A Daily History of Holes, Dots, Lines, Science, History, Math, Physics, Art, the Unintentional Absurd, Architecture, Maps, Data Visualization, Blank and Missing Things, and so on. |1.6 million words, 7500 images, 4.9 million hits| Press & appearances in The Times, Le Figaro, Mensa, The Economist, The Guardian, Discovery News, Slate, Le Monde, Sci American Blogs, Le Pont, and many other places… 5000+ total posts since 2008.

Ocean-Crossing Floating Airports Across the Atlantic, 1935

JF Ptak Science Books LLC  Post 903

This short
shelf-lived idea was that of Edward R. Armstrong (1880-1955), who in 1927  first published his plan for a series of 1200’x200’
floating platforms for refueling and whatnot for transcontinental flights.  These five-acre stations—named the “Langley” in honor of
Samuel Pierpont Langley1— would be placed every 375 miles across the ocean.  It doesn’t look like a very practical (or
good) idea, but Armstrong received a $750,000 piece of development change from du
Pont and GM, which was major dollars in 1929. 
 Blog jan 9 sea airport
Armstrong’s
idea would get major play in the popular press from time-to-time, his project
renamed “The Seadrome” and discussed as a series of floating islands.  Armstrong himself would organize the Seadrome
Ocean Dock Corp. in the late 1930’s, his pretty but enormously impractical idea
(reported by
Time Magazine2 in 1933 as little more than “a perennial gift to Sunday feature
editors”)
 finally grinding to a salty end with greater
fuel capacity and efficiency in transatlantic aircraft. 

An even worse idea appeared in the pages of Science and Mechanics in 1936:

Blog jan 9

 
Notes:
1. A Time
Magazine article
published 28 October 1929 [a day before the market crashed!] about the

Langley oddly states
that Langley was the “designer of the plane which, except for accidents, might
have flown before the Wrights’ plane did in 1903”.  Tough potatoes. What the magazine didn’t
state was that Langley, who was the president of the Smithsonian Institution at
the time with access to major money and benefactors simply went about the flight
problem incorrectly, and produced an airplane (or “aerodrome”, as he called it)
that did not and would not fly. Not flying because of accidents means, well,
not flying.  The Wrights’ approach to
problem solving was elegant and beat Langley
by miles.  Langley deserves credit for his other (many)
achievements, but not for this aircraft.
 
This same
article only references Armstrong as a “swarthy engineer”.
The article
is reprinted below.
 

Recent Posts

Archives

Categories