enabled the C anadian Corps to take Vimy Ridge, the m uddy flats of P asschendaele in 1917, and to b reak the G erm an lines of defence in 1918. All th is reflected well on the C anad ian Corps com m ander, L ieu ten an t G eneral S ir A rth u r Currie, who h ad always encouraged his officers to th ink and use their initiative.

Notes

1. C anada and the Great World War. Vol. II, pp. 1188-89.2. Daniel G. D ancocks, Spearhead to Victory (Edm onton,

1987), p .21.3. G.W.L. N icholson, The C anadian Expeditionary Force

1914-19191 O ttaw a 1962), p .122.4. At the beg inn ing of the w ar the P rincess P a tric ia ’s

C anad ian Light In fan try (PPCLI) form ed p a r t of the B ritish 2 7 th In fan try Division. The u n it w as privately ra ised and equipped by Mr. H am ilton G ault, a w ealthy M ontreal b usiness m an who gave $ 100,000 to organize the un it. The PPCLI w as originally com posed solely of ve te rans a n d fron tiersm en, an d w ould be considered one of the fiercest of all C an ad ian regim ents in battle . T hree m em bers of th e regim ent w ere aw arded the V ictoria C ross d u rin g World War I, an d the u n it still lives today as one of th ree C an ad ian regu la r forces units.

5. A. J . Kerry & W.A. McDill, The History o f the Corps o f Royal C anadian Engineers. Vol. 1 1749-1939. (Ottawa, 1962), p. 127.

6. 4 th Field C om pany War Diary, N ational Archives of C anada [NAC] RG9 III D 3, Vol. 4995. 16 October 1916.

7. D .J. Corrigall, The H istory o f the Tw entieth Battalion (Central Ontario Regim ent) CEF (Toronto, 1935), p .99.

8. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol.4930. 2 1 s t B attalion O peration O rder No.73, 16 Ja n u a ry 1917.

9. N icholson, p .233.10. Corrigall, p .99.11. L etters fr o m th e Front. V olume I (Toronto, 1920),

pp .47-48.12. B oth R aym ond a n d B ow erbank w ere aw arded the

M ilitary C ross for th e ir role in the C alonne Raid. See Letters From the Front. Volume I. p p .47-48.

13. Corrigall, p. 100.14. Ibid. p. 100.15. N orm ally sap p e rs w ent in w ith th e su p p o rt waves

carrying as m uch as 120 pou n d s of gear an d sto res. It is a ssu m ed th a t for ra id s they w ould have travelled m ore lightly, b u t th is w as no t to be th e case.

16. Ibid., p. 100.17. B.I. G u d m undsson , Stormtroop Tactics: Innovation in

the G erm an A rm y. 1914-1918 . (New York, 1989), p p .9 6 -9 7 . See a lso D av id N ash . G erm an A rm y H andbook April 1918. (London, 1977). A rep rin t of th e B ritish Army staff handbook of the G erm an Army a t War, first pub lished in 1918.

18. Ibid., p .97.19. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol. 4930 , 2 1 s t B atta lion , CEF,

Reference m em oranda to accom pany operation order No.73, 16 J a n u a ry 1917.

20. Corrigall, p. 102.

21. N icholson, p .233.22. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol. 4930. War D iary 2 0 th B attalion ,

CEF. 17 Ja n u a ry 1917.23. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol. 4930 , 2 1 s t B a tta lion , CEF,

Reference m em oranda to accom pany operation order No.73, 16 J a n u a ry 1917. T his rep o rt co n ta in s an appendix a ttachm en t of all telephone com m unications rep o r ts th a t w ere received d u rin g th e ra id on 17 January .

24. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol. 4930. DHS File 4-30. Narrative o f Raid. 17.1.17, by G. B ow erbank, OC B Coy, 21 s t Battalion, p . l .

25. NAC RG9 III D3, Vol. 4930 . DHS File 4 -30 . 2 1 s t B a tta lio n , CEF, D ocum ents belonging to th e la te Lieu tenant Colonel Elm er Jones, Officer C om m anding 2 1 st Battalion. E ach com pany com m ander su bm itted a narrative of th e ir respective a rea of operations to the Lt. Col. Following th e raid . T heir no tes w ere donated to the H istorical Section of the C anad ian Army in Ju n e 1928 by Mr. A.S. F raser who w as in p ossession of the no tes a t th e time.

26. Corrigall, p. 103.27. As quo ted from The Comm unique, N ew sletter of the

21st B attalion CEF.28. The G erm an officer w as a p rofessor from S trasb o u rg

U n iv e r s i ty a n d s p o k e go o d e n g l i s h . S ee T h e Communique, new sletter of th e 2 1 st B atta lion CEF.

29. The G erm ans often chained the ir m achine g uns down to two-foot p ickets w ith in specific a rcs of fire. This h indered a ttem p ts a t tu rn in g the w eapon a ro u n d and firing on re trea ting troops or into the tren ch sh o u ld it be overrun by the enemy. The C anadian answ er to th is w as to sim ply get th e sap p ers to blow the ch a in s off u sing sm all am o u n ts of explosives.

30. N icholson, p .234, an d Corrigall, pp. 103-104.31. A. Millet an d W. M urray, Military E ffectiveness Volume

One: The First World War (Boston, 1990), pp .2-3 .32. D ancocks, p.22.33. Bill Rawling,. Surviving Trench Warfare: Technology

a n d the C anadian Corps, 1914-1918 (Toronto, 1992), p.47.

34. Jo h n Sw ettenham , To Seize the Victory: The C anadian Corps in World War 1 (Toronto 1965), p .92.

35. N icholson, p. 124.

Andrew B. Godefroy (BA H istory/Political S c ie n c e , C o n c o rd ia U n iv e rs i ty ) is a Departm ent of National Defence Security and Defence Forum Scholar in the War S tud ies D e p a r tm e n t, R oyal M ilita ry C ollege of C an ad a . He is cu rre n tly com pleting h is M a s te r’s th e s is on C an a d ian -A m e ric an re la tions u n d e r the superv ision of Dr. Joel J . Sokolsky. Andrew is the au th o r of For F re e d o m a n d H o n o u r? T w e n ty -F iv e C anadian Volunteers Executed in the Great War, (CEF Books, 1998); and soon to be p u b lish ed The C lass o f 1914: The Royal Military College o f C anada in the Great War, 1914-1919, (CEF Books, 1999).

34

The Franks Flying Suit in Canadian Aviation Medicine

History, 1939-1945

George Smith

It is no t widely appreciated th a t C anadians were active du ring the w ar in the field of aviation medicine. Aviation medicine research in C anada d u r in g th e S e c o n d W orld W ar invo lved a s ig n if ic a n t co m m itm en t of p e rs o n n e l a n d re s o u rc e s . How ever, th e re h a s b e e n little historical investigation of this and th a t which has occurred is m isleading. In 1947 C.B. S tew art argued th a t C anad ian research was boosted by an early sta rt and achieved unsu rpassed results; the m ost p rom inen t of w hich w as the w ork of Wilbur F ranks.1 In the years since 1947, Stewart’s conclusions have never been challenged. In fact, h is to rian s have ultim ately ju dged the entire C anadian research effort equal to Great Britain’s a n d e v e n e q u a l to th e U n ite d S t a t e s ’.2 Unfortunately, this well-established consensus is no t com pletely accura te . The problem is th a t C anadian historians have consistently described C anadian work without reference or com parison to foreign research. Perhaps the m ost interesting an d illustrative exam ple is th a t of the F ranks Flying Suit.

D esigned by Dr. W ilbur F ranks, it w as the first anti-g suit to be worn in combat. In the years since World War Two, th is ach ievem ent h a s become symbolic of Canadian success in aviation m edicine. W henever one resea rch program h as been singled o u t to represen t C anad ian work, it h as usually been the F ranks Flying Suit.3 But, in fact, the F ranks su it was far from an unqualified success.

The F ranks su it w as developed to extend h u m an tolerance to radial accelerations. Radial a c c e le ra tio n s r e s u l t from c h a n g e s in one c o m p o n e n t of ve lo c ity ; d ire c tio n . R a d ia l

accelerations are encoun tered du ring sharp , acrobatic m anoeuvres, pu ll-ou ts from power d ives o r a n y tim e a n a ir c ra f t is fo rced to circum scribe an ever-tightening, circu lar flight p a th . R a d ia l a c c e le ra tio n s a re of u tm o s t im portance, even today, as a lim iting factor in aircraft and h u m an performance.

R a d ia l o r c e n tr if u g a l a c c e le r a t io n is m easured in m ultiples of the acceleration due to e a rth ’s gravity, which is 9.8 m /se c /se c (32.2 ft/ sec/sec). The normal force (1 g) applied from head to foot upon a s tan d in g person with a m ass of 80 kg is 80 kg. B ut if th is sam e p e rso n is subjected to an acceleration of 8 g, the force then applied from head to foot will be 640 kg. For medical purposes, this person will now weigh 640kg-

B ecause of the a ttitu d e of the a ircraft in conventional m anoeuvres, the acceleration or centrifugal force ac ts upon the sea ted aviator from h ead to foot. The g-force seem s to be p ressing the pilot into the seat. The m agnitude of the g experienced is a function of the velocity of the aircraft and the rad iu s of the circle being c irc u m s c rib e d . T he re s u l t in g e q u a tio n is expressed as g = W r.4 From this equation, it can be seen th a t th e im p o rtan ce of velocity is param ount in the calculation of g, as any increase in velocity ha s an exponential effect on the final outcome.

The m ost im portan t physiological effect of g is upon the circulatory system . At 7 g blood is as heavy as iron. Sitting in a conventional up righ t position in the aircraft, the g rea t vessels of the body a re s u b je c t to th is fo rc e .5 In th e s e

© Canadian Military History, Volume 8, Number 2, Spring 1999, pp.35-41. 35

Dr. Wilbur Franks, inventor of the Franks Flying Suit.

conditions, the h e a rt is no t able to m ain ta in a d e q u a te c irc u la tio n . The re s u l t is f irs t a d im m ing of vision a t 3 g, followed by to ta l b lackou t an d finally loss of consciousness a t 4 -6 g.

In order to increase h u m a n to lerance to rad ial accelerations, it is necessary to m ain tain blood p ressu re to the b ra in and th is objective is underm ined by the pooling of blood in the lower extrem ities, as a re su lt of the elasticity of the h u m a n v ascu lar system .6 The basic concept of the F ranks su it was ingeniously simple. In 1939 Dr. W ilbur F ranks, while conducting cancer re sea rch , h a d concluded: “th a t m ice, w hen suspended in a fluid the specific gravity of which approached th a t of the m ouse’s body, could w ithstand , w ithout ap p aren t dam age, over 100 tim es the norm al gravity.”7 Obviously, however, it was not practical to suspend pilots in a cockpit filled w ith fluid. Therefore, F ranks decided to “construct and test ou t a semi-rigid fluid jacket.”8 This jacket, or su it as it would later become, was of very special construction . It consisted of a “non-extensible” ou ter covering, which acted as

a shell to hold the fluid inside the su it.9 This shell had to be non-extensible because the purpose of the su it w as to direct the fluid inw ards aga in st its wearer. If the fluid w as allowed to expand ou tw ards all benefits were lost. There w as also an inner layer, which was extensible. Between the two layers of the su it w as con tained the “n o n ­com pressib le flu id .”10 This fluid, u n d e r high accelerations, was forced downw ard in the suit. Because the su it’s outer shell was non-extensible, th e flu id w as th e n forced inw ard , th e re b y p rov id ing su ffic ien t p re s s u re on th e low er extrem ities to p reven t the pooling of venous blood.

Although the concept was straightforward, it qu ick ly becam e obvious th a t a n u m b e r of problem s w ould have to be overcome. The first problem s were in the physical construc tion of the suit. Development work had to be undertaken w ith the Dunlop Tire and R ubber Com pany and Dominion Textiles Ltd to create a suitably strong an d non-extensib le fab ric .11 The problem th en becam e the jo in ts , w hich eventually h ad to be vulcanized.12

One of the m ost im portan t problem s which Franks solved was coverage. The original concept h ad provided for total coverage of the flier’s body below the level of the h eart. F ranks su spec ted th a t full coverage would cause problem s. Hence, even before flight te s ts began, F ranks h a d a theoretical solution in hand . Since the body was “essentially a fluid system ” and would allow the p ressu re from one surface to be tran sm itted th ro u g h o u t the su rro u n d in g a re a ,13 F ra n k s concluded th a t “the rubber enclosed fluid system need only cover selected portions of the body to have the system effective.”14 Franks was right and, w hen it becam e necessary to reduce the coverage of the suit, F ranks was ready.

Eventually, the problem s were overcome. In April 1941 F ranks arrived a t the Royal Aircraft E stab lish m en t in F arnborough England, the centre for RAF aviation medicine. In the several m onths th a t followed, F ranks w as successful in dem onstra ting the effectiveness of h is concept. Flight tes ts were conducted using Fairey Battle and Hawker Hurricane aircraft and the “su it was found to preven t b lackou t up to 9 G .”15 On 21 A ugust 1941, in a report entitled “Tactical Trials w ith H ydrostatic Flying S u it” the operational

benefits of the F ranks su it were explained: “In com bat the w earer of the su it can follow his opponent however sharp ly he tu rn s and still retain his vision which will enable him to use his sights. In the pull-ou t from a high speed dive a t low level a pro tec ted pilot will be able to force a following opponent to black out or break away.”16 In o ther words, the F ranks su it conferred upon its w earer decisive advantages in bo th offensive and defensive situations.

Thus, the effectiveness of the F ranks Flying Suit h ad been established by A ugust 1941, little m ore th a n a year after its first flight tests . This sh o rt period of tim e rep resen ted a significant scientific achievement, for it m ean t the conquest of n u m e r o u s d e s ig n a n d m a n u f a c tu r in g problem s. It was, however, a purely scientific achievem ent. W ould the F ra n k s Flying S u it m easure up in operational conditions?

Alm ost from its inception, the F ranks su it h ad been the object of concern in th is regard. In early testing, a t M alton in J u n e 1940, Wing C o m m a n d e r G re ig h a d q u a l i f ie d h is recom m endation of the su it w ith “the principle involving the design of the su it is sou n d b u t in i ts p r e s e n t fo rm it is n o t a p r a c t ic a l proposition.”17 A fu rther report on service trials, dated 8 Ju n e 1942 and w ritten by W.K. Stewart, a respected British pioneer in aviation medicine, found “difficulties” w ith the s u it .18 The F ranks su it had ano ther problem .

How was it possible for the Franks Flying Suit to be a com plete technical su ccess yet prove u ltim ately im practical in com bat? In fact, it already had. G erm an researchers, am ong whom S ieg fried R uff a n d O tto G a u e r w ere very p rom inent, h ad been working on an ti-g su its since 1935. In May 1939, Siegfried Ruff h ad outlined the G erm an concept:

A p a rtic u la r ly a p p ro p r ia te m e a su re to h in d e r th is d is lo ca tio n of b lood w ou ld be to s u r ro u n d th e body w ith a flu id w h ich p o sse sse s a specific gravity a s sim ilar a s possible to th a t of th e tissu es a n d flu ids of th e body an d w hich, u p o n increase of its p re s s u re , c a n n o t d is te n d . It h a s b een p ro p o sed to s u r ro u n d th e body u p to th e n eck w ith a do u b le w alled su it, of w h ich th e o u te r w all is in d is te n s ib le a n d th e in n e r d is ten s ib le , a d ju s te d closely to th e body su rface . In c a se of acceleration th e ch an g es of hyd ros ta tic p re ssu re in th e s u i t a n d in th e o rg an ism w ould oppose each o th e r .19

The G erm ans, then , proposed to u se a double walled, fluid-filled hydrostatic anti-g suit.

In o th e r w ords, G erm an sc ie n tis ts h a d discovered the F ranks su it before F ranks. And, as F ran k s would la te r find, the G erm ans had encountered a num ber of obstacles. As Siegfried Ruff explained, “However correct these technical considera tions , th is is a som ew hat difficult m a tte r to p u t into p rac tice .”20 Ultimately, Ruff concluded German scientists had found the “idea of u sing a double-walled, fluid-filled su it (inner wall pliable for ad ju s tm en t to the body surface an d o u ter wall rigid), a lthough theoretically correct, is practically im possible.”21 Not only had the G erm ans already invented the Franks Flying Suit, they had already discovered th a t it was not practical.

The fluid-filled su it w as no t p ractical as a resu lt of one feature inheren t in any fluid-filled su it - the fluid. The G erm an su it h ad no t been prac tica l b ecause of the w eight and bu lk of its fluid. In Siegfried R uffs judgem ent, the “weight of the su it alone, as well as the h indrance to the m ovem ents of its w earer,...in terfere w ith its effectiveness.”22This, then, was the fundam ental flaw in the concept.

The F ra n k s s u it w as u ltim a te ly ju d g ed im practical by B ritish an d C anad ian fighter pilots. Com bat tria ls dragged on for two years. There were successes, as a t O ran in November 1942, b u t the old problem , the fluid, couldn’t be beaten . In “The R em otest of M istresses,” Peter Allen concluded that, in rejecting the Franks suit, RAF fighter pilots were m otivated by concerns for th e ir physical com fort an d th e ir “m acho im age.”23 This is unlikely.24 In fact, in assessing the Franks suit, RAF fighter pilots were motivated by deeper misgivings. They found th a t the weight and bulk of the F ranks su it rendered it a liability in o p e ra tio n a l flying. In 1946, a N ationa l R esearch Council s tu d y noted th a t “[cjertain objections were eventually raised against the suit, in particu lar discomfort while ‘a t the ready’, and difficulty in tu rn ing to search for enem y aircraft com ing from b eh in d .”25 These two objections were b ased on years of experience in aerial combat.

T h e F r a n k s F ly in g S u i t , it m u s t be rem em bered, h ad been in tended to confer an advantage to its wearer in only one aspect of aerial

Franks, centre, with two assistants, fitting a Franks Flying Suit. Franks is lacing the suit up to fit the individual wearer and thereby to obtain the maximum protection from acceleration.

com bat. This it did very successfully . In air com bat manoeuvering, or dogfighting, the Franks su it enabled pilots to tu rn m ore sharp ly th a n their opponents, either to gain the necessary angle of deflection in the a tta ck or to p reven t an o p p o n e n t from d o in g so in th e d e fe n c e . U nfortunately for the F ranks su it, a ir com bat m anoeuvering w as only one aspec t of a very com plex environm ent. F ighter m issions also involved long h o u rs in the cockpit, be it ‘a t the ready’ or en rou te to the com bat area. Most importantly, the very nature of fighter combat had changed. By World War Two the increased speeds of fighter a ircraft, together w ith th e ir sm all physical size, had m ade the ‘bounce’, or surprise attack, by far the m ost deadly tactic.26 As a result, of all fighter aircraft shot down in World War Two, a t least 80 percent never saw their a ttacker.27 In these c ircum stances, a le rtness an d visibilty, e s p e c ia l ly to th e r e a r , w e re of p r im a ry im portance.

M eanwhile, the F ranks su it h indered pilots in tu rn ing to search behind them . It is apparent, then , th a t the advantage gained in w earing the F ra n k s s u i t w as m ore th a n o ffse t by th e disadvantages the su it presented under wartime com bat conditions. The F ranks su it m ight have

helped its w earer to avoid a 20 percen t chance of being sh o t down. B ut it w as w orking for the enem y the res t of the time.

By 1944, the fu tu re of the F ranks su it was, a t the very least, uncerta in . It h ad been proven to work from a technical standpoint b u t not from an operational standpo in t. This s ta te of affairs m igh t have c o n tin u ed for qu ite som e tim e. However, wartim e aviation medicine, being w hat it w as, did no t w ait patien tly for evolutionary improvements.

The one problem which the F ranks su it had never been able to overcome, like the G erm an one before it, w as the weight of the s u it’s fluid. This fluid m ade the su it heavy, it h indered the m ovem ents of its w earer and, equally im portant, it w as there all the time, w hether it w as needed or not. The only possible solution to the problem w as to remove the fluid and th is is exactly w hat w as done. Insp ired by A ustra lian th ink ing and utilizing C an ad ian p rac tica l experience, the A m ericans developed an air-filled anti-g su it w hich used com pressed air to provide co u n te r­p ressu re to the w earer’s body.28 Working a t the Aero Medical Laboratory, Wright Field, Dayton, Ohio, A m erican sc ien tis ts firs t reported the

(Ban

ting

Hou

se M

useu

m,

Lond

on)

resu lts of their resea rch in J a n u a ry 1945. The Type G-3 su it consisted of five a ir b ladders covering the calves, th ighs an d abdom en. It weighed a m ere two pounds. Moreover, it was activated only w hen the force on the aircraft exceeded 2g.29 W hen activated the G-2 p ressu re valve supplied com pressed air to the G-3 su it a t the variable ra te of 1.0 lb / in2/g .30 T hat is, the higher the acceleratory forces, the more coun ter­p ressu re was applied.

A fter th e w a r G e rm a n s c ie n t is ts w ho evaluated the Am erican G-3 su it were am azed. O tto G auer, w ho h a d w orked on th e firs t L u ftw a ffe f lu id -filled s u it , h a d p rev io u s ly believed water to be the ideal solution. Yet, Gauer found th a t the A m erican G-3 su it gave b e tte r pro tection th a n w as possible w ith flu id-based su its .31

In fact, the G-3 su it w as superio r to the F ranks su it in every respect. The Am erican G-3 su it was more effective w hen needed and alm ost non-existent when not needed because the weight of the fluid had been removed. Defeat was finally acknow ledged by w artim e p roponen ts of the F ra n k s s u i t fo llow ing one te r r ib ly sim p le

Human centrifuge at No. 1 ITS in operation. When completed the Canadian centrifuge was the best in any Allied country.

experiment. The Franks su it was emptied of fluid an d filled w ith com pressed air. It gave b e tte r protection.32

In the final analysis, the F ranks Flying Suit was an impressive scientific achievement; a great num ber of technical obstacles were overcome in the development of the Franks suit. Materials and co n s tru c tio n tech n iq u es were inven ted an d perfected. The degree of coverage w as refined. M uch of th is work w as usefu l to the postw ar developm ent of the Franks air-filled suit, as well as to the Am ericans.

Only one problem , the weight of the su it, could n o t be overcom e. The fluid-filled su it dangerously res tric ted the m ovem ents of its w earer an d was, therefore, never prac tica l for w idespread service. The F ran k s su it sim ply p re se n te d m ore o p e ra tio n a l liab ilities th a n benefits. Ultimately, the Americans developed the a ir - f i l le d G -3 s u i t , w h ic h h a d s u p e r io r perform ance to fluid-filled su its yet none of the liabilities.

The h istory of the F ranks su it dem onstrates the necessity of qualifying, by careful examination

and com parison, the achievem ents of C anadian researchers. The F ranks su it w as not, as h as often been supposed , an original concept. The G erm ans h a d already experim ented w ith fluid- filled su its and found them im practical. Nor was the F ranks su it the b es t concept. The Am erican G -3 w a s t h a t . T h e FFS r e p r e s e n te d a n evolutionary development; a necessary first step. It w as the A m ericans who capitalized upon F r a n k s ’ w ork . It w as th e A m e ric an s w ho p roduced the best an ti-g su it in the world; one which, like the B azett jacket, is still in service today.33

There is no doub t th a t the foregoing would se e m to c a s t a s h a d o w u p o n C a n a d ia n achievements in aviation medicine. The Canadian resea rch program w as n o t com parable to the program s of Germany, Great Britain or America. Nor was Canadian work always revolutionary, nor even successful, in nature.

W hen C.B. Stew art in 1947 a ttribu ted m uch of C an ad a’s success in aviation m edicine to an early s ta r t and described a “nu c leu s” of talented personnel and facilities th a t were in existence at the outbreak of war,34 th is was never challenged. In the years following, th is in te rp re ta tion was n ev er ch a llen g ed a n d w as o ften rep e a te d , som etim es verbatim .35 In short, h isto rians have agreed th a t, a t the ou tb reak of w ar in 1939, C anada was ready to compete against the rest of the world in aviation m edical research.

This w as sim ply n o t true . G erm an aviation m edicine in 1939 w as of superio r quality in alm ost every respect. Canadian medical scientists w ere n o t like th e ir G erm an c o u n te rp a r ts . C a n a d ia n s c ie n t is ts k n ew n o th in g of th e complexities of aviation medicine. Wilbur Franks discovered the acceleration pro tection afforded by w ater in h is cancer experim ents.36 B ut he m ight have discovered it more easily in G erm an aviation m edical textbooks of the tim e.37 O ther C anad ian resea rch ers su ch as B anting, Hall, F ranks and K itching were, in fact, com pletely unaw are of the m ost fundam en ta l aspec ts of aviation m edicine.38 In 1939, C anadian m edical sc ien tists were out of their depth.

B ut, by 1945, every th ing h a d changed . C anad ian resea rch ers h ad m ade original and su b stan tia l con tribu tions to h u m an knowledge of aviation m edical problem s. The p ressu rized

breathing equipm ent developed by Dr. Bazett and the electrocardiography program supervised by Dr. M anning were am ong the b es t in the world. O ther work, su c h as the acceleration resea rch begun by Dr. W ilbur F ranks, m ade possible revolutionary advances elsew here. C anad ian resea rch articles appeared in every im portan t periodical concerned w ith aviation medicine. As late as the 1950s the RCAF Institu te of Aviation Medicine in Toronto was conducting British low- p ressu re resea rch w hich the RAF In stitu te of A v ia tio n M e d ic in e w a s n o t c a p a b le of completing.39 In short, Canadian aviation medical research had achieved international recognition.

T h is , su re ly , m u s t be th e m e a s u re of Canadian success in aviation medicine. Canadian a v ia t io n m e d ic in e s t a r t e d th e w a r w ith com paratively little expertise , a h a n d fu l of personnel and few resources yet it ended the war w ith som e of the b es t resea rch program s in the world. C anad ian aviation m edical resea rchers began w ith severe lim its p laced u p o n th e ir potential. B ut they w ent beyond the limits.

Notes

1. C .B. S te w a r t , “C a n a d ia n R e s e a rc h in A v ia tio n M edicine,” Public A ffairs (M arch, 1947).

2. Wilfrid Eggleston, National R esearch in Canada: The NRC 1916-1966 (Toronto: C lark-lrw in, 1978), p .144 and Peter Allen, “The Rem otest of M istresses: The Story of C anada's U nsung Tactical Weapon: The Franks Flying Suit," CAHS Journal (W inter, 1983), p .120.

3. T his tren d began w ith C.B. S tew art's article in 1947 an d reached its zen ith w ith the appea ran ce of Peter Allen’s article in 1983.

4. Siegfried R uff & H u b ertu s S trughold , C om pendium o f Aviation Medicine (Ottawa: Alien Property, 1942), p.72. For th e p u rp o se s of d em o n s tra tio n , th e following d iscussion is b ased on p rew ar G erm an docum ents. Allied re sea rch e rs sp e n t the first years of th e w ar carefully checking these G erm an conclusions, w hich were pu b lish ed in the open lite ra tu re before 1939.

5. Ibid., pp .88 , 99.6. Ibid., p .88.7. P roceedings of a n Inform al M eeting of th e G roup

I n te r e s te d in A v ia tio n M ed ica l R e s e a rc h , H all Papers, p. 7.

8. Ibid.9. P rogress R eport on Work to Protect Personnel Against

The P ressu re Effects of Acceleration, Hall Papers, p. 3.10. Ibid., p . l .11. Ibid., p .4.12. Ibid.13. Ibid., p .3 .14. Ibid., p .4 .

15. C -2833 R eport on H ydrostatic Su it, Bibliography o f C anadian Reports in A viation M edicine 1939-1945 (Toronto: DRB.1962), p . l 77.

16. C -2837 T actical T rials w ith H ydrostatic Flying Suit, Bibliography, p. 178.

17. C -2830 R eport on P ractical Flying T ests C arried O ut W ith ‘Special Flying S u it,’ Bibliography, p. 177.

18. C -2842 In terim Report on F ran k s S u it T rials a t No.43 S q u ad ro n Acklington, Bibliography, p. 179.

19. Ruff, C ompendium, p .97.20. Ibid.21. “In f lu e n c e o f T a n g e n tia l F o rce s on th e H u m an

O rg an ism ,” B ulletin o f War M edicine (Ju ly , 1942), p.510.

22. Ruff, Com pendium , p .97 .23. Allen, FFS, p . l 20.24. S u b seq u en t accep tance of the A m erican G-3 su it w as

virtually instanteous. American fighter pilots were quick to se t aside th e ir “m acho im age,” a s were the fighter pilots of every W estern coun try in the post-w ar world.

25. E dgar C. Black, History o f the A ssocia te Comm ittee on Aviation M edical Research: 1939-1945 (O ttawa: NRC, 1946) p .97.

26. Mike Spick, Fighter Pilot Tactics: The techniques o f dayligh t air com bat (New York: S te in an d Day, 1983), p.56.

27. Mike Spick, The A ce Factor (New York: Avon, 1989),p p .11-12.

28. T.M. G ibson and M.H. H arrison, Into Thin Air: A History o f Aviation M edicine in the RAF (London: R obert Hale, 1984), pp. 155-157.

29. G.L. M aison, C.A. M aaske, G.A. H allenbeck an d E.E. M artin, “A cceleration and the G S u it,” Air Surgeon’s Bulletin (Jan u a ry 1945), p.6.

30. Milton Mazer, “The G S u it in C om bat,” Air Surgeon's Bulletin (August, 1945), p .237 .

31. O tto G auer, “The Physiological Effects of Prolonged A cceleration,” German Aviation Medicine in World War //(W ashington: USAF, 1950), p.582.

32. J o h n E rn stin g an d Peter King, Aviation Medicine: 2nd ed. (London: B u tterw orths, 1988), p .163.

33. R eaders in te rested in m odern aviation m edicine are d irected to E rn s tin g an d King, Aviation Medicine: 2nd ed. and , in particu la r, to the d iscu ssio n of th e RAF p artia l p re ssu re jerk in , w hich is a modified B azett ja ck e t (illustration p. 110).

34. S tew art, C anadian R esearch, p .98.35. Eggleston, NRC, p. 144.36. P roceed ings of a n Inform al M eeting of th e G roup

In te rested in Aviation M edical R esearch , Hall Papers, P '7 .

37. Ruff, Com pendium , p .97.38. Proceedings, Hall Papers, p .5.39. G ibson, Into Thin Air, p. 133.

George S m ith is a doctoral cand ida te a t Wilfrid L aurier University. This p aper is b ased on h is MA Thesis, com pleted a t the U niversity of W estern O ntario , en titled , “C anadian Aviation Medicine, 1939-1945.”

Brigadier-General Denis Whitaker Honoured by Belgians

Shelagh Whitaker

A w a r tim e l ia is o n b e tw e e n a C a n a d ia n infantrym an and a Belgian resistance fighter

c u lm in a te d 54 y ea rs la te r w ith th e rec e n t p resen ta tio n of Belgium ’s m ost d istingu ished decoration , C om m ander of the O rder of the Crown.

B r ig a d ie r -G e n e ra l D e n is W h ita k e r of Oakville, O ntario, one of C an ad a’s m ost highly decorated veterans of the Second World War, was aw arded the m edal in K alm thout, a village n ear Antwerp, by a special proclam ation by Belgium’s King Albert. The decoration is equivalen t to C anada’s Order of C anada and was awarded “for em inent services rendered .”

W hitaker, a s c o m m a n d e r of th e Royal Ham ilton Light Infantry (RHLI), is credited with

the liberation of the port of Antwerp in Septem ber 1944. This is recognized as a critical ba ttle in opening the port for Allied logistical supply in its drive towards Germany. In a unique partnership, m em b ers of th e B elgian R esis tan ce fough t alongside the C anad ians in a six-week battle to drive the G erm ans from the Antwerp docks and clear access to the Scheldt River.

Captain Eugene Colson, codenam ed “Harry,” h a d form ed a res is ta n c e force of som e 600 dockw orkers in A ntw erp’s dock area, in 1942. Their m andate w as to p ro tec t the docks from G erm an sabotage w hen the Allies liberated the city. The B ritish 11th Arm oured Division rolled in to Antwerp on 5 Septem ber b u t w as ordered o u t after two days to fight a t Arnhem . This left the docks wide open to enem y sabotage. Armed