flying, but
without doing any development work on the aircraft. One of the
most interesting flights on the Jetliner, which many of you,
especially those employed by Avro will remember, was on 26 May
1955, when we flew Mr. Martin of the Martin-Baker Company, which
pioneered in the development of the ejection seat. This flight
was for photographing the first live ejection from the CF-100.
He brought a man over from England to demonstrate the seat by
making a live ejection. I think Jan Zurakowski was flying the
CF-100 and we flew the Jetliner alongside over the flat area
near Camp Borden and photographed the rear seat ejection. We
then landed at Camp Borden to pick up the jumper and take him
and the seat back to Malton.
Then, sadly, I note from my log book the last flight of the
Jetliner on 23 November 1956, which was just about seven years
from the time that it first flew. Flight time totalled approximately
440 hours with very little trouble; a fine airplane, and a dream
to fly. It was so quiet in the cockpit that we never used a headset.
It was so much in advance of any aircraft of the time that it
is a pity that it didn't continue.
Some unkind remarks were made to explain its cancellation by
TCA. I really don't understand the purported press report of
C.D. Howe saying that-it didn't fly properly and that it had
to have sand ballast in the rear of the fuselage. This, of course,
was not correct. We did use ballast on many occasions for certification
work, in order to position the centre of gravitv just where we
wanted it for a particular test, but this certainly was not a
requirement for normal operations. The aircraft was beautiful
to fly. We had hydraulic assist on the ailerons, manual rudder
and elevators, with an electrically-operated horizontal stabilizer
to adjust for different loadings.
Many humorous things happened during the time we were flying
the Jetliner. One development program we did was on the de-icing
system, which was new at that time. It was an electrically-heated
de-icing system with rubber boots on wings and tail; the same
kind of boots that are common on propellers nowadays. But this
is the first installation I know of where it was used for surface
de-icing. They were Goodyear boots with electric elements in
them and sometimes, because the material was quite thin and the
engineers weren't sure what voltage was needed in them the surface
of the boot would burn through and that, combined with the moisture
getting in, would cause great sparks to flash out on the wing.
We had an engineering observer who sat at a test panel back
in the airplane. This man was not in love with flying and I don't
know why he chose to be a flight observer, but in any case, he
was sitting back at his panel where a red light would come on
to indicate that we had entered an icing condition. This ice
sensor would let us know that it was time to start operating
the boots. When he saw this red light come on for the first time,
he jumped up so fast he almost knocked himself out on the overhead
baggage rack. So, from that flight on, he wore a hard hat - in
case he jumped up too fast again. On another occasion, with Mike
flying the Jetliner on a stability test, we had large water tanks
forward and aft in the cabin with a pumping system so one could,
by pumping the water from tank to tank, change the cg for certification
work. A few minutes after takeoff, one sense antenna mounting
on the nose broke off and started to bang against the fuselage.
Mike realized that it would only be a matter of time before it
banged a hole in the fuselage and decided to come back in. Of
course the airplane was very heavy with the water ballast, so
he gave the order to the same observer to 'dump' the water. Our
friend heard the word 'dump' and thought he said "jump".
Another engineer had to go back and rest this observer from jumping
overboard, rather than dumping the water.
Well, so much for the saga of the Jetliner from my log book.
I'm surprised that my talk has been so long but there were so
many interesting episodes that I have only been able to skim
over the high spots. The aircraft was so advanced, and such an
ambitious adventure for the Canadian company in 1949 and the
early 1950's that I think it has earned a significant place in
the history of Canadian Aviation