Re: ABC News and Discovery Channel - long

["James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>]

MKIRKALDY@aol.com wrote:

> Dear Jim,
>
> >  Gary Osoba holds several world records in ultra-light gliders similar to
> >  Qn in performance.  He flew for us for the Discovery News piece.  Do you
> >  think the list would be interested in his comments about the flights and
> >  applications suited to the animals' needs, and if so, may I forward them
> >  to the list?
> Yes, I think that would be very interesting to read and applicable to what
> we have been talking about the last several months.  Put his comments
> in the context that you have stated above.  We certainly wouldn't have
> access to this knowledge otherwise.
>
> >  Please be aware that in these communications we didn't
> >  highlight the areas of speculation vs. solid knowledge.
> Label it as expert opinion, which is the best we have, and what
> the basis for it is.  You might want to make some comments outside
> the communication.

Actually, I would call it a preliminary look at possibilities based on informed
opinion.

> >  PS. At SVP, Wann and I are on at noon on the Thursday.
> Great!  I will be sure to be there.  Are you competing with anyone
> else at that time period?  That is also good in that you won't miss the
> TADLG breakfast.

Subject:         ABC News/Discovery Channel & Soaring
   Date:         Thu, 15 Jul 1999 23:34:35 -0500
   From:         Gary Osoba <go777@fn.net>
     To:           hang-gliding@lists.utah.edu

Earlier this week, I had the privilege of hosting a film crew from ABC
News, New York. They produce some of the programming for the Discovery
Channel, including a regular weekly feature entitled "Discovery News".
Although the work we did is certainly not as glitzy as that done for the
upcoming "Thomas Crown Affair", hopefully it will do some good in
promoting soaring concepts while capturing the attention of the general
public.

Delegates who attended the Knoxville Convention may recall a
presentation given by Jim Cunningham of Memphis about ancient flying
reptiles. Jim and Dr. Juan Langston of Texas University are particularly
keen on the largest Pterosaurs, the QN (for short) species. Fossilized
remains found in the region of Marfa, TX indicate adults with wing spans
of up to 39 feet and wing loadings in the range of 4 pounds per square
foot. The species evidently flourished by soaring in this area, lending
some credence to the notion that good soaring sites evidently remain
good for a very long time!

After researching the species and postulating various flight
environments and methods which it may have utilized, I was contacted
about some modern-day flight practices in gliders of very light wing
loadings which I have written about. Some on this list are familiar with
a term I coined a few years ago, "Microlift Techniques", and the
strategies employed thereby. Flying gliders which not only allow a pilot
to feel with  greater sensitivity the texture of the air, but possess
reasonable levels of performance at relatively slow speeds, much more
can be accomplished than conventional soaring wisdom would dictate.

We have only to look at the natural world and soaring birds to see that
great finesse, in combination with relatively modest performance, can
produce wondrous results. What serious soaring pilot has not been
awestruck upon observing a vulture or other raptor flying from horizon
to horizon at a few hundred feet....never circling.....penetrating
against a 20 or 25 knot wind....but never losing altitude due to his
carefully executed undulations and articulations?

Can we become more like the birds?

I believe so.

When originally contacted about demonstrating some of these Microlift
Techniques for a piece about the ancient Pterosaurs and their possible
flying methods in the near-earth regime, we envisioned utilizing the
prototype Carbon Dragon. This glider is presently unique in all the
world, possessing certain soaring capabilities which must be experienced
to be fully appreciated. Examples include safe climb-outs over flat
terrain from altitudes as low as 65 feet, as verified by barograms and
FAI Observers. Or completing cross-country distances and speeds which
don't add up when applying conventional MacCready formulae, sometimes
exceeding such by two-fold or more. In fact, it is a somewhat well-kept
secret that this type of flight, which most emulates natural flight, is
the type of flight which has captured the visionary imagination of my
friend Dr. Paul MacCready for many years now.

As filming time approached, gusty winds on the order of 25-40 mph were
forecasted. Not the best plan for the Carbon Dragon which flies at a
mere 2.25 pounds per square foot. The next generation of Ultralight
Sailplanes, which several dedicated designers are working on, will have
no trouble with these and stronger conditions and will exhibit superior
performance over a broad speed range. On the other hand, we now have at
the  disposal of our soaring research foundation an excellent little
Woodstock due to the generosity of Californian Bob Witte. The Woodstock
One has a span identical to the QN Pterosaur and a wing loading which is
very close to that postulated for the ancient reptile. It also has very
nimble handling and I have, to some extent, been able to utilize
Microlift Techniques with this design. Relatively low climbouts;
extended ridge lift from tree lines; and, serpentine extraction of
energy from both horizonal and vertical eddies which are not organized
like thermals (Vulture from horizon to horizon). Probably very much like
the techniques used by the by flying Pterosaurs. So, the decision was
made to do the filming with this glider.

As it turned out, we were able to demonstrate all three methods for
ground based and in-flight cameras, along with all the standard soaring
repertoire: take-offs, aerotows, typical thermal flight, approaches and
landings. How much of that will be applicable in a relatively short
piece about the QN species and its possible flight techniques, I don't
know. But it was all very positive and every little bit helps, right?

I was concerned about being able to demonstrate the serpetine methods I
so enjoy. Performance more on the order of the Carbon Dragon and
atmospheric conditions better than we had to work with make this much
easier. Nevertheless, we filmed a segment of nearly 30 minutes where I
was flying into a 30 mph headwind, through a trackless sky over flat
terrain, but maintained level flight the entire time through a senitive
feel and almost constant variation in pitch and heading.

It was a very satisfying "shoot", and the crew left for home much amazed
at the beauty of soaring flight. The producer remarked that she would
"never, ever again look at the sky, a cloud, or a bird in the same way
she had all her life".

I guess I talked a lot.

Best Regards,
Gary Osoba

Subject:         ABC News/Discovery Channel & Soaring
   Date:         Sat, 17 Jul 1999 19:15:32 -0700
   From:         "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
     To:         go777@fn.net, hang-gliding@lists.utah.edu



Hi Gary,
Thanks for the help last week. Sorry I couldn't come up to Wichita for
your flight. I was having one of those weeks where there weren't enough
hours in the day, and I didn't think you needed any input from me
anyway.  I'll be in contact by land line in the next day or so.
Best wishes -- and more thanks than I know how to express.  A few more
comments follow.
Jim Cunningham

Gary Osoba wrote:

> Delegates who attended the Knoxville Convention may recall a
> presentation given by Jim Cunningham of Memphis about ancient flying
> reptiles. Jim and Dr. Juan Langston of Texas University are particularly
> keen on the largest Pterosaurs, the QN (for short) species. Fossilized

> remains found in the region of Marfa, TX indicate adults with wing spans
> of up to 39 feet and wing loadings in the range of 4 pounds per square

> foot. The species evidently flourished by soaring in this area, lending
> some credence to the notion that good soaring sites evidently remain
> good for a very long time!

It's 'Wann' rather than 'Juan', Actually, we are keen on the smaller
Quetzalcoatlus (Quetzalcoatlus species) which had only a 16 foot
wingspan, but left a lot more remains.  However, we've discovered that
most everyone who talks to us is more interested in the larger
Quetzalcoatlus northropi (span about 35.96 feet give or take a foot or
so -- 39 feet is not impossible, but the only extant specimen of Qn
wasn't nearly that big -- nor was Arambourgiana at about 90% the size of
Qn -- to give another impression of size, it was about 17 feet from Qn's
shoulder to the tip of his snout). Wann was to have been my co-speaker
at Knoxville. But when he was unable to make it at the last minute, Paul
MacCready was kind enough to step in and replace him.  In fact, I made
the talk at Paul's request.  Interacting with either is an honor -- with
both amounts to walking in tall cotton.  When ABC asked if they could
come to Memphis and interview me, I suggested that they meet me in
Austin instead so Wann could be involved, and sicced 'em on you too,
since I thought your input would be an invaluable contribution to
paleontology.  This coming October, Wann and I are presenting a paper at
the annual SVP (Society of Vertebrate Paleontology) conference in Denver
if any of you guys are interested. The working title is 'A Skeletal
Mechanism With Application to Automatic Gust Load Alleviation in the
Azhdarchid Wing' (or something like that -- I figured if I made the
title long enough, I could shorten up the talk).  Perhaps (pretty please
with sugar on top), sometime you might consider submitting an abstract
to the SVP about possible lift generation mechanisms used by early birds
and pterosaurs.

> We have only to look at the natural world and soaring birds to see that
> great finesse, in combination with relatively modest performance, can
> produce wondrous results. What serious soaring pilot has not been
> awestruck upon observing a vulture or other raptor flying from horizon

> to horizon at a few hundred feet....never circling.....penetrating
> against a 20 or 25 knot wind....but never losing altitude due to his
> carefully executed undulations and articulations?

How true -- and well said, too.  I would mention that during their span
of dominance, pterosaurs' soaring efficiency appears to have been enough
greater than that of coexisting birds, that no soaring birds were able
to develop until they were gone, and that no known bird ever achieved
more than 2/3 the span of the largest known pterodactyls.  Pterosaurs
developed about 70 million years prior to birds, overlapped with them
for about 70 million years, and birds have survived them by about 65
million years. Currently, only the frigate birds and albatrosses can
come close to matching their apparent soaring efficiency, though neither
type of bird has a matching life style.

> Can we become more like the birds?

> I believe so.

Me too, though I also believe a lot could be learned by studying the
similarities and differences between pterosaurs and birds.


> In fact, it is a somewhat well-kept
> secret that this type of flight, which most emulates natural flight, is
> the type of flight which has captured the visionary imagination of my
> friend Dr. Paul MacCready for many years now.

Which is one of the reasons that Paul built the half-scale flying
replica of Qn a few years back.  Occasionally, you still see it on the
Discovery channel.

> The Woodstock
> One has a span identical to the QN Pterosaur and a wing loading which is
> very close to that postulated for the ancient reptile.

A waffle on my part here.  Qn had a span of about 36 feet or a tad less,
and a wing area of about 77-80 square feet, not counting the leg, tail,
and uropatagium, which were used to create uploads, downloads, and
yawing moments.  We are some months from completing our new weight
estimate for the animal, but it appears that it will fall in the 330-380
pound range, and Greg Paul thinks it may have been as high as 440
pounds.  We'll see. In any event, the wing loading could have varied
from about 3 to 5 psf.

> with this design. Relatively low climbouts;
> extended ridge lift from tree lines;

Qn probably used this in feeding runs.

> and, serpentine extraction of
> energy from both horizonal and vertical eddies which are not organized

> like thermals (Vulture from horizon to horizon).

Or perhaps from the disturbed flow across the long, skinny overflow
lakes they appear to have fed from.  They also could have used it as
Gary describes it when migrating from drainage basin to drainage basin
along the coast of the Cretaceous Sea that ran up through Kansas.  When
feeding, they flew in ground effect, when traveling they would have been
at heights similar to those vultures usually use.  The heat energy
available from the Cretaceous atmosphere appears to have been
substantially greater than is presently available, and the density also
appears to have been a bit higher, but not to an extent that would have
greatly affected their flight style.

> Probably very much like
> the techniques used by the by flying Pterosaurs. So, the decision was
> made to do the filming with this glider.

A good decision.  Thanks.

> How much of that will be applicable in a relatively short
> piece about the QN species and its possible flight techniques, I don't
> know. But it was all very positive and every little bit helps, right?

Don't expect much to survive.  But I plan to get a tape of your entire
segment, and I promise you I will find it invaluable as a research tool,
and will hang on every word you say.

The part of my interview I expect to survive is the one where we were
doing a retake and I told Wann what kind of a fool I felt like (with the
appropriate alliterative adjective modifying fool), and then I realized
my remote mike was still running, and I'd just told everybody what I
thought.

> I was concerned about being able to demonstrate the serpetine methods I
> so enjoy.

This I gotta see!

> Performance more on the order of the Carbon Dragon and
> atmospheric conditions better than we had to work with make this much
> easier.

Actually, except for drag, the Woodstock is probably closer to Qn's
probable performance than the Dragon.  I didn't know you had a Woodstock
when I suggested you and the Dragon to Sue.

> Nevertheless, we filmed a segment of nearly 30 minutes where I
> was flying into a 30 mph headwind, through a trackless sky over flat
> terrain, but maintained level flight the entire time through a senitive
> feel and almost constant variation in pitch and heading.

How much distance were you able to cover during that time?

> It was a very satisfying "shoot", and the crew left for home much amazed
> at the beauty of soaring flight. The producer remarked that she would
> "never, ever again look at the sky, a cloud, or a bird in the same way
> she had all her life".

Sue is quite a lady, and I found working with her to be a privilege.  I
think the rest of your crew was different from mine.

> I guess I talked a lot.

Me and Wann, too -- and the folks at Carnegie where the full-scale
skeletal replica is hanging.  Oh well, just gives 'em more to cut.

> Best Regards,
>Gary Osoba

Me too, some more.
Jim Cunningham

Subject:
        Re: ABC News/Discovery Channel & Soaring
   Date:         Sat, 17 Jul 1999 21:27:18 -0500
   From:         Gary Osoba <go777@fn.net>
     To:         "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
    CC:         hang-gliding@lists.utah.edu



Hi Jim:

> I was concerned about being able to demonstrate the serpetine methods I
> so enjoy. Nevertheless, we filmed a segment of nearly 30 minutes where >I was
flying into a 30 mph headwind, through a trackless sky over flat
> terrain, but maintained level flight the entire time through a sensitive
> feel and almost constant variation in pitch and heading.

You asked:

"How much distance were you able to cover during that time?"

About 15 miles. It was plenty windy. Another pilot flying with a
Cambridge data logger during the same time period reported winds closer
to 40 mph at points. I'm anxious to see the footage during this period
which was taken from a POV camera on the left wingtip looking inward.
During this type of flight, rapid variations in heading are much more
pronounced than variations in velocity. But usually there isn't time for
bank angles to develop to the order of circling angles before a
correction the other direction must be made in order to follow what is
often a knife's edge of a Microlift string. We'll have to see how it
looks on camera. The key was no circling at all for this stretch... just
rapid sensing and reponse.

> and, serpentine extraction of energy from both horizonal and vertical eddies
which are not organized
> like thermals (Vulture from horizon to horizon).

Jim again:

"Or perhaps from the disturbed flow across the long, skinny overflow
lakes they appear to have fed from.  They also would have used it as
Gary describes it when migrating from drainage basin to drainage basin
along the coast of the Cretaceous Sea that ran up through Kansas.  When
feeding, they flew in ground effect, when traveling they would have been
at heights similar to those vultures usually use."

I spent some time looking at ground effect efficiencies using the max
wing CsubL of 1.65 which the producer said you supplied her. Along with
the other parameters, I suspect these reptiles had reasonably good
performance while skimming across the top of water. I neglected to
mention that I tried to simulate this for the film crew as well,
descending with some extra speed into the ground effect and then
skimming a foot or so off the ground for about a third of a mile into
the wind. On the first of such runs, I told the producer I would try to
end the ground effect run as close as I could to my start point and the
tow rope.... rolled out, without brake or spoilers, to less than an inch
from the tow ring. The film crew was pretty impressed as earlier they
had expressed the common misconceptions about controllability, landing
precision without an engine, etc.

All in all, a very enjoyable time. I appreciate being able to work with
you on this Jim, and hope the story works out well.

Best Regards,
Gary Osoba

Subject:         Re: ABC News/Discovery Channel & Soaring
   Date:         Sat, 17 Jul 1999 21:26:56 -0700
   From:         "James R. Cunningham" <jrccea@bellsouth.net>
     To:         go777@fn.net
    CC:         hang-gliding@lists.utah.edu

Gary Osoba wrote:

> You asked:
> "How much distance were you able to cover during that time?"
>
> About 15 miles.

Pretty durned good.  So my animals could have covered some substantial ground
during the course of a day, even without flapping.  They were very
effective at flapping flight, but their fuel burn was exorbitant when doing so.

> I spent some time looking at ground effect efficiencies using the max
> wing CsubL of 1.65 which the producer said you supplied her.

This is steady-state CsubL max at high aspect ratio with wings extended.
Steady-state they could do perhaps 50% better when they had their wings in
'Concorde' mode, semi-retracted with wrists forward and tips well back, forming
a 'double delta'.  But with a very high drag penalty useful only
during a landing approach. Needless to say, they could do better still when
flapping, and without the drag penalty, but they wouldn't have done much
flapping while traveling.  A pigeon can actually bump his steady-state CsubL
max of 1.54 up to 3.4 when flapping, but a big pterodactyl couldn't do
so well because of the reduced flapping frequency relative to the smaller bird.

> Along with the other parameters, I suspect these reptiles had reasonably good

> performance while skimming across the top of water.

They did, and could flap when necessary to achieve extra thrust.  The
azhdarchid wing was quite capable of absorbing an occasional 'whap' on the
water, and had special modifications to allow the wing to be relatively shorter
than a pteranodontid pterodactyl of the same mass (if such ever
existed -- fragmentary evidence exists that there may have been at least one).
Typically, Qn would feed from a HAG (height above ground) of about
8-9 feet at 25%-30% of wingspan.

> I neglected to mention that I tried to simulate this for the film crew as
well,
> descending with some extra speed into the ground effect and then
> skimming a foot or so off the ground for about a third of a mile into
> the wind.

Great, though you were relatively a bit lower than the animal would have been,
so your savings in induced drag would have been more substantial.  I
gotta see that sequence.

> All in all, a very enjoyable time. I appreciate being able to work with
> you on this Jim, and hope the story works out well.

Same here, in spades.

Jim