The first letter

[Mike Buckley]

This is the very first letter my father-in-law wrote to his wife (both deceased). The letter is not dated but the envelope is postmarked May 14, 1962. They had been married four years when he was sent to Pasadena, California on a business trip, the first time the two of them were not in the same city once they knew each other. Thus, the need for the first letter.

Their home at the time in Vienna, Virginia still exists today, though it is much larger now. The very same motel (called then and now the Saga Motor Hotel) still exists at the same address. Only the phone number has changed, as the numbering system was later expanded to allow for more telephones throughout the country. The motel still advertises on its website that it is on the route of the annual Rose Parade, which is nationally broadcast on television every year in America. Notice that indication at the bottom of the letter.

Notice also that the motel's address printed on the letter has no mailing zip code and no two-letter abbreviation of the state, which would have been CA (for California). Those two conventions were put into use by the postal service the following year on a non-mandatory basis.

[Manfred M]

And I see it cost 7¢ to mail a letter across the country. A long-distance phone call at the time would have cost a fortune.

An interesting story and of course seeing a hand-written letter is becoming something quite rare too.

[Mike Buckley]

We have a letter written a few days later that was sent by air mail. At the time, standard mail and air mail were priced differently and envelopes intended for air mail use were commonly pre-printed with indications about that. The postage for the letter sent by air mail was 10 cents.

[Mike Buckley]

Regarding the handwriting, I always address a letter in cursive, as I've been doing that since elementary school when I learned to write in that style. Children today are not taught to read or write in cursive, so I always wonder if the letters I address will ever get to their destination.

[Wavelength]

I feel the life in it; really nice

[Mike Buckley]

Thank you to Nandakumar!

[Dave Humphries]

Interesting that he seemed to be suffering what we now call 'jet-lag', although I suspect that in '62, it might well not have been a jet plane!

(but I could be wrong)

Nicely shot and good narrative, Dave

[Mike Buckley]

Thanks, Dave! Your point about jet lag motivated me to look up the information about airplane service. Passenger jet airliners were used beginning in 1958, about four years before the letter was written. EDIT: That's when airplanes built in America were first used. Other jet airliners were built in Britain and Russia in the early 1950s.

[Dave Humphries]

I guess by the time I saw them at Heathrow, they' have needed transatlantic endurance, so perhaps arrived with me later in common usage. I am of the trubo-prop age

[Mike Buckley]

Pan Am began transatlantic service in the very first year jets were used and didn't provide domestic U.S. service until months later. I'm not sure, but I get the impression that the very first regular jet service was provided internationally, not domestically, at least in the U. S.

I also learned that a turbo prop is a propeller powered by a jet engine, which was a surprise to me. I never wondered what turbo means.

[Manfred M]

I also learned that a turbo prop is a propeller powered by a jet engine, which was a surprise to me. I never wondered what turbo means.

Most of the commercial propeller operated planes that are currently in service (mostly short range aircraft) use a gas turbine power plant. Internally they have a similar structure to a turbojet engine, but instead of using the exhaust for thrust, the gas turbine drives a propeller. Their exhaust does not make any significant contribution to thrust. They are far more fuel efficient at low altitudes (and lower speeds) than traditional jet engines (which are very efficient at high altitudes), so turbo props are used for "commuter aircraft".

The reason gas turbines are used on commercial propeller planes is that they are mechanically more reliable and have generate more power than a standard internal combustion engine (reciprocating engines, like the ones found in cars), albeit at a higher initial cost.

[rpcrowe]

At about that time, the standard abbreviation for California was Calif. New York abbreviation was N.Y. using periods after the N and the Y. The various boroughs of New York City had a numbering system that predated the ZIP code. My address was in Brooklyn and was usually written as B'klyn, 26, N.Y.

[John 2]

Interesting that he seemed to be suffering what we now call 'jet-lag', although I suspect that in '62, it might well not have been a jet plane!

(but I could be wrong)

Nicely shot and good narrative, Dave

An interesting piece of personal history that's prompted personal reminiscences of the time Mike. Dave, I looked up when the first de Havilland DH 106 Comet was introduced into commercial service. Like you, I would have guessed at a much later date but in fact it was in 1952. I was slightly amazed. As in the US, it was solely used for international travel - in the event, quite disastrously of course. It was ground breaking but of course in the end, paid the price for being the first.

[TonyW]

This is a very strange coincidence. At the date of this letter, my wife and I were living just off East Colorado Boulevade four blocks away. Three weeks after we got married, the year before, we left Sydney for the USA, traveling on a jet engined DC8, arriving on the same date at about the same time that we left. This was the first time we had left Australia and we were very young and naive in those days. It goes without saying that we are no longer young.

[Mike Buckley]

Interesting stuff written by John and Tony!

It was ground breaking

I never want to be on a jet or any kind of airplane that breaks the ground.

[John 2]

Interesting stuff written by John and Tony!



I never want to be on a jet or any kind of airplane that breaks the ground.

Probably not far from the truth though given that three of them fell out of the sky but at least in doing so, it alerted the World aviation industry to the existence of metal fatigue and the dangers of square windows in a jet airframe.

[Manfred M]

Probably not far from the truth though given that three of them fell out of the sky but at least in doing so, it alerted the World aviation industry to the existence of metal fatigue and the dangers of square windows in a jet airframe.

The tough part was that the affected Comets had a tendency to disappear over water, making it more challenging to figure out the failure modes (metal fatigue and stress raisers (sharp corners on the windows)). They may have been first to market, but both the 707 and DC8 aircraft that followed shortly after were technically and commercially far more successful

[Tronhard]

The Comet actually flew until about 2011, but in a military version as a long distance maritime patrol aircraft, The Hawker Siddeley Nimrod. The aircraft was an excellent design and the removal of the large square windows from the airframe let to its successful record in its military roles. They could have reduced the size of the windows in the civil airliner version, but by that time public confidence had gone and that was the kiss of death to its operation as an airliner.

Probably not far from the truth though given that three of them fell out of the sky but at least in doing so, it alerted the World aviation industry to the existence of metal fatigue and the dangers of square windows in a jet airframe.

[Mike Buckley]

My father-in-law who wrote the letter would surely have enjoyed the current direction of the discussion, as he was an engineer.

[Manfred M]

My father-in-law who wrote the letter would surely have enjoyed the current direction of the discussion, as he was an engineer.

The issues with the Comet were definitely covered off in some detail; especially in how it affected advances in testing and the understanding of fatigue limits and fatigue failure. was covered in some detail in a couple of my engineering courses back in the late 1970s. It opened up a whole new field of inspection / testing used throughout many industries that have made these structures much safer and opened up the use of high strength and low weight materials used in aviation and other industries.

While I understand why the pressurization cycling and related fatigue failure was not well understood at the time, the window failure issues (stress raisers at sharp corners) was a well understood phenomenon. To me that was a inexcusable design error with an extremely simple solution; although this was exacerbated by using a different (less expensive) manufacturing technique than had been used in the window design. That is something that probably slipped through the design review / manufacturing process review in deHavilland's desire to be first to market.