Talk:Triangle control frame
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Opening comments
The TCF is singulary notable as a control part in kites, hang gliders, trikes, and ultralights. Any comprehensive encyclopedia over objects of culture would do well to include a comprehensive article on the A-frame or triangle control frame (TCF) found in aviation since Leonardo da Vinci. Joefaust (talk) 01:53, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- The problem is that your article is very messy, that's why I tagged wih "wikify" and "cleanup". Try to rewrtite it in a way people can really understand the importance of this subject (and that's the reason for the "context" tag. Also, note that there are empty sections. Try to rewrite the article in a way that all of the tags can be removed (or at least most of them. Victao lopes (talk) 03:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
In hang gliding, trikes, and ultralights that use the triangle control frame for its predominant fuselage part, there is hardly anything less notable than the wing and the pilot; the control frame is mentioned with focus by every maker and manufacturer; the TCF is central to life and death matters; the TCF is involved in every flight in an intimate matter. Hoards of articles in the last forty years include note on the TCF. Scores of patents involve notes on the TCF. Joefaust (talk) 16:48, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
This article uses far too many words to say too little. Is the flight control used primarily in ultralights worth an article of this length? Yes, it is mostly triangular (for simple structural/ergonomic reasons not clearly expressed in the article), but the shape is not of especial importance. Someone could fabricate a circular control frame - it might be structurally less efficient, but would have the same function and significance. Articles on "flat rudder pedals" or "round control sticks" make little sense, as either focuses too much on a less significant aspect.
The "three centuries" bit is dubious given flying heavier than air craft have only been around a bit over a hundred years. Needs less emphasis (at most a passing mention), or to be omitted.
Not sure that all the minor design variations are worth mention. Yes, of course pretty much everything that goes into aircraft is of strong and light materials (not a lot of concrete or ornamental iron in flying machines). Yes, of course designers try lots of variations.
The use of cables, struts or cantilevers on ultralights might be worth a mention, but this is pretty much the same discussion as for wing support in early/light aircraft. Just another design trade-off...
A better title/subject might be "flight controls (ultralight aircraft)", in which a comparison of variants, and a note on the advantage of this one form could be worthwhile. pbannister (talk) 20:25, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Pbannister, thanks for comments. There is a patent that indicates a semi-circle variant of control for similar purpose, but that too arrived in design as a variant away from the TCF for specific purpose. But a semi-circle with its two end points and lower center point is thus triangular, even in that patent for a toy hang gldier. In 1896 civil engineer Octave Chanute realize the control frame and set for a patented hang glider; his bridge building with trusses came into his design of control for hang gliders; his efforts stream into the most popular use of man-carrying aircraft: ultralights and hang gliders. That such a choice by such a person streams through so many changes is worthy of encyclopedic attention.
The encyclopedic history of the important object seem appropriate. The realm of flight controls for ultralight aircraft is a very much larger realm than this article; flight controls go into sail modifications, extra aerodynamic surfaces, morphing, variable geometry, electrical control of porosity, and much more. This article has a focus on just one control frame part that has proven to be key to safety, control, growth of hang gliding, growth of ultralights. But the TCF is certainly not the only control frame or control method; this article is not about the variants of control systems for ultralights or hang gliders, but on one specific control frame. Other articles on other control methods are certainly welcome. "Flight controls (ultralight)" is a huge umbrella worthy of a summary article; in such an article the TCF would be a significant subpart while there would be very many other important subparts. The wiki can help visitors know about a popular option, not the only option.
In order for the public learner to identify the evolution, history, and mechanics of the TCF, it is fertile to undertand that the control frame has been and can be embedded in various ways for specific mission and purpose. Specifying the strutted hold, the cable-stayed hold, and a mixed-hold is a clarifying tactic that well informs the visiting reader. Without this clarifying tactic, the TCF might not be understood by the non-expert.
The effort to reduce the number of words without losing key aspects will continue by me and others. Thank you for any work or suggestions.
The designing of Leonardo da Vinci for control systems on flying machines is important encyclopedic matter; more needs to be done on this matter for this article. The three centuries is actually short for the matter: 21st, 20th, 19th is three centuries overlap with actual patented invention on the matter in focus. Joefaust (talk) 17:36, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Image sequencing matters
Victao, it is key that the 1929 George A. Spratt be in an upper position; his evolute was fundamental, as it also included smartly mass-shifting and control-wing mechanics with the TCF in balanced cable-stayed manner for minimalistic airframe. Joefaust (talk) 19:41, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] ANNUAL TIMELINE OF TCF INNOVATIONS AND SPECIAL FACTS
Each TCF innovation should be noted; the citations from innovators are available; this will take some time for people to develop. My estimate is that the annual noteworthies is about 20% accomplished, so far. From 1970 forward each year had some noteworthy TCF innovation or fact to report across one or more dimensions of safety, flight control experience, maintenance challenges, manufacturing connectors at the apex or leg-base connections, add-ons, material changes, sizes, positioning challenges. Anyone is invited to bring forward citations for any noteworthy TCF item. Joefaust (talk) 05:00, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Length talk??
Who posted the length caution? There is exactly one object being presented; that object TCF is centrally important in a large sector of aviation. No other article focuses on the TCF. To do justice to the TCF, the various paragraphs need veriable illustrated facts. The article is not yet too long as several aspects of the TCF are incompletely treated yet. Joefaust (talk) 01:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC) Joefaust (talk) 01:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
My estimate is that the article is about 30% complete as of Feb. 9, 2008. Joefaust (talk) 17:18, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] What does "Invalid Time" mean?
Joefaust (talk) 18:58, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Alternative Terms
I reckon speedbar (in this context), refers to a bellybar, and not to an aerofoil-section basebar (and the BHPA Pilot Handbook agrees with me). --catslash (talk) 19:11, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Catslash, nice to have some company on this. Please quote the handbook pertinent sentences here. Thanks. The evolution of the basebar from tall high-sitting pilot in early days to the mostly-prone use of the basebar in hang gliding provided a neat forwarding from an early belly bar to a bellied speedbar that was not streamlined to a bellied speedbar that was streamlined, but where the "belly" aspect became much secondary compared to early uses of the belly dent. There is fuzzy overlap in the use of the terms. Alternates in literature: "belly bar" or "bellybar" allowed some room for the belly; speed was not at first the target of belly bars. There may be some fuzzy overlap in the use of the term "speedbar" which is streamlined for low drag and penetration and speed; the speedbars with the belly indent came to be ergonomically more correct for cruising and some maneuvering. A straight streamlined speedbar without the belly will give the low drag but not the eronomic plusses of the added belly indent. It costs more to make the belly indent in a streamlined speedbar; having both the streamlined speedbar and the belly indent gives a higher-end speedbar. There were some speedbars that were not streamlined; the ergonomic holds from the indents initially arriving in hang gliding for belly-forward pitch for speed came to be handy for excellent grabbing for prone-pilot-forward motions for pitching for speed. http://ozreport.com/pub/images/tommythompson.jpg shows a "belly bar" noted in http://ozreport.com/9.144 See also http://www.willswing.com/news.asp?newsSeek=332 The early tall sitting pilot had a belly bar to give room for belly while getting pitch-forward speed; the evolution to more prone flying, aerobatics, and XC times favored the belly bar for more reasons than was first present with the bellybar. Now, a streamlined speedbar that has the belly indent really has in focus more the ergonomic aspects of the offset angled regions of the basebar. Joefaust (talk) 20:37, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- You're probably right that the terms are a bit fuzzy. The BHPA: 'Pilot Handbook': Appendices: Glossary says speed-bar [1] Hang glider base-bar with bends to permit pilot to weightshift further forward [2] Paraglider SPEED SYSTEM. I'd say it's primary function was so you can stop the ground going backwards when you're upright for landing. --catslash (talk) 22:33, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Citations and Exposure Incompletions
- folding speedbar
- folding basetube
- Detail of drag of padding on legs of TCF
- Schematics of all TCFs
- Cable-only TCF
- Dates for firsts for innovations for TCF
- Early ski-kite control bars
- Bar mitts.
- Various reasons ...from sketches of Leonardo da Vinci to others who have stood on TCF, put feet on TCF.
- TCF basebar control pressures per aircraft specific model per maneuver.
- Interface of Pilcher's works with Otto Lilienthal's work related to the TCF
- Assembly bolt
- Attachment bolt
- Finishing uptubes to maximize the grab needs for normal and extraordinary uses. Cite articles that have dealt with the drag cost of uptube cushioning.
- TCF for speedgliding competition
- TCF detail articles for each specific type of towing circumstance.
- Tow dolly and the TCF
- The TCF of the Ski Plane of 1961-1962 and flown very much in Australia::
Interview with Bill Moyes on February 12, 2008, answered by e-mail: "1962 I was just a simple water skier and have never seen Mike Burns fly. I was led into the sport by gelignite Jack Murray. Jack had one of Mike Burns’ ski planes, it was a cumbersome beast on two floats and a steel air frame, I still have Jack's old ski plane wing." "Jack claimed that Bill McLachlan saw the wing in the art gallery in Rome where Leonardo Da Vinci’s work was exhibited. Bill McLachlan contacted Mike Burns to build the device and Jack bought and flew one of the first produced." This citation firms a sequence of awarenesses of Bill Moyes regarding wings and TCF; the first awareness was about the Bill McLachlan and Mike Burns result in the Ski Plane that had a TCF along the mechanics developed in 1929 by at least George A. Spratt and Rogallo-wing of the lines developed in the Fleep and the Paresev.
- Give citation for using the interior chambers of the uptubes for secondary functions.
- Up Products, Peter Brock, fittings for TCF
- Photographs of each key TCF for hang gliders, trikes, ultralights.
- SkiPlane phtograph and details of the TCF on it.
- http://www.aka.org.au/kites_in_the_classroom/student.htm Scale model triangle control frame on them. Toys sold with TCF. Citations for the patents and products and manufacturers of the scale hang gliders, microlights, trikes, ultralights...that use the TCF. Prolems with TCF at scale.
- On trophy "The Aerostructures Delta Wing Ski Plane Trophy" definitely had the two words separate for "Ski Plane" and also definitely two words "Delta Wing". On the trophy were winners for each year: 1967 Bert Jones, 1968 Bert Jones, 1969 Bert Jones, 1971 _____, 1972 _____, 1973 Bill Moyes, 1974 _____. The control system of the Ski Plane had TCF. Bill Moyes has placed some notes in an interview about his own experiences.
Joefaust (talk) 21:38, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] 1908 gliding club hang glider had a cable-stayed simple triangle control.
A college gliding club Schlesischer Flugsport Club in 1908 demonstrated a cable-stayed simple triangle control bar with pilot hung from wing behind the control bar. Breslau 1908. A photograph is researched and obtained by Stephan Nitsch and is published in www.HangGliderHistory.com Copyright is in public domain as the photograph is over 100 years old. The same control method was instructed well in the patents and demonstrations of George A. Spratt. Help is requested in getting the 1908 photo into WikiCommons; Stephan Nitsch gave indication that the photograph from his collection can get into Wikipedia, but I am not yet skilled enough to have all this happen. The cable-stayed triangle control bar became part of the public domain for hang gliders; added to the wing of the Paresev 1B and the Standard Rogallo hang glider arrived mechanically and ornamentally. Joefaust (talk) 02:57, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
