Seaplane, Part III

The H8K entered production in 1941 and first saw operational use on the night of 4 March 1942 in a second raid on Pearl Harbor. Since the target lay out of range for the flying boats, this audacious plan involved a refuelling by submarine at French Frigate Shoals, some 550 miles north-west of Hawaii, en route. Two planes from the Yokohama Kokutai (Naval Air Corps) attempted to bomb Pearl Harbor, but, due to poor visibility, did not accomplish any significant damage.

H8K2s were used on a wide range of patrol, reconnaissance, bombing, and transport missions throughout the Pacific war. The H8K2 was given the Allied code name "Emily".

Four aircraft survived until the end of the war. One of these, an H8K2, was captured by U.S. forces at the end of the war and was evaluated before being eventually returned to Japan in 1979. It was on display at Tokyo's Museum of Maritime Science until 2004, when it was moved to Kanoya Air Base in Kagoshima.

The submerged remains of an H8K can be found off the west coast of Saipan, where it is a popular scuba diving attraction known erroneously as the "B-29", or the "Emily". Another wrecked H8K lies in Chuuk Lagoon, Chuuk, in Micronesia. This aircraft is located off the south-western end of Dublon Island.

The Mitsubishi F1M (Allied reporting name "Pete") was a Japanese reconnaissance floatplane of World War II. It was the last biplane type of the Imperial Japanese Navy, with 1,118 built between 1936 and 1944. The Navy designation was "Type Zero Observation Seaplane", not to be confused with the Type Zero Carrier Fighter or the Type Zero Reconnaissance Seaplane.

The F1M1 was powered by the Nakajima Hikari MK1 radial engine, delivering 611 kW (820 hp), a maximum speed of 368 km/h (230 mph) and operating range of up to 1,072 km (670 mi) (when overloaded). It provided the Imperial Japanese Navy with a very versatile operations platform.

Optionally armed with a maximum of three 7.7 mm (.303 in) machine guns (two fixed forward-firing and one flexible rear-firing) and two 60 kg (132 lb) bombs.

The F1M was originally built as a catapult-launched reconnaissance float plane, specializing in gunnery spotting. However the "Pete" took on a number of local roles including area-defense fighter, convoy escort, bomber, anti-submarine, maritime patrol, rescue and transport. The type fought dogfights in the Aleutians, the Solomons and several other theaters. See also PT 34 sunk 9 April 1942 by "Petes".

The Consolidated PBY Catalina was an American flying boat of the 1930s and 1940s produced by Consolidated Aircraft. It was one of the most widely used multi-role aircraft of World War II. PBYs served with every branch of the United States Armed Forces and in the air forces and navies of many other nations. In the United States Army Air Forces and later in the United States Air Force their designation was the OA-10, while Canadian-built PBYs were known as the Canso.

During World War II, PBYs were used in anti-submarine warfare, patrol bombing, convoy escorts, search and rescue missions (especially air-sea rescue), and cargo transport. The PBY was the most successful aircraft of its kind; no other flying boat was produced in greater numbers. The last active military PBYs were not retired from service until the 1980s. Even today, over 70 years after its first flight, the aircraft continues to fly as an airtanker in aerial firefighting operations all over the world.

The initialism of "P.B.Y." was determined in accordance with the U.S. Navy aircraft designation system of 1922; PB representing "Patrol Bomber" and Y being the code used for the aircraft's manufacturer, Consolidated Aircraft.

The PBY was originally designed to be a patrol bomber, an aircraft with a long operational range intended to locate and attack enemy transport ships at sea in order to compromise enemy supply lines. With a mind to a potential conflict in the Pacific Ocean, where troops would require resupply over great distances, the U.S. Navy in the 1930s invested millions of dollars in developing long-range flying boats for this purpose. Flying boats had the advantage of not requiring runways, in effect having the entire ocean available. Several different flying boats were adopted by the Navy, but the PBY was the most widely used and produced.

Although slow and ungainly, PBYs distinguished themselves in World War II as exceptionally reliable. Allied armed forces used them successfully in a wide variety of roles that the aircraft was never intended for. They are remembered by many veterans of the war for their role in rescuing downed airmen, in which they saved the lives of thousands of aircrew downed over water. PBY airmen called their aircraft the "cat" on combat missions and "Dumbo" in air-sea rescue service.

As American dominance in the Pacific Ocean began to face competition from Japan in the 1930s, the U.S. Navy contracted Consolidated Aircraft and Douglas Aircraft Corporation in October 1933 to build competing prototypes for a patrol flying boat. Naval doctrine of the 1930s and 1940s used flying boats in a wide variety of roles that today are handled by multiple special-purpose aircraft. The U.S. Navy had adopted the Consolidated P2Y and Martin P3M models for this role in 1931, but both aircraft proved to be underpowered and hampered by short ranges and low maximum payloads.

Consolidated and Douglas both delivered single prototypes of their designs, the XP3Y-1 and XP3D-1, respectively. Consolidated's XP3Y-1 was an evolution of the XPY-1 design that had originally competed unsuccessfully for the P3M contract two years earlier and of the XP2Y design that the Navy had authorized for a limited production run. Although the Douglas aircraft was a good design, the Navy opted for Consolidated's because the projected cost was only $90,000 per aircraft.

Consolidated's XP3Y-1 design (company Model 28) was revolutionary in a number of ways. The aircraft had a parasol wing with internal bracing that allowed the wing to be a virtual cantilever, except for two small streamlined struts on each side. Stabilizing floats, retractable in flight to form streamlined wingtips, were another aerodynamic innovation, a feature licensed from the Saunders-Roe company. The two-step hull design was similar to that of the P2Y, but the Model 28 had a cantilever cruciform tail unit instead of a strut-braced twin tail. Cleaner aerodynamics gave the Model 28 better performance than earlier designs.

The prototype was powered by two 825 hp (615 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-1830-54 Twin Wasp engines mounted on the wing’s leading edges. Armament comprised four 0.30 in (7.62 mm) Browning machine guns and up to 2,000 lb (907 kg) of bombs.

The XP3Y-1 had its maiden flight on 28 March 1935, after which it was transferred to the US Navy for service trials. The XP3Y-1 soon proved to have significant performance improvements over current patrol flying boats. The Navy requested further development in order to bring the aircraft into the category of patrol bomber, and in October 1935, the prototype was returned to Consolidated for further work, including installation of 900 hp (671 kW) R-1830-64 engines. For the redesignated XPBY-1, Consolidated introduced redesigned vertical tail surfaces. The XPBY-1 had its maiden flight on 19 May 1936, during which a record non-stop distance flight of 3,443 miles (5,541 km) was achieved.

The XPBY-1 was delivered to VP-11F in October 1936. The second squadron to be equipped was VP-12, which received the first of its aircraft in early 1937. The second production order was placed on 25 July 1936. Over the next three years, the PBY design was gradually developed further and successive models introduced.

The Naval Aircraft Factory made significant modifications to the PBY design, many of which would have significantly interrupted deliveries had they been incorporated on the Consolidated production lines. The new aircraft, officially known as the PBN-1 Nomad, had several differences from the basic PBY. The most obvious upgrades were to the bow, which was sharpened and extended by two feet, and to the tail, which was enlarged and featured a new shape. Other improvements included larger fuel tanks, increasing range by 50%, and stronger wings permitting a 2,000 pound (908 kg) higher gross takeoff weight. An auxiliary power unit was installed, along with a modernized electrical system, and the weapons were upgraded with continuous-feed mechanisms.

A total of 138 of the 156 PBN-1s that were produced served with the Soviet Navy. The remaining 18 of them were assigned to training units at NAS Whidbey Island and the Naval Air Facility in Newport, Rhode Island. Later, improvements found in the PBN-1 – notably, the larger tail – were incorporated into the amphibious PBY-6A.

The final PBY construction figure is estimated at around 4,000 aircraft, and these were deployed in practically all of the operational theatres of World War II. The PBY served with distinction and played a prominent and invaluable role in the war against the Japanese. This was especially true during the first year of the war in the Pacific, because the PBY and the Boeing B-17 Flying Fortress were the only two available aircraft with the range necessary. As a result, they were used in almost every possible military role until a new generation of aircraft became available.

A Catalina of No. 205 Squadron RAF was also involved in a dogfight with a Mitsubishi G3M Nell bomber of Mihoro Air Group near the Anambas Islands on 25 December 1941, in which the Catalina was shot down.

PBYs were the most extensively used ASW aircraft in both the Atlantic and Pacific Theaters of the Second World War, and were also used in the Indian Ocean, flying from the Seychelles and from Ceylon. Their duties included escorting convoys to Murmansk. By 1943, U-boats were well-armed with anti-aircraft guns and two Victoria Crosses were won by Catalina pilots pressing home their attacks on U-boats in the face of heavy fire: John Cruickshank of the RAF, in 1944, against the U-347 and in the same year Flight Lt. David Hornell of the RCAF (posthumously) against the U-1225. Catalinas destroyed 40 U-boats in all, but they suffered losses of their own. One of the Brazilian-operated Catalinas attacked and sank the U-199 in Brazilian territorial waters on 31 July 1943. Later, the aircraft was baptized as “Arará”, in honor of a merchant ship that carried that name and was previously attacked and sunk by another U-boat, the U-507.

In their role as patrol aircraft, Catalinas participated in some of the most notable engagements of World War II. The aircraft's parasol wing and large waist blisters allowed for a great deal of visibility and combined with its long range and endurance, made it well suited for the task.

A Coastal Command Catalina located the German battleship Bismarck on 26 May 1941 while she tried to evade Royal Navy forces.

A flight of Catalinas spotted the Japanese fleet approaching Midway Island, beginning the Battle of Midway.

A RCAF Canso flown by Squadron Leader L.J. Birchall foiled Japanese plans to destroy the Royal Navy's Indian Ocean fleet on 4 April 1942 when it detected the Japanese carrier fleet approaching Ceylon (Sri Lanka).

Several squadrons of PBY-5As and -6As in the Pacific theater were specially modified to operate as night convoy raiders. Outfitted with state-of-the-art magnetic anomaly detection gear and painted flat black, these "Black Cats" attacked Japanese supply convoys at night. Catalinas were surprisingly successful in this highly unorthodox role. Between August 1943 and January 1944, Black Cat squadrons had sunk 112,700 tons of merchant shipping, damaged 47,000 tons, and damaged 10 Japanese warships.

The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) also operated Catalinas as night raiders, with four squadrons Nos. 11, 20, 42, and 43 mounting mine-laying operations from 23 April 1943 until July 1945 in the southwest Pacific deep into Japanese-held waters, that bottled up ports and shipping routes and kept ships in the deeper waters to become targets for US submarines; they tied up the major strategic ports such as Balikpapan that shipped 80% of Japanese oil supplies. In late 1944, their precision mining sometimes exceeded 20 hours in duration from as low as 200 feet in the hours of darkness. One included the bottling up the Japanese fleet in Manila Bay planned to assist General MacArthur's landing at Mindoro in the Philippines.

They also operated out of Jinamoc in Leyte Gulf, and mined ports on the Chinese coast from Hong Kong as far north as Wenchow. They were the only non-American heavy bombers squadrons operating north of Morotai in 1945. The RAAF Catalinas regularly mounted nuisance night bombing raids on Japanese bases, they earned the motto of "The First and the Furthest" as a testimony to their design and endurance. These raids included the major base at Rabaul. RAAF aircrews, like their US Navy counterparts, developed 'terror bombs', ranging from mere machine gunned scrap metal and rocks to empty beer bottles with razor blades inserted into the necks, to produce high pitched screams as they fell, keeping Japanese soldiers awake and scrambling for cover.

PBYs were employed by every branch of the US military as rescue aircraft. A PBY piloted by Lt. Cmdr. Adrian Marks (USN) rescued 56 sailors from the USS Indianapolis after the ship was sunk during World War II. PBYs continued to function in this capacity for decades after the end of the war.

PBYs were also used for commercial air travel. The longest commercial flights (in terms of time aloft) ever made in aviation history were the Qantas flights flown weekly from 29 June 1943 through July 1945 over the Indian Ocean. Qantas offered non-stop service between Perth and Colombo, a distance of 3,592 nm (5,652 km). As the PBY typically cruised at 110 knots, this took from 28–32 hours and was called the "flight of the double sunrise", since the passengers saw two sunrises during their non-stop journey. The flight was made with radio silence (because of the possibility of Japanese attack) and had a maximum payload of 1000 lbs or three passengers plus 65 kg of armed forces and diplomatic mail.

An Australian PBY made the first trans-Pacific flight across the South Pacific between Australia and Chile in 1946, making numerous stops at islands along the way for refueling, meals, and overnight sleep of its crew.

With the end of the war, all of the flying boat versions of the Catalina were quickly retired from the U.S. Navy, but the amphibious ones remained in service for some years. The last Catalina in U.S. service was a PBY-6A operating with a Naval Reserve squadron, which was retired from use on 3 January 1957. The PBY subsequently equipped the world's smaller armed services, in fairly substantial numbers, into the late 1960s.

The U.S. Air Force's Strategic Air Command had PBYs (designated OA-10s) in service as scouting aircraft from 1946 through 1947.

The Brazilian Air Force flew Catalinas in naval air patrol missions against German submarines starting in 1943. The flying boats also carried out air mail deliveries. In 1948, a transport squadron was formed and equipped with PBY-5As converted to the role of amphibious transports. The 1st Air Transport Squadron (ETA-1) was based in the port city of Belem and flew Catalinas and C-47s in well-maintained condition until 1982. Catalinas were convenient for supplying military detachments scattered among the Amazon waterways. They reached places where only long-range transport helicopters would dare to go. ETA-1 insignia was a winged turtle with the motto "Though slowly, I always get there". Today, the last Brazilian Catalina (a former RCAF one) is displayed at the Airspace Museum (MUSAL), in Rio de Janeiro.

 

 

Jacques-Yves Cousteau

 

Jacques-Yves Cousteau used a PBY-6A (N101CS) as part of his diving expeditions. His second son, Philippe, was killed while attempting a water landing in the Tagus river near Lisbon, Portugal, 28 June 1979. His PBY had just been repaired when he took it out for a flight. As he landed, one of the aircraft's propellers separated, cut through the cockpit and killed the younger Cousteau.

Paul Mantz converted an unknown number of surplus PBYs to flying yachts at his Orange County California hangar in the late 40's/early50's.

Chilean navy captain Roberto Parragué in his PBY Catalina "Manu-Tara" undertook the first flight between Easter Island and the continent (from Chile) and the first flight to Tahiti; making him a national hero of France as well of Chile. The flight wasn't authorized by authorities.

Of the few dozen remaining airworthy Catalinas, the majority of them are in use today as aerial firefighting planes. China Airlines, the official airline of the Republic of China (Taiwan) was founded with two PBY amphibious flying boats.

The Catalina Affair is the name given to a Cold War incident in which a Swedish Air Force PBY Catalina was shot down by Soviet fighters over the Baltic Sea in June 1952 while investigating the disappearance of a Swedish Douglas DC-3 (later found out to be shot down by a Soviet fighter while on a SIGINT mission; found 2003 and raised 2004-2005).

The PB2Y Coronado was a large flying boat patrol bomber designed by Consolidated Aircraft. As of 2005, one Coronado remains at the Pensacola, Florida National Museum of Naval Aviation.

After deliveries of the PBY Catalina, also a Consolidated aircraft, began in 1935, the United States Navy began planning for the next generation of patrol bombers. Orders for two prototypes, the XPB2Y-1 and the Sikorsky XPBS-1, were placed in 1936; the prototype Coronado first flew in December 1937.

After trials with the XPB2Y-1 prototype revealed some stability issues, the design was finalized as the PB2Y-2, with a large cantilever wing, twin tail, and four Pratt & Whitney R-1830 radial engines. The two inner engines were fitted with four-bladed reversible pitch propellers; the outer engines had standard three-bladed feathering props. (However, note the three-bladed prop on the inner engine in the picture at the left.) Like the PBY Catalina before it, the PB2Y's wingtip floats retracted to reduce drag and increase range, with the floats' buoyant hulls acting as the wingtips when retracted.

Development continued throughout the war. The PB2Y-3, featuring self-sealing fuel tanks and additional armor, entered service just after the attack on Pearl Harbor and formed most of the early-war Coronado fleet. The prototype XPB2Y-4 was powered by four Wright R-2600 radials and offered improved performance, but the increases were not enough to justify a full fleet update. However, most PB2Y-3 models were converted to the PB2Y-5 standard, with the R-1830 engines replaced with single-stage R-1830-92 models. As most existing PB2Y-3s were used as transports, flying low to avoid combat, removing the excess weight of unneeded superchargers allowed an increased payload without harming low-altitude performance.

Coronados served in combat in the Pacific, in both bombing and anti-submarine roles, but transport and hospital aircraft were the most common. The British Royal Air Force Coastal Command had hoped to use the Coronado as a maritime patrol bomber, as it already used the PBY Catalina. However, the range of the Coronado (1,070 miles) compared poorly with the Catalina (2,520 mi), and the Short Sunderland (1,780 mi). Consequently, the Coronados supplied to the RAF under Lend-Lease were outfitted purely as transports, serving with RAF Transport Command. The 10 aircraft were used for trans-Atlantic flights, staging through the RAF base at Darrell's Island, Bermuda, and Puerto Rico, though the aircraft were used to deliver vital cargo and equipment in a transportation network that stretched down both sides of the Atlantic, from Newfoundland, to Brazil, and to Nigeria, and other parts of Africa. After the war ended 5 of the RAF aircraft were scrapped, one was already lost in collision with a Martin Mariner and the last four were scuttled off the coast of Bermuda in 1946.

Coronados served as a major component in the Naval Air Transport Service (NATS) during World War II in the Pacific theater. Most had originally been acquired as combat patrol aircraft, but the limitations noted above quickly relegated them to transport service in the American naval air fleet also. By the end of World War II the Coronado was outmoded as both a bomber and a transport, and virtually all of them were quickly scrapped, being melted down to aluminum ingots and sold as metal scrap.

The Martin PBM Mariner was a patrol bomber flying boat of World War II and the early Cold War period. It was designed to complement the PBY Catalina in service. 1,366 were built, with the first example flying on February 18, 1939 and the type entering service in September 1940.

In 1937, the Glenn L. Martin Company designed a new twin engined flying boat to succeed its earlier Martin P3M and supplement the Consolidated PBY, the Model 162. It received an order for a single prototype XPBM-1 on 30 June 1937. This was followed by an initial production order for 21 PBM-1 aircraft on 28 December 1937.

To test the PBM's layout, Martin built a scale flying model, the Martin 162A Tadpole Clipper with a crew of one and powered by a single 120 hp (90 kW) Chevrolet engine, this flying in December 1937. The first genuine PBM, the XPBM-1, flew on 18 February 1939.

The aircraft was fitted with five gun turrets and bomb bays that were in the engine nacelles. The gull wing was of cantilever design, and featured clean aerodynamics with an unbraced twin tail. The PBM-1 was equipped with retractable wing landing floats that were hinged inboard, like the Catalina. The PBM-3 had fixed floats, and the fuselage was three feet longer than that of the PBM-1.

 

The first PBM-1s entered service with Patrol Squadron FIFTY-FIVE (VP-55) of the United States Navy on 1 September 1940. Prior to the outbreak of World War II, PBMs were used (together with PBYs) to carry out Neutrality Patrols in the Atlantic, including operations from Iceland. Following the Japanese Attack on Pearl Harbor, PBMs were used on anti-submarine patrols, sinking their first German U-Boat, U-158 on 30 June 1942. In total, PBMs were responsible, wholly or in part, for sinking 10 U-Boats during World War II. PBMs were also heavily used in the Pacific, operating from bases at Saipan, Okinawa, Iwo Jima and the South-West Pacific.

The United States Coast Guard acquired 27 Martin PBM-3 aircraft during the first half of 1943. In late 1944, the service acquired 41 PBM-5 models and more were delivered in the latter half of 1945. Ten were still in service in 1955, although all were gone from the active Coast Guard inventory by 1958 when the last example was released from CGAS San Diego and returned to the US Navy. These flying boats became the backbone of the long-range aerial search and rescue efforts of the Coast Guard in the early post-war years until supplanted by the P5M and the HU-16 Albatross in the mid-1950s.

PBMs continued in service with the US Navy following the end of World War II, flying long patrol missions during the Korean War. It continued in front-line use until replaced by its direct development, the P5M Marlin, with the last USN squadron equipped with the PBM, Patrol Squadron FIFTY (VP-50), retiring them in July 1956.

The British Royal Air Force acquired 32 Mariners, but they were not used operationally, with some returned to the United States Navy. A further twelve PBM-3Rs were transferred to the Royal Australian Air Force for transporting troops and cargo.

The Royal Netherlands Navy acquired 17 PBM-5A Mariners at the end of 1955 for service in Netherlands New Guinea. The PBM-5A was an amphibian plane with retractable landing gear. The engines were 2,100 hp (1,566 kW) Pratt & Whitney R-2800-34. After a series of crashes, the Dutch withdrew their remaining aircraft from use in December 1959.

The Short S.25 Sunderland was a British flying boat patrol bomber developed for the Royal Air Force by Short Brothers. Based in part upon the S.23 Empire flying boat, the flagship of Imperial Airways, the S.25 was extensively re-engineered for military service. It was one of the most powerful and widely used flying boats throughout the Second World War, and was involved in countering the threat posed by German U-boats in the Battle of the Atlantic. It took its name from the town (latterly, city) of Sunderland in northeast England.

The early 1930s saw intense competition in developing long-range flying boats for intercontinental passenger service, but the United Kingdom had no match for the new American Sikorsky S-42 flying boats, which were making headlines all over the world. Then, in 1934, the British Postmaster General declared that all first-class Royal Mail sent overseas was to travel by air, effectively establishing a subsidy for the development of intercontinental air transport in a fashion similar to the U.S. domestic program a decade earlier. In response, Imperial Airways announced a competition between aircraft manufacturers to design and produce 28 flying boats, each weighing 18 tons (18.2 tonnes) and having a range of 700 miles (1,100 km) with capacity for 24 passengers.

The contract went almost directly to Short Brothers of Rochester. Although Short had long built flying boats for the military and for Imperial Airways, none of them was in the class of size and sophistication requested, but the business opportunity was too great to pass up. Oswald Short, head of the company, began a fast-track program to come up with a design for a flying boat far beyond anything they had ever built.

While the first S.23 was under development, which would later be a success in its own right, the British Air Ministry was taking actions that would result in a purely military version of the Short flying boats. The 1933 Air Ministry Specification R.2/33 called for a next-generation flying boat for ocean reconnaissance. The new aircraft had to have four engines but could be either a monoplane or biplane design.

The R.2/33 specification was released roughly in parallel with the Imperial Airways requirement, and while Shorts continued to develop the S.23, they also worked on a response to the Air Ministry's need at a lower priority. Chief Designer Arthur Gouge originally intended that a 37 mm COW gun be mounted in the bow with a single Lewis gun in the tail. As with the S.23, he tried to make the drag as low as possible, while the nose was much longer than that of the S.23. The military flying boat variant was designated S.25 and the design was submitted to the Air Ministry in 1934. Saunders-Roe also designed a flying boat, the Saro A.33, in response to the R.2/33 competition, and prototypes of both the S.25 and A.33 were ordered by the Ministry for evaluation. The initial S.25 prototype first took flight in October 1937.

The S.25 shared much in common with the S.23 but was most notably different in that it had a deeper hull profile. As construction proceeded the armament was changed to a single Vickers K machine gun in the nose turret and four Browning machine guns in the tail. Then there was a change in the tail turret to a powered version and Gouge had to devise a solution for the resulting movement aft of the aircraft's centre of gravity. The prototype first flew, without armament, on 16 October 1937. After the preliminary flight trials the prototype (K4774) had its wings swept back by 4° 15' by adding a spacer into the front spar attachments. This moved the centre of lift enough to compensate for the changed centre of gravity. This arrangement flew on 7 March 1938 with Bristol Pegasus XXII engines of 1,010 hp (750 kW).

As with the S.23, the Sunderland's fuselage contained two decks with six bunks on the lower one, a galley with a twin kerosene pressure stove, a yacht-style porcelain flush toilet, an anchoring winch, and a small machine shop for inflight repairs. The crew was originally intended to be seven but increased in later versions to 11 crew members or more.

It was of all-metal, mainly flush-riveted construction except for the control surfaces, which were of fabric-covered metal frame construction. The flaps were Gouge-patented devices that moved rearwards and down, increasing the wing area and adding 30% more lift for landing.

The thick wings carried the four nacelle-mounted Pegasus engines and accommodated six drum fuel tanks with a total capacity of 9,200 litres (2,025 Imperial gallons, 2,430 U.S. gallons). Four smaller fuel tanks were added later behind the rear wing spar to give a total fuel capacity of 11,602 litres (2,550 Imperial gallons, 3,037 U.S. gallons), enough for eight- to 14-hour patrols.

The specification called for an offensive armament of a 37 mm gun and up to 2,000 pounds (910 kg) of bombs, mines or (eventually) depth charges. The ordnance was stored inside the fuselage and was winched up to racks, under the wing centre section, that could be traversed out through doors on each side of the (bomb room) fuselage above the waterline to their release position. Defensive armament included a Nash & Thomson FN-13 powered turret with four .303 British Browning machine guns in the extreme tail and a manually operated .303 on either side of the fuselage, firing from ports just below and behind the wings. These were later upgraded to 0.5-inch calibre Brownings. There were two different nose turret weapons, the most common, later, being two Browning machine guns. The nose weapons were later augmented by four fixed guns, two each side, in the forward fuselage that were fired by the pilot. Much later a twin-gun turret was to be dorsal-mounted on the upper fuselage, about level with the wing trailing edge, bringing the total defensive armament from three to 16 machine guns.

Portable beaching gear could be attached by ground crew so that the aircraft could be pulled up on land. The gear consisted of two 2-wheeled struts that could be attached to either side of the fuselage, below the wing, with a two- or four-wheel trolley and towbar attached under the rear of the hull.

As with all water-based aircraft, there was a need to be able to navigate on water and to control the craft up to and at a mooring. In addition to the standard navigation lights, there was also a demountable mooring mast that was positioned on the upper fuselage just aft of the astrodome hatch with a 360-degree white light to show that the aircraft was moored. The crew were trained in common marine signals for watercraft to ensure safety in busy waters. References in this section.

The craft could be moored to a buoy by a pendant that attached to the keel under the forward fuselage. When the craft was off the buoy, the forward end of the pendant was attached to the front of the hull just below the bomb aimer's window. For anchoring, there was a demountable bollard that fixed to the forward fuselage from where the front turret was retracted to allow an airman to man the position and pick up the buoy cage or to toss out the anchor.

A standard stocked anchor was stowed in the forward compartment alongside the anchor winch. Depending on the operating area, a number of different kinds of anchor could be carried to cope with different anchorages.

For taxiing after landing, the galley hatches were used to extend sea drogues that could be used to turn the aircraft or maintain its crosswind progress (by deploying the drogue on one side only), or to slow forward motion as much as possible (both deployed). When not in use, the drogues were hand hauled back inboard, folded, and stowed in wall-mounted containers just below the hatches. Operation of the drogues could be a very dangerous exercise if the aircraft was travelling on the water at speed or in strong currents, because the approximately three-foot (1 m) -diameter drogue would haul up on its five-tonne attachment cable end inside the galley very sharply and powerfully. Once deployed, it was normally impossible to recover a drogue unless the aircraft was stationary relative to the local tidal flow.

Another means of direction control on the water was by application of the rudder and aileron flight controls. The ailerons would cause asymmetric lift from the airflow and, ultimately, drop a float into the water to cause drag on that wing. The pilots could vary engine power to control the direction and speed of the aircraft on the water. In adverse combinations of tide, wind, and destination, this could be very difficult.

The Sunderland was usually entered through the bow compartment door on the left forward side of the aircraft. The internal compartments—bow, gun room, ward room, galley, bomb room, and the after compartments—were fitted with swash doors to keep them watertight to about two feet (610 mm) above normal water level. These doors were normally kept closed.

There was another external door in the tail compartment on the right side. This door was intended for boarding from a Braby (U-shaped) pontoon that was used where there was a full passenger service mooring alongside a wharf or similar. This door could also be used to accept passengers or stretcher-bound patients when the aircraft was in the open water. This was because the engines had to be kept running to maintain the aircraft's position for the approaching vessel and the front door was too close to the left inboard propeller.

Normal access to the external upper parts of the aircraft was through the astrodome hatch at the front of the front spar of the wing centre section, just at the rear of the navigator's station.

Bombs were loaded in through the "bomb doors" that formed the upper half walls of the bomb room on both sides. The bomb racks were able to run in and out from the bomb room on tracks in the underside of the wing. To load them, weapons were hoisted up to the extended racks that were run inboard and either lowered to stowages on the floor or prepared for use on the retracted racks above the stowed items. The doors were spring-loaded to pop inwards from their frames and would fall under gravity so that the racks could run out through the space left in the top of the compartment. The doors could be released locally or remotely from the pilot's position during a bomb run. Normally the weapons were either bombs or depth charges and the racks were limited to a maximum of 1,000 lb (450 kg) each. After the first salvo was dropped, the crew had to get the next eight weapons loaded before the pilot had the aircraft positioned on the next bombing run.

The fixed nose guns (introduced by the Australians) were demounted when the aircraft was on the water and stowed in the gun room just aft of the bow compartment. The toilet was in the right half of this same compartment and stairs from the cockpit to the bow area divided the two.

Maintenance was performed on the engines by opening panels in the leading edge of the wing either side of the powerplant. A plank could be fitted across the front of the engine on the extensions of the open panels. A small manually-started auxiliary petrol engine, which was fitted into the leading edge of the right wing, powered a bilge and a fuel pump for clearing water and other fluids from the fuselage bilges and for refuelling. Generally, the aircraft were reasonably water tight, and two people on a wobble pump could transfer fuel faster than the auxiliary pump.

In sheltered moorings or at sea, fuelling was accomplished by a powered or unpowered barge and with engine driven or hand powered pumps. At regular moorings, there would be specially designed refuelling barges to do the job, normally manned by trained marine crew. These vessels could refuel many aircraft during the course of the day. Handling of the fuel nozzles and opening/closing the aircraft fuel tanks would normally be an aircraftman's task.

Where there were unreliable fuel supplies, usually at outlying moorings away from any fixed base, it might take a crew of four 3–4 hours to transfer 2,000 gallons (9,092 litres) of fuel into the aircraft. If the barge had a capacity of only about 800 gallons (as was usual), it could take three times that long. Oil supplies and minor spares were carried in the aircraft at such outlying bases if the crew were operating autonomously. In serious cases, where refuelling from drums or when the supplies were otherwise in doubt, aircraft were refuelled through Chamois leather filters to separate the dirt, rust, and water from the fuel.

Airframe repairs were either effected from the inside or delayed until the aircraft was in a sheltered mooring or beached. One of the serious problems was that the heat-treated rivets in the hull plates were susceptible to corrosion after a period in salt water (depending on the quality of the heat treatment process). The heads would pop off from stress corrosion, and leaks would start into the bilges. The only resort was to haul the aircraft out onto the hard and replace them, usually at the cost of many additional heads coming off because of the riveting vibrations.

 

Most maintenance and servicing personnel had tools modified to attach them to their person because dropping a tool normally meant it was gone forever. Glooped was the explanation for the loss, being the sound of the tool entering the water.

The beaching gear was large and unwieldy. The main legs had to be ballasted to sink, wheels down, so that the leg could be raised upright into its housing under the wing centre section, and then the lower part was pressed against the fuselage wall where it was pinned. This usually meant that two people would get completely wet. The tail trolley was also ballasted to sink under the aft fuselage where the seagoing section of the hull ended. The upper arms of the trolley were raised to locate in mating holes in the exterior skin of the hull where the main weight of the aircraft would ultimately keep it in place; but until then it was precariously unstable.

Meanwhile a rope from the shore to the header buoy at the nose of the aircraft was threaded through the pulley on the buoy and attached to the aircraft's bollard. The shore end of this rope was managed by a person positioned at an electric capstan that would control the release of the aircraft from the buoy. A short rope connected the tail towing eye in the fuselage to another hauling device, most often a tractor, that was able to manoeuvre the aircraft on the slipway and on the hardstanding beyond.

When all was ready, the bowman cast off from the buoy pendant. The tail was pulled carefully to the slipway and the header buoy rope was paid out from the capstan off to the side. The idea was that the tail trolley should be brought into contact with the submerged section of the slipway as gently as possible, ensuring that the aircraft remained securely in place on the trolley as it started rolling up the slip. A sharp impact on the trolley wheels, located approximately five ft (1.6 m) below the keel, was enough to rotate the trolley around its fuselage attachment arms and dislodge it, allowing the keel to strike the slip and thereby sustain damage.

When tidal flow or wind adversely affected the positioning of the aircraft, a situation could arise where the tail and attachments were running true, but the nose of the aircraft had now swung to one extreme of the slipway, preventing the main wheels on one side from correctly contacting the slip. Consequently, it is not surprising that Sunderlands were not beached for minor reasons.

 

Once the tail trolley was well up the slipway, a steering arm could be inserted into the lower part of the trolley and used to turn the wheels so that the assemblage could be guided to follow the tractor. Movement in the opposite direction was effected by a bridle attached to the front of the lower part of the main legs. On the slipway, the tail towing eye was used to restrain the aircraft from running away down the slope.

A large float mounted under each wing stopped the aircraft from toppling over on the water. With no wind, the float on the heavier side was always in the water; with some wind, the aircraft could be held using the ailerons with both floats out of the water. If a float was lost as the craft lost airspeed after landing, crew members would go out onto the opposite wing to keep the remaining float in the water until the aircraft could reach its mooring.

Aircraft with lower hull damage were patched or had the holes filled with any materials to hand before landing. The aircraft would then be immediately put onto a slipway with its wheeled beaching gear or beached on a sandy shore before it could sink. More than two fuselage compartments had to be full of water to sink the aircraft. During the Second World War, a number of severely damaged aircraft were deliberately landed on grass airfields ashore. In at least one case, an aircraft that made a grass landing was repaired to fly again.

Marine growths on the hull were a problem; the resulting drag could be enough to prevent a fully-loaded aircraft from gaining enough speed to become airborne. The aircraft could be taken to a freshwater mooring for sufficient time to kill off the fauna and flora growing on the bottom, which would then be washed away during takeoff runs. The alternative was to scrub it off, either in the water or on the hard.

The takeoff run of a flying boat was often dependent only on the length of water that was available. The first problem was to gain sufficient speed for the craft to plane, otherwise there would never be enough speed to become airborne. Once planing, the next problem was to break free from the suction (from Bernoulli's principle) of the water on the hull. This was partly helped by the "step" in the hull just behind the craft's centre of buoyancy at planing speed. The pilot could rock the ship about this point to try to break the downward pull of the water on the surface of the hull. Somewhat rough water was a help in freeing the hull from the water, but on calm days it was often necessary to have a high speed launch cross in front of the aircraft to cause a break in the water flow under the aircraft. It was a matter of judgement of the coxswain to get the crossing close enough but not too close. Because it was expected that some takeoffs would be protracted affairs, often the crews were not very careful to keep within maximum all-up weight limitations, and getting airborne just took a little longer. In such cases, the flight engineer would ignore the rising cylinder head temperatures and maintain the use of takeoff power for more than five minutes at a time.

On Mk V aircraft, fuel could be dumped from retractable pipes that extended from the hull and were attached the bomb room side of the galley aft bulkhead. It was expected that dumping would be done while airborne, but it could also be done on the water, with care to ensure that the floating fuel went downwind away from the aircraft.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Aversa, R., R.V.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2017a. Nano-diamond hybrid materials for structural biomedical application. Am. J. Biochem. Biotechnol.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, B. Akash, R.B. Bucinell and J.M. Corchado et al., 2017b. Kinematics and forces to a new model forging manipulator. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 60-80.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella, I.T.F. Petrescu and J.K. Calautit et al., 2017c. Something about the V engines design. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 34-52.

Aversa, R., D. Parcesepe, R.V.V. Petrescu, F. Berto and G. Chen et al., 2017d. Process ability of bulk metallic glasses. Am. J. Applied Sci., 14: 294-301.

Aversa, R., R.V.V. Petrescu, B. Akash, R.B. Bucinell and J.M. Corchado et al., 2017e. Something about the balancing of thermal motors. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 10: 200.217. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2017.200.217

Aversa, R., F.I.T. Petrescu, R.V. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016a. Biomimetic FEA bone modeling for customized hybrid biological prostheses development. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1060-1067. DOI: 10.3844/ajassp.2016.1060.1067

Aversa, R., D. Parcesepe, R.V. Petrescu, G. Chen and F.I.T. Petrescu et al., 2016b. Glassy amorphous metal injection molded induced morphological defects. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1476-1482.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016c. Smart-factory: Optimization and process control of composite centrifuged pipes. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1330-1341.

Aversa, R., F. Tamburrino, R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and M. Artur et al., 2016d. Biomechanically inspired shape memory effect machines driven by muscle like acting NiTi alloys. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1264-1271.

Aversa, R., E.M. Buzea, R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and M. Neacsa et al., 2016e. Present a mechatronic system having able to determine the concentration of carotenoids. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1106-1111.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, R. Sorrentino, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016f. Hybrid ceramo-polymeric nanocomposite for biomimetic scaffolds design and preparation. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1096-1105.

Aversa, R., V. Perrotta, R.V. Petrescu, C. Misiano and F.I.T. Petrescu et al., 2016g. From structural colors to super-hydrophobicity and achromatic transparent protective coatings: Ion plating plasma assisted TiO2 and SiO2 Nano-film deposition. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1037-1045.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, F.I.T. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016h Biomimetic and Evolutionary Design Driven Innovation in Sustainable Products Development, Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1027-1036.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016i. Mitochondria are naturally micro robots-a review. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 991-1002.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016j. We are addicted to vitamins C and E-A review. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1003-1018.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016k. Physiologic human fluids and swelling behavior of hydrophilic biocompatible hybrid ceramo-polymeric materials. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 962-972.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016l. One can slow down the aging through antioxidants. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1112-1126.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016m. About homeopathy or jSimilia similibus curenturk. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1164-1172.

Aversa, R., R.V. Petrescu, A. Apicella and F.I.T. Petrescu, 2016n. The basic elements of life's. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1189-1197.

Aversa, R., F.I.T. Petrescu, R.V. Petrescu and A. Apicella, 2016o. Flexible stem trabecular prostheses. Am. J. Eng. Applied Sci., 9: 1213-1221.

Mirsayar, M.M., V.A. Joneidi, R.V.V. Petrescu,    F.I.T. Petrescu and F. Berto, 2017 Extended MTSN criterion for fracture analysis of soda lime glass. Eng. Fracture Mechanics 178: 50-59.     DOI: 10.1016/j.engfracmech.2017.04.018

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013a. Lockheed Martin. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 114.

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013b. Northrop. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 96.

Petrescu, R.V. and F.I. Petrescu, 2013c. The Aviation History or New Aircraft I Color. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 292.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2012. New Aircraft II. 1st Edn., Books On Demand, pp: 138.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2011. Memories About Flight. 1st Edn., CreateSpace, pp: 652.

Petrescu, F.I.T., 2009. New aircraft. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Computational Mechanics, Oct. 29-30, Brasov, Romania.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2016a Otto Motor Dynamics, GEINTEC-GESTAO INOVACAO E TECNOLOGIAS, 6(3):3392-3406.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2016b Dynamic Cinematic to a Structure 2R, GEINTEC-GESTAO INOVACAO E TECNOLOGIAS, 6(2):3143-3154.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014a Cam Gears Dynamics in the Classic Distribution, Independent Journal of Management & Production, 5(1):166-185.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014b High Efficiency Gears Synthesis by Avoid the Interferences, Independent Journal of Management & Production, 5(2):275-298.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu R.V., 2014c Gear Design, ENGEVISTA, 16(4):313-328.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014d Balancing Otto Engines, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(3):473-480.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014e Machine Equations to the Classical Distribution, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(2):309-316.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014f Forces of Internal Combustion Heat Engines, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 7(1):206-212.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014g Determination of the Yield of Internal Combustion Thermal Engines, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 8(1):62-67.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2014h Cam Dynamic Synthesis, Al-Khwarizmi Engineering Journal, 10(1):1-23.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu R.V., 2013a Dynamic Synthesis of the Rotary Cam and Translated Tappet with Roll, ENGEVISTA  15(3):325-332.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013b Cams with High Efficiency, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 7(4):599-606.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013c An Algorithm for Setting the Dynamic Parameters of the Classic Distribution Mechanism, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 6(5B):1637-1641.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013d Dynamic Synthesis of the Rotary Cam and Translated Tappet with Roll, International Review on Modelling and Simulations 6(2B):600-607.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2013e Forces and Efficiency of Cams, International Review of Mechanical Engineering 7(3):507-511.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012a Echilibrarea motoarelor termice, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2012, ISBN 978-1-4811-2948-0, 40 pages, Romanian edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012b Camshaft Precision, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2012, ISBN 978-1-4810-8316-4, 88 pages, English edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2012c Motoare termice, Create Space publisher, USA, October 2012, ISBN 978-1-4802-0488-1, 164 pages, Romanian edition.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011a Dinamica mecanismelor de distributie, Create Space publisher, USA, December 2011, ISBN 978-1-4680-5265-7, 188 pages, Romanian version.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011b Trenuri planetare, Create Space publisher, USA, December 2011, ISBN 978-1-4680-3041-9, 204 pages, Romanian version.

Petrescu, F.I., Petrescu, R.V., 2011c Gear Solutions, Create Space publisher, USA, November 2011, ISBN 978-1-4679-8764-6, 72 pages, English version.

Petrescu, F.I. and R.V. Petrescu, 2005. Contributions at the dynamics of cams. Proceedings of the 9th IFToMM International Symposium on Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, (TMM’ 05), Bucharest, Romania, pp: 123-128.

Petrescu, F. and R. Petrescu, 1995. Contributii la sinteza mecanismelor de distributie ale motoarelor cu ardere internã. Proceedings of the ESFA Conferinta, (ESFA’ 95), Bucuresti, pp: 257-264.

Petrescu, FIT., 2015a Geometrical Synthesis of the Distribution Mechanisms, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(1):63-81. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.63.81

Petrescu, FIT., 2015b Machine Motion Equations at the Internal Combustion Heat Engines, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(1):127-137. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.127.137

Petrescu, F.I., 2012b Teoria mecanismelor – Curs si aplicatii (editia a doua), Create Space publisher, USA, September 2012, ISBN 978-1-4792-9362-9, 284 pages, Romanian version, DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.2917.1926

Petrescu, F.I., 2008. Theoretical and applied contributions about the dynamic of planar mechanisms with superior joints. PhD Thesis, Bucharest Polytechnic University.

Petrescu, FIT.; Calautit, JK.; Mirsayar, M.; Marinkovic, D.; 2015 Structural Dynamics of the Distribution Mechanism with Rocking Tappet with Roll, American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 8(4):589-601. DOI: 10.3844/ajeassp.2015.589.601

Petrescu, FIT.; Calautit, JK.; 2016 About Nano Fusion and Dynamic Fusion, American Journal of Applied Sciences, 13(3):261-266.

Petrescu, R.V.V., R. Aversa, A. Apicella, F. Berto and S. Li et al., 2016a. Ecosphere protection through green energy. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 1027-1032. DOI: 10.3844/ajassp.2016.1027.1032

Petrescu, F.I.T., A. Apicella, R.V.V. Petrescu, S.P. Kozaitis and R.B. Bucinell et al., 2016b. Environmental protection through nuclear energy. Am. J. Applied Sci., 13: 941-946.

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017a Modern Propulsions for Aerospace-A Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017b Modern Propulsions for Aerospace-Part II, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017c History of Aviation-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Bucinell, Ronald; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017d Lockheed Martin-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017e Our Universe, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, Relly Victoria; Aversa, Raffaella; Akash, Bilal; Corchado, Juan; Berto, Filippo; Mirsayar, MirMilad; Apicella, Antonio; Petrescu, Florian Ion Tiberiu; 2017f What is a UFO?, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 About Bell Helicopter FCX-001 Concept Aircraft-A Short Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Home at Airbus, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Mirsayar, MM., Kozaitis, S., Abu-Lebdeh, T., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 Airlander, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).

Petrescu, RV., Aversa, R., Akash, B., Corchado, J., Berto, F., Apicella, A., Petrescu, FIT., 2017 When Boeing is Dreaming – a Review, Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology, 1(1).