In-Flight Simulators and

Fly-by-Wire/Light Demonstrators: A
Historical Account of International
Aeronautical Research 1st Edition Peter
G. Hamel (Eds.)
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://textbookfull.com/product/in-flight-simulators-and-fly-by-wire-light-demonstrator
s-a-historical-account-of-international-aeronautical-research-1st-edition-peter-g-hamel
-eds/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

ASA Fly the Wing A Flight Training Handbook for

Transport Category Airplanes 4th Edition Billy Walker

https://textbookfull.com/product/asa-fly-the-wing-a-flight-
training-handbook-for-transport-category-airplanes-4th-edition-
billy-walker/

Fly by Night Physics How Physicists Use the Backs of

Envelopes 1st Edition A. Zee

https://textbookfull.com/product/fly-by-night-physics-how-
physicists-use-the-backs-of-envelopes-1st-edition-a-zee/

Ludwig Prandtl A Life for Fluid Mechanics and

Aeronautical Research Michael Eckert

https://textbookfull.com/product/ludwig-prandtl-a-life-for-fluid-
mechanics-and-aeronautical-research-michael-eckert/

Simulators for Transportation Human Factors Research

and Practice 1st Edition Mark S. Young

https://textbookfull.com/product/simulators-for-transportation-
human-factors-research-and-practice-1st-edition-mark-s-young/
Lesson Plans to Train Like You Fly a flight instructor
s reference for scenario based training Mcmahon

https://textbookfull.com/product/lesson-plans-to-train-like-you-
fly-a-flight-instructor-s-reference-for-scenario-based-training-
mcmahon/

Determined by Reasons: A Competence Account of Acting

for a Normative Reason 1st Edition Susanne Mantel

https://textbookfull.com/product/determined-by-reasons-a-
competence-account-of-acting-for-a-normative-reason-1st-edition-
susanne-mantel/

Palgrave Handbook of Research in Historical Culture and

Education 1st Edition Mario Carretero

https://textbookfull.com/product/palgrave-handbook-of-research-
in-historical-culture-and-education-1st-edition-mario-carretero/

An Account of Elements of Stream of Consciousness & a

Stylistic Analysis of The Death of the Moth by Virginia
Woolf by Ayoub Anajjar (1) 1st Edition Anajjar Ayoub

https://textbookfull.com/product/an-account-of-elements-of-
stream-of-consciousness-a-stylistic-analysis-of-the-death-of-the-
moth-by-virginia-woolf-by-ayoub-anajjar-1-1st-edition-anajjar-
ayoub/

Mobility, Migration and Transport: Historical

Perspectives 1st Edition Colin G. Pooley (Auth.)

https://textbookfull.com/product/mobility-migration-and-
transport-historical-perspectives-1st-edition-colin-g-pooley-
auth/
Peter G. Hamel Editor
Translated by Ravindra V. Jategaonkar

In-Flight Simulators
and Fly-by-Wire/Light
Demonstrators

A Historical Account of
International Aeronautical Research
In-Flight Simulators and Fly-by-Wire/Light
Demonstrators
Peter G. Hamel
Editor

In-Flight Simulators
and Fly-by-Wire/Light
Demonstrators
A Historical Account of International
Aeronautical Research

Translated by
Ravindra V. Jategaonkar

123
Editor
Peter G. Hamel
Director (Retired)
DLR German Aerospace Center
Institute of Flight Systems
Braunschweig
Germany
e-mail: p.hamel@t-online.de
peter.hamel@alum.mit.edu

Translated by
Ravindra V. Jategaonkar
Senior Scientist (Retired)
DLR German Aerospace Center
Institute of Flight Systems
Braunschweig
Germany
e-mail: ravindra.jategaonkar@t-online.de

This book can be indexed, referenced, and cited as follows:

In-Flight Simulators and Fly-by-Wire/Light Demonstrators: A Historical Account of International
Aeronautical Research, Edited by Peter G. Hamel, Translated by Ravindra V. Jategaonkar, and
published by Springer, March 2017.

Revised, extended and translated from the original book in German:

“Fliegende Simulatoren und Technologieträger: Braunschweiger Luftfahrtforschung im internationalen
Umfeld“, edited by Peter G. Hamel and published by Appelhaus Verlag, Braunschweig, 2014, ISBN
978-3-944939-06-3.

ISBN 978-3-319-53996-6 ISBN 978-3-319-53997-3 (eBook)

DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-53997-3

Library of Congress Control Number: 2017933443

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is
concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction
on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic
adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not
imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and
regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed
to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty,
express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional
affiliations.

Printed on acid-free paper

This Springer imprint is published by Springer Nature

The registered company is Springer International Publishing AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
Be more attentive to new ideas from the research world

George S. Schairer,
Former Vice President Research, Boeing (1989)
Foreword to the English Edition

For the first 40 years of aviation, most of the failures of the earliest attempts at powered,
fixed-wing flight were associated with inadequate understanding of dynamic stability and
control. Although Lanchester, Bryan, and Williams had already developed the theory of
aircraft dynamics by the early 1900s, their work still had found negligible use for design
purposes by as late as the mid 1940s. However, WWII brought demands for maneuverability
so that aircraft dynamic stability and control has been a focus of attention ever since.
It was through the research and the technology demonstrators that are excellently reviewed,
chronicled, and documented in this book that the aviation industry gained an understanding of
aircraft stability and control. With that knowledge, aircraft designers have been freed
forevermore from the constraints of the classical conception of stability and control associated
with fixed stabilizing fins and manually movable surfaces for control. Fly-by-Wire artificial
stability systems give the designer the flexibility to design an aircraft solely from the per-
spective of performance and ignore the classical stability requirements. The genesis of the
development of artificial stability was in the pioneering work that was done primarily in the
United States and in Germany (often in collaboration).
In the US, the early basic studies were conducted in the 40s and 50s by NASA and by the
Flight Research Department of the Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory (CAL, now called Cal-
span) with totally different objectives. The scientists at NASA were seeking ways to improve
the flying qualities of a particular existing aircraft with a control problem. Meanwhile, CAL’s
objective was to develop methods for measuring and describing the dynamic stability and
control characteristics of any aircraft in flight. Both paths led to the invention of variable
stability aircraft that could be used in the early stages of design of automatic control for
stability augmentation. This book describes the multiple projects in US from 1947 until today
that produced a progression of theoretical and experimental advances in aircraft dynamic
stability and control.
In Germany, significant contributions to understanding dynamic stability and control began
even earlier than did the work in the US, but there too, as with NASA, the initial work was
largely concerned with correcting an existing control problem. Since WWII, important con-
tributions have come mostly from the Institute of Flight Mechanics of DFVLR (since 1999
Institute of Flight Systems of the German Aerospace Center—DLR) in Braunschweig. That
Institute, under the leadership of its Director, Dr. Peter G. Hamel, has established a worldwide
reputation for its expertise in all the fields related to flying-qualities investigations and, in
particular, the development and highly innovative use of their in-flight simulators of both
fixed-wing and rotary-wing aircraft, and their novel applications of Fly-by-Wire and
Fly-by-Light. Although autopilot functions with limited stabilization were already available on
aircraft with mechanical flight control systems, stability augmentation and variable stability
aircraft would not have been possible without Fly-by-Wire. Peter and his Institute are also to
be credited with their pioneering work in the adaptation of the concepts of system identifi-
cation to flight vehicles.
Aircraft system identification is a way to build the accurate mathematical model of an
aircraft that is essential to designing augmented stability and automatic control for that aircraft.

vii
viii Foreword to the English Edition

An ever-increasing number of modern civilian and military aircraft is inherently aerody-

namically unstable. However, the stability augmentation and automated control that are basic
to all current aircraft designs ensures the comfort and safety of your flight.
Peter and his collaborators at the DLR Institute of Flight Systems achieved important
advancements in the multiple technologies of stability augmentation and in-flight simulation
decades before they were thought of anywhere else. These achievements have been particu-
larly noted and praised by two well-known experts in the field, Mal Abzug and Gene Larrabee,
in their 2002 book titled, “Airplane Stability and Control: A history of the technologies that
made aviation possible”.
Peter and the co-authors of this book have made a noteworthy contribution to the history of
aviation. The book is the consequence of an enormous effort to cover the complete spectrum of
international contributions in the evolution of artificial stability, variable stability aircraft, and
in-flight simulation. It also addresses the development of the technologies of Fly-by-Wire and
Fly-by-Light that made these developments possible. While this book presents an exhaustive
account of variable stability and Fly-by-Wire research and demonstrations worldwide, it
emphasizes the work in Germany and, in particular, at DLR’s Institute of Flight Systems. The
prominence of descriptions of related activities in Germany is understandable and appropriate
considering that much of the pioneering work was done there and that this is the first time it
has been so well documented. The extensive efforts in Germany that go back over 100 years
and, in particular, the achievements at the Institute of Flight Mechanics contributed profoundly
to the development of stability and control augmentation and the use of in-flight simulation.
I can personally attest to the scope and value of contributions to the current state of under-
standing aircraft dynamic stability and control made by Peter and his Institute. I have known
Peter G. Hamel for over 40 years and I have had the pleasure of collaborating with him in
several projects related to the topics of this book. Through my personal knowledge, I can
vouch, without hesitation that he is eminently well qualified to chronicle and evaluate the
worldwide developments of these capabilities that have become essential to aviation.
This book will be of interest not only to novices, but also to practicing scientists and
engineers and to those interested in aviation history. This comprehensive historical account is
devoid of mathematical equations and deep theoretical discussions, but it is full of tales of
innovative experiments and creative thinking, amusing anecdotes, and fascinating photos that I
have no doubt the readers will enjoy. So, my advice to the hesitant reader is, if you are
interested in gaining reliable knowledge about the origins, the innovators, and the evolution of
stability augmentation, variable stability aircraft, and in-flight simulators as well as of
Fly-by-Wire/Light this is the book for you.

Mountain View, CA, USA Irving C. Statler

September 2016 Principal Engineer, Flight Research Department
Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory, 1946–1970
Director, U.S. Army Aviation Aeromechanics Laboratory, 1970–1985
Director, NATO Advisory Group for Aerospace R&D, 1985–1988
Research Scientist, Human Factors Research Division
NASA Ames Research Center, 1988–2008
Foreword to the German Edition

A beautiful definition of performance is: “A impersonates B, while C observes”. Applied to

the in-flight simulation, a highly sophisticated modified aircraft “impersonates” in real flight
another vehicle in the sense of a “flying actor”, while scientists and engineers “observe”, that
is, analyze the outcome of flight to make decisions.
One should be a bit careful while using the term “supreme discipline”, no matter in which
area, because thereby you implicitly degrade all other disciplines in the same field, or in other
words assign them a lower importance. In the present case, however, it seems justified to speak
of in-flight simulation possibly as a “supreme discipline” in aircraft construction, as it
encompasses all other disciplines such as aerodynamics, flight mechanics, construction,
structures, aircraft systems, and aeroelasticity. In order to get an in-flight simulator operational
in the air, best experts in all these fields have to work together, as one encounters the
boundaries of physical sciences and engineering techniques, which have to be fathomed and
extended in this most challenging task. This was true in the past with fewer tools available to
develop aircraft such as the technology demonstrator VFW 614 ATTAS, just like today when
the demands on the prediction accuracy have increased with the availability of better
numerical and experimental tools.
It goes to the credit of Peter G. Hamel as an initiator and editor of this book, supported by
many who were involved then as well as even today, to have looked back and reappraised the
technical history of in-flight simulation. For his contributions in this field, he was honored with
the most prestigious award “Ludwig-Prandtl-Ring” of the German Society for Aeronautics and
Astronautics. Prandtl was the one who has provided a scientific basis to flight science, which
was still in the infant stages during the early twentieth century, through his work on the
boundary layer theory and the construction of wind tunnels. Almost a century after Prandtl’s
fundamental work, the author looks back at the history of in-flight simulation and illustrates
thereby the rapid development of flight physics.
This has a long tradition in Germany. In a broad sense, the work of the first flight scientist
Otto Lilienthal may be interpreted in a figurative sense as contributions to in-flight simulation.
He wanted to replicate the flight of birds with his gliders. Later the theoretical work by Ludwig
Prandtl appeared, the aircraft profile and the flying wing by Hugo Junkers, the jet engine by
Hans Joachim Pabst von Ohain, and the swept wing by Adolf Busemann, just to name a few.
This book shows impressively how the efforts of scientists and engineers in this country have
contributed not only with technical achievements to the success of aeronautics, but also
established over a long period a highly successful unified community of research, education,
development, production and operations. Only such a close cooperation in a fertile network
guarantees a technically and socially valuable future in the days to come.
Aircraft have changed only a little in recent years. However, there is now an urgent need for
fundamentally new aircraft to meet the growing demands for better cost effectiveness, envi-
ronmental sustainability, and passenger comfort. These new devices need different properties
than the aircraft flying today, and these properties must be simulated in advance, especially in
flight. Hence, the need for simulations and in-flight simulators is higher than ever, and as such
this book is not only a historical reappraisal, but also represents a mandate for the future.

ix
x Foreword to the German Edition

The book you hold in your hands shows in an excellent manner the technical facets and the
great efforts which are needed to successfully “act” as a problem solver in aeronautics. I would
like to take this opportunity to sincerely thank the editor, Peter G. Hamel, not only for his
technical expertise, but also for his tenacity on the long road from an idea to realizing the book
in its impressive final form. To the readers, I wish much enjoyment in reading the book, many
insights into the rich past, own perceptions of the current global state of the art, and inspiration
derived thereby for the future.

Cologne, Germany Rolf Henke

August 2016 Member of the Executive Board
German Aerospace Center (DLR)
President, German Society for Aeronautics and Astronautics (DGLR)
Foreword

In-flight simulation is the ultimate approach in applied flight sciences to assessment and evaluation
of aircraft and other aeronautical systems, as it represents the most intense fusion of flight
mechanics, flight control, flight systems technology, and flight testing. It is a versatile tool for flight
research and aircraft industry alike. Starting with studies of future configurations up to the simu-
lation of atmospheric phenomena including system influences, dependencies, and even failure
cases can be addressed with in-flight simulation, reaching high technology readiness levels.
But is this approach still the best way to tackle the current and future questions in aircraft
flight research and development? From the viewpoint of a research institution with strong links
to aircraft industry and governmental partners, we can state today that in-flight simulation still
has and most probably will ever have an important role to play in aeronautics. The reasons for
this are many and I would like to mention just three of them.
Firstly, new configurations are about to enter the scenario of modern civil transport aircraft
with possibly radical new features with no proven databases to rely on. Early in-flight sim-
ulations of potentially unstable configurations and, even more important, of the flight control
systems will be an efficient, fast, and reliable way to establish the required confidence of
engineers and management alike.
Secondly, the segment of unmanned flying vehicles is the fastest growing area in modern
aeronautics. Autonomously operating vehicles will enter the world’s airspace in the next
decades. Manned and unmanned in-flight simulation will be one of the most powerful tools to
prove the maturity of new designs and, not to forget, new legal approaches to certification.
Thirdly, international aeronautics industry starts to detach from national institutions and
educational systems, leaving national authorities with the task of maintaining basic capabilities
in aeronautical design and development. As the in-flight simulation places highest demands on
the key competencies of aircraft modeling, control, and integration, it is best suited to ensure
maintaining the expertise in these areas. This is all the more true in the future with new
systems having ever-increasing complexity and safety standards. The implementation of
in-flight simulation will help us to understand that technical capabilities will not be sufficient
to make a flight vehicle design optimal but the knowledge on how to design and develop will
be as important as the technical skills and includes a deep understanding of the humans, acting
within the engineering, design, and decision processes.
There are many good reasons to pursue in the future this jewel of modern flight sciences. It
is apparent from this book that a symbiosis of scientific excellence at universities, research
institutions, industry capabilities, and political focus is mandatory in this pursuit. It is highly
appreciated that the authors of this book present the highlights, achievements, and worldwide
historical evolution of this aspect of flight engineering sciences. Thanks to the authors for this
brilliant and one of the most vivid compilations of aeronautic achievements that has been
given to international scientific communities!

Braunschweig, Germany Stefan Levedag

November 2016 Director, Institute of Flight Systems
German Aerospace Center

xi
Preface

More than sixty years of international research and development in the field of airborne
simulation and electronic Fly-by-Wire flight control systems have left their marks on the
advances in aeronautical system design. After all, two generations of aeronautical specialists
and generalists have passed during this period. It is likely that this wealth of accumulated
knowledge and experience in this complex field of aircraft systems may be difficult to trace, or
may even be forgotten, or not efficiently used in the future.
A call from a former test pilot and chief of the flight department of the German Aerospace
Research Center (DLR) in Braunschweig resulted in the friendly and collegial suggestion to
summarize the knowledge and experience gained by DLR in the supreme discipline of flight
research, namely in-flight simulation. This was the occasion to invite a small group of former
and still active scientists and engineers from research, academia, and industry to participate in
such a project. Embarking on the project on a small scale on February 6, 2013, it evolved into
an undertaking of much wider scope, encompassing not only DLR activities in Germany but
global view covering all international organizations.
Now, historical retrospect in technical fields is not particularly in demand since past
experiences are quickly overtaken. Nevertheless, despite the rapid technological progress,
historical technical accounts may become valuable resources and reference points for
knowledge refreshing and long-life learning to avoid the pitfalls.
An objective of the book is, therefore, to look back on the development, testing, and
utilization of in-flight simulators and Fly-by-Wire technology demonstrators. They have
strongly contributed to the current international state of knowledge in designing and evalu-
ating today’s modern aircraft, free according to the slogan “without the knowledge of the past,
one can neither understand the present nor shape the future”.
For the first time, this book attempts to describe, in some depth, chronologically the global
complementary research and development activities of in-flight simulation and associated
electronic and electro-optical flight control systems (Fly-by-Wire/Light). This task is invariably
associated with the risk that equivalent or similar research activities abroad are unintentionally
overlooked or not adequately accounted for. Keeping this in mind, the book attempts to
maintain a fair balance of presentation of global activities, to avoid any scientific autism.
The authors of this book try to give as objective a description as possible of the activities in
this demanding field of research in experimental flight system technologies, with an increased
degree of detail in the description of German research and development results. This is
particularly evident in the sections of the chapters “In-Flight Simulator VFW 614 ATTAS”
and “Helicopter In-Flight Simulator EC 135 FHS”. This level of detailing is sometimes useful
for the definition phase of a future project by providing the experience and the lessons learned
from former project scientists at the beginning of a new project to minimize potential risks.
A further concern of the book is to pass on the knowledge and experience to aerospace
students, young scientists, and engineers, thereby stimulating and accelerating the lifelong
learning process without repeating mistakes that were made in the past.

xiii
xiv Preface

The book is also intended as a landmark and reference book for aviation and technology
enthusiasts who would like to get an overview of the historical evolution of in-flight simulators
and Fly-by-Wire/Light technologies. Sufficient references in the individual chapters are given
to the interested reader in order to allow a further deepening of individual scientific and
technical aspects as required. For optimum visualization, the number and size of illustrations
and graphics were not spared. The technical language was formulated in the most general way
possible in order to achieve the desired readability.

Braunschweig, Germany Peter G. Hamel

December 2016
Acknowledgements

If the contributors of this documentation have succeeded in portraying the history of research
and development activities of supreme aerospace technologies over the past sixty years in an
appropriate and illustrative form, it was possible only due to the cooperation and support of
many aviation enthusiasts. To name each and every one, who have contributed directly or
indirectly, in a small or bigger way, to the book is a difficult task, associated with the risk of
overlooking one or the other. I take an easier way out, by thanking all of them for support of
this endeavor. Nevertheless, few individuals and organizations need special mentioning.
In addition to the co-authors listed in the book, who participated as retirees or active
persons from industry, research, and universities, without hesitation, fees or expenses, there
were financial sponsors who had made the original book project in the German language
realizable. In this respect I would like to express my special gratitude to Airbus Helicopters
(Wolfgang Schoder), Diehl Aerospace (Gerardo Walle), Dornier Museum (Bernd Sträter),
ExpertSystems (Earon Beckmann), German Aerospace Center (Rolf Henke, Stefan Levedag),
and VDev Systems & Services (Önder Bagci).
Likewise, I extend my sincere thanks to the benevolent supporters and advisors Ulrich
Butter (formerly Eurocopter), Jürgen Klenner (formerly Senior Vice-President Airbus),
Hans-Peter Reerink (formerly CEO, Diehl Aerospace), Hannes Ross (formerly EADS), and
Jens Strahmann (formerly Airbus).
I also owe special thanks to Rolf Henke, a member of the executive board of the German
Aerospace Center, for valuable suggestions and moral support, and the two institute directors,
Stefan Levedag and Dirk Kügler, who gratefully supported the book project and for the
infrastructure granted at their institutes.
Acknowledgement is owed to the German Aerospace Center members Stephan Bensberg,
Hans-Jürgen Berns, Martin Gestwa, Uwe Göhmann, Hans-Ludwig Meyer, Michael Press,
Detlef Rohlf, Ina Rüdinger, Berend van der Wall and Michael Zöllner, who gave of their time
and talents for the good of the book.
I would also like to express my special appreciation to Roger Connor (Smithonian Insti-
tution), Jean-Francois Georges (formerly CEO, Dassault Falcon Jet Corporation), Lou Knotts
(CEO, Calspan), Michael Stephan (formerly Airbus Helicopters) and Hans-Ulrich Willbold
(Airbus Group), who helped to close documentary gaps in the book by providing text and
image material.
In preparing the English edition of this book, big merits go to my colleague and fellow
campaigner Ravindra Jategaonkar, who was Senior Scientist at DLR. He did perform a
remarkable intelligent and critical translation in order to balance the scope and phrasing within
the individual chapters and to improve the overall book quality. Without his unstinted par-
ticipation and substantial contributions, the English edition of our book would not have
become possible.
From the United States, the country of origin to the evolution of advanced airborne sim-
ulation and Fly-by-Wire technologies, I had the pleasure to receiving very helpful advice from
Irving C. Statler, a former leading scientist and member of the first hour of the famous Cornell
Aeronautical Laboratory pioneering team who were designing and operating the world’s first

xv
xvi Acknowledgements

variable stability aircraft. Irv willingly submitted himself to the tedious work of reviewing and
commenting on various chapters of the book in terms of contents, presentation, and clarity.
I am also sincerely indebted to Gavin Jenney, the former leading expert of the first hour in
designing and testing a Fly-by-Wire system at the USAF Flight Dynamics Laboratory, and Ed
Aiken, a proven NASA scientist of the first hour in variable stability rotorcraft research. Both
helped me in the last minute to review a few chapters, confirm, and streamline our research
results concerning specific historical aspects of US Fly-by-Wire and variable stability rotor-
craft research.
I would like to gratefully acknowledge the US Air Force and Army, Calspan, NASA, DLR,
JAXA and other international industry, institutions, and organizations. We retrieved several
photographs and information from their open public Internet sources, which is credited to
them.
Apart from the individual professionals mentioned in the foregoing, I particularly appre-
ciate two other individuals. First, my wife Hannerl, who had to miss over an extended period
of time the normal family life twice, once during the German edition during 2013–2014, and
again during 2016. Second, Padma, wife of my collaborator and Translator of this book, for
going through the same fate. Their support and understanding made the task bearable and have
indirectly contributed to this volume.
Finally, I would like to acknowledge the interest of Springer International Publishing AG in
publishing this book. We would like to extend our thanks to Leontina Di Cecco for the
sovereign care and implementation of our wishes in the development of this book project. We
also extend our appreciation to Janet Sterritt-Brunner of Springer Nature for the cover page
design and Gowtham Chakravarthy and the Production Team of Scientific Publishing Ser-
vices, Chennai, India for copy-editing the manuscript and efficiently incorporating the
corrections.

Braunschweig, Germany Peter G. Hamel

December 2016
Contents

1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Peter G. Hamel

2 Flying Qualities—Some History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Bernd Krag and Bernd Gmelin

3 Modeling and Simulation—Basics and Benefits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Bernd Krag

4 Predecessors in Germany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Peter G. Hamel

5 Variable Stability Aircraft and In-Flight Simulators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

Peter G. Hamel

6 Fly-by-Wire/Light Demonstrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
Peter G. Hamel

7 In-Flight Simulator HFB 320 FLISI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Knut Wilhelm

8 Helicopter In-Flight Simulator Bo 105 ATTHeS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 185

Bernd Gmelin

9 In-Flight Simulator VFW 614 ATTAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207

Dietrich Hanke and Klaus-Uwe Hahn

10 Helicopter In-Flight Simulator EC 135 FHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279

Jürgen Kaletka

11 “DLR Project Cancelled” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305

Peter G. Hamel

12 International Cooperation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 317

Peter G. Hamel

13 Quo Vadis? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

Peter G. Hamel

Erratum to: In-Flight Simulator VFW 614 ATTAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E1

Dietrich Hanke and Klaus-Uwe Hahn

xvii
xviii Contents

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333

Aircraft Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335
Subject Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 337
List of Contributors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 341
Abbreviations and Acronyms

AAF Autonomous Aerial Refueling

ACAH Attitude Command Attitude Hold
ACVH Attitude Command Velocity Hold
ACT Active Control Technology
ACTIVE Advanced Control Technology for Integrated Vehicles
ACTTA Active Control Technology of Transport Aircraft
AD Applied Dynamics
ADIRS Air Data and Inertial Reference System
ADOCS Advanced Digital Optical Control System
ADS Air Data System
ADS-33 Aeronautical Design Standards 33
A/D Analog to Digital
ADB Autonomes Digitales Bediengerät (Autonomous Digital Control Panel)
AFB Air Force Base
AFCE Automatic Flight Control Equipment
AFCS Automatic Flight Control System
AFDD Aeroflightdynamics Directorate
AFFDL US Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory
AFFTC Wright-Patterson AFB and Edwards Flight Test Center
AFTI Advanced Fighter Technology Integration
AFTPS US Air Force Test Pilot School
AFWAL Air Force Wright Aeronautical Laboratories
AGARD Advisory Board of Aerospace Research and Development
AH Attitude Hold
AHRS Attitude and Heading Reference System
AIAA American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
AKH Arbeitskreis Hubschrauber Technologien (German Working Group on
Helicopter Technology)
ALCS Augmented Longitudinal Control System
ALIAS Aircrew Labor In-Cockpit Automation System
ALT Altitude Navigation Mode
AP Autopilot
APC Aircraft Pilot Coupling
ARA Avionics Research Aircraft
ASTRA Advanced Stability Training and Research Aircraft
ATD Advanced Technologies Demonstrator
ATLAS Adaptable Target Lighting Array System
ATOL Automatic Takeoff and Landing
ATRA Advanced Technologies Research Aircraft
ATTAS Advanced Technologies Testing Aircraft System
ATTHeS Advanced Technologies Testing Helicopter System

xix
xx Abbreviations and Acronyms

AVA Aerodynamische Versuchsanstalt (today: part of DLR)

AVEN Axis-Symmetric Vectoring Exhaust Nozzle
AVRADCOM Aviation Research and Development Command
AVT Applied Vehicle Technology Panel of RTO
AWI Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research
AW&ST Aviation Week & Space Technology
BA/BAe British Aerospace
BASE Gust Alleviation and Elastic Mode Damping
BFS German Federal Air Traffic Control Authority
BGT Bodensee-Gerätewerk (today: Diehl Aerospace)
BMFT German Federal Minister for Research and Technology
BMVg German Federal Ministry of Defense
BWB German Federal Office of Defense Technology and Procurement
(today: Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment, Information Technology
and In-Service Support—BAAINBw)
CAA Civil Aviation Authority
CAL Calspan; Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory
CAS Control Augmentation System
CAS Calibrated Air Speed
CASTOR Combat Aircraft for Training, Operations, and Research
CCS Configuration Control System
CCV Control Configured Vehicle
CEO Chief Executive Officer
CEV Centre d’Essais en Vol
CFD Computational Fluid Dynamics
C.I.T. Cranfield Institute of Technology
CPDLC Controller Pilot Datalink Communications
CPU Central Processing Unit
CWS Control Wheel Steering
DAL Design Assurance Level
DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
DC Drag Control
DEHS Digital Electric Hydraulic Flight Control System
DFC Direct Force Control
DFG Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (German Research Foundation)
DFL Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Luftfahrt (German Aeronautical Research
Establishment, today: part of DLR)
DFVLR Deutsche Forschungs- und Versuchsanstalt für Luft- und Raumfahrt
(German Aerospace Research and Test Establishment, today: DLR)
DGPS Differential Global Positioning System
DIGITAC Digital Flight Control for Tactical Fighter Aircraft
DISCUS Digital Self-healing Control for Upgraded Safety
DIVA Dialog Orientierte Versuchsdaten Auswertung
DLC Direct Lift Control
DLH Deutsche Lufthansa
DLR Deutsches Zentrum für Luft- und Raumfahrt (German Aerospace Center)
DLS DME Based Landing System
DME Distance Measurement Equipment
DSFC Direct Side Force Control
DVL Deutsche Versuchsanstalt für Luftfahrt (German Aeronautical Test
Establishment, today: part of DLR)
Abbreviations and Acronyms xxi

D/A Digital to Analog

EAP Experimental Aircraft Program
EASA European Aviation Safety Agency
EBF Externally Blown Flaps
E-COCK Experimental Cockpit (ATTAS)
EDP Experimental Data Processing (ATTAS)
EECU Electronic Engine Control Unit
EFA European Fighter Aircraft
EFCS Electronic Flight Control System
EFM Enhanced Fighter Maneuverability
EFMS Experimental Flight Management System
EGNOS European Geostationary Navigation Overlay Service
EMA Electro Mechanical Actuator
EPNER École du Personnel Navigant d’Essais et de Réception (French Test Pilots’
School)
EPR Engine Pressure Ratio
EPV Easily Piloted Aircraft
ERR Experiment Regelrechner (Experimental Control Computer for ATTAS)
ESA European Space Agency
ETPS Empire Test Pilots’ School
EU European Union
EVP Easily Piloted Aircraft
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FACT Future Aircraft Control Testbed
FADEC Full Authority Digital Engine Control
FADS Flush Air Data System
FAST Full Scale Advanced Systems Testbed
FBW Fly-by-Wire
FBL Fly-by-Light
FCLC Flight Control Law Computer
FCS Flight Control System
FCU Fuel Control Unit
FDL US Air Force Flight Dynamics Laboratory
FFS Flugführungssystem (Flight Guidance System
FHS Flying Helicopter Simulator
FIS Flight Inspection Systems
FL Flight Level
FLISI Fliegender Simulator (Flying Simulator)
FMP Flight Mechanics Panel of AGARD
FMoD German Federal Ministry of Defense
FMS Flight Management System
FRI Russian Flight Research Institute (Gromov Institute)
FRC Flight Research Center
FRL Flight Research Laboratory, NRC
FTB Flying Test Bed
FVP Flight Vehicle Integration Panel of AGARD
GCP Guidance and Control Panel of AGARD
GLA Gust Load Alleviation
GND Ground
GPAS General Purpose Airborne Simulator
GPS Global Positioning System
GRATE Ground Attack Test Equipment,
xxii Abbreviations and Acronyms

HAIG Hongdu Aviation Industry Group, China

HESTOR Helicopter Simulator for Technology, Operations and Research
HDG Heading Navigation Mode
HFB Hamburger Flugzeugbau
HIL Hardeware-in-the-Loop
HLH Heavy Lift Helicopter
HMD Helmet Mounted Display
HPP Hydraulic Power Package
HSF Hubschrauber-Schlechtwetter- Führung (Helicopter Adverse Weather
Guidance)
HTA Hermes Training Aircraft
HUD Head-up Display
IBLS Integrity Beacon Landing System
ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization
ICP Intelligent Control of Performance
ILA International Luftfahrt-Ausstellung
IFCS Intelligent Flight Control System
IFR Instrumented Flight Rules
IFS In-Flight Simulation
IFSTA Integrated Flight Simulation Test Aircraft
IHTP In-House test Platform
ILAF Identically Location of Acceleration and Force Application
ILS Instrument Landing System
IMC Instrument Meteorological Conditions
INS Inertial Navigation System
JDA Japan Defense Agency
JSF Joint Strike Fighter
KURS Kurzzeit-Experimente unter reduzierter Schwerkraft (short-term experiments
under reduced gravitational force)
LAMS Load Alleviation and Mode Stabilization
LAT Liebherr-Aero-Technik (today: Liebherr Aerospace)
LAMARS Large Amplitude Multi-Mode Aerospace Research Simulator (USAF FDL)
LAPAZ Luft-Arbeits-Plattform für die Allgemeine Zivilluftfahrt (Air utility platform
for the General Civil Aviation)
LEM Lunar Excursion Module
LFA Luftfahrt Forschungsanstalt (German Aviation Research Institute)
LLRV Lunar Landing Research Vehicle
LLTV The Lunar Landing Training Vehicle
LuFo Luftfahrtforschung Förderung (National Aerospace Research Program)
LVAC Launch Vehicle Adaptive Control
LVDT Linear Variable Displacement Transducers
MAC Mean Aerodynamic Chord
MATV Multi-Axis Thrust Vectoring
MBB Messerschmitt Bölkow-Blohm
MCDU Multi-Function Control and Display Unit
MDO Multidisciplinary Design Optimization
MFCS Model Following Control System
M.I.T. Massachusetts Institute of Technology
MLS Microwave Landing System
MoA Memorandum of Agreement
MoD Ministry of Defense
MoU Memorandum of Understanding
Abbreviations and Acronyms xxiii

NAVAIR Naval Air Systems Command

NACA National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics
NAL Japanese National Aeronautical Laboratory
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
ND Navigation Display
NPL National Physical Laboratory
NLR National Aerospace Laboratory, The Netherlands
NRC National Research Council, Canada
NTPS United States Naval Test Pilot School
NWB Normal Windkanal Braunschweig (Low-Speed Wind Tunnel)
OLGA Open Loop Gust Alleviation
ONERA The French Aerospace Laboratory
PACT Precision Aircraft Control Technology
PFCU Primary Flight Control Unit
PIO Pilot Induces Oscillation
PSA Peek-Seeking Algorithm
PTU Power Transfer Unit
RAE Royal Aircraft Establishment
RASCAL Rotorcraft Aircrew Systems Concepts Airborne Laboratory
RC Rate Command
RCAH Rate Command-Attitude Hold
RPC Rotorcraft-Pilot-Coupling
RTC Real-Time Clock
RTO Research and Technology Organisation
RVG Reglerversuchsgestell (Controller Test Stand)
SAC Side-Arm Controller
SAE Society of Automotive Engineers
SAFAR Small Aircraft Future Avionics Architecture (EU Project)
SARA Sikorsky Autonomous Research Aircraft
SCI Systems Concepts and Integration Panel of RTO
SCAS Stability Command Augmentation System
SEMA Smart Electro Mechanical Actuator
SETAC SEctorTACan with TACAN (Tactical Air Navigation) of the company SEL
SFCC Secondary Flight Control Computer
SFCS Survivable Flight Control System
SFTE Chinese Flight Test Establishment
SGL/SIGRI SGL Carbon Group
SHADOW Sikorsky Helicopter Advanced Demonstrator of Operator Workload
SLS Space Launch System
SRA Systems Research Aircraft
SSE Single or Separate Surface Excitation
STA Shuttle Training Aircraft
STANAG Standarization Agreement (NATO)
STO Science and Technology Organization
STOL Short Take-Off and Landing
STOVL Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing
SV Stabilité Variable (Variable Stability)
TAGS Tactical Aircraft Guidance System
TALAR Tactical Landing Approach RADAR (Early MLS flight path guidance
system, USAF)
TAS True Airspeed
TIFS Total In-Flight Simulator
xxiv Abbreviations and Acronyms

TMR Thrust Measuring Rig

TNT Tragflügel Neuer Technologie (Aerofoil New Technology)
TPS Test Pilot School
TRL Technology Readiness Level
TSRV Transport Systems Research Vehicle
TST Transonischer Tragflügel (Supercritical Transonic Wing)
TTA Trajectory Training Aircraft
TU Technical University
TU-BS Technical University of Braunschweig
UAV Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
UHCA Ultra High Capacity Aircraft
USAF United States Air Force
USNTPS US Naval Test Pilot School
UTSI Space Institute of the University of Tennessee
UTTAS Utility Tactical Transport Aircraft System
VAAC Vectored-Thrust Aircraft Advanced Flight Control
VCID Voice-Controlled Interactive Device
VECTOR Vectoring, Extremely Short Takeoff and belonged Landing,
Control and Tailless Operation Research
VFW Vereinigte Flugtechnische Werke
VISTA Variable Stability In-Flight Simulator Test Aircraft
VMS Vertical Motion Simulator
VRA Variable Response Research Aircraft
VS Variable Stability
VSA Variable Stability Aircraft
VSC Variable Stability and Control
VSRA Variable Stability Aircraft Research
VSS Variable Stability System
VTOL Vertical Take-Off and Landing
VVS Variable Stability Testbed
WADC US Air Force Wright Air Development Centers
WTD-61 German Air Force Flight Test Center
ZKP Ziviles Komponenten Programm
ZKR Zentraler Kommunikationsrechner (ATTAS)
ZTL Zukunfttechnik Luft (Future Technology in Aeronautics)
 Introduction
1
Peter G. Hamel

P.G. Hamel (&)

Braunschweig, Germany
e-mail: p.hamel@t-online.de

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 1

P.G. Hamel (ed.), In-Flight Simulators and Fly-by-Wire/Light Demonstrators,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-53997-3_1
2 P.G. Hamel
1.1 In-Flight Simulation as Ultimate Tool
for Flight Systems Research
During the past five decades, sensor, actuator and image
information systems (displays), in conjunction with control
laws, provided important technologies to improve the flight
performance and characteristics of aircraft and spacecraft. As
a prerequisite for this, the revolution in the digital technol-
ogy that took place in parallel led to an explosive increase in
the computing power, which in turn enabled significant
progress in the enhancements of features to improve flying
qualities, automation, and monitoring for improved flight
performance and safety. Figure 1.1 depicts this integration
process with its associated developmental technological
risks. It is obvious that the interdependency between the
three basic elements the flight system techniques will mostly
dictate the research focus. In order to achieve a proper bal-
ance between effectiveness and flight safety of the integrated
systems, it is necessary to account for and to optimize the
dynamic interaction between the aircraft, the pilots, and the
systems [1, 2].
With the trend of increasing automation, it is the
human-automation interaction that is not adequately under-
stood and taken into account during the design process. The
pilot-aircraft interactions entail well-trained skills, whereas
the pilot-automation interactions pose cognitive workload
that is not understood. As a consequence, it must be ensured
that during pilot’s control inputs through his control panels
the presented information and the effect of automatic influ-
ence and decisions remain plausible for the pilot in the sense
of flight physics. The description of the pilot-related per-
formance potential/capabilities, with regard to the perception
of the current flight and system situation, of the ability to
work under changing flight and environmental conditions,
and his decision-making process in critical flight conditions,
represents one of the most complex research tasks for
Fig. 1.1 Interactions in integrated flight systems
engineers, medical doctors and psychologists in the field of
aviation science. In connection with the understanding of
whether the pilot, flying an aircraft equipped with complex
computer logics, will react correctly in an unfamiliar or
unknown flight situation, the pilot represents a weak spot or
in other words may symbolize the Achilles’ heel of safe
flight [3].
Particular importance is also placed on timely proof of the
functionality and system safety of new technologies through
flight tests. This objective is based on the demand for a
timely and cost-effective review of the technical and eco-
nomic risks associated with the development of opera-
tionalization of new methods or critical technologies.
Thereby it is essential that today’s development and life
cycles of civilian or military flight systems cover a period of
an engineer’s life of about 35–40 years. Thus, there is also
the risk of losing interdisciplinary know-how in the aero-
nautical engineering field. As a consequence, it calls for
continuous research and industrial-political efforts to realize
the anticipated developments or ongoing system improve-
ments though demonstrator programs or in-flight simulations
in reasonable time periods. In international terminology, this
is termed as reaching of a technology maturity level
(Technology Readiness Level—TRL), which is assigned a
value of about 6, that means “functional and test prototype
in operational range” (see also Sect. 6.1.2).
The interlinkages of flight system techniques depicted in
Fig. 1.2 elucidates the individual steps to be followed in an
ideal case during the new development or improvement of
existing flight systems.
The limited usage of these technologies, due to, say,
developmental, political or financial reasons, or of other
research tools in related disciplines such as structures or
propulsion technologies, culminates to the disastrous effects
shown in Fig. 1.3. Such events and the resulting socio-
political issues have become a world-acclaimed predicament.
As such, Norman Augustine needs to be greeted [4].
Fig. 1.2 The chain of research tools for flight vehicle system development
1 Introduction
Fig. 1.3 Development risks and realities
The two elements shown in Fig. 1.2, namely the in-flight
simulation, the supreme discipline flight testing, and the arts
and science of system identification, a symbiosis of cre-
ativity and specialized knowledge, offer two versatile and
experimentally oriented methods and are of particular value
for the verification, optimization, and evaluation of flying
qualities of manned or unmanned aerial systems with inte-
grated Fly-by-Wire/Light flight control and information
systems. But, it should also be pointed out that the
human-in-the-loop ground-based simulation, plays, indeed,
an indispensable role in a flight vehicle development pro-
gram to minimize the more costly in-flight simulation.
A more detailed discussion and definition of the disci-
plines “in-flight simulation” and “system identification” will
be given in Chap. 3. Both these disciplines represent also
special, long-term focal points of research activities at the
Institute of Flight Systems at the German Aerospace Center
(DLR) in Braunschweig. An account of these efforts will be
given in Chaps. 7–10.
1.2 Current State of Knowledge
There are a number of national and international, historical
reports on the development of electronic flight controls for
improving the handling and flying qualities of aircraft and
helicopters [5–12].
The hitherto most detailed historical account related to
airplanes with variable stability and in-flight simulation
comes from one of the fathers of in-flight simulation,
Waldemar O. Breuhaus, of the former Cornell Aeronautical
Laboratory, the company which later became the Calspan
Corporation in the USA [13]. Throughout this book, the
name Calspan (CAL) will be used for all references to the
company.
This historical account was later extended and supple-
mented by the Calspan expert Norman Weingarten with his
years of experience [14]. A further well represented and
detailed history of aerospace research at Cornell
3
Aeronautical Laboratory and Calspan is given in [15]. In an
extremely exciting book that goes beyond the scope of
in-flight simulation, one comes across a highly readable
autobiography of William F. Milliken, a former managing
director of Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory (CAL). William
F. Milliken, Waldemar O. Breuhaus, Irving C. Statler,
Robert P. Harper and Edmund V. Laitone and others
spearheaded at CAL the flight test research in aircraft
dynamic response measurements, variable stability flight
testing, the importance of test pilot judgements and closed-
loop system analysis. Further, the book provides a historical
overview of industrial flight testing and the use of
aviation-related technologies in US automobile sport by way
of Bugatti as an example [16]. Also, the special role of the
NASA Ames and Dryden Research Centers (the latter since
2014: Armstrong Research Center) in this field can be easily
traced through a few selected examples [17–19]. From the
international book world two publications are known which
describe experimental aircraft and to a limited extent also
in-flight simulators, predominantly developed in the United
States or Russia [20, 21].
The importance of in-flight simulation and their techno-
logical benefit was emphasized in the first international
symposium during 1991 held in Braunschweig. Flight
demonstrations with DLR´s in-flight simulators VFW 614
ATTAS and Bo 105 ATTHeS were presented then [22, 23].
A detailed discussion of this symposium took place in the
international leading aviation magazine Aviation Week &
Space Technology (“Gathering of the In-Flight Simulation
Fraternity”) [24].
1.3 The Book Layout
The current compendium is organized into three parts. The
first, short part consisting of Chaps. 2 and 3 introduces
succinctly the topics addressed in this collection, namely
flying qualities background, basics, and benefits. The second
part consists of Chaps. 4–6. It provides a brief account of
predecessors in Germany in Chap. 4. This is followed by an
exhaustive account of variable stability aircraft and in-flight
simulators in Chap. 5, covering United States, Canada,
England, France, Russia, Japan, China, and Italy. Chapter 6
provides, likewise, an elaborative account of Fly-by-Wire/
Light Demonstrators, first from abroad, and in the latter half
those from Germany. The third part of the book, consisting
of Chaps. 7–12 focuses on the research and development
activities in Germany in more detail. It aims at providing the
readers with the inside information about these challenging
projects to understand the intricacies, efforts required, and
the outcome. Each of these chapters in all the three parts
provides relevant technical literature to trace the historical
4 P.G. Hamel
developments, the evolution, and the current status in the
fields of in-flight simulation and Fly-by-Wire/Light research.
References
1. Hamel, P. (Ed.): The Challenge of Flight Research—A Historical
Account and Technical Guide, DLR-IB 111-99/02 (1999)
2. Levedag, S. (Ed.): Institute of Flight Systems—Status Report
2000–2008: Scientific and Technological Results (in German)
(2008)
3. Advani, A.: Fixing the Aviators’ Achilles´ Heel, Aviation Week &
Space Technology, p. 58, March 24 (2014)
4. Augustine, N.: Augustine’s Laws, AIAA, 6th edn (1997).
ISBN-13: 978-1563472404
5. Howard, R.W.: Automatic flight controls in fixed wing aircraft—
the first 100 years. Aeronaut. J. 77, 533–562 (1973)
6. Oppelt, W.: A historical review of autopilot development,
research, and theory in Germany. J Dyn Syst Measur Control.
98, 215–223 (1976)
7. Hunt, G.H.: The evolution of fly-by-wire control techniques in the
UK. Aeronaut. J. 83, 165–174 (1979)
8. Abzug, M.J., Larrabee E.E.: Airplane Stability and Control,
Cambridge Aerospace Series. Cambridge University Press, Cam-
bridge (2002)
9. McRuer, D., Graham, D.: A flight control century: triumphs of the
systems approach. AIAA J. Guidance Control Dyn. 27(2), 161–
173 (2003)
10. Carico, G.D.: Helicopter Controllability, Naval Postgraduate
School, Monterey, CA, AD-A220 078 (1989)
11. Prouty, R.W., Curtiss Jr., H.C.: Helicopter control systems: a
history. AIAA J. Guidance Control Dyn. 26(1), 12–18 (2003)
12. Stiles, L.R., Mayo, J., Freisner, A.L., Landis, K.H., Kothmann, B.
D.: Impossible to Resist—The Development of Rotorcraft
Fly-by-Wire Technology, 60th Annual Forum & Technology
Display of the American Helicopter Society, Baltimore, MD, USA,
June 8–10 (2004)
13. Breuhaus, W.O.: The variable stability airplane. AAHS J. 36(1),
30–55 (1991)
14. Weingarten, N.C.: History of in-flight simulation at general
dynamics. AIAA J. Aircr. 42(2), 290–304 (2005)
15. Burns, K.R., Milliken, W.F., Statler, I.C.: The History of
Aerospace Research at Cornell Aeronautical Laboratory and
Calspan, Vol. 4 in a series: The Flight Research Department,
AIAA 2007–0350
16. Milliken, W.F.: Equations of Motion—Adventure, Risk, and
Innovation. Bentley Publishers (2006)
17. Aiken, E.W., Hindson, W.S., Lebacqz, J.V., Denery, D.G., Eshow,
M.M.: Rotorcraft In-Flight Simulation Research at NASA Ames
Research Center: A Review of the 80’s and Plans for the 90’s,
NASA TM 103873 (1991)
18. Shafer, M.: In-Flight Simulation Studies at the NASA Dryden
Flight Research Facility, NASA TM-4396 (1992)
19. Borchers, P.F., et al.: Flight Research at Ames—Fifty Years of
Development and Validation of Aeronautical Technology, NASA
SP-1998-3300 (1998)
20. Markman, S.: One-of-a-Kind Research Aircraft: A History of
In-Flight Simulators, Testbeds & Prototypes. Schiffer Publishing
Ltd. (2004)
21. Gordon, Y., Komissarov, D.: Soviet and Russian Testbed Aircraft.
Hikoki Publication Ltd. (2011)
22. Hamel, P. (Ed.): In-Flight Simulation for the 90’s, International
Symposium, July 1–3 (1991), Braunschweig, DGLR Mitteilungen
91-05 (Proceedings, Inquiries at: DLR, Institut für Flugsys-
temtechnik, P.O. Box 3267, 38022 Braunschweig) (1991)
23. Harper, R.P.: Overview: The Evolution of In-Flight Simulation at
Calspan, in [22], Paper 1 (1991)
24. Mecham, M.: Airborne Simulation Expands, AW&ST, pp. 42–49,
October 7 (1991)
Author Biography
Peter G. Hamel was the Director of the Institute of Flight Mechanics/Flight
Systems of the German Aerospace Center (DLR/DFVLR) (1971–2001). He
received his Dipl.-Ing. and Dr.-Ing. degrees in Aerospace Engineering from
the Technical University of Braunschweig in 1963 and 1968, and his SM
degree from M.I.T. in 1965. From 1970 to 1971 he was Section Head of
Aeronautical Systems at Messerschmitt-Bölkow-Blohm in Hamburg. Since
1995 he is an Honorary Professor at the Technical University of Braun-
schweig and a founding member of three collaborative research centers at
the University. He was Chairman of the National Working Group on
Helicopter Technology (AKH) (1986–1994) and the appraiser for the
National Aviation Research Program (LuFo) until today. He was also
the Manager of DLR’s Rotorcraft Technology Research Program and the
German Coordinator for the former AGARD Flight Mechanics/Vehicle
Integration (FMP/FVP) Panel. He is a member of the German Society for
Aeronautics and Astronautics (DGLR) and of the American Helicopter
Society (AHS), and a Fellow of AIAA. He is the recipient of the AGARD
1993 Scientific Achievement Award, of AGARD/RTO von Kármán Medal
1998, of AHS Dr. A. von Klemin Award 2001, and of the prestigious DGLR
Ludwig-Prandtl-Ring 2007.
 Flying Qualities—Some History
2
Bernd Krag and Bernd Gmelin

What looks good, flies also good.

2.1 Fixed-Wing Aircraft

B. Krag (&)
B. Gmelin (&) Anyone who has ever watched a seagull, gliding effortlessly
Braunschweig, Germany over the lake in the upwind along the bluff, is full of
e-mail: bernd.krag@t-online.de
admiration of the ease and elegance with which he flies. The
B. Gmelin fine movements of wings and tail to correct the flight are not
e-mail: bernd.gmelin@t-online.de

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017 5

P.G. Hamel (ed.), In-Flight Simulators and Fly-by-Wire/Light Demonstrators,
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-53997-3_2
6 B. Krag and B. Gmelin
discernible. The bird is in an absolute balance with the wind,
gravity, and lift. Thereby he conveys an impression of a
perfect flier to the observer.
The first aircraft at the beginning of the last century were
far away from such a perfection. Even the first aviation
pioneers, who delved into flying 200 years back, had rec-
ognized what one must do to enable a flying vehicle cover a
longer distance in an undisturbed gliding flight. To construct
their models they oriented themselves mostly on the basic
configuration of a bird with a wing in the front and an
empennage arranged behind. With the center of gravity of
the flight vehicle in correct position, these models flew stable
and quite well. Technically, the expert then speaks of a
“stable flight”. In this case, stable does not mean “durable”,
but rather the ability of the aircraft to return automatically to
its unperturbed initial condition in response to a disturbance.
Also, the exotic tropical plant “Zanonia Macrocarpa”, whose
seeds show an extremely stable flight behavior, served as a
prototype for a favorable aerodynamic design of a flying
vehicle (see Fig. 2.1). The knowledge about what must be
done to accomplish a stable gliding flight was essentially
known to the aviation pioneers at the beginning of the last
century. Design and numerical data required for construction
of an aircraft, however, did not exist. One had to rather learn
from the practical experience.
However, an airplane should not only fly straight and
level in gliding flight, but must start from the ground, land
again and above all fly in curves. With regard to the stability,
one could rely on some existing knowledge. On the other
hand, in the area of flight controls, the aviation pioneers had
to tread unknown territories.
The Stork, whose flying skills Otto Lilienthal had studied
intensively and had drawn his conclusions, served as a role
model for his hang glider. Aerodynamic experiments by a
specially constructed device provided him with the numer-
ical data for the construction of his flying machine. His
Fig. 2.1 Stability or controllability—where is the compromise?
(Credit P. Hamel)
“normal apparatus” from the year 1894 even revealed the
basic configuration of an aircraft. A horizontal and vertical
surface were mounted some distance behind the wings. He
needed both of these for the stability of his gadget about the
vertical axis (directional stability) and about the lateral axis
(longitudinal stability). The wings were mounted signifi-
cantly upward (V-position), which provided sufficient
inherent stability about the longitudinal axis (roll stability).
However, Lilienthal steered his gadget by shifting of weight.
As a consequence, the controllability was severely restricted
and thus was the cause of his fatal crash in 1896.
The Wilbur and Orville Wright brothers followed another
method. They had keenly followed the flight tests by
Lilienthal and recognized that ensuring sufficient controlla-
bility about all the three axes is of pivotal importance. To
achieve that, the flyer possessed aerodynamically effective
elevator and rudder. For roll control about the longitudinal
axis, which is necessarily required for coordinated curve
flight, highly elastic wings were built and twisted. The
horizontal tailplane was arranged in front of the center of
gravity (see Fig. 2.2). Thereby the “Flyer” was no longer
stable. Pilot had to intervene constantly in order to stabilize
Fig. 2.2 The first fully controllable aircraft, the “Flyer III” in flight
(1905), (Credit Deutsches Museum)
2 Flying Qualities—Some History
the flyer and keep it on the track. The Wright brothers
believed that a skilled pilot must be in a position to con-
tinually balance the Flyer through an effective control. Too
large an inherent stability is on the other hand more likely to
be obstructive, when large disturbances must be compen-
sated by control inputs. Probably the Wright brother had not
adequately appreciated the importance of inherent stability
for the flying [1].
With their desire for neutral stability, the Wright brothers
were rather alone in the pioneer generation by aircraft
manufacturers. Awareness was established that sufficient
inherent stability is absolutely essential for safe flying.
A pilot continuously struggling to stabilize the gadget can
hardly perform any other task. Only much later the idea of
reduced static stability (Relaxed Static Stability) was once
again taken up during the development of highly maneu-
verable combat aircraft. These aircraft were, however, not
stabilized by a pilot, but through a multi-redundant flight
controller.
In the year 1909, Louis Charles Blériot had arrived at the
classical basic configuration for the aircraft with his Type XI,
which was mostly adopted for the aircraft construction
thereafter, (see Fig. 2.3). This configuration is characterized
by a front mounted motor with a tractor propeller and tail-
plane located at the rear for the longitudinal and lateral
control. The roll control was not yet by ailerons, but through
twisting the entire wing. The aircraft was apparently suffi-
ciently stable about all the axes and allowed Blériot a smooth
ride across the English Channel to England.
Aircraft development showed a rapid boom during the
First World War. In Germany a variety of very different
aircraft types were delivered to the Imperial German Army
Air Service. Of course, there was no question of consistent
and good flying qualities. It was a challenge for the pilots to
fly many of these aircraft and they were hardly deployable.
This diversity led the aircraft engineering department of the
German Aeronautical Test Establishment (DVL) in 1917, to
Fig. 2.3 Safely over the English Channel: Monoplane Blériot,
Type XI (1909). Louis Blériot as pilot, (Credit Deutsches Museum)
7
test several aircraft types for their flying qualities and to
assess them by the pilots. Although it was not an objective
assessment, a few characteristics emerged, which were then
considered important and desirable [2]. These evaluations
based on the pilot assertions, however, did not offer yet a
reliable basis to improve the flying qualities through tech-
nical measures.
The aircraft which came closest in demonstrating the
wishful good flying qualities was the biplane Fokker D VII
constructed by Antony Fokker (see Fig. 2.4). Introduced in
the year 1918, the Fokker D VII evolved as the most suc-
cessful combat aircraft during the First World War. The
aircraft was inherently stable, highly maneuverable and
possessed good control surface effectiveness about all axes.
One characteristic was particularly notable, namely, the
aircraft recovered itself automatically from the dangerous
spin as soon as the controls were released by the pilot. In the
heat of an aerial combat, it was quite easy for the pilot to
stall the aircraft and thereby enter into a spin.
Since the beginning of the aircraft development, the
above problem encountered in flight was also addressed
scientifically in parallel. It was the British mathematician
George H. Bryan, who in the year 1911 formulated the
problem of aircraft motion on a sound mathematical basis.
Bryan formulated the equations of motion and introduced
the concept of “stability derivatives”. However, it was not
possible yet to solve this system of equations.
Based on Bryan’s equations, the flight scientists Leonhard
Bairstow from the National Physical Laboratory (NPL) in the
UK provided the first rudiments of stability analysis. He
realized that the complex system of equations could be
decoupled into a “longitudinal motion” and in largely
decoupled “lateral motion”. Solutions to these now simplified
equations resulted in the flight mechanical eigenmodes of
motion, which are commonly known to today’s aeronautical
engineer such as “Phugoid”, “short period” and “Dutch roll”
Fig. 2.4 The best fighter aircraft of First Word War, the legendary
Fokker D VII biplane aircraft (1918), (Credit Deutsches Museum)
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
under. The pole appears to end in a fork, and to be attached to the
axle bed.
On the decline of the Roman power, many of the arts of civilisation
which they had been instrumental in forwarding fell into disuse. The
skilled artisans died and left no successors, there being no demand
for them. This will account for no mention being made of carriages or
chariots for some centuries. Of course there were various primitive
contrivances in use to which the name of cart was given, but the
great and wealthy moved about the cities or travelled on horseback,
or if they were incapable of this, they used litters carried by men or
horses. The great bar to the general adoption of wheeled carriages
was undoubtedly the very bad state of the roads.
An evident improvement in construction was made by the Saxons.
In the Cotton Library there is a valuable illuminated manuscript,
supposed to be the work of Elfricus, Abbot of Malmesbury. The
subject is a commentary on the Books of Genesis and Exodus, with
accompanying illustrations. In one of these is represented the first
approach to a slung carriage; and it may be interesting to the lovers
of historical coincidence that it is given in an illustration of the
meeting of Joseph and Jacob, and in that part of the Bible which first
makes mention of vehicular conveyance. The chariot in which
Joseph is seated is a kind of hammock (most probably made of
leather, which was much used by the Anglo-Saxons), suspended by
iron hooks from a framework of wood. It moves upon four wheels,
the construction of which is not clear, owing to the decorative license
taken with them by the artist. The father of Joseph is placed in a cart,
which we doubt not, from its extreme simplicity, is a faithful type of
those of the time. This proves the illuminator to have been true to his
subject and the custom of the period in which he lived, as the chariot
was monopolised by the great men, while the people rode in carts.
With the Normans came the horse litter, a native originally of
Bithynia, and from thence introduced into Rome, where it is still used
by the Pope on state occasions, and also among the mountain
passes of Sicily, as well as in Spain and Portugal. Malmesbury
records that the dead body of Rufus was placed upon a rheda
caballaria, a kind of horse litter. King John, in his last illness, was
conveyed from the Abbey of Swinstead in lectica equestre. These
were for several succeeding reigns the only carriages in use for
persons of distinction. Froissart writes of Isabel, the second wife of
Richard II., as “La june Royne d’Angleterre en une litieré moult riche
qui etoit ordonèe pour elle.” These litters were seldom used except
on state occasions. When Margaret, daughter of Henry II., went into
Scotland, she is described as journeying on a “faire palfrey,” but after
her was conveyed by two footmen “one very riche litere, borne by
two faire coursers vary nobly drest; in which litere the sayd queene
was borne in the intryng of the good towns or otherwise to her good
playsher.”
Carriages proper were first introduced on the continent. Italy,
France, Spain, and Germany contend with each other for the honour
of the first introduction. The earliest record we have is on the
authority of Beckmann, who says that, when at the close of the
thirteenth century Charles of Anjou entered Naples, his queen rode
in a caretta, the outside and inside of which were covered with sky-
blue velvet interspersed with golden lilies.
The English were not long before they adopted this new
innovation. In an early English poem called the “Squyr of Low
Degree,” supposed to be before the time of Chaucer, the father of
the Princess of Hungary thus makes promise:—

“To-morrow ye shall on hunting fare,

And ride my daughter in a chare.
It shall be covered with velvet red,
And cloths of fine gold all about your head,
With damask white and azure blue,
Well diapered with lilies new:
Your pomelles shall be ended with gold,
Your chains enamelled many a fold.”

The pomelles were doubtless the handles to the rods affixed

towards the roof of the “chariette,” and were for the purpose of
holding by when deep ruts or obstacles in the roads caused an
unusual jerk in the vehicle.
 On the continent, there seems to have been a great deal of
opposition to the use of carriages. In 1294, Philip, King of France,
issued an ordinance prohibiting the citizens’ wives the use of cars or
chars; and later on, Pope Pius IV. exhorted his cardinals and bishops
not to ride in coaches, according to the fashion of the time, but to
leave such things to women; and it really was thought infra dig. for a
man to travel other than on horseback. Even his Holiness the Pope
rode upon a grey horse; though to indemnify him for the exertion, his
horse was led, and his stirrup held by kings and emperors.
These exhortations had about the same effect as James I.’s
“Counterblast to Tobacco;” they created an increased demand, and
the people showed their sense in preferring the ease that does no
injury to the self-denial that does no good, in spite of the opposition
of their superiors.
The first coach made in England was for the Earl of Rutland, in
1555, and Walter Rippon was the builder. He afterwards made one
for Queen Mary. Stow’s “Summerie of the English Chronicle” is the
authority upon which this statement is made.
In a postscript to the life of Thomas Parr, written by Taylor, the
Water Poet (and a mortal enemy to land carriages), we find the
following note: “He (Parr) was eighty-one years old before there was
any coach in England (Parr was born in Edward IV.’s reign in 1483);
for the first ever seen here was brought out of the Netherlands by
one William Boonen, a Dutchman, who gave a coach to Queen
Elizabeth, for she had been seven years a queen before she had
any coach; since when they have increased with a mischief, and
ruined all the best housekeeping, to the undoing of the watermen, by
the multitudes of Hackney coaches. But they never swarmed so
much to pester the streets as they do now till the year 1605; and
then was the gunpowder treason hatched, and at that time did the
coaches breed and multiply.” Taylor is to be thanked, not only for his
information, but for his capital though unconscious burlesque upon
those fancied philosophers who talk of cause and effect, where
events, because they happen in sequence, are made to depend one
on the other, when the fact of their being two things apart makes
them independent existences.
 We have not space to dwell upon these old specimens at length.
Queen Elizabeth’s coach is called by an old author “a moving
temple.” It had doors all round, so that when the people desired, and
the virgin queen was agreeable, they might feast their eyes on the
beauty of its trimming or linings.
The following entry in Sir William Dugdale’s diary may be
interesting: “1681. Payd to Mr. Meares, a coachmaker in St. Martin’s
Lane, for a little chariot wch I then sent into the country, £23 13s. 0d.,
and for a cover of canvas £01 00s. 00d.: also for harness for two
horses £04 00s. 00d.”
The opposition on the part of the watermen to the introduction of
coaches assumed rather serious proportions, more especially as the
populace sided with them; to such a height did the antagonism run
that a movement was made to introduce a Bill into Parliament to
prevent the increase of coaches; the apology for its introduction
being, that in war time it would be a matter of great difficulty to mount
the troops if so many horses were monopolised for these coaches.
Luckily, however, it came to nothing, and the antipathy gradually died
out.
Coaches and vehicles of all descriptions now became general,
and in 1635 a patent was granted to Sir Saunders Duncombe for the
introduction of sedans; their purpose being “to interfere with the too
frequent use of coaches, to the hindrance of the carts and carriages
employed in the necessary provision of the city and suburbs.” A
rivalry now sprung up between coach and sedan, and gave rise to a
humorous tract, in which they hold a colloquy as to which should
take precedence, a brewer’s cart being appointed umpire.
The coaches at this period were fearfully and wonderfully made.
There are several examples of them scattered about in the various
museums. The people who used them at this time had no great
ideas of them, for so formidable an affair was the undertaking of a
journey reckoned, that even from Birmingham to London a departure
was the signal for making a will, followed by a solemn farewell of
wife, children, and household!
 Towards the end of the seventeenth century improvements began
to take place. In Wood’s diary mention is made of a machine called
the “Flying Coach,” which performed the journey between Oxford
and London in thirteen hours! This was express rate for that age,
especially as there was some talk of making a law to limit the ground
covered by a coach to thirty miles a day in summer, and twenty-five
miles a day in winter. Oh, those good old times! The outcry lessened,
and the imperfect vehicles and bad roads were left to passengers
unmolested. What the latter were may be imagined from the fact
that, when Charles III. of Spain visited England, and Prince George
of Denmark went out to meet him, both princes were so impeded by
the badness of the roads that their carriages were obliged to be
borne on the shoulders of the peasantry, and they were six hours in
performing the last nine miles of their journey.
In the eighteenth century improvements were made in the
construction of coaches, but they were still heavy lumbering
contrivances, so that little or no progress was made in the rate at
which they travelled. Even so late as 1760 a journey from Edinburgh
to London occupied eighteen days, a part of the roads being only
accessible by pack horses. There is a very good specimen of the
vehicle of the early part of the eighteenth century in the South
Kensington Museum, belonging to the Earl of Darnley’s family, and is
well worthy of study as being one of the lightest examples known of
this period.
In the Museum of South Kensington is also an excellent example
of the fully developed coach of 1790. It is a very massive-looking
affair, and belonged to the Lord Chancellor of Ireland; it looks very
much like a faded edition of the City state coach now, though when
new it doubtless had a very good appearance. It consists of a very
large body, suspended from upright or whip springs by means of
leather braces; the standing pillars slope outwards, making the sides
longer at the roof than at the elbow line. The wheels are of good
height, and the carriage part is very massively constructed, the
upper part being finished off with scroll ironwork, and on this in the
front the coachman’s hammercloth is raised. The panels are painted
with landscapes, &c., by Hamilton, R.A., and no doubt altogether it
cost a deal of money.
Vehicles now began to assume that variety of shape and form of
which we have in our own time so many specimens. There were
Landaus, introduced from a town of that name in Germany; these
were, like the coaches, only made to open in the centre of the roof
just as they do now, but instead of the covering falling into a
horizontal line it only fell back to an angle of 45 degrees, and this
pattern was maintained for a number of years. Landaulets were
chariots made to open. Generally speaking, the difference between a
coach and a chariot was that the former had two seats for the
accommodation of passengers, and the latter but one, and in
appearance was like a coach cut in half. Then came phaetons,
barouches, sociables, curricles, gigs, and whiskies, which, in their
general form and attributes, were similar to the vehicles of the
present day which bear these names. In those days fast driving was
all the “go,” and young men vied with each other in driving the loftiest
and most dangerous gigs and phaetons. Contemporary literature
teemed with romantic tales of spills and hairbreadth ’scapes from
these vehicles, and yet dilated on the fearful pleasure there was in
driving them.
The larger wheeled vehicles were hung upon framed carriages,
with whip springs behind and elbow springs in front, like the
gentlemen’s cabriolets of the present day. When drawn by two
horses they were called curricles, or by one horse, chaises. There
was a little variation in the shape of the body, viz. the full curricle
pattern and the half curricle, with or without a boot, similar to a
Tilbury or a gig body. The wheels were 4 feet 3 inches to 5 feet in
height. Lancewood was then used for shafts.
It is at the beginning of the nineteenth century that real progress is
to be found in coaches and other carriages. In 1804, Mr. Obadiah
Elliott, a coachmaker of Lambeth, patented a plan for hanging
vehicles upon elliptic springs, thus doing away with the heavy perch,
as the longitudinal timber or iron connecting the hind-carriage with
the fore carriage is called. Perches are still used, but are chiefly
confined to coaches proper, or those hung upon C springs. Elliott
also considerably lightened the carriage part of the vehicles he
turned out. This was the first step to a grand revolution in the
manufacture of carriages, which was to affect every variety of
vehicle, great or small. Elliott’s enterprise was rewarded by the gold
medal of the Society of Arts, and by his business becoming a very
prosperous one, for the public were not slow in discovering the
advantages arising from great lightness in vehicles.
A print, published in 1816, shows a landaulet hung on elliptic
springs, four in number, with a square boot framed to the body, and
the driving seat supported on ironwork high above the boot. Behind
there is a footboard supported on the pump-handles. The distance
between the axletrees is very short, only 6 feet 6 inches from centre
to centre. The body is rather small, and the wheels are 3 feet 8
inches and 4 feet 8 inches high respectively, and the bottom of the
body is 3 feet 6 inches above the ground. The span or opening of the
springs is 10 inches.
In 1814 there were 23,400 four-wheeled vehicles paying duty to
Government, 27,300 two-wheeled, and 18,500 tax-carts in Great
Britain, showing a total of 69,200 vehicles. The later returns will
show how much a reduction in the duties and the use of elliptic
springs have promoted the increase of vehicles of all kinds.
A vehicle much in fashion at this period was the curricle, which
had been in use for some time in Italy, where it was suspended from
leather braces. Springs were added by the French, and, on its being
introduced here, the English altered the shape, giving the back a
graceful ogee curve, improved the hood, and added a spring bar
across the horses’ backs. It was a vehicle of easy draught, and could
be driven at great speed. Unfortunately it was rather dangerous if the
horse shied or stumbled, and this tended to reduce the demand for
it, and it was gradually superseded by the cabriolet, though Charles
Dickens used one as soon as he could afford it, and Count D’Orsay
had one made as late as 1836.
The vehicle called the briska, or britchka, was introduced about
1818 from Austria. It was hung both upon C springs and elliptic
springs, and was made in various sizes for different requirements. It
was nearly straight along the bottom. The hind panel was ogee
shaped, and the front terminated in a square boot. There was a
rumble behind, and the back seat was fitted with a hood which could
be raised or lowered at pleasure, and the knees were covered by a
folding knee flap. This was an inconvenient vehicle for our climate,
as only half the number could be sheltered in wet weather that could
be accommodated in dry. It was very fashionable for a time, but died
out about 1840.

Fig. 5.—Stanhope.

The “Stanhope” takes its name from being first built to the order
and under the superintendence of the Hon. Fitzroy Stanhope, by
Tilbury, the builder of the vehicle bearing that name. It was shaped
like the old ribbed gig, but was hung upon four springs, two of which
were bolted between the shaft and axle, and the other two
crossways, parallel to the axle at either end of the body, and
shackled to the side springs. Stanhopes are an easy kind of vehicle,
and do not rock so much as other gigs behind a rough-trotting horse.
At the same time they are rather heavy, owing to the large amount of
iron plating used to strengthen the shafts, &c.
 Fig. 6.—Tilbury.
The “Tilbury” was very much like the Stanhope, but had no boot,
and like it was heavily plated with iron. It was hung by two elbow
springs in front, with leather braces to the shafts or front cross bar,
and behind by two elbow springs passing from beneath the seat to a
cross spring raised to the level of the back rail of the body by three
straight irons from the hind part of the cross bar. Later, two more
springs were added between the axletree and the shafts, by scroll
irons. The Tilbury was a very good-looking and durable vehicle, but
its weight took away the public favour, and it went out of fashion
about 1850. It was, however, adopted with great success by Italy and
other continental countries, where the roads are bad, and solidity of
construction is the first consideration.
Dog-carts and Tandem-carts are too well known to need
description. The former were so called from their being used for the
conveyance of sporting dogs, such as greyhounds or pointers, and
the slats or louvre arrangement of the sides was for the purpose of
admitting air to the animals; though scarcely ever used for this
purpose now, the original plan has been pretty closely adhered to,
except that the boot is considerably reduced and made to harmonise
more with the other parts.
Some of the greatest improvements in the shape and style of
various vehicles were effected by a celebrated maker named
Samuel Hobson, who remodelled and improved pretty nearly every
vehicle which came under his hands. He particularly directed his
attention to the true proportion of parts, and artistic form of carriages.
He lowered the bodies, and lengthened the under or “carriage” part.
The curves and sweeps also received due attention. In fact, he
carefully studied those “trifles” (as Michael Angelo’s friend would
have termed them) on which depended the success of the
production as a work of art. Imitation being the sincerest form of
flattery, the other coachmakers soon showed their sense by copying
his best ideas, though, to give these other coachmakers their due,
they greatly assisted Mr. Hobson with suggestions for improvements,
and as a reward availed themselves of his superior talent for working
on these ideas.
As our interior trade and manufactures increased, the custom
arose of sending commercial travellers throughout England to call
attention to the various goods, and it was found very convenient to
send these travellers in light vehicles which could convey samples of
the various articles. This led to a very great increase in the number
of gigs; and about 1830 one coach factory of London supplied
several hundreds of these vehicles to travellers at annual rentals.
And though on the introduction of the railway system long journeys
by road were unnecessary, these gigs were found of great use in
town and suburban journeys, and in London they may be seen by
hundreds daily, and they are scarcely used by any one else but
commercial travellers. They are too familiar to need detailed
description.
In 1810 a duty was levied by Government upon vehicles for sale. It
was repealed in 1825, but the returns give the number of vehicles
built for private use in 1814 as 3,636, and in 1824 as 5,143, whilst
the number of carriages in use in 1824 had grown to 25,000 four-
wheeled, and 36,000 two-wheeled, besides 15,000 tax-carts; an
increase since 1814 of 20,000 vehicles.
In 1824 there was built for George IV. a low phaeton, called a pony
phaeton, which has since become very common, and has undergone
but very little change from the original. It was a cab shape, half-
caned, with a skeleton bottom side hung upon four elliptical springs,
with crane ironwork back and front. It was drawn by two ponies; the
wheels were only 21 and 33 inches high.
A carriage had been introduced from Germany, called a droitska or
droskey—an open carriage with a hood, on a perch, and suspended
from C springs. The peculiarity was, that the body was hung very
near the perch, so that the seat was only 12 inches above the hind
axletree, and the place for the legs was on either side of the perch.
The chief merits of this vehicle consisted in its lightness as
compared with barouches and briskas, and its shortness.
The cab phaeton was invented by Mr. Davies, of Albany Street,
about 1835; it consisted of a cab body with a hood, hung upon four
elliptic springs, and a low driving seat and dasher, for one horse. It
met with great success and was soon in general use. It was
introduced on the continent, where it became known under the name
of “Milord,” and became the common hack carriage, after which it
went out of fashion with the upper circles. It has, however, been
recently revived under the name of “Victoria.” The Prince of Wales
and Baron Rothschild set the fashion by using Victorias about 1869,
and it really is a very elegant and useful vehicle.
In 1839 the first Brougham was built by Mr. Robinson, of Mount
Street, for Lord Brougham, since when this has become the most
common and the most fashionable vehicle in use. The size of the
first brougham was in its chief dimensions similar to those now
manufactured; it was hung on elliptic springs in front, and five
springs behind. Coachmakers seemed to have lavished the greatest
care and attention on these vehicles, in order to turn out the lightest,
and at the same time the most artistic contrivance, and great
success has attended their efforts.
The foregoing is a brief history of vehicular conveyances from the
earliest times to the present. During the last ten or fifteen years
many further improvements have been added, tending to produce
more perfect vehicles in every respect; but these improvements have
been more in matters of detail than those at the commencement of
the century, and hence are more likely to escape ordinary
observation; but the critical eye will soon discover these changes,
and marvel at the short space of time in which the real work has
been done.
A glance at public carriages may not be out of place. Hackney
coaches were first used in England in 1605. These were similar to
the coaches used by fashionable people, but they did not ply for hire
in the streets, but remained at the hiring yards until they were
wanted. Their number soon increased, owing to there being a
greater number of persons who wished to hire than could afford to
keep a conveyance of their own. In 1635 the number was limited to
fifty, but in spite of the opposition of the King they continued to
increase in number, and in 1640 there were 300 in London. In Paris
they were introduced by Nicholas Sauvage, who lived in a street at
the sign of St. Fiacre, and from this circumstance hackney carriages
are called “fiacres” in France. In 1772 the hire of a fiacre in Paris was
one shilling for the first hour and tenpence for the second. There
were 400 hackney coaches in London in 1662, and the Government
then levied a yearly duty of £5 each upon them. In spite of this their
number had in 1694 increased to 700, a substantial proof of their
usefulness.
In 1703 a stage coach performed the journey from London to
Portsmouth, when the roads were good, in fourteen hours. From this
time there was a gradual increase in the number and destinations of
stage coaches.
In 1755 stage coaches are described as being covered with dull
black leather, studded with broad-headed nails by way of ornament,
and oval windows in the quarters, with the frames painted red. On
the panels the destination of the coach was displayed in bold
characters. The roof rose in a high curve with a rail round it. The
coachman and guard sat in front upon a high narrow boot,
sometimes garnished with a hammercloth ornamented with a deep
fringe. Behind was an immense basket supported by iron bars, in
which passengers were carried at a cheaper rate than in other parts
of the vehicle. The wheels were painted red. The coach was usually
drawn by three horses, on the first of which a postillion rode, dressed
in green and gold, and with a cocked hat. This machine groaned and
creaked as it went along, with every tug the horses gave, though the
ordinary speed was somewhere about four miles an hour.
One hundred years ago news and letters travelled very slowly, the
post-boys to whom the letter bags were intrusted progressing at the
rate of three and a half miles an hour! In 1784 a proposal was laid
before Government by Mr. John Palmer, the originator of mail
coaches, to run quicker vehicles, though at much dearer rates of
postage. This scheme was at first opposed by Parliament, but after a
struggle of some two years, Palmer’s coaches were adopted for the
conveyance of the mails, though the rate at which these travelled
was only six miles an hour for a long time after their introduction.
A great impetus was given to the production of better forms of
stage coaches by gentlemen taking to drive them as an amusement,
and two clubs were soon formed of noblemen and gentlemen who
took an interest in four-in-hand driving and in vehicles in general.
Several clubs of this kind are now flourishing to encourage manly
sport, and with the capacity to promote improvements in the form of
the “drag,” as it is now called.
It is to an architect that we owe the invention of the Hansom cab.
The safety consisted in the arrangement of the framework at the
nearest part to the ground, so as to prevent an upset if the cab tilted
up or down. The inventor was Mr. Hansom, the architect of the
Birmingham Town Hall. Numberless improvements have been made
on this idea, but the leading principles are the same.
In 1829 the first omnibus was started in London by Mr. Shillibeer,
who some time previously had been a coachmaker in Paris. It was
drawn by three horses, and carried twenty-two passengers, all
inside. The fare was a shilling from the “Yorkshire Stingo,” in
Marylebone Road, to the Bank. This vehicle was found too large for
the streets of London, so a smaller one was started, drawn by two
horses and carrying twelve passengers inside. In 1849 an outside
seat was added along the centre of the roof, and by 1857 the
omnibus had become pretty nearly the same form as we now know
it. Our present omnibus is probably the lightest vehicle of its kind for
carrying such a large number of passengers. Its average weight is
about 25 cwt. The London General Omnibus Company have, on an
average, 626 omnibuses running on week-days, and 6,935 horses to
work them. They build their own vehicles, and each runs about sixty
miles a day, at a speed of about six miles an hour, and nearly all are
supplied with brake retarders, worked by the foot, which effect a
great saving in the strain put upon the horses in stopping.
 CHAPTER II.

PREPARATION OF THE DESIGN AND

SETTING OUT THE FULL-SIZED DRAUGHT.
In coach-building, as in building construction, the first thing to be
done is to prepare a design of the vehicle proposed to be built
according to the requirements of the customer. A scale of one inch to
a foot is a very good one for the purpose, though the scale drawings
are more often made to a scale of one and a half or two inches to a
foot. These drawings (or draughts as they are technically termed),
are prepared by specially trained draughtsmen, and it requires no
mean skill to produce, on a small scale, a pictorial representation of
the future vehicle, truly proportioned in all its parts, and a delicacy of
touch in order that the parts may not look coarse. These drawings, if
well made (and they generally are), give a very accurate picture of
the carriage, and a purchaser is generally able from this to say what
peculiar feature he requires, or where he thinks it should be altered;
if he can do this it saves a great deal of trouble in the future, whilst
the coach is being built.
For this work the draughtsman requires a drawing-board and T
square, and two set squares; as he never has to prepare very large
drawings, a board of imperial size will be amply sufficient, and the T
square to have a corresponding length of blade. T squares are made
of a variety of woods, but the most serviceable is one made of
mahogany, with an ebony edge; the most important consideration
being that the edge should be truly “shot” from end to end. The set
squares should either be vulcanite or skeleton mahogany with ebony
edges; the latter are preferable, as they work more cleanly than the
vulcanite, which, unless kept very clean, are apt to make black
smears across the drawing. In order to fasten the paper down to the
drawing board, drawing pins will be required; they are simple pins of
iron or steel, with a large flat brass head; four is the number required
for each sheet of paper, one at each corner. A very much better way
to fix the paper down is to “strain” it to the board. It is done in the
following way:—The sheet of paper to be fastened down is
thoroughly well wetted, by means of a sponge or large flat brush, on
one side (which, it does not matter, but see that your board is
perfectly clean before starting); it should then be left for five or ten
minutes for the water to well soak into the pores of the paper; when
this is done, the paper will be quite limp. Now take a perfectly clean
straight edge, or the back edge of the T square, and turn up one of
the edges of the paper ¼ or ½ an inch against it; along this edge run
a brush charged with glue from the glue pot, or a piece of ordinary
glue dipped into boiling water and rubbed along the edge will do just
as well, and when you think there is enough sticky matter to promote
adhesion between the paper and the board, turn the edge of the
paper back on the board (without removing the straight edge or T
square), and quickly rub it with the tips of the fingers until it goes
down flat all along without any air bubbles: do this to all four edges of
the paper, and place in a perfectly flat position to dry; and if the
operation has been carefully conducted the paper will be beautifully
flat to draw upon, and there can be no fear of its shifting. When the
drawing is finished, all that has to be done is to cut round the edges
of the paper just inside the glued edge, and take it off. A little hot
water will take off the glued strip, and take care to wash all the glue
off at the same time, otherwise a smaller piece of paper might stick
in some important part, and the drawing spoilt in order to detach it.
 Fig. 7.—Coach.
The draughtsman will do well to have a few French curves, for
drawing the “sweeps” or curved lines of the carriage bodies, and
scales of various sizes, which are slips of boxwood or ivory, on which
are marked at the edges various scales, from ¹⁄₁₆th of an inch to a
foot up to 3 inches to a foot; and last, though not by any means
least, a good box of compasses or mathematical instruments. We
shall not discuss the merits of the various kinds of instruments here,
but any one wishing to go into the matter may do so by reading
“Mathematical Instruments” in Weale’s Series. But we should
strongly advise the draughtsman to go to some good maker, as bad
drawing instruments only lead to bad drawing.
The drawing paper used should be of a kind having a slight gloss
on the surface, like “hot-pressed” paper, but without its granular
texture. This kind of paper is usually called a “board,” as Bristol
board, and kept in various sizes, and sold by all colour dealers.
Various names are given to it, but it is all pretty nearly alike.
The paper being fastened, the drawing is commenced by drawing
the ground line a (Fig. 7); from that set off the height that the body is
to be from the ground, indicated by the dotted line b, and draw the
line c, which is the depth of the rocker. This latter is the real bottom
of the vehicle, and from it is measured the height of the seat, about
12 inches, shown by the dotted lines on the body. Then from the seat
measure 42 inches, the length of the roof d. Lay off 23 inches for the
width of the door, and draw e and f. From f measure 28 inches, the
depth of the back quarter g, and from e measure 25 inches, which
will give the front quarter h. Now the curves or sweeps of the body
can be put in by means of French curves. From the hinge pillar
measure 26 inches, shown by dotted line i, and this is the centre of
the hind wheel, which is 4 feet 3 inches high. The spring is 1¼
inches thick, and consists of 5 plates 42 inches long. The opening
between the springs is 12½ inches, the lower one being clipped
beneath the axle. Measure 12½ inches from the underside of the
axle, which will give the underside of the top spring. 1¼ inches must
also be allowed for the back bar j, and the pump-handle k will be ½
an inch thick. Then draw the boot l in such a position that the front
wheels will lock or turn under it freely. This may be found by drawing
a plan of the wheel as shown, and with the centre of the lock bolt
produced to n, strike the lines m, and it will be seen that the wheels
will just clear the body, which is all that is necessary. From this it will
be noticed that the centre on which the fore carriage turns is not in
the same plane as the axle. This is more particularly discussed in the
chapter on wheel-plates. The front wheel is 42 inches high, the
springs the same size as the back springs. The draught may be now
completed from Fig. 7, after having settled on the various heights
and sizes, and can be inked in with Indian ink. The dotted lines,
being merely constructional, are rubbed out when the drawing is
inked in. To complete the drawing, the spokes of the wheels must be
shown. These should be neither too many nor too few, but there is
no rule which regulates their number, except that there should be
two to each felloe. Having inked the parts in and cleaned the pencil
lines off, the drawing is ready to be coloured. The colours applied to
the drawing are the same as will be used for painting the carriage, so
we shall not detail them here.
From this drawing is constructed the full-size draught, which is
prepared before a tool is touched. On the walls of the body-making
shop are large black-boards, 10
or 12 feet square, and on these
the draughts are prepared just
in the same way as described
for the scale drawing, except
that all the heights are marked
up a vertical line which runs
through the centre of the
doorway, and from this the
various widths are also set off.
This and the ground line are the
first two lines drawn, and it is
imperative that they should
make a perfect right angle with
each other, otherwise the
draught will not be true, and the
material worked from it will be
wasted. This full-sized draught
requires the greatest care in
preparation, as all the patterns
to which the materials are cut or Fig. 8.—Brougham with Cant-Board. s,
shaped are taken from it, even Standing pillar (developed). b, Bottom
to the smallest parts. bar. r, Rocker. l, Seat.
The full-size draught also
differs from the scale draught, inasmuch as all the details of the
construction of the vehicle are shown as in the accompanying cut
(Fig. 8), which shows the construction of a small doctor’s brougham,
and Fig. 9, which shows the construction of a landau. This latter is a
representation of the working draught for the vehicle, and, in fact, is
a reduced copy of what would be drawn upon the black-board in the
shop, except that some of the minor details are omitted to avoid
confusion.
Fig. 9.—Landau.