Douglas DT
Enable an agent to identify the Douglas DT aircraft family, distinguish its configurations, and assess what evidence is needed to interpret, preserve or evaluate a represented aircraft.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
5 bundles · 9 layers · 14 findings · 22 questions
DT identity and lineage Establish what belongs to the Douglas DT entry and how variant identities are supported.
Designation evidence
Connect DT names to authoritative records.
Variant attribution
Record the evidence needed to assign a DT suffix instead of inferring it from appearance or an abbreviated caption.
- Which original record establishes the full DT designation of the aircraft being described? provenance
- Which documented features distinguish that variant from other DT configurations? definition
Builders and related types
Separate manufacturing provenance from design lineage and registry membership.
Family membership
Preserve builder and conversion relationships while requiring evidence before including a separately named derivative.
- Which organisation designed the configuration, and which organisation manufactured the referenced aircraft? provenance
- Did a conversion retain a DT designation or become a separately designated type requiring a neighbouring model? boundary
DT airframe and landing configuration Describe the wing arrangement and landing equipment that govern identification, support and storage.
Biplane and wing fold
Separate flight geometry from stowage geometry.
Wing geometry and fold evidence
Record variant-specific wing geometry and folding provisions; Boeing describes the DT as a folding-wing aircraft. [Boeing historical product catalogue](https://www.boeing.com/content/dam/boeing/boeingdotcom/history/pdf/Boeing_Products.pdf)
- Which drawing or manual establishes the wing-fold arrangement for this DT variant? provenance
- Do the recorded span and storage dimensions refer to spread wings, folded wings or dismantled components? measurement
Wheels and floats
Describe landing-equipment alternatives and their attachment requirements.
Landing-equipment compatibility
Require configuration evidence before treating wheel and float installations as interchangeable on a particular DT example.
- Which wheel or float installation is documented for the variant and date under examination? provenance
- What attachment, clearance and support information must be established before proposing movement or display? action
DT powerplant and performance Tie propulsion and performance claims to a documented aircraft configuration.
Engine installation
Identify the engine and associated installation rather than assuming one specification covers every DT.
Powerplant configuration
Record engine identity, rated output and supporting systems against variant and conversion history.
- Which engine, propeller and cooling arrangement are supported by records for this DT configuration? definition
- Was the installation original, an experimental conversion or a later reconstruction? provenance
Configuration-qualified performance
Attach the conditions necessary to interpret quoted speed, range and loading.
Comparable performance values
Keep historical measurements separate from estimates and avoid transferring one configuration's values to another.
- What engine rating, landing equipment, load and test conditions accompany each quoted performance value? measurement
- Does a quoted mass represent empty weight, a test loading or an authorised limit? measurement
DT mission equipment and assessment Connect crew and torpedo-carriage arrangements to historical interpretation and evidence-based assessment.
Crew and torpedo installation
Record the configuration of crew positions and external mission equipment.
Mission-fit attribution
Distinguish the intended torpedo role from the crew accommodation and equipment documented for a particular configuration.
- How many crew positions are documented for this variant, and what functions were assigned to them? definition
- Which evidence identifies the original carriage installation and distinguishes it from removed, modified or replica equipment? provenance
Surviving fabric and permitted actions
Translate configuration and condition evidence into appropriate assessment boundaries.
DT assessment basis
Require evidence about wing bracing, folding joints, landing-equipment attachments and installed systems before recommending physical intervention.
- Which DT structural drawings and inspections establish the condition of the represented airframe and its critical attachments? provenance
- What evidence and competent authorisation support display, movement, restoration or operation of this particular example? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Kinds and varieties
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these kinds and varieties hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Identifiers and schemes
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of Douglas DT this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Classifiers Filled
- Family
- Thing Registry
- Category
- Physical world and living systems
- Entry kind
- thing
- Plane
- PHY
- Domain
- PHY.OBJ
- Other names and narrower kinds
- Douglas DT in service, DT-5, DT-1, DT-2, DT-2B, DT-4
What it is Filled
The Douglas DT was an American single-engine biplane torpedo-bomber aircraft family developed by the Douglas Aircraft Company in the early 1920s for the United States Navy, with wheeled and float-equipped configurations.
In scope
- Douglas DT family identity and documented variant boundaries
- Wheel-equipped and float-equipped configurations
- Airframe, propulsion, crew and torpedo-carriage interfaces
- Configuration-dependent dimensions, performance and limitations
- Historical identification and preservation assessment
Out of scope
- Individual aircraft ownership, inventory and maintenance logs as independent records
- Douglas Aircraft Company as an organisation
- Torpedo design and employment tactics
- Airfields, carriers and seaplane facilities
- Related aircraft types with separate identities
- Generic aviation regulations and pilot qualifications
Why it exists Filled
Enable an agent to identify the Douglas DT aircraft family, distinguish its configurations, and assess what evidence is needed to interpret, preserve or evaluate a represented aircraft.
Distinguishing features Filled
- Require a DT designation supported by a manufacturing, service or archival record; visual resemblance alone cannot establish membership.
- Check the single-engine biplane torpedo-aircraft configuration against the documented DT variant. The Navy identifies these features for the DT-2: [Naval History and Heritage Command](https://www.history.navy.mil/content/dam/nhhc/research/histories/naval-aviation/dictionary-of-american-naval-aviation-squadrons-volume-2/pdfs/appen1-1.pdf).
- Treat wheels versus floats as a configuration distinction to investigate, rather than sufficient evidence of a different aircraft family.
- Use the complete designation suffix and engine-installation history to distinguish original configurations from experimental conversions.
- Check whether a related Douglas aircraft retained DT identity or acquired a separate designation; shared ancestry does not establish registry equivalence.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Present a replica or restoration as an original airframe.
- Recommend flying a historic airframe without airworthiness approval.
- Glorify the aircraft's weapons role without historical context.
Only with a human decision
- Restoration decisions that would alter original historic material.
May
- Describe the history, variants and service of the Douglas DT from cited sources.
- Identify surviving examples and replicas from museum records.
Moral aspects Filled
- Historic military aircraft are heritage of naval aviation and the people who served.
- Restoration choices decide what history survives.
Who is affected
- Museums and heritage bodies
- Historians
- Veterans' families
Owners Filled
Steward
The museum or owner holding a surviving example.
Master systems
- Museum collection records
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q22672426 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.douglas-dt
- Wikidata: Q1252197 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1252197)
Direct properties required Filled
- Documented designation: DT family designation with full suffix; unresolved
- Designer and actual builder: Design organisation and manufacturing organisation linked separately to evidence
- Landing configuration: Wheels; floats; incomplete; unresolved
- Installed powerplant: Engine model, propeller and installation linked to variant and date
- Wing configuration: Spread; folded; partially folded; dismantled; unresolved
- Dimensions: Wingspan, length and height in m, retaining original units and configuration
- Mass and loading basis: kg, distinguishing empty, loaded and documented limiting mass
- Crew accommodation: Number and arrangement of crew positions by variant
- Torpedo-carriage installation: Documented original; modified; removed; replica; unresolved
- Represented example status: Historical record only; original material; reconstruction; replica; unresolved
Recognition required Filled
- A single-engine biplane with two open cockpits in tandem.
- Fitted either with wheels or with twin floats for operation from water.
- Straight, equal-span wings with struts and wire bracing.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Classify a photograph, drawing or aircraft record against documented DT variants.
- Compare wheel and float configurations using specifications tied to each configuration.
- Trace an engine conversion or redesignation without creating an unsupported new registry entry.
- Identify missing evidence before assigning a performance value or historical capability.
- Prepare a preservation or inspection brief focused on DT airframe and equipment interfaces.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Historic airframes and materials are fragile and deteriorate.
- Inaccurate restorations spread misinformation about the type.
Standards and interfaces required Filled
- The DT designation belongs to the torpedo aircraft category in the aircraft designation system adopted by the United States Navy in 1922.
Context of use required Filled
- This naval biplane was developed for aerial torpedo delivery, with configurations suited to operation from land or water.
- It is encountered in historical records and aviation collections concerning early naval aviation, torpedo aircraft and floatplane development.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q1252197: Douglas DT - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Douglas DT - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which DT variants, export designations and experimental conversions belong within this registry entry, and which require links to separate registered types?
- Which primary records reconcile conflicting production totals and distinguish newly built aircraft from conversions?
- What dimensions, engine ratings, crew arrangements and performance figures are authoritative for each wheel or float configuration?
- Which original DT manuals survive, and what do they establish about structural inspections, wing-fold securing provisions, consumables and maintenance limits?
- Do original DT airframes or substantial components survive, and what provenance distinguishes them from replicas or reconstructions?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q1252197/spec.json