Viewing page 14 of 16

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

[[left page]]
Four
THE AIR LINE PILOT
July, 1947
TOO LITTLE RUNWAY FOR TOO MUCH PLANE

[[image]]
It's an old familiar story––landing and take-off crack-ups because of runways that are far too short to offer an adequate margin of safety. Not only the larger planes––the Constellations and the DC-4's––but often even the smaller DC-3's find themselves in trouble because of skimpy runways. Here is a front view of a wrecked Union Southern Airlines chartered DC-3 which overshot its runway in heavy rain at Newark Airport recently, injuring 13 persons. The solution to this type of accident, which often results in fatalities, lies in longer runways. Runways a minimum of 7,500 feet in length, capable of extension to 10,000 feet, have been consistently advocated by ALPA.––Acme Photo

Three Cases Go Into Mediation
(Continued from Page 3, Col. 3)
trends in the majority of employment agreement conferences, was the report submitted by the conferees following completion of the agreement and stating:
"Our business was conducted with the company and the different officials in a true spirit of 'collective bargaining.' All of our problems were frankly and clearly discussed and solved to everybody's advantage. Each meeting with the company was constructive and when the contract was finally signed everybody agreed that something worthwhile had been accomplished."
Sigmund Janas, President of Colonial, is recognized as one of the best air line presidents in the business and company-pilot relationship in these negotiations is unexcelled.
Members of the Colonial pilots negotiating committee, to whom much credit is due for speedy conclusion of the agreement, were: M. A. Gitt, chairman, R. A. Silver, and B. S. Macklin, all of Local Council No. 28, Colonial; and K. J. Ulrich, of the Employment Agreement Department. Company spokesmen were Sigmund Janas, President of Colonial Airlines; B. T. Dykes, vice-president of operations; C. W. Rach, director of flight operations; and F. D. Smith, chief pilot.

NAL Agreement
Completion of an agreement with National Airlines, with the exception of provisions for retroactive pay for flying the Douglas DC-4, which item was placed in mediation and docketed as case A-2588, with mediation conferences attended by President David L. Behncke and W. P. Kilgore, acting Executive Vice-President, being held in Washington on July 14 and 15, marked the third agreement to be completed in a month of busy employment agreement making activity.
Agreement on provisions with the exception of the retroactive pay item was reached on June 26 after six days of conferences held in the company offices, 3240 N. 27th Street, Miami, Fla., on June 20, 21, 23, 24, 25 and 26. A previous series of meetings had been held on March 18, 19 and 20, and April 29.
The agreement, which provides for all equipment presently operated by the company and including Lockheed Lodestars, DC-4's and DC-6's, is essentially the same as the Eastern agreement with one minor exception regarding the Lockheed Lodestar. All other factors, such as copilots pay, vacations, etc., are virtually the same.
Representing ALPA and the National pilots at the June 20-26 conferences were: S. E. Stoia, J. P. Holmes and E. P. MacDonald, all of Local Council No. 73, National-Miami; D. N. Cooper, of Local Council No. 8, National-Jacksonville; D. E. Burch, chairman of Local Council No. 73, National-Miami; and W. P. Kilgore, of ALPA Headquarters. The company was represented by R. M. McCraith, manager of Labor Relations; G. T. Baker, president; E. J. Kershaw, operations manager; and E. G. Gouillard, of the Airlines Negotiating Committee.

Conclude NEA Negotiations
Northeast Airlines joined the parade of companies on which open agreements have been concluded with completion of the NEA agreement on July 9 after three days of conferences that began on July 7 in
[[next column]]
the company offices at Boston, Mass.
Writing of bidding rights for copilots into the agreement was one of the highlights of the Northeast contract which also provided for two additional copilot rate of compensation brackets although there is no equipment differential.
In addition to rates of compensation for both first pilots and copilots, the company agreed to pay retroactive pay to first pilots and copilots flying DC-4's back to the date when the equipment was first flown in scheduled operation, which assures approximately 12 months retroactive pay for the Northeast first pilots and copilots.
Completion of the Northeast agreement came after one previous conference, on June 26, which was suspended after one day because the company offer which was extended at that time was not acceptable.
Pilot conferees participating in these conferences were H. C. Holman, A. V. R. Marsh, B. S. Dixwell, R. O. Loranger and C. Liebman, all of Local Council No. 9, NEA-Boston; and K. J. Ulrich, of the Employment Agreement Department. The company was represented by M. H. Anderson, vice-president of operations; and M. H. Wheeler, chief pilot.
On June 24, K. J. Ulrich, of the Employment Agreement Department, met with TWA company officials in the International operations offices of TWA in New York City for the purpose of getting the company's interpretation with respect to bidding on runs on the company's International Division. Bidding procedures were discussed and clarified.

Panagra Nears Settlement
A series of direct negotiation conferences during June and July moved the Panagra agreement to conclusion in direct negotiations, rather than in mediation, despite the fact that mediation had been requested on June 17 and the case docketed by the National Mediation Board as Case A-2579.
The conferences with Panagra were held in New York on June 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27, and July 2, 3, 7, 8, and 9, resulting in an agreement on the pay sections and several other sections which were open, on the final day winding up close to two months of conferences to iron out the details as a prelude to completion of this agreement.
The basis of rates of compensation is designation of three distinct rates of compensation––one for the DC-3, and one for the DC-4, and one for the DC-6––based on 82.5 hours of flying per month with additional rates of compensation for all flying time in excess of this monthly maximum.
Pilot conferees at the Panagra conferences were: T. L. H. Young, Chairman W. L. Martin, and M. H. Foster, all of Local Council No. 38, Panagra; and J.C. Christie of the Employment Agreement Department. Douglas Campbell, vice president of operations, and Edward Spencer, assistant to Mr. Campbell, appeared for the company.

Braniff Negotiations
The final draft on the amendment to the Braniff Agreement, which would conclude both mediation cases on Braniff Airways––Case A-2504, covering their domestic operation, and Case A-2557, covering their South American operations, both of which were docketed on May 23––is in the process of preparation at Headquarters following meetings with the company held on June 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21
[[next column]]
at the company offices in Dallas, Texas.
An agreement was finally reached on all points, one of the oustanding [[outstanding]] features being the equipment differential for copilots starting with the DC-3 and graduating upwards to the DC-4 and DC-6 with the top and bottom based on a five year scale.
Members of the pilot negotiating committee included F. R. Freyer, chairman, O. M. Huff, D. L. Hurst, C. T. Raines, D. O. Henson, and J. W. Grissom, Jr., all of Local Council No. 42, Braniff; and J. C. Christie, of the Employment Agreement Department, who represented Headquarters. The company spokesmen were: C. E. Beard, executive vice-president; R. C. Schrader, vice-president of operations, Malcolm Harrison, personnel manager; and A. A. Stanton, director of personnel and training.

Mediation on AOA
Negotiations on American Overseas Airlines, on which a retroactivity agreement was reached on June 12, continued during the past month with the fifth and sixth of a long series of conferences held in New York City on June 16, 17, 18, 20, 23, 24, and 25 and resulting in a deadlock engendered by refusal of the company to negotiate, on June 27, at which time it was placed in mediation and docketed as Case A-2601.
With the retroactivity question disposed of earlier, the two final June conferences involved rates of
(Continued on Page 5, Col. 3)

[[image]]
LIKE SON, LIKE MOM
While father and son, sister and brother, and just plain brother teams in aviation have come in for notoriety, here's one that beats them all––a mother and son team, believe it or not. When Orvis M. Nelson, former ALPA first vice-president, recently became vice-president in charge of the International Division of Philippine Air Lines, he assigned his mother, Mrs. Mamie B. Nelson, 67, as stewardess for a 28,000-mile PAL survey flight from Oakland, Calif., to Manila, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Saigon, Bangkok, Singapore, and Batavia. Orvis and his mother are shown in the control cabin of a DC-4 prior to the flight which probably made Mrs. Nelson the oldest air line stewardess on record. She's a grand lady and a pioneer of the northern Minnesota lumber industry.

[[next column]]
14 Safety Recommendations
As an outgrowth of the United Air Lines crash at LaGuardia Field on May 29, fourteen substantial recommendations, some of which have already been made several times by ALPA, were submitted by the ALPA representatives at the CAB hearings into the accident held June 11, 12, 13, and 14.
Citing the fact that the pilot of the plane was within operational limitations for taking off on runway 18, the fourteen-point list of recommendations follows:
(1) The use of a sliding gross weight scale predicated upon varying wind velocities to determine the legality of using a runway for take-off or landing should be discontinued immediately. It has to be borne in mind that present-day air line operations involve the use of heavy, high wing loading airplanes and that a pilot must not be required to depend on wind to get him over obstructions. These airplanes are not gliders. Further, that when evaluating the use of runways for transport aircraft, the effect of high temperatures, calm air and the altitude of the airport should be given greater consideration. The performance of our airplanes at present is in many cases theoretical. When applied to actual conditions frequently encountered, it simply doesn't work out. It is felt in addition, that action, such as closing runway 18 at LaGuardia Airport to four-engine aircraft is no contribution to the overall safety picture, since the formula used in declaring runway 18 as a safe runway, under the sliding gross weight scale, is still in effect as it applies to numerous other questionable runways still open to landing and take-off of air line traffic throughout the country.
(2) Installation of adequate wind indicators, properly maintained and lighted, at a suitable location at the take-off position of every runway on any airport handling air line traffic.
(3) Study should be made of the feasibility of placarding the ends of runways on air line airports with signs at suitable locations, and visible to the pilot, showing runway lengths and take-off load restrictions for various types of equipment.
(4) Performance tests are invariably made by specialists who have been practicing the procedures hour after hour. Instead of this, these tests should be flown by regular line pilots who have just finished flying six or seven hours in scheduled operation, preferably after midnight. It is felt further that tests which established load limits for runways are conducted under far too favorable circumstances, that the varying condition of aircraft used in air line operation and loss of power due to elevation, temperature and engine wear should be given more consideration, and that tests should be made in rain and other unfavorable conditions, that the engines used should have seven or eight hundred hours of service since overhaul, such as the airplanes pilots have to fly many times when these
[[next column]]
actual conditions are encountered, and that the aircraft itself should have 4.000 hours minimum time.
(5) Since at the present time passengers may carry several hundred pounds of hand luggage into the cabin of an airplane, which is not weighed or distributed properly, and since an improperly loaded airplane requires excessive use of trim tab on take-off with consequent increase in take-off run and longer use of take-off power, and which frequently causes undesirable trim characteristics in the air which can be decidedly dangerous, a more effective means of proper loading should be devised.
(6) Comparatively minor crackups will continue to turn into flaming funeral pyres as long as integral fuel tanks are used which will spill raw gas on hot exhaust stacks any time the wing surface is even slightly ruptured. With the tremendous gas loads presently being carried, the self-sealing characteristics and other desirable features of gasoline tanks developed for combat airplanes in the war should be incorporated in all air line aircraft. The development of a non-volatile fuel is the ideal goal and should be pressed to the utmost.
(7) Small obstructions, such as floodlight standards, near the ends of runways often present a serious problem on landing and nullify a considerable portion of effective runway length and it is recommended that such obstructions be eliminated wherever possible.
(8) Since drop-offs at runway ends create turbulence and constitute a severe hazard when trying to land as short as possible, which is necessary with the high landing speeds of present day airplanes, and which, in case of brake failure or overshooting, can and do result in fatalities in what would merely be minor crackups if they were properly graded, such drop-offs should be eliminated by grading or fill.
(9) Installation of reversible pitch propellers on air line aircraft should be expedited in every possible way.
(10) A fire extinguishing system which would automatically discharge on impact or when the aircraft is very rapidly decellerated [[decelerated]] should be developed and installed on all air line aircraft and effective fire fighting apparatus should be maintained on all air line airports.
(11) Inasmuch as rough runways shake the wings and affect lift adversely, a condition which calls for greater take-off speed, which results in consuming a greater amount of available runway, plus the fact that rough runway surfaces give very poor braking effect on landing or if it becomes necessary to abandon a take-off and an attempt to stay within the airport boundaries must be made, it is mandatory that all runways be maintained level and smooth. Further it is known that rough runway surfaces also make crosswind take-offs more critical than normal. When rough runways are wet or icy, the previously mentioned conditions really become critical. Runway lengths should be increased considerably, wherever possible, without permitting any increase in present wing loadings or landing speeds. Increased landing speeds have largely nullified any safety factor which could have been derived from longer runways constructed in the past few years.
(12) On new aircraft, it is recommended that there be adequate emergency exits which can be opened from the outside of the plane.
(13) It is recommended that fire axes be required as part of the equipment of all the air line aircraft.
(14) Our final recommendation at this time, is that an independent Air Safety Board should be set up as soon as possible.
One of the glaring facts brought out at both the crash scene investigations and the CAB hearings was the inadequacy of runway lengths to provide a margin of safety for modern, high-speed aircraft such as the DC-4. Constellation, DC-6 and still larger planes of the future which are already on the drawing boards. ALPA has been a consistent advocate and proponent of runways, a minimum of 7,500 feet in length capable of extension to 10,000 feet.
Representing ALPA at the UAL hearings were 11 pilots and four Headquarters representatives. They were:
T. C. Patecell, of Local Council No. 36, PAA-Transatlantic; C. W. Gaenzler, Clayton Stiles and J. E. LaBaugh, all of Local Council No. 52, UAL-New York; R. A. Dunahoo, of Local Council No. 2, TWA-New York; J. D. Scott, W. W. Owen, Frank Baque, Jr., and W. E. Johnson, all of Local Council No. 18, EAL-Miami; J. G. LaVake, chairman of the EAL Safety Committee, and J. E. Wood, first vice-president of ALPA, both of Local Council No. 51, EAL-New York; and T. G. Linnert, C. F. Eck, J. F. Rice and R. E Nelson, of ALPA headquarters.


[[right page]]
July 1947| THE AIR LINE PILOT | Five
[Image: "Technically Speaking"]

LANDING GEAR DESIGN AND AIRPORT DESIGN
Landing gear design, which has remained basically the same since the development of the tricycle landing gear, is now coming in for its share of attention with research along this line falling principally into two main categories: (1) the caterpillar type landing gear, and (2) the swivel type landing gear.
Both are well in the stage of advanced development and may conceivably have a vital bearing on airport design requirements of the future should either of these innovations prove practical and adaptable to commercial aviation.
The purpose of the caterpillar type landing gear, illustrated in the upper photo with a close-up in the inset, was originally to make military aircraft adaptable to a greater number of landing fields, but its commercial possibilities are also being studied. The
[image]
caterpillar type landing gear is installed on a light bomber and unconventional undercarriage, it is claimed, enables the pilot to have a larger selection of landing fields, such as pastures, sandy stretches on beaches, or even land covered with relatively high underbrush. In addition to bombers, installation of this type of undercarriage with its tractor-like tread is being planned for other planes, particularly cargo carriers.

Swivel Gear for Cross-Wind Conditions
The lower photo illustrates still another attempt to modify and reduce airport design requirements. It is the installation of a swivel type landing gear on aircraft, a development which many observers believe may revolutionize the entire airport program. The light plane equipped with this type of landing gear is shown landing during cross-wind conditions.
This cross-wind or swivel type landing gear is a development of the Civil Aeronautics Administration and installations on Beechcraft, Navion, and DC-3 type airplanes are underway. In the face of the huge areas of land required for today's airport planning, the inherent result of requiring only one strip for a
[image]
landing field is an economic factor that has startling possibilities in the development of private, transport, and military aviation and the aviation industry as a whole.
It is still too early to predict either the success or failure of this landing gear research which holds out promise but is still in little more than an experimental stage, but future developments are being avidly watched by many interested aviation industry people.
If it can combine safety and economy in its own right, it will be an ideal step forward and permit greater utilization of present airport facilities, but if its development portends an excuse for skimpy future airport planning, its own purpose will be defeated and an ideal combination alienated with possible aviation progress in no way served.

EVERYBODY ELSE OUT OF STEP
During recent air safety hearings on Capitol Hill industry observers marveled at a rare occurrence. The Air Line Pilots Association the Air Transport Association agreed on a major matter. Both urged adoption of high intensity approach lights. But stubborn CAA thinks everyone else is out of step, say the war success of these aids is doubtful, and continues to spend taxpayers' money installing neon lights which both pilots and air line engineers describe as inferior. Why must the CAA be battered constantly from all sides to change its mind on such basic problems? It will be compelled some day to admit every mistake it makes. Why not do so quickly and get on with the progress?––From Aviation News of March 10, 1947.

[next column]
On Pan American, a Difficult Task
(Continued from Page 4, Col. 3)
pay, rules and working conditions including station allowance, hours of service, deadheading, moving expenses, vacations, investigations and discipline, sick leave, number of crew members, new or changed takeoff and landing minimum, and a new proposed paragraph covering appointment of a fifth member to the System Board of Adjustment in event of a deadlock.
Subsequent direct negotiation conferences between the pilots and AOA were held on April 1, 2, 3, 23, 24, 25, and May 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17, and June 10, 11, 12, and 13.
Pilot conferees at these conferences were E. J. Martin, chairman; and K. A. Whitsit, B. O. Sparks, J. F. Scott, R. A. Nordt, and B. W. Phillips, all of Local Council No. 29, AOA; and K. J. Ulrich of the Employment Agreement Department, acting as headquarters representative. The company was represented by H. R. Harris, AOA vice-president and general manager; Emil Jarz, personnel director; J. Y. Craig, director of flight operations; E. G. Hamilton, assistant to the vice-president; and C. A. Hodgins and L. P Morrison, of the Airlines Negotiating Committee.

Progress on PAA
Continuation of direct negotiation conferences with Pan American Airways, which were headed by ALPA's chief negotiator, President David L. Behncke, was another highlight of the June-July employment agreement making activities of ALPA as conferences were held at the company offices, 2819 Bridge Plaza, Long Island, N. Y., on June 21, 22. 23, and 24.
In addition to President Behncke and R. L. Oakman, ALPA Statistician who represented headquarters, the pilot representatives were: E. J. Forrler, Chairman, and J. M. Marcum and F. W. Saul, of Local Council No. 36, PAA-Transpacific; F. H. Goslin of Local Council No. 61, PAA-Houston; Chairman P. B. Baxter of Local Council 26, PAA-Western; and Chairman J. M. Rusch, of Local Council No. 55, PAA-Seattle.
Representing the company were Franklin Gledhill, PAA vice-president; J. D. Fenton, of PAA's industrial relations department; Robert Fatt, chief pilot; S. B. Kaufman, L. C. Lindsey, H. Fleming, and O. J. Studeman.

Meet Again in August
Progress was made by the conferees on the pay section which came in for a thorough discussion, including increases for both regular and master copilots, and another series of conferences will be held later in the summer, probably in early August.
Due to the fact that the company operates entirely outside the United States and around the world to many international points, the making of this contract is obviously a difficult task and will, when completed, be a milestone in ALPA's contract making achievements.
Previous conferences had been held with PAA on May 27, 28 and 29 at which considerable work was accomplished on the amending of the PAA agreement, paving the way for the June series of negotiations. The PAA pilot conferees have presented the company with a straight formula method, following much the same pattern as the Eastern Air Lines Agreement with a 75-hour, half-day and half-night guarantee, which is a deviation from the former method of rates of compensation for the PAA pilots.

UAL MEC Meets
A meeting of the United Air Lines Pilots Master Executive Council was held in Chicago on July 6 and 7 followed by a meeting of the UAL pilots negotiating committee on July 8. The meeting consisted of discussions on contract negotiation, the purchase of the WAL Denver-Los Angeles route by UAL and other routine MEC business.
Those present at the UAL MEC meeting were: Master Chairman J. L. Crouch and Chairman E. J. Smith, of Local Council No. 27, UAL-Seattle; Chairman E. G. Culbertson and V. M. Williams, of Local Council No. 12, UAL-Portland; Chairman C. F. Skannal and W. A. Fife, of Local Council No. 33, UAL-Denver; Vice-Chairman P. E. Brohme, of Local Council No. 52, UAL-New York; Vice-Chairman J. R. Cottle, of Local Council No. 14, UAL-Salt Lake; Chairman A. Schmidt, of Local Council No. 34, UAL-San Francisco; Chairman L. L. Jones, of Local Council No. 57, UAL-Burbank; and Chairman G. T. Tremble, of Local Council No. 12, UAL-Chicago.

Meet with UAL
Following the UAL MEC meeting conferences were resumed with United at the Palmer House in Chicago on July 8, continuing through July 11 at which time it was switched to the Company offices at the Chicago Municipal Airport where a one-day meeting was held on July 12.
Among the many points discussed at these conferences was the equitable distribution of terrain pay which spreads the compensation for mountainous terrain flying over the entire system but which simplifies the company's method of figuring
[[next column]]
the rates of compensation for such flying.
Due to the fact that all pilots flying United's newly-established Hawaiian route will be based in the continental Unites Sates, factors relating to this were discussed as part of the agreement instead of as a separate contract covering this over-ocean flying as previously. United's Hawaiian route will be equipped exclusively with DC-6's.
Headed by President David L. Behncke, pilot conferees at the June meetings with UAL were chairman S. T. Nelson, of Local Council No. 34, UAL-San Francisco; R. L. Spickelmeir and R. D. McKillip, of Local Council No. 33, UAL-Denver; G. G. Jones, of Local Council No. 37, UAL-Seattle; V. M. Williams, of Local Council No. 12, UAL-Chicago; and R. L. Oakman, ALPA Statistician.
The company was represented by J. A. Herlihy, vice-president of operations; C. V. O'Callaghan, assistant to director of flight operations; Tom Daley, attorney; and H. M. Eskeldson, of the Air Lines Negotiating Committee.
Immediately following the mediation conferences with National Airlines in Washington on July 14 and 15, President Behncke left for Atlanta Ga. on July 15 where he was joined by Statistician R. L. Oakman and F. O. Munch, of the Employment Agreement Department for conferences with Delta Airlines which were held on July 16, 17 and 18.

Crash Hearings
The Engineering Department shared the spotlight with the Employment Agreement Department for concerted activity during late June and early July largely as the result of the United Air Lines, Pennsylvania-Central Airlines, and Eastern Air Lines crashes and the ensuing investigations and official hearings.
Official Civil Aeronautics Board hearings and ALPA's own on-the-scene investigations occupied the full time of Headquarters Engineering Department personnel as well as that of many pilot crash representatives who play an active part in all phases of the investigation.
The three crashes, which took a total of 146 lives within a two week period, resulted in two Civil Aeronautics Board hearings during the month while the third was getting underway as this issue of the AIR LINE PILOT went to press.
As a result of the hearings in the UAL and PCA crashes, ALPA has submitted the pilots recommendations to the CAB, many of them coinciding closely with the interim recommendations of President Truman's Special Board of Inquiry into Air Safety on which ALPA is represented by H. B. Cox, of Local Council No. 31, AA-Burbank (See story
(Continued on Page 6, Col.4)
[[next column]]

IT APPEARED IN AMERICAN AVIATION
In the "Letters to the Editor" column of the American Aviation magazine recently, the following letter was published and strongly contradicts the derogatory remarks voiced against the Air Line Pilots Association in a letter signed "An Airline Co-pilot" which appeared in a previous issue of the publication:
"I have noticed the anonymous letter signed 'An Airline Co-pilot' in the April 1, 1947, issue of your magazine, which is so far off the beam that it cannot go unanswered.
"As another co-pilot, I would like to put your anonymous co-pilot straight on a few things.
"In the first place, I don't believe the letter was actually written by a co-pilot but by a company official designed to cause disruption in the ranks of the Air Line Pilots Association. About the only thing correct about Dave Behncke in it is that he spelled the name right.
"The so-called revolt at the recent convention turned out to be little more than a dud. All of the co-pilots voted for Dave Behncke, with the exception of one or two delegated who were influenced by certain company-controlled first pilots.
"ALPA has brought co-pilots' pay up from practically nothing to its present level. When Dave Behncke and ALPA started working, it was $50 a month and flying hours were approaching 160 hours a month.
"Anyone who has any knowledge of ALPA and Behncke whatsoever, knows that they have always leaned over toward the co-pilots and the greatest proportion of gains in salaries and working conditions have benefited co-pilots.
"Although most first pilots have not had an actual raise since 1934, the co-pilots have gone up steadily during each cycle of negotiations.
"The statement that co-pilots aren't allowed to criticize is another brazen fabrication, because you know, 'Mr. An Airline Co-Pilot (?)' that co-pilots aren't criticized for talking but are continually encouraged to do so.
(Signed)
A Real Air Line Co-Pilot."

[[top of the last two columns]]
For the Nation's First Grandmother
[image]
When Mrs. Martha Truman, mother of the nation's Chief Executive, needed special medicine during her recent illness, the air age whisked it to her from New York to Kansas City as rapidly as though it was an order from the corner drugstore. Pilot of the plane was Capt. R. G. Hanson, of Local Council No. 2, TWA-New York, who is shown above as he delivered the package containing the special medicine to an expressman for delivery to the home of the President's mother in Grandview, Mo.––Acme Telephoto [[image caption]]