Wikipedia

User:Steelpillow/Aircraft

< User:Steelpillow
 |  Home  |  Aircraft  |  Wikipedia Books  |  Wiki tips  |  Pages created  |  Awards  |  Commons  |  Commons watchlist  | 

My page for messing about with all things Aircraft.

See also my aircraft notes archive.

Useful links edit

Wikiprojects
Templates, style guides, etc.

Questionable sources edit

Main page: Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Resources § Common sources to avoid
Domain search 23/11/2022 Notes
theaerodrome.com 481
Aerial Visuals Sub-sites include Airframe Dossier
airwar.ru 281
aviastar.org 0
greyfalcon.us 0 Black Sun Redux
globalsecurity.org 5,653 Many not under Aviation wikiproject
Kites, Birds and Stuff 0 P.D. Stemp
luft46.com 0
luftarchiv.de 0
militaryfactory.com + aircraft 121 121 not under Aviation wikiproject
nevingtonwarmuseum.com 0
planespotters.net 1,184
secretprojects.co.uk 0
ww2aircraft.net 0
Total 7,581 Plus Military Factory

Notes on editing edit

Suggested citation tag:

{{citation needed|date={{subst:CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{subst:CURRENTYEAR}}|reason=unreliable and/or copyvio source removed}}
Which gives:[citation needed]

Suggested edit comments, as appropriate:

rm unreliable and/or copyvio source per [[AV/R]]
rm unreliable and/or copyvio source per [[AV/R]], tag
rm unreliable and/or copyvio source per [[AV/R]] and associated data

Notes on searching edit

  • Use the "Search for pages containing"' option, or the full-page web form.
  • For online sources, the domain name is the best identifier; for books, use the title.
  • Put the search term in quotes, otherwise the result will be drowned in hits on the constituent words.
  • This simple search misses in-page links which do not add the source identifier to the text of the citation, but it is a useful guide.

Engine infoboxes edit

Main page: User:Steelpillow/test1

Refactoring {{Infobox aircraft engine}} and other engine infoboxes.

Template:Aircraft specs edit

I am currently experimenting with table formatted output in my sandbox; engine parameters in User:Steelpillow/test2.

Template rendering edit

This is my current template code for, i.e. rendering of, the Supermarine Spitfire prototype K5054, with a few bits added to exercise all the code changes.

Specifications (fake pseudoheading)

[convert: needs a number]

Roadmap edit

  • Comment-out visible examples of Template:Big so the pseudoheadings don't clash with real ones. - done
  • Remind myself how to generate table pipe code via a parser function. - done (see below)
  • Top-and-tail the whole thing as a singe table cell. - done (no functions, so uses ordinary wikitext)
  • Break into subheader and whole-list data cells. The headers are: General characteristics, Performance, Armament and Avionics. - done (uses magic word)
  • Clean out Big stuff. - done
  • Quick-and-dirty find/replace table code for bullets. - done (uses boilerplate html)
  • De-dupe row breaks after subheaders, courtesy of find/replace. - done
  • Debug Avionics. - done
  • Check sub-templates for bullet-list code. - done (only one is Template:Aircraft specs/eng)
  • Does Template:Aircraft specs/eng get invoked by anything else? - done (not that I can find)
  • Copy across the engine template, point my main code at my clone. - done
  • Fix bullet/s etc. in engine template. - done (uses boilerplate html, didn't try anything else)
  • Split into 2 columns (don't forget colspans and engine template). - done
  • Comment-out bold markup (don't forget engine template). - done
  • Delete wikitable class and check/finalise layout. - done
  • Invite comments. - done, see Template talk:Aircraft specs#Proposed format
  • Hardpoints nested lists (templated); see notes. - done
  • Add style="vertical-align:top" to each applicable <tr> element. - done
  • Restore bold in Col 1 and remove border. - done
  • User coded nested lists - need a bot to strip redundant bullet stars?
  • Move to official sandboxes (rename engine template links) and check against existing test cases.
  • Invite reviews.

Nested hardpoint parameters edit

Example: Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II#Specifications (A-10C)

These parameters are indented as a nested sub-list following the hardpoints parameter entry. They have bolded pseudonames as usual, but are also indented to the bullet-list second level:

  • hardpoint rockets
  • hardpoint missiles
  • hardpoint bombs
  • hardpoint other

It should be possible to trap the pseudo headings as table headings in the usual way, and indent via margin/padding.

It is also possible to just invoke hardpoints and enter free text, including sub-lists. See below.

User sub-list nesting edit

Some articles have nested lists added by the users as free text. For example:

Fairchild Republic A-10 Thunderbolt II#Specifications (A-10C)
Individual entries use up to triple bullet-stars (up to two levels being coded in the template/s). Avionics is bulleted list.
Lockheed P-38 Lightning#Specifications (P-38L)
|bombs<br> has nested lists, needing at least 2 bullet stars. Note the line break.
BAC TSR-2#Specifications
Long and rambling sub-list item

They sometimes use a <br>, <br/> or <br /> to pseudo-nest. This could be trapped and used to create a second, single-cell row, leaving the upper right cell empty (rowspan would be a pig to implement and risks borking the vertical alignment). The content could be indented via cellpadding.

Some entries hardcode up to triple-bullet indents are in the user entries and cannot be ignored, i.e. the bulleted format is baked in to these entries. There are bound to be rogue articles with unpredictable variations. Can these do more than mess up the number of bullets?

Can't be clever and crop the daisy chains in the rendering, as that would perpetuate a future nightmare. But is it acceptable to bork the display with daisy-chains and force cleanup of the existing entries?

Template and related subpages edit

Note especially the subsidiary template for engine specs, Template:Aircraft specs/eng, as it has list bullet points in it.

Pages with the prefix 'Aircraft specs' in the 'Template' and 'Template talk' namespaces:

Escaping pipe characters in tables edit

Parser functions will mangle wikitable syntax and pipe characters (|), treating all the raw pipe characters as parameter dividers. There are several approaches to this, each behaving differently:

  • The {{!}} magic word. This 'hides' the pipe from the MediaWiki parser, ensuring that it is not considered until after all the templates and variables on a page have been expanded. It will then be interpreted as a table row or column separator.
  • The pipe character HTML entity &#124; .
  • Raw HTML table syntax.
Description You type You get
Escaping pipe character as table row/column separator {{!}} |
Escaping pipe character as a plain character &#124; |

Producing table syntax using templates and/or parser functions edit

When producing table syntax using templates and/or parser functions, a pipe character in a parameter has to be coded {{!}}, which uses Template:!, to avoid being interpreted as parameter separator for the template or parser function.

In the case of a conditional table row we typically need code of the form "{{!}}-newline{{!}}.. newline" as then- or else-part of an if-construct. To avoid trimming, use a branching template (in this example Template:Ifnotempty) that preserves the newline:

Code Result 
{| class=wikitable
{{ifnotempty|x|{{!}}-
{{!}}a
}}{{ifnotempty||{{!}}-
{{!}}b
}}{{ifnotempty||{{!}}-
{{!}}c
}}{{ifnotempty||{{!}}-
{{!}}d
}}{{ifnotempty|x|{{!}}-
{{!}}e
}}
|}
a
e

In order to avoid generate extra newlines, the end of one template is put in the same line as the start of another in the above example. You can also comment <!-- cmt --> around the newlines to avoid the same problem, or use empty <nowiki /> tags. See Help:Newlines and spaces for more information.

Alternatively, XHTML table syntax can be used. It is not sensitive to line breaks and lets you avoid branching templates, {{=}} and extra {{!}} hacks.

---

Lists edit

To Do edit

Conversion aids edit

Maintenance pages edit

When updating these, synchronise substantial changes to minimise rework of templated articles.

Standard lists edit

Current options edit

general:

Type Country Class Role Date Status No. Notes

mil-current:

Type Origin Class Role Introduced In service Total Notes

mil-historical:

Type Origin Class Role Introduced Retired Total Notes

role:

Type Country Class Date Status No. Notes

nonstandard:

Roll your own headings...

maintenance (subject to change):

Type Country Class Date Status Notes

Lists for conversion/consideration edit

See also Category:Lists of aircraft by role and Category:Lists of aircraft by design configuration.

Civil transports
Private/light

Misc lists edit

Civil operators edit

The style guide for tables of aircraft in airline fleets is given at WP:ALFC:

  1. See if any changes need making (also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Airlines).
  2. Add the format option to Template:Avilisthead.
  3. Update WP:ALFC with links to avilist and template.
Issues
  • Headings: Aircraft | Total | Orders | Passengers | Routes | Notes - define standard.
  • Class & Style: apply the default wikitable sortable, per WP:AVILIST.
  • Total row: obsolete, as fleet size is given in the main infobox.

Starter examples:

  • Type | Total | Orders | [Options] | Passengers [x5] | Notes
  • Type | Total | Introduced | Status | Notes
  • Type | Origin | Class | Introduced | Status | Total | Notes

Status can be broken down into In service and Retired, as per mil lists.

  • Type | Total | Introduced | Status | Notes

Questions:

  1. should orders and options be included? We don't currently do so for military lists.
  2. should no. of passengers be included for operator lists of airliners? If so, is Class needed as well?

Type identification edit

For example:

  • Ordering by designation (e.g. F-1): Designation | Manufacturer
  • NATO reporting names: Type | NATO codename

Use the Avilisthead nonstandard option to begin with.

If a particular trend emerges, for example lots of similar lists with NATO codenames, then consider adding a new format option.

Airships edit

"Airship" usage edit

In the pioneer years of aeronautics, terms such as "airship", "air-ship", "air ship" and "ship of the air" meant any kind of navigable or dirigible flying machine. [airships 1] [airships 2] [airships 3] [airships 4] [airships 5] Dirigible balloons could also be referred to as "flying machines."[airships 6]

Terminology began to change from 1910, for example in 1909 Jane published the first edition of his All the World's Airships, which included separate sections for "dirigibles" and "aeroplanes". The second edition in 1910 kept to the same name while Berriman's book on Aviation, published in the same year, firmly declared an "airship" to be a dirigible balloon and not an aeroplane.[airships 7] Jane's next edition adopted the modern name.

Since then the exact term "airship" has only been used for powered, dirigible balloons, with sub-types being classified as rigid, semi-rigid or non-rigid.[airships 8]

Other variants of the old usage lingered on informally for the next thirty years. In 1919 Frederick Handley Page was reported as referring to heavier-than-air "ships of the air," with smaller passenger types as "Air yachts."[airships 9] Even in the 1930s, the large intercontinental flying boats now competing with the giant dirigible airships were still sometimes referred to as "ships of the air" or "flying-ships"[airships 10][airships 11]

General (flying machine)
Flying ship, a large flying boat
Misc / unclassified

"Blimp" usage edit

"Blimp" as an airship edit

The FlightGlobal archive http://www.flightglobal.com/pdfarchive/default.aspx

  • 2000-2001: "airship" 91 hits, "blimp" 11 hits
  • 2002-2004: "airship" 79 hits, "blimp" 3 hits

The Smithsonian web site http://www.si.edu/

  • "airship" 3430 hits
  • "blimp" 1560 hits
  • "blimp AND airship" 1420 hits
  • "blimp -airship" 224 hits
  • "airship -blimp" 2230 hits
"Blimp" vs "Zeppelin":[5]

The Goodyear Blimp web site http://www.goodyearblimp.com/cfmx/web/blimp

  • Lots of pages use both "blimp" and "airship" and sometimes "ship." Broadly, "Blimp" is used wherever the product name appears, while "airship" is the more common in descriptive content. For example, "Goodyear blimps are among the most recognized brand icons..." vs. "After 14 years of filling the skies, the “Spirit of Goodyear” airship retired...".
  • The explanation of Airship Types talks of "Non-rigid airships, like Goodyear's current blimp fleet..."
  • The History of the Goodyear Blimps also covers their rigid airships such as Akron and Macon, while concluding that "Today, Goodyear operates three airships in the United States -- the Spirit of America, based in the City of Carson, California; the Spirit of Goodyear, based in Akron, Ohio; and the Spirit of Innovation, based in Pompano Beach, Florida.".

UK usage: In the UK it is customary to title non-rigid airships as "airship", for example "SS class airship". The term "blimp" is slang and is not used in titles by any UK-published reference I have ever seen. So WP:COMMONNAME requires that we use "airship" and not "blimp" in article titles here, too. For example Ege, "Balloons and Airships", Blandford (1973) titles them "airships". He has an interesting comment in the entry for the "The SS or 'Sea Scout' class airships of the Royal Navy", where he writes: "Colloquially they always were referred to as 'Blimps'. Over the years several explanations have been advanced about the origin of this word. the most common is that in the military vernacular the Type B was referred to as 'limp bag', which was simply abbreviated to 'blimp'. An alternative explanation is that on 5 December 1915 A. D. Cunningham, R.N., who designed the SSZ type, flipped the envelope of a non-rigid airship with his fingers during an inspection, which produced a sound that he pronounced as 'blimp'; and that the word then caught on as the nickname for all small non-rigid airships." He pretty much avoids the "B" word everywhere else, though uses it occasionally in quotes when discussing American ownership.

From the Blimp article

A 1943 etymology published in the New York Times supports the British origin during the First World War when the British were experimenting with lighter-than-air craft. The initial non-rigid aircraft was called the A-limp; and a second version called the B-limp was deemed more satisfactory.[airships 12]

Yet a third derivation is given by Barnes & James in Shorts Aircraft since 1900:

In February 1915 the need for anti-submarine patrol airships became urgent, and the Submarine Scout type was quickly improvised by hanging an obsolete B.E.2c fuselage from a spare Willows envelope; this was done by the R.N.A.S. at Kingsnorth, and on seeing the result for the first time, Horace Short, already noted for his very apt and original vocabulary, named it "Blimp", adding, "What else would you call it?"[airships 13]

Dr. A.D. Topping researched the origins of the word and concluded that the British had never had a "Type B, limp" designation, and that Cunningham's coinage appeared to be the correct explanation.[airships 14]

The Oxford English Dictionary notes its use in print in 1916 "Visited the Blimps..this afternoon at Capel." and in 1918 (in the Illustrated London News) "an onomatopœic name invented by that genius for apposite nomenclature, the late Horace Shortt." The B-limp.[airships 15]

"Blimp" as a tethered kite balloon edit

Surveillance balloon

JLENS:

  • "Military blimp escapes, causes power outages before landing in Pennsylvania". Stars and Stripes. Retrieved 30 October 2015.
  • "Military Blimp Gets Loose, Cuts Power Lines". AVweb. Retrieved 30 October 2015.
  • Jonah Bromwich; Runaway Military Surveillance Blimp Drifts From Maryland to Pennsylvania, New York Times, 28 October 2015.
  • S.A. Miller; Billion-dollar military surveillance blimp breaks loose across Maryland, Pennsylvania, Washington Times, 28 October 2015.
  • Andrea Peterson, Craig Timberg and Christian Davenport; The military lost control of a giant, unmanned surveillance blimp, The Washington Post, 28 October 2015.

Skystar 300

Drone Aviation "Blimp-in-a-box"

Barrage balloon

  • blimp, Pronunciation: /blɪmp, noun, informal, 1 (also Colonel Blimp) British A pompous, reactionary type of person, 2 A small airship or barrage balloon, 2.1 North American A fat person,..." Oxford English Dictionary online.[6]
  • Paris, M.; From the Wright Brothers to Top Gun: Aviation, Nationalism, and Popular Cinema, Manchester University Press, 1995, Page 127: "A novel and highly visible form of defence was the barrage balloon, the 'blimp', flown over a potential target...."[7]
  • Follow that Blimp, WW2 People's War, BBC: "He was armed with a rifle and chasing an escaped barrage balloon which drifted overhead." [8]
  • Wragg, D.; Historical Dictionary of Aviation, History Press, 2008, Pages 25-27: "Airship ... During the Second World War, the main combatants used barrage balloons, or blimps, to protect vital targets ...".

Advertising balloon

Kite balloon edit

Currently Kite balloon redirects to Observation balloon

A Kite balloon is a tethered balloon which is aerodynamically shaped to be stable in windy conditions.[airships 16] This stability allows it to be used in weather conditions which are too severe for a round balloon.[airships 17]

Kite balloons have been used as observation balloons (aka surveillance balloons) and barrage balloons and more recently.

History edit

Early work on "elongated balloons", which later came to be called kite balloons, was carried out in both Germany and Britain from the beginning of the twentieth century. In Germany some success was achieved, although the complex shape of the device added significant weight. The British Army expert and pioneer Colonel James Templer was less successful.[airships 17]

Early in World War I Germany deployed them in large numbers as observation balloons and they quickly proved their worth. In response, the French quickly developed their own designs and in turn deployed them extensively over both land and sea. The British responded more slowly.

Italy deployed kite balloons as barrage balloon in the defence of Venice from 1916 onwards. 1917 saw the launching of German air attacks against England. One of the British defensive measures taken was to raise a line of high-altitude barrage balloons which carried between them a cable from which many more cables hung vertically, creating an "apron" over which enemy aircraft had difficulty in flying. Like their similarly-shaped but powered non-rigid airship counterparts, kite balloons became commonly known as "blimps".

By the end of the war, the use of kite balloons for observation was reducing due to their vulnerability to attack, while they had been widely adopted for aerial barrages by all sides.

  • For an article on WWI usage, see Aeroplane Monthly, June 1976.
  • For some notes on WWII usage, see "Skywriters", Aeroplane Monthly, August 1976.

Barrage balloons of very similar design reappeared again during World War II and more sophisticated defences based on their use were devised.

In postwar times, kite balloons have continued to be used in a variety of civilian roles.

Most recently, in the 21st century they have seen a revival of interest as surveillance balloons.

Design principles edit

References edit

  1. ^ US patent 467069 "Air-ship" referring to a compound aerostat/rotorcraft.
  2. ^ Ezekiel Airship (1902) wright-brothers.orgaltereddimensions.net "airship,"- referring to an HTA aeroplane.
  3. ^ The Bridgeport Herald, August 18, 1901 - "air ship" referring to Whitehead's aeroplane.
  4. ^ Cooley Airship of 1910, also called the Cooley monoplane.[1][2] - a heavier-than-air monoplane.
  5. ^ George Griffith, The angel of the Revolution, 1893 - "air-ship," "vessel" referring to a VTOL compound rotorcraft (not clear from the reference if it might be an aerostat hybrid.)
  6. ^ Sacramento Evening Bee, November 17th 1896, "Air ship," synonymous with "flying machine" referring to a dirigible balloon.
  7. ^ Berriman, A.E.; Aviation, Methuen, 1910, Page 249.
  8. ^ Ege (1973)
  9. ^ Auckland Star, 24 February 1919 "Ships of the air," "Air yachts" - passenger landplanes large and small
  10. ^ The Sydney Morning Herald, Monday 11 April 1938 -"ship of the airs," "flying-ship," referring to a large flying-boat.
  11. ^ Smithsonian, America by air "Ships of the Air" referring to Pan Am's Boeing Clipper flying-boat fleet.
  12. ^ "Origin of 'Blimp' Explained," New York Times. January 3, 1943
  13. ^ Barnes & James, p.13
  14. ^ van Beverhoudt, A.; These Are the Voyages, Lulu 2013, Page 119
  15. ^ "blimp, n." OED Online. Oxford University Press, March 2014. Web. 15 April 2014.
  16. ^ Ege, L.; Balloons and Airships, Blandford, 1973. page 68.
  17. ^ a b Walker, P.; 'Early Aviation at Farnborough, Vol. I: Balloons, Kites and Airships, Macdonald 1971, Pages 47, 184.

Rotor wings edit

Main article: Rotor wing
Thoughts
  1. Rotary wing redirects to Rotorcraft. Should Rotor wing be moved (over redirect) to Rotor airplane, with the (conventional and) stopped-rotor section moved to say Stopped rotor (over redirect) or Rotorcraft?

Rotor aeroplane edit

An aircraft which obtains its primary lift from horizontal-axis rotors (TENTATIVE F&S the Magnus effect, D h-a allsorts, common usage as a multicopter drone).

"Rotor airplanes An aircraft, which uses the Magnus effect by a rotating cylinder defines a new category besides fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft." - Seifert.

Horizontal-axis rotor edit

Find a cite for Davey's "Rotor aeroplanes"?

See also Talk:Rotor wing, which knocks on to Convertiplane and Powered lift for starters.

Stopped rotor edit

Main article: Rotorcraft § Stopped rotors

Sources edit

sources cited in the main article
additional sources
  • Stopped-Rotor Aircraft, globalsecurity.org
  • X-Wing, globalsecurity.org
  • XV-2 / S-57, globalsecurity.org: described as a "convertiplane".
  • Popular Mechanics, Aug 1962, pp67-69 [11] Girard "Heliplane" delta rotor, inc. Lockheed/Ryan VTOL F-104 Starfighter proposal.
  • McD-D paper including a triangular rotor disc: [12]
  • Davis, O.E.; Rotorcraft – Back to the Future, Boeing, 2012. (Boeing/DARPA StopRotor project)
  • Vargas-Clara multi-mode/multi-rotor/wing study.[13]
  • Paul Lewis; "Stop and start", FlightGlobal, May 2002.[14]: summary of early US research on rotor/wing variants, inc useful terminology.

Disc-rotors (stopped?) edit

  • Ellehammer helicopter
  • Caldwell ‘Disc-Rotor Plane’ of 1934 (ref Davis)
  • Boeing/DARPA DiscRotor (ref Davis)

Articles edit

Horizontal-axis
Rotor/Wing Aircraft
Cross-flow fan FanWing
Cycloidal rotor - redirect to Cyclorotor
Cyclorotor		 Cyclogyro
Flettner rotor Flettner airplane
Flettner aeroplane
Horizontal-axis rotor Rotor aeroplane
Rotor airplane - redirect to Rotor wing
Magnus rotor (Rotor aeroplane/airplane here?)
Radial-lift propeller
Radial-lift rotor
Rotor wing - main article (Not Rotorcraft?)
Self-propelling wing
Thom rotor
Wing rotor
Vertical-axis

Sources edit

Misc edit

  • ICAO Definitions from the Chicago Convention defines "rotorcraft" broadly enough to include most of these types: "A power-driven heavier-than-air aircraft supported in flight by the reactions of the air on one or more rotors."
  • FAA CFR Part 1 [15] does likewise: "Rotorcraft means a heavier-than-air aircraft that depends principally for its support in flight on the lift generated by one or more rotors."
  • FAI ditto: an "aerodyne that derives the whole or a substantial part of its lift from a rotary wing system.” (see this RAeS discussion document)
  • "helicoplane" search on Wikipedia shows much arbitrary usage.
  • Rotor plane kite - "Rotor plane" as a spinning airfoil.
  • US patent 3410506 - "Rotor airplane" as a variable-geometry compound helicopter.
  • US Patent 3231220 longitudinal-axis "magnus/wing" type rotor as "rotor-wing".
  • [16] longitudinal-axis Magnus rotor as "Rotowing"
  • "Rotor plane" popularly used indiscriminately for any compound helicopter, autogyro, or ducted rotorcraft.
  • US patent including a self-propelling wing or radial-lift rotor: [17] - useful list of previous patents.

Davey edit

Need to verify the rotors under discussion before interpreting the use of "rotor aeroplane". (see paper notes)

Savonius edit

Savonius, Sigurd J.; The Wing-Rotor in theory and Practice, Savonius, Finland, 1925.[18]

Foshag & Boehler edit

Foshag, W.F. and Boehler, G.D.; Review and Preliminary Evaluation of Lifting Horizontal-Axis Rotating-Wing Aeronautical Systems (HARWAS), Aerophysics Co., 1969. [19]

  • Horizontal-Axis Lifting Devices
    • Magnus Effect and Related Systems
      • Wing Rotor (Rotating Airfoil) Decelerators
      • Rotating Airfoil Convertible to Fixed Wing (RACW)
      • Rotating High-Lift Devices on Wings
        • Rotating Cylinder Leading-Edge Slat (RCLE)
        • Rotating Cylinder in Wing (RCIW)
        • Rotating Cylinder at the Trailing Edge (RCTE)
        • Rotating Cylinder in Flap (RCIF)
        • Rotating Airfoil in Wing (RAW)
        • Rotating Airfoil Slat (RAS)
        • Rotating Airfoil Flap (RAF)
        • Rotating Airfoil in Flap Leading Edge (RAIF)
        • Rotating Flap Systems in Ground Effect.
        • Rotating Flaps for Lateral Control
      • Orbiting Flap and Undulating Propeller
      • Cross-Flow or Transverse-Flow Fan and Flap
    • Cyclogiro Systems
      • Full-Feathering Universal Pitch Systems
      • Helicopter With Auxiliary Cycloidal Rotor Propulsion and Control
    • Horizontal-Axis Propellers With Cyclic Pitch: The Richard Helicoplane*
  • Near-Horizontal Axis "Radial-Lift" Concepts
    • Radial-Lift Propeller or Self-Propelling Wing*
    • The Helicoplane With Inclined Propeller Axis

*(p.177) "...the propeller without cyclic pitch but with its axis at an incidence to the free stream. This configuration, which Richard claims to be a special and important case of the helicoplane...". (p.182) "As will be seen in section II, cyclic-pitch propellers and "thrust wing" or "radial-lift" propellers are operating on the same principle." The helicoplane, radial-lift propeller and self-propelling "thrust wing" are based on a common principle. That is, the cyclic pitch of the helicoplane is equivalent to the tilting of the other two. Both require cyclic reversal of circulation flow around the airfoil.

Cycligiro produces both thrust and lift.

Zipfel edit

Zipfel, Peter H.; "On Flight Dynamics of Magnus Rotors", Department of the Army, USA, 1970.

Lots of non-cylindrical rotors, no simple airfoil types.

Seifert edit

Seifert, Jost; "A Review of the Magnus Effect in Aeronautics", Progress in Aerospace Sciences Vol. 55, Elsevier, 2012, pages 17–45.

§1 (p.18) "A rotor airplane is defined as an airplane which uses the Magnus effect for lift generation."

§1.2 and Fig.6 (p.21) "This airplane model provides a molded Magnus rotor instead of a fixed wing." [spiral scooped cylinder].

§2.1.4 (p.24): "A circular cylinder is not capable of autorotation. This is a disadvantage as in the case of a motor failure the lift drops with the rotary speed of the cylinder. But there are other kinds of Magnus rotors which are capable of autorotation."

ibid (p.25): "The Savonius rotor appears to have the highest rate of autorotation among the Magnus rotors investigated by Iversen. Miller performed wind tunnel experiments for an irregular shaped cylindrical Magnus rotor, see Fig. 15. [Caption]: "Four-vaned cylindrical Magnus rotor"

§2.1.9 (p.27) "The first prominent Magnus effect application, the Flettner rotor, was mounted with endplates. The idea of applying end-plates to the rotors was suggested by Prandtl in 1924."

2.1.10 (p.29) "Rotors with spanwise disks (Thom-rotor)"are a good choice if the rotor-length is limited by the rotor airplane requirements. However, more power is required to drive the Thom-rotor. In most cases, the Flettner-rotor is the best trade-off..."

§3.2.1 (p. 32): "Rotor airplanes An aircraft, which uses the Magnus effect by a rotating cylinder defines a new category besides fixed wing and rotary wing aircraft."

§3.2.2 "This [spinning-aerofoil] autogyro does not use the Magnus effect, as the rotor airplanes above, by affecting the boundary layer through a spinning cylinder," - i.e. is a spinning aerofoil rotor not a Magnus rotor? But c.f. 2.1.4 above.

"Cycloidal propeller" (presumably also a cycloidal wing, c.f. the cyclogyro) is different class again. Hybrid rotor has both a cylinder and a cycloidal propeller/wing.

Dunne aircraft edit

ToDo edit

  • Split off Dunne D.4 from D.1:
    Need specs for each: Walker?
  • D.3 create new article.

Dunne types edit

Further information: User:Steelpillow/Test2

Mortimer and Vaughan Safety edit

The Mortimer and Vaughan Safety aeroplane was an attempt to create an aeroplane which would be safe to fly. Constructed of wood, metal and fabric, its main wing comprised a hollow circular biplane in which the fore and aft sections were hinged together at the tips and the fore section was hollowed out at the back to give the appearance of a tandem biplane with joined wing tips. Seating was accommodated in the rectangular-section fuselage, below which was attached a four-wheeled undercarriage. Propulsion was to be via three propellers, two located in between the wings and one low down at the nose.

Following construction of a model in 1909, a full-size example was built.[mv 1] It was completed in 1910 but it crashed and caught fire on its first outing, and was destroyed. A second, modified example in 1911 also failed to fly. A publicity photograph of it apparently in flight in fact depicts it hung on wires to give the impression of flight.[mv 2][mv 3][mv 4]

See also edit

Aircraft of comparable role, configuration, and era

References edit

  1. ^ Flight, 4 December 1909, p.784.
  2. ^ Angelucci, E. and Matricardi, P.; World Aircraft: Origins–World War 1, Sampson Low, 1977, Page 72.
  3. ^ Jerram, Michael F.; Incredible Flying Machines, Marshall Cavendish, 1980. p.68.
  4. ^ Jane, F.T.; Jane's All the World's Aircraft, 1913, Page 6b. Reproduces the publicity image.
  • Lewis and Goodall & Tagg also have their scrapings.
  • Belize Postage stamp

Articles worth deleting/reorganising? edit

Motive power edit

Unpowered flight edit

Aircraft engines edit

Classes and configurations edit

Review articles organisation/hierarchy. The following list is probably not complete.

See also Category:Aircraft configurations.

Diagrams edit

Aircraft configurations generally: engines, tailbooms, etc.

Miscellaneous classes edit

Fixed-wing aircraft edit

Rotorcraft edit

Rotor aeroplanes

Aerostats edit

Hybrids and compounds edit

Misc
VTOL

Bits and pieces edit

Review articles organisation/hierarchy, especially leading edge devices and stability/control surfaces.

This list is probably incomplete. It needs checking for more and reorganising:

Active morphing edit

Related topics


See also my aircraft notes archive.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Steelpillow/Aircraft&oldid=1174873926"