Lockheed YP-24
Enable an agent to identify the Lockheed YP-24 aircraft design, distinguish its documented prototype configuration from proposals and related aircraft, and judge what historical or technical conclusions the evidence permits.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
6 bundles · 11 layers · 16 findings · 26 questions
Identity and design boundaries Establish which design the YP-24 entry denotes and which related names require separate treatment.
Designation continuity
Connect names to the design through dated documentary evidence.
XP-900 and YP-24 correspondence
Determine the documented relationship between company and military labels without treating a designation change as a new type.
- Which contemporary records establish whether XP-900 and YP-24 identify the same design and prototype? provenance
- Which manufacturer attribution and designation spelling should be preferred, and which should remain searchable aliases? definition
Antecedents and derivatives
Locate the YP-24 within its design lineage without absorbing neighbouring aircraft.
Related-design separation
Record inherited features and substantive changes relative to the Altair, proposed attack derivative and subsequent Consolidated designs.
- Which Altair components or design features were retained, and which changes define the YP-24 pursuit configuration? boundary
- Which records distinguish the proposed Y1A-9 and subsequent Consolidated Y1P-25 from the YP-24 rather than treating them as interchangeable names? boundary
Airframe and crew configuration Describe the physical arrangement needed to recognise and compare the YP-24.
Structure and geometry
Resolve external form, dimensions and construction by major assembly.
Airframe identification baseline
Build a configuration baseline from dimensioned drawings and attributable photographs.
- What span, length, height and wing area are documented, and do the values describe the built prototype or a proposal? measurement
- What evidence establishes the wing, fuselage and tail construction separately, particularly any wood-versus-metal distinctions? provenance
Crew stations and visibility
Record how the pursuit mission shaped accommodation and observation.
Two-seat mission arrangement
Resolve crew positions, duties, enclosure and access without importing arrangements from derivatives.
- How were the two crew stations arranged, and what duties and controls were assigned to each? definition
- Which photographs or drawings establish canopy arrangement, access and visibility restrictions for the YP-24 itself? provenance
Propulsion and retractable gear Capture the installations that determine power delivery, ground handling and configuration changes in flight.
Engine and propeller
Establish the installed propulsion configuration and its supporting systems.
Conqueror installation evidence
Resolve the reported Curtiss Conqueror installation through engine and airframe records.
- Which records confirm the installed Curtiss engine designation and distinguish it from engines specified for related proposals? provenance
- What power rating, propeller arrangement, cooling provisions and fuel specifications apply to the documented installation? measurement
Landing gear system
Describe retraction, extension and the evidence for abnormal gear states.
Gear operation and failure evidence
Separate the documented mechanism and failure observations from later explanations.
- How was the YP-24 undercarriage actuated, locked and indicated, and what emergency extension provisions are documented? definition
- What contemporary evidence supports accounts linking a landing-gear malfunction to the prototype's loss? provenance
Pursuit role and performance Relate intended military use to equipment, loading and demonstrated capability.
Mission equipment
Distinguish pursuit requirements from equipment actually fitted.
Armament and role baseline
Track the status of each military equipment claim and its effect on the crew and loading configuration.
- What pursuit tasks were specified, and how was the second crew member intended to contribute? definition
- Which weapons and associated equipment were proposed, installed or tested on the YP-24, and which claims belong only to the attack derivative? boundary
Flight evaluation
Tie reported capability to test conditions and evidence quality.
Measured versus predicted performance
Retain the distinction between specification figures and flight-test results.
- Which speed, climb, ceiling and range figures were measured, and at what mass, altitude and engine setting? measurement
- Which Army Air Corps evaluation requirements or acceptance criteria are documented, and what evidence shows whether the prototype met them? provenance
Programme record and evidence use Connect the prototype's history to defensible statements about the aircraft type.
Prototype and procurement history
Resolve what existed, what was ordered and why development ended.
Built versus planned aircraft
Establish the chronology and evidence status of prototype construction, evaluation and follow-on plans.
- Which serial, delivery and flight records establish the number of completed YP-24 airframes and their chronology? provenance
- Which documents distinguish technical setbacks, procurement decisions and corporate financial events in the programme's termination? provenance
Attribution and permitted inference
Define the evidence needed to classify representations and use technical claims responsibly.
Historical identification confidence
Require traceable evidence when attributing photographs, drawings, components or reconstructed configurations to the YP-24.
- What combination of caption provenance, configuration details and date is sufficient to attribute an image or drawing to the YP-24? action
- Which comparisons or reconstruction decisions must remain unresolved when configuration drawings, test reports or component provenance are missing? 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 Lockheed YP-24 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 Lockheed YP-24 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 Lockheed YP-24 this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Typical measurements
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of Lockheed YP-24 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 Lockheed YP-24 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 Lockheed YP-24 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
What it is Filled
The Lockheed YP-24 was an American experimental two-seat, single-engine, low-wing fighter aircraft with retractable landing gear, first flown in 1931 and built as a single prototype for evaluation by the United States Army Air Corps.
In scope
- YP-24 designation, manufacturer attribution and association with the XP-900 designation
- Airframe configuration and distinguishing relationships to the Lockheed Altair and subsequent pursuit designs
- Propulsion, retractable undercarriage, crew stations and intended military equipment
- Configuration-specific dimensions, performance and evaluation evidence
- Prototype history and the distinction between proposed, ordered, built and demonstrated capabilities
Out of scope
- Independent lifecycle records for individual airframes, surviving components or replicas
- Complete models of the Lockheed Altair and related Consolidated aircraft
- Separate publication of proposed attack derivatives as though they were built YP-24 configurations
- General histories of Lockheed, Detroit Aircraft Corporation or the Army Air Corps
- Generic aircraft operation, maintenance procedures and present-day flight authorization
Why it exists Filled
Enable an agent to identify the Lockheed YP-24 aircraft design, distinguish its documented prototype configuration from proposals and related aircraft, and judge what historical or technical conclusions the evidence permits.
Distinguishing features Filled
- Check documentary identification against the museum's Detroit-Lockheed YP-24 attribution rather than accepting an isolated P-24 label. [National Museum of the USAF](https://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Upcoming/Photos/igphoto/2000543708/)
- Require the combination of a two-seat pursuit role, low-wing monoplane layout and retractable undercarriage; no single feature establishes YP-24 identity.
- Distinguish an Altair-derived pursuit configuration from an Altair transport by checking crew accommodation, fuselage configuration and military design documentation.
- Separate XP-900/YP-24 designation continuity from later Consolidated development: resemblance or shared ancestry alone does not establish the same aircraft type.
- Require evidence of an actual YP-24 installation before assigning equipment described for a proposed attack derivative to this entry.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Present later production derivatives as the same aircraft.
- Invent details where the record of a single prototype is thin.
- Assign blame for the prototype's loss to named people without evidence.
Only with a human decision
- Attributing parts or artefacts to the prototype.
May
- Identify photographs or drawings as this single experimental fighter.
- Describe its innovations, such as retractable gear, and its loss from historical sources.
Moral aspects Filled
- Prototype history credits designers and test pilots; misattribution wrongs them.
- Speculation fills gaps that sources do not support.
Who is affected
- Historians
- Descendants of designers and test pilots
Owners Filled
Steward
Nobody: the only example was lost; archives hold its records.
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q69129709 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.lockheed-yp-24
- Wikidata: Q4450165 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q4450165)
Direct properties required Filled
- Designation and documentary identity: Registry identity linked to dated manufacturer and military designations
- Configuration evidence state: proposed | ordered | built | installed | ground-tested | flight-tested | uncertain
- Crew arrangement: Seat count, station arrangement, enclosure and documented duties
- Airframe construction: Material and structural method recorded separately for wing, fuselage and tail
- Powerplant installation: Engine designation, cooling arrangement, propeller configuration and installation date
- Engine power rating: kW and source-stated hp, with rating conditions
- Geometry and loading: Span and length in m; wing area in m²; mass in kg, each with configuration and loading basis
- Undercarriage configuration: Retraction arrangement, actuation method, position indication and documented emergency provisions
- Performance evidence: Speed in km/h, altitude and range in m or km, climb in m/s; measured or estimated status required
Recognition required Filled
- Low-wing monoplane with a two-seat cockpit and retractable main gear.
- Liquid-cooled engine with a pointed nose.
- Early 1930s experimental markings in photographs.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Assess whether a photograph, drawing or catalogue record represents the YP-24 and report the confidence of that attribution.
- Reconcile manufacturer and military designations without creating additional registry entries.
- Compare the YP-24 with its transport antecedent and pursuit successors using documented configuration differences.
- Classify performance and equipment claims as proposed, installed or demonstrated.
- Identify which archival records are needed before accepting a reconstruction, technical comparison or historical claim.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Mechanical failure of novel landing gear led to the loss of the prototype.
- Untested combinations of features carried high test-flight risk.
Standards and interfaces required Filled
- The United States Army Air Corps assigned the official designation YP-24 within its pursuit aircraft designation system.
Context of use required Filled
- This aircraft was a single prototype developed for military evaluation as a two-seat pursuit aircraft in the early 1930s.
- It is encountered primarily in aviation histories, archival photographs and studies of aircraft design development.
- Its documented trials support discussion of the prototype configuration, while proposed capabilities require separate historical evidence.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q4450165: Lockheed YP-24 - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Lockheed YP-24 - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which primary records settle designation chronology, prototype serial identity and the number of completed airframes?
- What were the exact airframe materials, dimensions, engine variant and loading conditions of the flight-tested configuration?
- Which military equipment was physically installed or tested, rather than specified for a proposed pursuit or attack version?
- What does the contemporary accident record establish about the landing-gear malfunction, crew escape and prototype loss?
- Which performance figures and programme-termination explanations are supported by contemporary records rather than repeated retrospective accounts?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q4450165/spec.json