|
Francis Rogallo
declares himself as he understood the difference between mechanical invention and ornamental invention:
Special Message from Francis M. Rogallo set here before he rises in his Final Thermal
All the following to his signature are Rogallo's words:
SPECIAL MESSAGE :
from The Rogallo Kite Line
Dear Joe,
I delayed answering your letter until I had a
chance to read all of the seven Low & Slow.
I found them very interesting and envy you in California for
the great enthusiasm you have generated for L&S
flight systems. It may be caused by something in
the California environment, because I caught it during
my first 24 years spent there, and I have never
gotten over it.
A large number (about 20) patents related to flexible
wings have been taken out in my name, solely or
jointly with others. The government owns two and
has the right to use most of the remainder, although
I retain the non-government rights.
The patents apply to both stiffened and completely
flexible wings. I have had license agreements in the
past with a few companies, including the Irvin Parachute
people of Gardena, Calif., but none of these
licenses are active at present; that is, I am not now
getting any income from inventions.
Many people are using our ideas, inventions,
discoveries, or whatever one calls them, which is
a satisfaction to us. We would like to get some
monetary return, but this has always been a secondary
consideration; so I guess we can't complain.
So far, I don't think anyone else is getting rich at our
expense.
The government (officially and otherwise) considered
flexible wings of no interest to the government
for over ten years after our first patent application,
which was privately financed by us (Mr. & Mrs. F.M.
Rogallo). I'll enclose a couple of pages from the
"Langley Researcher" covering the award you asked
about. The IRS later sent a bill for about $21,000
which we paid; and the final outcome is still in court.
It is difficult to determine L/D from free flight
tests. In thermals or in flow over ridges I have observed
vertical kite lines and climbing all-flexible
gliders. The NASA has made wind-tunnel tests of
representative models of many flexible designs. The
highest L/D obtained from a complete wing with all
lines in the airstream was about 3 l/2 for completely
flexible wings. This was a twin keel parawing
and the results are reported in NASA T.N. D-5965.
Wings of the Barish and Jalbert types did not do as
well, but all types are subject to further improvement,
and besides L/D is not by any means the only characteristic of importance.
Our first flexible wing patent states that rectangular
or elliptic shapes may be used and that
various forms of stiffening may be used, including
ram air inflation (see L&S 7. 17). It is sometimes
hard to distinguish between new design and new
invention, even in the patent office.
NASA people have made a few exploratory tests
of double -membrane, ram -inflated delta wings,
and some with scoop inlets near the aft end of the
wings.
I have notices that the press regards every man
who builds a home built aircraft as an inventor,
even if he has made no changes in someone else's
design. It must make a better story that way, and
probably very few people really care about the origin
of technology, only about its final application.
I can't say what motivated some other inventor to
do what he did. Sometimes I don't know why I do
what I do.
I have a number of different commercial stick
kites, but do not fly them much. I have heen flying
some 3 mil Mylar, no-stick kites while trying
to make some improvements in them. I also fly
some man-carrying all-flexible wings, single and
twin-keel designs, usually on an anchor line on the
beach, but at times in tow behind a boat, or in free
flight down the big dune (Jocky Ridge) at Kitty Hawk
or near there. So far I have kept out of the press,
but others have not.
I hope I have answered most of your questions.
Sincerely,
F. M. (Rog) Rogallo
Video: Flexible wing http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXNSTkhYy_s |
| Notice that the Fleep project wing and the wing of Charles Richards in Paresev project encompassed all of the mechanicals found in the 1960s Standard Rogallo Hang Glider first foot launched by Barry Hill Palmer.
Later versions of the standard Rogallo hang glider certainly thus could not be global mechanical inventions, only ornamental tweaking of appearance over an established mechanical integrity. We had the triangle control frame since 1800s and strongly since 1908; Barry Hill Palmer used four control systems, one of which was with a hung pilot behind the TCF; for the 12 following years many makers would use the same arts while altering only well-known parts to fit particular preferences, costs, and experiments; several local boys-made-hang-gliders were locally acclaimed "inventors" on the same matters, but such could not win global respect as all the mechanics were well-known before the end of 1961, and actually much earlier. |