When did V1, VR, and speed bugs come into use?

[Shrikered]

I'm researching how flying methods changed over time. One development I'm interested in is the use of V1 speeds: 1) that a must go/ok to stop speed exists, 2) it should be calculated before each flight and depends on conditions, 3) the terminology of V1, V2, VR, etc.

WW2 bombers: Decision on whether to keep going was pure judgment, according to all the first-person accounts I have read.
V1 is mentioned in some DC-3 manuals from the 1950s, as a fixed /specified speed. As far as I can figure out, this is "incorrect," i.e. the correct V1 should always depend on weight and runway length, among other things.
What was the origin of formal calculations for V1 before each takeoff? Was it FAA/CAB mandated, or up to each airline?
Same questions for landing speeds VR.

And, when did speed bugs come into use? I've found several photos and an NTSB crash report that the DC-9 had a single speed bug, set by hand of course. The report was 1976. But for all I know, speed bugs could have been common 10 or 20 years earlier - I just have not found any references yet.
I've also seen mention of pilots carrying their own bugs with them, so they could add on additional ones.

Any anecdotes or other information would be appreciated, even six months from now. Thanks much.
Web site, with some discussion of this research among other things: Art2science.org

[FlightlessParrot]

A bit tangential, but it seems the Martin Marauder was an early example of an aircraft that had to be flown to pre-determined speeds, so it might appear in the pre-history of V speeds.

[4Greens]

Speed bugs were in use on B707's in Australia in 1967.

[safetypee]

I recall using a chinagraph grease pencil mark in a range of aircraft mid-late 70s (Dove, early 125, 748, and 1-11).
This was replaced by white plastic clip-on bugs mounted on the bezel of the 2ATI format instruments; these improved with colour variants and with widths proportional to 5 or 10 kt sped range depending on the speed scale.

[Herod]

I've been led to believe that the first study of V speeds was done by "Hazel" Hasleden when he was on the ETPS course in the late forties. Since he was involved with the flight testing of the Victor and the Dart Herald, I wouldn't be surprised. An real gentleman, who nursed me through line training on the F27. I soon realised he had forgotten more than I was ever likely to learn.

[Fareastdriver]

In the fifties and sixties Bomber Cammand runways had a line painted across the runway at 1500 ft. from the start point. On the Vickers Valiant you calculated the speed; dependent on weight, temperature, pressure altitude and headwind component; that which you had to pass over the line to confirm that all engines were providing the calculated thrust. You normally passed over it with an extra five knots or so and at that point the PNF would call "Up Five". Any "Down" call would require an abandoned takeoff. This was neccessary because in some scenarios the Stop Speed, where you could stop on the remaining length of runway in the event of an engine failure, was before the Safety Speed, where you could continue the takeoff.

[Brian Abraham]

Would have to get the books out to back up the statement, but was it not a result of the Comet take off accidents that brought the use of V speeds about?

[Spooky 2]

The earliest 707's had instruments that did not allow for speed bugs. Later when they changed the instrument lighting to an internal source white lighting, the bezel on the AS indicators allowed for the little white bugs that could be moved for the various takeoff and approach speeds.

Or at least that's how I remember it.

[thetimesreader84]

One of the old, bold former flight engineers that ran my ATPL brush up ground school, reckons that V1, V2 etc were introduced after the comet crash in Rome, where the crew tried to rotate 10kts below "flying speed"?

Also, He reckons that the performance factors we use today (clearing obstacles by 35ft in the dry, 15ft in the wet, screen heights of 50ft, needing 115% of LDR for landing, etc etc), was all based on what a Boeing 707 needed to takeoff / land in southern California in the summer. Any comments?

TTR

[safetypee]

Brian, the times; AFAIR the Comet takeoff accidents had grater relevance to Vmu / Vr, pich control power, and the difference between being stall-limited and geometry-limited before takeoff.

[clunckdriver]

First ran into speed bugs on the DC8, they were a retrofit, the DC9 came from the factory with them installed, {at our flight opps request I seem to recall} in the early sixties I think all our pure jet fleet had them, the Viscounts and Vangaurds managed to fly without them I think.

[RatherBeFlying]

I believe the former Air Canada Viscount simulator had them, but it's been a couple decades.

[JammedStab]

Still don't have them on some fairly big airplanes. Like the C-130/L382 Hercules(except perhaps the glass cockpit models).

Who needs bugs?

[BOAC]

Then of course we had 'VStop' and 'VGo' to complicate things.

Are these 'speed bugs' the little white things I used to find in the panel ledge below the ASI?

[Basil]

Didn't you just hate it when the neatness numpty shoved them all together and you had to get your perfectly manicured nails damaged prising them apart.
Thank God for glass!

[Centaurus]

and you had to get your perfectly manicured nails damaged prising them apart.

That is why some pilots always carried a nail file to prise open the bugs.

A Boeing test pilot in 1977 told me that in the Boeing 737-200 the original "Bug" was the moveable orange coloured triangular cursor on the ASI which was designed as the autothrottle cursor. He said that the width of that flat part of the cursor was such that it equalled five knots either side of the pointy end. I thought that was rather neat. So approaching at Vref +5 you simply ensured the ASI needle was aligned with the top end of the orange cursor. It was only valid at the lower end of the speed scale as the speed graduations were different at the higher end of the ASI.

Now Boeing use two white index moveable bugs and squeeze them together in order to depict Vref. The two white index pointers when squeezed together are supposed to average Vref. I prefer that Vref be depicted by one white index pointer personally. Not very good IMHO.. OMG - I must get a life away from Pprune...

[JammedStab]

Originally Posted by Centaurus

Now Boeing use two white index moveable bugs and squeeze them together in order to depict Vref. The two white index pointers when squeezed together are supposed to average Vref. I prefer that Vref be depicted by one white index pointer personally. Not very good IMHO..

Don't think that was done on the 727. We didn't anyways.

[MarkerInbound]

My understanding of why V1, Vr and V2 are all 84.2 knots in a DC-3 is that the plane did not have these numbers in 1936. At some point (maybe 1950s?) it was decided to impose them them upon it. Instead of of doing new flight testing on an already ancient airframe, they worked the regulatory math (can not be less than 1.2) off the stall speed which is based on max gross takeoff weight. Later on it was decided to change the speeds from mph to knots. That math brought about the 84.2 knots.

Yes, it was an oral question.

[cobol]

neatness numpty

Perhaps the neatness numpty, in his infuriating way, pushed all the ASI bugs together to prevent YOU taking off with the landing bug settings from the previous flight set on the ASI?

[clunckdriver]

Cobol, couldnt happen on anything I flew with bugs ,as on T/O we would have "two stowed" at the twelve o'clock position, these would only be used for landing phase to show various flap extension speeds, but some did find their "jollies" in stuffing them together, they would have been better employed cleaning up the crap left by some for the next crew to get rid of!