vs an SH-60 or MH-53? Notice the depressions in the water. Image Unavailable, Please Login Image Unavailable, Please Login
All made with a slide rule, some graphite lines on velum paper, and human hands. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Preliminary sketches were probably on vellum. Final work was probably ink on linen. Been there done that and have seen them. I have an original blue print of the drawings for the SE-5 general arrangement. Ink on linen and beautifully done. An art no longer with us using the old drafting split end pens and curves.
Correction accepted! Its still amazing to me that we could make such machines to such precision without the use of electronic aids.
Thanks. The drawings were a medium to transport the dimensions that were calculated and noted on the image. Then the dimensional data was reiterated in the shop by the craftsmen. One of my sons is an auto machinist and he functions by a litany of close tolerance dimensions prescribed by manuals and a few drawings. He not only works in values of the umpteen thousands of an inch but has to recognize heat expansion differentials and warpage when working different materials and the deformation of large cast items such as blocks and heads. He is a much under appreciated technician because he has no degree in math or registered computer skills but he uses it all and sure knows his stuff when it comes to rebuilding an engine. He has done antique aircraft engines including a Hisso V8, modern drag race car engines, and a plethora of big blocks for RV's. He's done a helluva lot more with his high school education than I ever did. And he overcame dyslexia. No, I'm not very proud of him
Having to design aircraft without electronic aids is a reason why building structural mockups before production began was so important. The mockup gave you a chance to catch major (and even minor) discrepancies before putting an aircraft into production, and they probably saved a lot of grief in the long run. Today mockups are done electronically, and the fit of the parts is generally much better from the get-go.
We did the first digital mock up on the 777 program and it saved millions. Accuracy was absolute and interferences were immediately discovered. It saved time in years and saved vast sums in money. I have some of the landing gear and engine nacelle /strut layouts that were done on the -80. They were sketched on 11 X 14 vellum as were many other elements. They were expanded to larger sizes to determine more accurate structural configurations before being drawn full size on the aluminum (MLO) master layout. All of the preliminary steps were eliminated when we went to the CATIA and launched everything full size from the start.
I love that picture! Is that the same location as Burbank now, or was that a different airport? From the mountains in the distance, it looks like Burbank to me.
That's an early version, I think. It has the Wright G-2's with the 1/4 inch cable that wrapped around the cowling to keep it on.
That's one way. The DC-2 had 7 windows, the DC-3 has 8 and a fatter fuselage. Also a larger vertical fin and rudder. The DC-3 grew out of the DST (Douglas Sleeper Transport) when C.R. Smith saw the expanded fuselage not so much for the berths but as more seats for a daytime transport and the DST disappeared. One of the visionaries that enabled the airline industry to grow.
DC-1 with 6 windows. View attachment 3326703 Yes, the berth windows are seen above the pax windows and the fuselage is fatter. I assume that you are referring to the black and white photo.
You might be correct about that, I'm not certain but that is the one that stopped the Boeing 247. I don't recall any other airline operating it other than TWA. This painting depicts the delivery of the last sacks of Civil Contact Airmail in 1934 when Jack Fry and Eddie Rickenbacker flew it from L.A. to Newark. They not only flew the final delivery but broke the transcontinental speed record in the DC-1. They were supposed to have flown it in a DC-2 but it had mechanical problems. The WX guessers in L.A. predicted the arrival of a storm on the east coast at 1230 hrs that day. Fry and Rickenbacker arrived at 1215 and the storm can be seen approaching in the east. Old airline pilots that viewed the painting delighted in identifying things like the AAL hanger, police station, and the Greek restaurant at which they ate. Ernie Gann flew into that airport and he hated landing there at night because the runways were made of coal cinders and absorbed the landing lights. He said that landings were nothing but rude arrivals. The DC-2 landing gear didn't help because of its overly stiff shock struts.
I used to live a short bike ride away in the early 1980's when my dad was stationed at Wright Patterson.
Yes, the DC-1 had 6 windows because it would seat 12, but TWA decided they wanted a little more, so Douglas stretched the aircraft to 7 windows for 14 passengers, which is what went into production. The only DC-1 wound up in Spain, where it was lost during the Spanish Civil War. As stated, the DC-3 fuselage was wider and rounder, since it went (initially) from 2 abreast to 3 abreast and thus seated 21 in the day configuration. Later most operators managed to squeeze more seats in and went to 4 abreast.
Thanks, Jim, for enhancing that historical data about the DC series. I might be wrong but didn't the DC-1 get one outer wing blown off and a DC-2 outer wing was joined to it and it did fly as a DC- 1 1/2? If I remember , the center section joint bolt pattern accommodated all other outer panels. The changes to the outer panels were increased span, tip design, and aspect ratio.
