The Burnelli Web Site
Evidence of Suppression and Official denial is overwhelming

September 19, 1939

The basic principle of the lifting fuselage as developed by V. J. Burnelli since 1919 is now in such an advanced stage that it in extremely important for the Air Corps to experiment further with it with a view to reducing it to military practice.

From studies of the research made by the Burnelli Co., the NACA and the Air Corps the military adaptability of the basic design has the following advantage over the orthodox streamlined deadweight fuselage.

    The coefficient or drag is the lowest known for any airplane today.

    The coefficient of lift is greater.

    The lifting fuselage has distinct advantages for the installation of power plants, bombs, armament and all other accessories over the 'streamlined fuselage.

    From wind tunnel tests already conducted by the NACA and NYU the performance is exceptionally good in every phase.

    The design embodies extremely good-factors of safety -- considerably higher than the streamlined fuselage type.

    The design is simple of construction and in the opinion of the Air Corps lends itself to high speed production better than any design and therefore the valuable time element involved in all production contracts can be taken advantage of to its fullest extent.

It is apparently a cheaper airplane to build because of the time element referred to in 6 above.

It is to be remembered that Mr. Burnelli was the first to reduce to practice the use of smooth skin surface on airplanes in cooperation with the Material Division under Maj. Carl Green's supervision.

We understand that the present company has no affiliation with the British Company manufacturing under the Burnelli patents. We are informed by the company that the British have built one commercial article under the designs of a ship built by Mr. Burnelli in 1929, and that this design only resembles the designs submitted to the Air Corps in basic principles We also understand that this airplane was tested at Farnsborough by the RFC with excellent results, substantiated by a cable from the British manufacturer, a copy of which we have.

We have also seen articles in various British technical magazines that are extremely flattering to the basic design involved and the report of the test pilot, Mr. Clyde Pangborn, would indicate that the design embodies extremely good flying qualities under all conditions of a very severe flight teat required by the RFC

It is, therefore, the opinion of the Air Corps that this project should be carried through to its fullest experimental possibilities and probably to the ultimate conclusion for the purchase of a prototype.

I am informed by the Burnelli Company that in an effort to cooperate with the Air Corps they have proceeded with the required work and at this moment it in seventy percent completed.

In my opinion it is essential in the interest of the national defense that this procurement be authorized [emphasis added]

      COPY of letter prepared by officers of Engineering Divisions at Washington for signature of General Arnold to Secretary of War.

Correspondence is listed in Chronological order
March 29, 1995 to present day (1 - 33)
(All correspondence since March 29, 1995 is present)

1. Mar 29, 1995 Burnelli letter to NASA 2. May 5, 1995-NASA response 3. Aug. 10, 1995-Burnelli letter to NASA General Counsel
4. Aug. 31, 1995-NASA response 5. Sept. 6, 1995-Burnelli responds to NASA Sr. Patent Atty 6. Sep. 20, 1995-Burnelli to NASA re: lifting body research project
7. Sept. 21, 1995-NASA says "the patent expired" 8. Sep. 27, 1995-Burnelli to NASA Counsel, "..when criminal conspiracy is involved.." 9. Oct. 3, 1995-NASA Gnl Counsel, "..I am not your attorney.."
10. Oct 3, 1995-Burnelli to NASA, "..outrageous bureaucratic tyranny.." 11. Oct 6, 1995-BURNELLI submits reports and tests to NASA 12. Nov. 2, 1995, Burnelli, "..may I have a response.."
13. June 27, 1996 Burnelli claims NASA is refusing to acknowledge 14. July 3, 1996 - NASA: "We will not consider taking licence".. 15. July 9, 1996 Burnelli, presents Lockheed correspondence
16. Aug 12, 1996 Burnelli presents Flight magazine article 17. Aug 27, 1996 - NASA Gen'l Counsel requests past correspondence-lost 18. Sept 3, 1996 Burnelli, " ..appeal to you, correct a grave injustice.."
19. Sept 6, 1996 NASA: "..we have no record of your letter.." 20. Sept 24, 1996 - Burnelli: "..all aircraft mfr's recognized Burnelli importance in mid-30's" 21. Sept 25, 1996 NASA: "..Burnelli did not submit a proposal.."
22. Oct 7, 1996 Burnelli: "..NASA, you have deferred our correspondence.." 23. Oct 11, 1996 - Burnelli: "..internet NASA FACT is a lie.." 24. Oct 28, 1996 NASA: "..we will continue to disagree.."
25. Dec 9, 1996 Burnelli: "..NASA, you have repudiated your obligations.." 26. Jun 10, 1965 - Jean A. Roche', Head Aeronautician Engr./Tech. Advisor, US Army Air Forces 27. Jan 13, 1997 BURNELLI: "..we have not received answers to our letters.."
28. Jan 29, 1997 BURNELLI: .."we request that NASA provide no further funding to BWB project.." 29. Feb 10, 1997 BURNELLI: ..Smithsonian article quote:.."the first to touch on the concept was Vincent Burnelli.. " 30. Feb 20, 1997 - NASA: .."considers this matter closed.."
31. Sep. 4, 1995 AVIATION DAILY article .."McDonnell eyes blended wing body research.." 32. Feb 5, 1986 MIAMI HERALD: " NASA behind the times" 33. CARISI Report

Return to "top" of letter