Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of turbulence criteria to provide early guidance for the design of vertiports is presented in this paper. For any aircraft, winds, in particular crosswinds and gusty winds, are top of mind for all pilots engaging in take-off and landing maneuvers. It is anticipated that the same will be true for VTOL and eVTOLs landing on vertiports, in particular as new vertiports are built closer and closer to urban centres. First, a review of the current design criteria for vertiports around the world related to wind is presented, highlighting the commonality between the guidance and the gaps in their content. Second, the controllability criteria that VTOL and eVTOLs will likely need to meet in the pursuit of an airworthiness certification are reviewed and their pertinence with regards to vertiport design are discussed. Third, the characters of the wind and their impact on eVTOL flights at or near take-off and landing infrastructure is explored. Finally, a set of turbulence criteria for vertiports and a turbulence index are proposed. The index includes a scale for conditions ranging from favorable for take-off and landing; to more and more demanding conditions; up to turbulence conditions to be firmly avoided.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".