The Hang Gliding Historical Committee is tasked with preserving and celebrating the rich history of hang gliding.

Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby JoeF » Sat May 18, 2013 9:41 am

FrancisAndGertrudeRogallo.jpg
FrancisAndGertrudeRogallo.jpg (25.04 KiB) Viewed 1699 times
FordTimes.gif
Ford Times article used the photo.
FordTimes.gif (52.05 KiB) Viewed 1698 times

Rogallo.jpg
Rogallo.jpg (4.39 KiB) Viewed 1699 times

p382a.jpg
p382a.jpg (13.09 KiB) Viewed 1699 times

Francis Rogallo
Francis M. Rogallo
Francis Melvin Rogallo
Gertrude Sugden Rogallo
Frank Rogallo
FMR
Rog
FR
Tease: :arrow: http://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/Francis_M._Rogallo

All are invited to post Rogallo matters in this thread.

Starting anywhere? Stories are welcome. Ask questions. Find and post answers. Aim to publish memos and talks and papers. Links?

Start:
Little known: :arrow: Francis Rogallo flew in a Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired four-boom kite glider in 1962; he was the the pilot payload.
More commonly known: He again in 1965 flew in a Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired four-book kite glider in 1965.
Better known: He flew in a Brock UP Products Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired hang glider via gift and coaching by Peter Brock in 1974.
Then in North Carolina he had more hang gliding flights as PIC.
:arrow: Following the Francis-Gertrude invention, many people see a new confidence interior to most any wing, no matter how solid is the wing; wing understanding fundamentally changed a neat notch.
====================================================
Two early patents by Francis and Gertrude were followed by a stream of other patents by Francis involving the flex-wing from limp to stiffened versions.
It would be neat to collect all the patents, as well as trace those patents that made reference to their and his patents. And to see the patent partners on some of the patents. And to understand the fine-grained claims involved in the patents. Some claims would not hold up in severe novelty contests, but that happens; keep moving forward and up!
===================================================
Start on some questions:
[ ] It turned out that Francis withheld exposing a huge amount of tech and fact from JD. Why? As all the tech becomes exposed on timelines, then one will be able to see the huge amount of tech regarding hang gliders that was not extended to JD in the few polite letters. Why did Francis withhold telling JD of the 1962 flight that Francis had in a Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired four-boom kite-glider? Speculations are welcome; facts would be great, but may be hard to find; let us know when you are personally speculating; speculation outlines sometimes work to help forward research. What tech in flow was still confidential? For instance, why did not Francis spell out all the craft exposed by John Worth? Wondering, could it have been to stay away from discouraging the tinkering JD who, if discouraged, might quit expanding the Rogallo-based tech? In hindsight, I speculate that the avalanche of prior tech that JD finally was exposed to by 1968, he might have tossed in the towel knowing that he had no novelty in his mechanics as regards the kite-glider, only tiny brush-strokes of ornamental appearance; there would finally be zero mechanical protection; even JD's last breath of aiming to power a flex-wing was blown, perhaps, by finally seeing Palmer doing the ultralight early as well as the huge Ryan display in the powering space. Francis might have been being simply gentle with the tinkerer, perhaps not wanting to overwhelm JD. Look finally to the tech timeline and see how huge was the flex-wing prior-art. Francis wrote of "others" but did not detail, thus leaving JD to march to a JD drumbeat. Rogallo withheld showing JD that the A-frame simplicity was already extant doing tasks in a most simple hang glider years before the tinkering of JD. Francis put out flattering praise, not the withheld facts. Francis kept association with whispers of Rog's own limp stuff and really held back the very extensive progress that had already been made in the stiffened stuff; Francis just shared a little of what there was. Some national security items were probably part of the reason also; the space race and uses in the armed services of the flex-wing were partly public and partly still in confident wraps, as is usual.

[ ] A comprehensive timeline on the Rogallo stream could be fun and useful. Gradually such will be accomplished. Most anyone interested could posted dated facts with reference. Such contribution will feed the coming timelines. Rogallo Timeline. Such entries will also double into the larger Hang Gliding Timeline. If is fine if many timelines are created. It is easy now to gather and make new timelines, ever more rich. Everyone may play on such project. Just post factoids and references. Speculate, guess, but be open about such, so the game plays out fairly and blesses the hang gliding community. Work on fuzzy items; face controversies; bring on the counterexamples and examples! Unfold the grand party. :!: :!:
Attachments
OneSourceOfDrRogallo1961.jpg
OneSourceOfDrRogallo1961.jpg (54.28 KiB) Viewed 1698 times
JoeF
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby JoeF » Sat May 18, 2013 4:32 pm

To help preserve NASA's test in a book, we study here from Chapter 11 as found at: http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4308/ch11.htm which shows from the larger document titled:
SP-4308 SPACEFLIGHT REVOLUTION. The chapter 11 holds more than the section we study in this post. The chapter 11 was titlled: In the Service of Apollo
And in our study we may find items to clarify or even correct. And some items may be expanded. And all open for public discussion. The section does not cover comprehensively the matter and misses other Rogallo-influenced projects in NASA and its subcontractors, nor the works being done in the armed services; hopefully participants in this topic thread will bring forward other centers of activity that are missed by this section. For active footnote linking and some photographs, please see the source for that richness. The footnote numbers hereon disturb the text some and are not actively linked.

Rogallo's Flexible Wing

More than any other division at Langley, the Full-Scale Research Division acted as a "service effort" for Apollo. Testing in the high-speed wind tunnels of this division provided essential data in the transonic regime for the moon shot. Not all Apollo work carried out in the Full-Scale Research Division, however, involved high-speed aerodynamics. Perhaps the most interesting and potentially significant technologies developed in this division involved low-speed aerodynamics -specifically, a proposed Apollo capsule recovery system that used a controllable paraglider. This concept, which was eventually turned down both for Gemini and Apollo, was the brainchild of Francis M. Rogallo, an ingenious thinker and kite-flying enthusiast who worked in the 7 x 10-Foot Tunnel Branch.

Although Bob Gilruth and many other engineers responsible for Project Mercury considered the ballistic capsule approach "an elegant solution" to the problem of quickly putting a person in orbit, no aeronautical engineer was especially happy with the plan.35 Their dream was for the spacecraft [381] to return to earth using "wings and wheels" -that is, to really fly down through the atmosphere to a landing on a conventional runway.

NASA placed its hopes for such an airplane-like landing on an unusual inflated-fabric flexible wing, or parawing. Such a wing was being developed at Langley in the early 1960s under the intellectual direction of Francis M Rogallo. Rogallo's idea for Gemini, as well as for Apollo, was to pack away a carefully designed parawing like a parachute until the spacecraft fell to about 60,000 feet, at which time an elaborate unstowing and unfurling process began. By 20,000 feet, if a I went well, the descending spacecraft would turn into the world's heaviest hang glider, suspended under a dart-shaped parawing. The astronauts themselves would then bring the soaring craft down to a landing either on water or on soil.36

Rogallo had started at NACA Langley in 1936 after graduation from Stanford University, and since 1945 the flexible wing had been a pet project. A survey of the history of the parawing provides not only an understanding of the genesis of one of Langley's most intriguing -if never used - developments for Apollo but also insight into the sudden and dramatic impact of Sputnik and the spaceflight revolution on the course of independent research at Langley.

Rogallo and his wife, Gertrude, spent their spare time flying home-built kites at their beach house at Nags Head, North Carolina, which is near Kitty Hawk. By the end of World War II, this hobby had begun to give the couple ideas for unconventional vehicles, such as hydrofoil boats, ground-effect machines, V/STOL aircraft, and flexible wings. Because they could not find any organization, including their own NACA, to support R&D for their ideas, they "decided to do what we could privately as time permitted." Initially their efforts focused on configurations resembling boat sails; later, their designs were similar to parachutes. Finally, they concentrated on shapes somewhere between boat sails and parachutes -flexible wings. By the end of 1948, the couple had developed a flexible kite, which the Rogallos called "Flexi-Kite," and a type of gliding parachute, which they later named a "paraglider." 37

In 1948, Rogallo and his wife filed a patent for a V-shaped flexible wing, which was awarded (U.S. Patent No. 2,546,078) in March 1951. From the outset, the inventors had thought of their parawing as a wing not only for sport gliders but also for military and civil powered aircraft. No one, however, took their proposals seriously. As Rogallo remembers, when meeting friends and acquaintances, they were generally greeted with, "How's the kite business?" The Rogallos had resorted to selling their Flexi-Kite as a toy in order to illustrate the parawing principle and help finance their work Francis Rogallo would often say in later years that toys should copy the real thing and not the other way around.38

For the first seven years of its development, the motivation behind the flexible wing had been "purely aeronautical," but that changed in 1952 when the Rogallos saw the Colliers magazine that ran the exciting series....



[382]
Francis and Gertrude Rogallo (right), inventors of the V-shaped flexible "parawing." In December 1961, Langley flight-tested a 5O-foot parawing's ability to bring down safely a model of a manned space capsule from a few thousand feet above Plum Tree Island (below), an old army bombing range near Langley Field.

.



.





[383] ....of stories about spaceflight. Francis Rogallo was struck by the issue's beautiful illustrations of rigid-winged gliders mounted on top of huge rockets. As he recalled later in a 1963 speech to the American Astronautical Society, "I thought that the rigid-winged gliders might better be replaced by vehicles with flexible wings that could be folded into small packages during the launching." In August 1952 he met Dr. Willy Ley, one of Colliers consultants, and told Ley his thoughts about flexible wings for astronautics in the conversation Rogallo mentioned that the technology of flexible wings might someday prove very useful when spacecraft commute regularly between planets: a rocket ship returning from Mars could pop out flexible wings as it entered the earth's atmosphere and glide the last 100 or 200 miles home, saving "the stockholders" that much fuel. "But the time was not yet ripe."39 (Note that Rogallo imagined, perhaps in jest, that private corporations would be sponsoring the interplanetary travel, not governments.)

In April 1954, hoping to gain acceptance of his concept for aerospace applications, Rogallo gave a presentation, complete with glider model demonstrations, to the local Tidewater reserve unit of the Air Force Research and Development Command. Two months later, he submitted a proposal to include parawing research in the NACA budget, but the proposal was rejected. Indefatigable, he submitted a proposal to discuss his flexible wing concepts at the annual meeting of the Institute of Aeronautical Sciences (IAS). This was "the first [proposal] that actually reached the program committee after several tries," but it too was turned down. The IAS rejection letter read: "Although the paper is out of the ordinary and looks like it might be fine to hear, it just does not fit into our program."40

As it did for so many research projects, the launch of Russia's Sputnik 1 in October 1957 changed the course of history for the parawing. Even before the formation of NASA in 1958, Rogallo had received NACA approval to make a few crude wind-tunnel and model flight investigations of parawings in the 7 x 10-Foot Tunnel Branch. In December 1958, he made a presentation to the Langley Committee on Aerodynamics, and as he remembers, "gradually people in other divisions became interested and volunteered to investigate parawings in their facilities." During 1959 cloth parawings were tested in the 4-Foot Supersonic Pressure Tunnel at Mach 2, and still other parawing models were deployed at high altitudes (150,000 to 200,000 feet) at nearly Mach 3 from rocket launchings at Wallops Island. In August 1959, von Braun invited Rogallo to Huntsville for a presentation, so "business was picking Up "41

For the next year and a half, into early 1961, Rogallo gave talk after talk on his parawing concept to various technical groups. He spoke at the national aeronautics meeting of the Society of Automotive Engineers (April 1960); at Ryan Aeronautical Company and North American Aviation (May 1960); at the annual IAS meeting in New York City (Jan. 1961); and at local IAS chapter meetings in Lancaster, California, and San Diego [384] (March 1961). By the end of 1960, the Ryan company, the same company that built Charles Lindbergh's Spirit of St. Louis, began building a powered man-carrying "Ryan Flex-Wing" at its own expense; Rogallo was on hand in San Diego to witness its first flight. Also, in early 1961, NASA Marshall gave Ryan and North American contracts to study the feasibility of recovering Saturn boosters by means of parawings. NASA in-house studies of the technological capabilities of the wing were made at Marshall and Langley and demonstrated that recovery of the (later canceled) C-2 rocket stage was feasible. By the end of 1961, the DOD let its first parawing contract, to Ryan, for flight tests of the Flex-Wing. The aircraft was later sent to NASA Langley for investigation in the Full-Scale Tunnel. Thereafter, the number of projects and contracts related to parawings increased too rapidly to mention in this brief history.42

"It looked like parawings were here to stay," Rogallo rejoiced at the time, and Sputnik was the reason.43 By the summer of 1963, it appeared that the concept had achieved worldwide acceptance and that the time had come for his parawing study group to give the U.S. government royalty-free license to use its patents, which it did in a ceremony in Washington on 18 July 1963. In a short speech, Rogallo expressed his hopes for the invention: "We feel confident that the civil and military agencies of the government will carry on this work, and we hope private industry will promote use of the concept for business and pleasure as effectively as they have for astronautics and military aeronautics." In a separate ceremony a day earlier, Dr. Hugh Dryden, deputy administrator of NASA, presented Francis Rogallo and his wife with a check for $35,000 for their development of the flexible wing concept; at that time, it was the largest cash award ever made by the space agency to an inventor.44

Unfortunately, the spaceflight revolution, which had so quickly turned circumstances in the wing's favor, just as quickly turned circumstances against it. That is often the nature of revolutions -to take things full circle. From the beginning, NASA's interest in Rogallo's paraglider grew primarily from the possibility of using it as a controllable space capsule recovery system. When that interest waned, so too did NASA's support for the innovative flight technology.

Given NASA's formal go ahead for research, Rogallo and his colleagues in the Full-Scale Research Division invested much time, energy, and emotion in the paraglider concept. Several Langley employees shared Rogallo's enthusiasm for the innovative flight technology and even conducted manned flexible wing flight research during weekends on the Outer Banks with privately owned equipment. Although qualitative in nature, these investigations proved "valuable in providing quick answers and indicating promising directions for the much more costly and time-consuming instrumented but unmanned NASA flight research."45 In wind-tunnel studies at Langley, this research covered a broad spectrum of parawing design parameters - everything from the original concept of a flexible lifting surface (indicated [385] in the engineering data as a "limp paraglider") to rigid frame gliders with conical and cylindrical canopies

As this research on the basic technology of the parawing gained momentum at Langley, NASA's STG, still at Langley at this time, grew interested in the possible application of the foldable, deployable, inflatable-frame paraglider to its Gemini EOR program. Specifically, the STG believed it might be used as part of Mercury Mark II, the follow-on to Project Mercury, which ultimately (in January 1962) became Project Gemini. The STG felt that such a wing could be deployed either before or after reentry to provide controlled glide and horizontal landing. Even on a lifting reentry body - NASA was giving "lifting body" technology considerable attention in relation to space station studies during this period (see the epilogue) -tests at Langley and other NASA facilities were showing that a parawing could improve the post-entry flight or landing characteristics.46

In early July 1961, a few weeks before the second manned Mercury flight by Gus Grissom, Gilruth's organization initiated three well-funded design study contracts on the paraglider concept with Ryan, North American, and Goodyear. Of these three companies, North American would eventually produce the most acceptable plan -a study to explore the parawing as an earth-landing system for Project Apollo.47 A few weeks later, the STG began requesting that studies of the Rogallo-type paraglider be conducted at NASA centers. At Langley this led, on 31 August, to a research authorization for "Free-Flight and Wind-Tunnel Tests of Guided Parachutes as Recovery Devices for the Apollo Type Reentry Vehicle." By late fall, all of this work came together as a formalized NASA paraglider development program, with Langley and Ames responsible for the wind-tunnel tests and the Flight Research Center for scheduling manned flight tests. Starting in mid-1963, 12 manned flight tests were actually made at Edwards with a so called Parasev.48

If the United States had not been in a hurry to go to the moon, the Rogallo paraglider might have been used as the capsule recovery system for Gemini and Apollo; of course, if the country had not been in such a hurry, it would not have gone to the moon at all in the 1960s -and perhaps would not have gone there ever. As it turned out, the paraglider became "hopelessly snarled in a financial, technical, and managerial morass."49 Richard Hallion recollects the specific problems encountered during the flight tests at Edwards:



Paraglider development involved solving major design difficulties in deploying the wing, ensuring that crew would have adequate control over the parawing-equipped craft, and providing stability, control, and handling qualities. The Flight Research Center's technical staff was never convinced that the scheme was workable. Eventually, because of poor test results and rising costs and time delays, the idea was dropped from Gemini in mid-1964 FRC engineers and pilots had believed that any vehicle so equipped might present a pilot with a greater flying challenge than contemporary advanced airplanes.


[386]

An early version of the single-seat Paraglider Research Vehicle ("Parasev") is test "flown" in Langley's Full-Scale Tunnel in January 1962. L-62-631.


These conclusions were based on experience. Flights with the small, singleseat experimental Parasev had proved extremely tricky even in the hands of experienced test pilots. The first machine, Parasev 1, flew as if "controlled by a wet noodle." As Hallion records, during one ground tow, a veteran NASA test pilot "got out of phase with the lagging control system and developed a rocking motion that got worse and worse; just as the tow truck started to slow, the Parasev did a wing-over into the lakebed, virtually demolishing the Parasev and injuring [the pilot], though not seriously." This was not the only time that a paraglider test vehicle would slam into the ground.50

The Parasev, built and rebuilt several times, eventually made over 100 flights at Edwards and showed enough progress that it might have proved feasible for capsule reentry if further developed. However, NASA could not wait for its maturation. Besides, the paraglider was "not absolutely necessary, being more technological frosting than cake.''51 NASA did not need an elegant reentry plan, just a workable one. By early 1964, NASA was committed to a water landing for Apollo. In mid-1964, Gemini's program [387] manager, Charles W. Mathews, a former Langley STG engineer, canceled the paraglider. Rogallo's idea would not fly anyone or anything back from space.

Rogallo never gave up on his pet concept and continued to develop it even after he retired and moved with Gertrude to Nags Head. There they spent all their time working on their paragliders for sport aviation and other applications. Before leaving NASA Langley, Rogallo and his colleagues in the Low-Speed Vehicle Branch had continued to explore a very broad spectrum of wing shapes and structures for his flexible wings. Never again, however, would his concept receive the same high level of NASA support and funding that it had received when linked to the manned space programs of the early 1960s. Nevertheless, a Parawing Project Office (under engineer Dewey L. Clemmons, Jr.) continued at Langley until 1967 and kept the research alive.
JoeF
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby JoeF » Sat May 18, 2013 7:08 pm

The North Carolina Cultural Resources had the following news release in year 2003:
NEWS RELEASE

Press Contacts: For Immediate Release
Susan Friday Lamb, 919-715-0200, ext. 313 July 17, 2003
John Campbell, 919-715-0200, ext. 243

Listing by County
AVIATION PIONEERS
WITH NORTH CAROLINA CONNECTIONS


Part of that NEW RELEASE was:
Francis Rogallo developed a flexible-wing hang glider, the Rogallo wing, over a period from the late 1940s to the 1960s. He is regarded as the father of the modern hang glider.
JoeF
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby JoeF » Sat May 18, 2013 8:13 pm

The North Carolina Cultural Resources had the following news release in year 2003:
NEWS RELEASE

Press Contacts: For Immediate Release
Susan Friday Lamb, 919-715-0200, ext. 313 July 17, 2003
John Campbell, 919-715-0200, ext. 243

Listing by County
AVIATION PIONEERS
WITH NORTH CAROLINA CONNECTIONS


Part of that NEW RELEASE was:
Francis Rogallo developed a flexible-wing hang glider, the Rogallo wing, over a period from the late 1940s to the 1960s. He is regarded as the father of the modern hang glider.


Comment: Fathering can mean many things. And "modern" has its challenges. Certainly contemporary hang gliders hold the gifts of thousands of people, many before Rogallo. So, it may be the pleasant adventure to follow the actual stories of all the people and see the flowering of both craft and activity. It is a challenge to see what has more or less effect; for instance, just how do wars and endings of wars affect psyches to invite certain responses to opportunities to play and fly? How does economics and materials play? What is the effect of communicating a certain focus when faced with national security, like facing Sputnik I ? Is Sputnik 1 a kind of "father" to the flowering of Rogallo hang gliders? Swimming in the various over-ten large rivers of influence that seemed to contribute to an accelerating blossoming of hang glider activity in 1960 forward can be exciting, fun, and even joyous. Bridging earlier hang gliding to the seeming renaissance were leaders like Waldo Waterman and Volmer Jensen; Waldo of 1910 hang gliding and Volmer Jensen from 1941 hang gliding were distinct leaders in the new renaissance by funds, example, communications, and refreshed craft within the new renaissance. Rogallo was one of the "fathers" of hang gliding in the renaissance; part of the media wrote "Rogallo Revolution" for the public's eye; space race and communications from NASA, as such had large impact on participation over craft that had full mechanism already in public domain; no new invention was required to have the craft that made most of the hang gliders of the mid-1900s renaissance; but from the Rogallo wing invention of fully limp (allowing stiffening) with the serendipity of position in NASA and the NASA need, came a flow to have kite-gliders thrusted to high center for high national need that actually had already been much earlier invented mechanically. The forces of security, the social temperature, the availability of time and materials, etc. were "fathers" of a flow; some emotional aspects of society seemed to be a "father" of the HG renaissance of mid last century.
Thomas H. Purcell, Jr. is a candidate for "fathering" via his works and strong plan push. Palmer is candidate for "father" with his strong building and sharing that went very far in echo, even echo into the bowels of National Geographic to show the world Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired easy of hang gliding. Part of the Palmer flow wet the Soaring Society of America group of hang gliding determined guys; they organized and had a newsletter; they were looking at the very advanced Horten flying wing hang glider that predated 1960 and advanced materials like honeycomb Nomex; a guru of organizing was the editor of Soaring magazine, Richard Miller; he formed in mid-1960s the very focused Low, Slow and Out of Control newsletter for six editions; some in their group and he were hang gliding; about 30 guys in their group; plans were sold by Miller; Miller published a book in 1967 Without Visible Means of Support that spurred the hang gliding renaissance of that time. Palmer and Hobson already foot launched the four boomer Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired hang gliders of their own make in 1961 and 1962 respectively, and Prentice of UK at age 13 in 1960 had already got off the ground with his flex-wing hang glider inspired only by kites and early hang gliders and aviation in general, and others. John Worth in 1960-62 "wrote the book" on Rogallo wing hang gliders, as he and his friends would say; he is a candidate to be one of the fathers of the renaissance. Richard Miller had deep and abiding dedication; he soaked in history and then NASA and then Palmer to forward all via written communications, projects, invitation, sharing, publishing, meetings, etc. and had far reaching visions shared in his book; he gathered Bruce Carmichael and Lambie; Miller attracted my attention through his book; we made contract about publishing and Low & Slow was born; then Self-Soar Association; these reached into 23 nations before foot-launching even occurred in Australia (1971), though ski kiting was occurring in Australia to be a flow that meandering into the the huge solid flows elsewhere. Bill Moyes' athleticism for flying seemed to "father" many HG children; Bill Bennett has been considered by many as "Uncle Bill" for HG sake. Many children of many fathers from many places! Self-Soar Association honored in its publications as many "fathers" as could be found, but chose Otto Lilienthal to head the membership card with "Otto Memberships." Otto seemed to be some seminal "father" to modern hang gliding, as he starkly distinguished himself from the earlier hang gliders who mostly hurt themselves in first trials; he went 2000 controlled flights before meeting death from a crash in one of his very many hang gliders. Perhaps Gustave Whitehead will one day be seen as one of the fathers of modern hang gliding for virtue of his teaching in a patent in the first decade of the 1900s of battened flex-wing with hung pilot using lower control frame for shifting weight of pilot relative to the attitude of the wing. And there are local "fathers" where one person has a mentor of hang gliding; an imprint occurs frequently when a mentor or coach helps one have a first free-flight where one runs and enters free-flight with a wing of any sort. On "Father's Day" ... each will have his or her choice for various reasons. The big renaissance of hang gliding participation that grew from 1960 onwards was a vitality that was from life before 1960 but nurtured by many feeding sources that tease one to call "father" or "mother" or "uncle" or "instructor" or "mentor" or "friend." Having a flow of such givers and communicators that help blossom personal free-flight in kite gliders seems to me a generous blessing worthy of persistent gratitude. To respect as many of them as possible, we have chances to share the stories involved. This topic thread is about two of those persons: Francis Melvin Rogallo and Gertrude Sugden Rogallo, perhaps "parents" of the "Rogallo Revolution" rather than hang gliding itself; what say you? Please consider starting a topic thread on your HG "father" or "mother" or "mentor" or "parents" ... There is room to story the full flow of modern hang gliding (and ancient too), etc. :!: :idea:
JoeF
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby JoeF » Sun May 19, 2013 12:00 am

It might be a challenge to link to the source page, so a text editorial study copy of the text is here displayed below.

This regards the artifact from Peter Brock to Francis Rogallo, a Rogallo-NASA-Ryan-inspired UP Products hang glider using public domain arts as well as detail parts especially designed by Peter Brock. Francis use the wing at Kitty Hawk and later donated the artifact ship to the North Carolina Cultural Resources. Some of the statements made internally toward the artifact are interpretive and perhaps too fuzzy or inaccurate. Invite study discussion on any point.
I will attempt a linking to the source page:arrow: HERE.

Sorry for ALL CAPS, as that is the presentation at the site. wrote:Image
HANG GLIDER
Image
Accession #: H.1993.510.1
Agency: Museum of History
Date Made: 1970-1980
Dimensions (English): [Lt]28' 5/8" [Wdt]8' 7 9/16" [Ht]6 1/2"
Dimensions (Metric): [Lt]855.0 cm [Wdt]263.0 cm [Ht]16.5 cm
Category: TRANSPORTATION EQUIPMENT
Class:
Alternate Name:
Signature/Marks:
Description: BROCK 82 MODEL; RED & WHITE SAIL OF SYNTHETIC MATERIAL; 3 ALUMINUM TUBES FORM TRIANGULAR SHAPE & JOIN TOGETHER AT TOP; ALUMINUM TUBE FORMS CROSS-BRACE; TRAPEZE SEAT; INSIDE CENTER TUBES ARE 2 FISHING RODS W/ RED FLAGS TO GAUGE WIND.
Vessel Name:
Title:
Associations: ULTRALIGHT PRODUCTS/MAKER - --GREAT SALT LAKE SAILS\MAKER OF SAIL --ROGALLO, FRANCIS M.\DESIGNER\DONOR
Place Made:
Place Used: USA NORTH CAROLINA DARE KITTY HAWK
Use History: THIS GLIDER WAS MADE FOR USE IN THE SPORT OF HANG GLIDING, WHICH COMBINES WIND AND MUSCLE POWER FOR FLIGHT.
Style:
Maker: ULTRALIGHT PRODUCTS
How Made:
Materials: ALUMINUM --PLASTIC
EXPANDED DESCRIPTION:
THIS ORIGINAL ROGALLO FLEXIBLE-WING GLIDER, THE BROCK 82, FEATURES A LARGE TRIANGULAR SAIL SUPPORTED BY AN ALUMINUM FRAME WITH A SUSPENDED SEAT UNDERNEATH NEAR THE TOP POINT OF THE TRIANGLE. THE HANGGLIDER HAS A TRIANGULAR REPRODUCTION SAIL THAT IS RED AND WHITE AND IS MADE OF SYNTHETIC MATERIAL. WRITTEN ON THE WHITE PORTION OF THE SAIL ON THE RIGHT REAR SIDE IS "BROCK" IN BLACK LETTERS. THREE BLACK ALUMINUM TUBES FORM THE TRIANGULAR SHAPE AND JOIN TOGETHER AT TOP. AN ALUMINUM TUBE ALSO FORMS THE CROSS-BRACE. THE INSIDE CENTER TUBES ARE TWO FISHING RODS WITH RED FLAGS AND FUNCTION AS A WIND GAUGE. A TRAPEZE SEAT, MADE OF FABRIC AND PLASTIC, HANGS INSIDE THE CONTROL TRIANGLE FROM THE CENTER OF THE CONTROL ROD. THE SEAT HAS A BLUE PADDED STRIP ACROSS THE BACK TO SUPPORT THE BACK OF THE GLIDER. THE SEAT ALSO HAS TWO GRAY STRAPS WITH BUCKLES THAT SECURE THE GLIDER'S LEGS TO THE SEAT. THERE IS A STRAP THAT EXTENDS UNDER THE SEAT AND COMES TOGETHER AT THE POINT OF THE TRIANGLE FRAME TO ATTACH THE SEAT TO THE FRAME. THE ENTIRE CONSTRUCTION CAN BE ROLLED AND INSERTED INTO A RED CANVAS CARRYING CASE THAT MEASURES EIGHTEEN FEET LONG WITH A BLACK HANDLE.

HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE:
FRANCIS M. ROGALLO, KNOWN AS THE "FATHER OF THE SPORT OF HANG GLIDING", WAS BORN IN CALIFORNIA AND LATER MOVED TO KITTY HAWK, NORTH CAROLINA. HE RECEIVED A PATENT FOR THE FLEXIBLE-WING GLIDER IN 1951. IN 1995 ROGALLO AND HIS WIFE GERTRUDE WERE INDUCTED INTO THE FIRST FLIGHT SHRINE BY THE FIRST FLIGHT SOCIETY OF KITTY HAWK.
JoeF
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2527
Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 3:41 pm

Re: Francis Melvin Rogallo, Gertrude Sugden Rogallo

Postby Rick Masters » Mon Jan 12, 2015 8:25 am

Image
Army Research and Development Newsmagazine
June 1961
http://asc.army.mil/docs/pubs/alt/archi ... n_1961.PDF
Rick Masters
User avatar
Contributor
Contributor
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Fri Jul 15, 2011 5:11 am

Forum Statistics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Bing [Bot] and 2 guests

Options

Return to Hang Gliding Historical Committee

cron