Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T21:09:06.787Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Keeping the Pilot Happy—the Contribution of Research and Development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 July 2016

Morien Morgan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When asked to give the de Havilland Memorial Lecture I could have taken as my subject the general state of play in aerospace research and development, with special reference to what Farnborough and its outstations were up to. Geoffrey de Havilland was a Farnborough product—a fact of which we at the RAE are very proud—so such a theme might have been appropriate. But de Havilland was not only a gifted aircraft designer, he was also essentially a test pilot. The whole rather special atmosphere at Hatfield which he created and sustained—and which still survives his death—owes much to the fact that we had here in one man both a quite exceptional engineer and an experienced and highly critical pilot who was quite capable of evaluating his own products in the air. As a matter of interest, I have reproduced in Figs. 1(a), and 1(b), pages from one of his 1911 notebooks at Farnborough which have recently come to light; even in those early days the pilot/designer combination sings out.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 75 , Issue 729 , September 1971 , pp. 630 - 647
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 1971 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Morgan, and Thomas, . Control Surface Design in Theory and in Practice. Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, August 1945.Google Scholar
2. Cooper, . Understanding and interpreting pilot opinion. Aero Eng Review, Vol 6, No 3, 1957.Google Scholar
3. McRuer, Ashkenas and Guerre, . A systems analysis of longitudinal flying qualities. WADC TR60-43, 1960.Google Scholar
4. Newell, and Campbell, . Flight evaluation of variable short-period and phugoid characteristics in a B.26. Cornell Aero Lab Inc WADC TR54-594, 1954.Google Scholar
5. Kidd, and Bull, . Handling qualities requirements as influenced by pilot evaluation and sample size. Cornell Aero Lab Inc Report TB 1444-F-l, 1963.Google Scholar
6. Barnes, . A simulator investigation of the effects of Wn and Lα on the landing approach task. BAC Report AE 266, 1966.Google Scholar
7. Military Specification—Flying Qualities of Piloted Aeroplanes. MIL-F-8785B (ASG), 1969.Google Scholar
8. Bisgood, . A review of recent research on handling qualities, and its application to the handling problems of large air craft. Parts I and II. ARC R&M 3458 (RAE Aero 2688), 1967.Google Scholar
9. Bisgood, . A review of recent research on handling qualities, and its application to the handling problems of large aircraft. Part III. ARC R&M 3606. (RAE TR 68022), 1970.Google Scholar
10. Pinsker, W. J. G. Direct Lift Control. The Aeronautical Journal of the Royal Aeronautical Society, Vol 74, No 718, October 1970.Google Scholar
11. King, and McPherson, . A piloted simulator study of a jet VTOL aircraft in partially jet-borne flight. RAE TR 68301, 1968.Google Scholar
12. O'Hara, . Stability augmentation in aircraft design. Paper presented to ICAS Conference, September 1970.Google Scholar
13. Howell, . Flight experience of rate demand control using electrical signalling in the Arro 707C aircraft. AGARD Report 536, 1966 Google Scholar