Aerospace-Facts-And-Figures-1998
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
General Information Summary
The purpose of the Dutch Safety Board’s work is to prevent future accidents and incidents or to limit their after-effects. It is no part of the Board’s remit to try to establish the blame, responsibility or liability attaching to any party. Information gathered during the course of an investigation – including statements given to the Board, information that the Board has compiled, results of technical research and analyses and drafted documents (including the published report) – cannot be used as evidence in criminal, disciplinary or civil law proceedings. GENERAL INFORMATION Identification number: 2007044 Classification: Serious incident Date, time1 of occurrence: 18 May 2007, 20.53 hours Location of occurrence: Groningen Airport Eelde (EHGG) Aircraft registration: OO-VLI Aircraft model: Fokker F27 MK50 (Fokker 50) Type of aircraft: Passenger Aircraft Type of flight: Scheduled passenger transport Phase of operation: Landing Damage to aircraft: Minor Cockpit crew: Two Cabin crew: One Passengers: Eleven Injuries: None Other damage: One runway edge light and a runway end light destroyed Light conditions: Daylight (sunset at 21.32 hours) SUMMARY A Fokker 50 made a flight from Amsterdam Schiphol Airport to Groningen Airport Eelde. After executing a visual approach to runway 05, the aircraft landed long (approximately halfway along the runway) and at high speed. The crew was unable to stop the aircraft within the remaining runway length. Subsequently, it ran off the end of the runway and came to a halt in the grass. None of the fourteen persons on board was injured. The aircraft sustained minor damage. This report is mainly based on information from the flight data recorder and the cockpit voice recorder and interviews with the flight crew members. -
Business & Commercial Aviation
BUSINESS & COMMERCIAL AVIATION LEONARDO AW609 PERFORMANCE PLATEAUS OCEANIC APRIL 2020 $10.00 AviationWeek.com/BCA Business & Commercial Aviation AIRCRAFT UPDATE Leonardo AW609 Bringing tiltrotor technology to civil aviation FUEL PLANNING ALSO IN THIS ISSUE Part 91 Department Inspections Is It Airworthy? Oceanic Fuel Planning Who Says It’s Ready? APRIL 2020 VOL. 116 NO. 4 Performance Plateaus Digital Edition Copyright Notice The content contained in this digital edition (“Digital Material”), as well as its selection and arrangement, is owned by Informa. and its affiliated companies, licensors, and suppliers, and is protected by their respective copyright, trademark and other proprietary rights. Upon payment of the subscription price, if applicable, you are hereby authorized to view, download, copy, and print Digital Material solely for your own personal, non-commercial use, provided that by doing any of the foregoing, you acknowledge that (i) you do not and will not acquire any ownership rights of any kind in the Digital Material or any portion thereof, (ii) you must preserve all copyright and other proprietary notices included in any downloaded Digital Material, and (iii) you must comply in all respects with the use restrictions set forth below and in the Informa Privacy Policy and the Informa Terms of Use (the “Use Restrictions”), each of which is hereby incorporated by reference. Any use not in accordance with, and any failure to comply fully with, the Use Restrictions is expressly prohibited by law, and may result in severe civil and criminal penalties. Violators will be prosecuted to the maximum possible extent. You may not modify, publish, license, transmit (including by way of email, facsimile or other electronic means), transfer, sell, reproduce (including by copying or posting on any network computer), create derivative works from, display, store, or in any way exploit, broadcast, disseminate or distribute, in any format or media of any kind, any of the Digital Material, in whole or in part, without the express prior written consent of Informa. -
Electronic Flight Bag (EFB): 2010 Industry Survey
Electronic Flight Bag (EFB): 2010 Industry Survey Scott Gabree Michelle Yeh Young Jin Jo U.S. Department of Transportation Research and Innovative Technology Administration John A. Volpe National DOT-VNTSC-FAA-10-14 Transportation Systems Center Cambridge, MA 02142 Air Traffic Organization Operations Planning Human Factors Research and Engineering Group September 2010 Washington, DC 20591 This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia, 22161 Notice This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. Notice The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Form Approved REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES September 2010 COVERED Final Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. -
Robust Gas Turbine and Airframe System Design in Light of Uncertain
Robust Gas Turbine and Airframe System Design in Light of Uncertain Fuel and CO2 Prices Stephan Langmaak1, James Scanlan2, and András Sóbester3 University of Southampton, Southampton, SO16 7QF, United Kingdom This paper presents a study that numerically investigated which cruise speed the next generation of short-haul aircraft with 150 seats should y at and whether a con- ventional two- or three-shaft turbofan, a geared turbofan, a turboprop, or an open rotor should be employed in order to make the aircraft's direct operating cost robust to uncertain fuel and carbon (CO2) prices in the Year 2030, taking the aircraft pro- ductivity, the passenger value of time, and the modal shift into account. To answer this question, an optimization loop was set up in MATLAB consisting of nine modules covering gas turbine and airframe design and performance, ight and aircraft eet sim- ulation, operating cost, and optimization. If the passenger value of time is included, the most robust aircraft design is powered by geared turbofan engines and cruises at Mach 0.80. If the value of time is ignored, however, then a turboprop aircraft ying at Mach 0.70 is the optimum solution. This demonstrates that the most fuel-ecient option, the open rotor, is not automatically the most cost-ecient solution because of the relatively high engine and airframe costs. 1 Research Engineer, Computational Engineering and Design 2 Professor of Aerospace Design, Computational Engineering and Design, AIAA member 3 Associate Professor in Aircraft Engineering, Computational Engineering and Design, AIAA member 1 I. Introduction A. Background IT takes around 5 years to develop a gas turbine engine, which then usually remains in pro- duction for more than two decades [1, 2]. -
Low Temperature Environment Operations of Turboengines
0 Qo B n Y n 1c AGARD 2 ADVISORY GROUP FOR AEROSPACE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 3 7 RUE ANCELLE 92200 NEUILLY SUR SEINE FRANCE AGARD CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 480 Low Temperature Environment Operations of Turboengines (Design and User's Problems) Fonctionnement des Turborkacteurs en Environnement Basse Tempkrature (Problkmes Pos& aux Concepteurs et aux Utilisateurs) processed I /by 'IMs ..................signed-...............date .............. NOT FOR DESTRUCTION - NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION I Distribution and Availability on Back Cover AGARD-CP-480 --I- ADVISORY GROUP FOR AEROSPACE RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT 7 RUE ANCELLE 92200 NEUILLY SUR SEINE FRANCE AGARD CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGS 480 Low Temperature Environment Operations of Turboengines (Design and User's Problems) Fonctionnement des TurborLacteurs en Environnement Basse Tempkrature (Problkmes PoSes aux Concepteurs et aux Utilisateurs) Papers presented at the Propulsion and Energetics Panel 76th Symposium held in Brussels, Belgium, 8th-12th October 1990. - North Atlantic Treaty Organization --q Organisation du Traite de I'Atlantique Nord I The Mission of AGARD According to its Chartcr, the mission of AGARD is to bring together the leading personalities of the NATO nations in the fields of science and technology relating to aerospace for the following purposes: -Recommending effective ways for the member nations to use their research and development capabilities for the common benefit of the NATO community; - Providing scientific and technical advice and assistance to the Military Committee -
Economic Feasibility Study for a 19 PAX Hybrid-Electric Commuter Aircraft
Air s.Pace ELectric Innovative Commuter Aircraft D2.1 Economic Feasibility Study for a 19 PAX Hybrid-Electric Commuter Aircraft Name Function Date Author: Maximilian Spangenberg (ASP) WP2 Co-Lead 31.03.2020 Approved by: Markus Wellensiek (ASP) WP2 Lead 31.03.2020 Approved by: Dr. Qinyin Zhang (RRD) Project Lead 31.03.2020 D2.1 Economic Feasibility Study page 1 of 81 Clean Sky 2 Grant Agreement No. 864551 © ELICA Consortium No export-controlled data Non-Confidential Air s.Pace Table of contents 1 Executive summary .........................................................................................................................3 2 References ........................................................................................................................................4 2.1 Abbreviations ...............................................................................................................................4 2.2 List of figures ................................................................................................................................5 2.3 List of tables .................................................................................................................................6 3 Introduction ......................................................................................................................................8 4 ELICA market study ...................................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Turboprop and piston engine -
Comparison of Helicopter Turboshaft Engines
Comparison of Helicopter Turboshaft Engines John Schenderlein1, and Tyler Clayton2 University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80304 Although they garnish less attention than their flashy jet cousins, turboshaft engines hold a specialized niche in the aviation industry. Built to be compact, efficient, and powerful, turboshafts have made modern helicopters and the feats they accomplish possible. First implemented in the 1950s, turboshaft geometry has gone largely unchanged, but advances in materials and axial flow technology have continued to drive higher power and efficiency from today's turboshafts. Similarly to the turbojet and fan industry, there are only a handful of big players in the market. The usual suspects - Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, and Rolls-Royce - have taken over most of the industry, but lesser known companies like Lycoming and Turbomeca still hold a footing in the Turboshaft world. Nomenclature shp = Shaft Horsepower SFC = Specific Fuel Consumption FPT = Free Power Turbine HPT = High Power Turbine Introduction & Background Turboshaft engines are very similar to a turboprop engine; in fact many turboshaft engines were created by modifying existing turboprop engines to fit the needs of the rotorcraft they propel. The most common use of turboshaft engines is in scenarios where high power and reliability are required within a small envelope of requirements for size and weight. Most helicopter, marine, and auxiliary power units applications take advantage of turboshaft configurations. In fact, the turboshaft plays a workhorse role in the aviation industry as much as it is does for industrial power generation. While conventional turbine jet propulsion is achieved through thrust generated by a hot and fast exhaust stream, turboshaft engines creates shaft power that drives one or more rotors on the vehicle. -
Rolls-Royce / Itp Regulation
EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG Competition Case M.8242 - ROLLS-ROYCE / ITP Only the English text is available and authentic. REGULATION (EC) No 139/2004 MERGER PROCEDURE Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Art 6(2) Date: 19/04/2017 In electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32017M8242 EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels, 19.04.2017 C(2017) 2613 final In the published version of this decision, some information has been omitted pursuant to Article PUBLIC VERSION 17(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 concerning non-disclosure of business secrets and other confidential information. The omissions are shown thus […]. Where possible the information omitted has been replaced by ranges of figures or a general description. To the notifying party: Subject: Case M.8242 – Rolls-Royce / ITP Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation No 139/20041 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area2 Dear Sir or Madam, (1) On 24 February 2017, the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertaking Rolls-Royce Holdings plc ("Rolls-Royce", United Kingdom) acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation control of the whole of the undertaking Industria de Turbo Propulsores SA ("ITP", Spain) by way of a purchase of shares (the "Transaction").3 Rolls-Royce is designated hereinafter as the "Notifying Party", and Rolls-Royce and ITP are together referred to as the "Parties". 1 OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. -
SA227-AC Aircraft Registration: N175SW
Aircraft Data and Inspection Report Operator: Berry Aviation Date: 5.20.20 Location: Springfield Missouri Aircraft Type: Fairchild Merlin III C Serial #: AC621 Aircraft Model: SA227-AC Aircraft Registration: N175SW Date of Manufacture: Aug/1985 Current Total A/C Time: 34089.1 Current Total Airframe Cycle: 54373 Hours since Major Inspection/Overhaul: 61 Maintenance Program: FAR Part 91; Manufacturer's Recommended Inspection Type and Interval:Phase Last Inspection: Date: 10/11/2018 Operator's Representative: Title: Inspection Completed By: Laurie Stilwell Date of Completion: Inspection Type: Off-lease Work Order Reference: Notes: LH Engine Data Aircraft Registration No.: N175SW Serial #: AC621 TAT: 34089.1 Effective Date: TAC: 54373 Limits Left Hand Engine: TPE331-11U-611G Serial #: P-44414C Oprtrs Mfrs Engine H@I TSN: 24816.7 TCSN: 33347 24816 TSCAM: 5539.8 TCSCAM: 7939 7000 7000 FH ENG C@I 33346 TSO CSO Remaining ENG Time Since CAM Inspection: 5539.8 7939 1460.2 7000 7000 FH ENG Time Since Hot Section Inspection: 659.0 2841.0 3500 3500 FH ENG Time Since Gearbox Inspection: 5539.8 NA 1460.2 NA 7000 FH CYC/Time at PN SN install CSN/TSN Remaining Limit 1st Stage Turbine Wheel 3101520-4 1818244926610 0 212 19788 20000 CYC 2nd Stage Turbine Wheel 3102106-10 50134508846 761 2266 12734 15000 CYC 3rd Stage Turbine Wheel 3102655-2 10-156101-13373 0 1505 4495 6000 CYC Seal Plate 3102483-1 5-18040-2320 16713 18212 1788 20000 CYC Compressor Bearing 3103708-1 95-06049-265 5926.5 7545.2 1454.8 9000 FH 1st Stg Compressor Impeller 3108182-2 350100114 -
NPA 2018-13 Table of Contents
European Aviation Safety Agency Notice of Proposed Amendment 2018-13 Appendix I to AMC to Annex III (Part-66) Aircraft type ratings for Part-66 aircraft maintenance licences RMT.0541 (66.024) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) addresses a regulatory coordination issue related to aircraft type ratings. According to the AMC to Annex III (Part-66), type ratings should be endorsed on an aircraft maintenance licence (AML) in accordance with Appendix I to AMC to Part-66 ‘List of type ratings’. An NPA is issued regularly to amend this list, after assessing feedback received from the industry, and to add new aircraft types or to remove aircraft types whose type certificate (TC) has been revoked or surrendered. This NPA adds also the tables of the new Group as a consequence of the introduction of the ‘L’ licence subcategories by Commission Regulation (EU) 2018/1142. The main objective is to ensure a common standard throughout the Member States. Action area: Regular updates/review of rules Affected rules: AMC/GM to Annex III (Part-66) to Commission Regulation (EU) No 1321/2014 Affected stakeholders: Maintenance certifying staff; maintenance training organisations; maintenance organisations; competent authorities Driver: Efficiency/proportionality Rulemaking group: No Impact assessment: None Rulemaking Procedure: Standard 12.5.2009 5.12.2018 2019/Q2 TE.RPRO.00034-008 © European Aviation Safety Agency. All rights reserved. ISO 9001 certified. Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA intranet/internet. Page 1 of 186 An agency of the European Union European Aviation Safety Agency NPA 2018-13 Table of contents Table of contents 1. -
Modelling the Propeller Slipstream Effect on the Longitudinal Stability and Control
Modelling the Propeller Slipstream Effect on the Longitudinal Stability and Control Thijs Bouquet Technische Universiteit Delft MODELLINGTHE PROPELLER SLIPSTREAM EFFECT ON THE LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND CONTROL by Thijs Bouquet in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Aerospace Engineering at the Delft University of Technology, to be defended publicly on Friday January 22, 2016 at 1:30 PM. Supervisors: Prof. dr. ir. L. L. M. Veldhuis Dr. ir. R. Vos Thesis committee: Dr. ir. E. van Kampen TU Delft An electronic version of this thesis is available at http://repository.tudelft.nl/. Thesis registration number: 069#16#MT#FPP ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This thesis marks the conclusion of my time as a student at the faculty of Aerospace Engineering of Delft Uni- versity of Technology. This was no small feat, which could not have been done without the help of others, I would therefore like to express my gratitude. First of all, I would like to thank my supervisors, Dr.ir.Roelof Vos and Prof.dr.ir.Leo Veldhuis, for their guid- ance, support and feedback throughout the past year. Secondly, I would like to thank Dr.ir.Erik-Jan van Kam- pen for being a part of my thesis committee. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues for their support. A special mention has to be made for the students of ’Kamertje-1’, whose mutual goals created a sense of camaraderie which motivated me greatly. Finally, I would like to thank my family, who were never more than a phone call away to support and en- courage me throughout my entire education. -
International Aero Engines V2500-A1, V2522-A5
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 225 / Tuesday, November 23, 2010 / Proposed Rules 71373 under the criteria of the Regulatory (i) For TAE 125–01 engines, Operation & DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Flexibility Act. Maintenance Manual OM–01–02, Issue 3, We prepared a regulatory evaluation Revision 13. Federal Aviation Administration of the estimated costs to comply with (ii) For TAE 125–02–99 and TAE 125–02– this proposed AD and placed it in the 114 engines, Operation & Maintenance 14 CFR Part 39 AD docket. Manual OM–02–02, Issue 1, Revision 10. [Docket No. FAA–2010–0494; Directorate List of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 39 Prohibition of FADEC Software Earlier Identifier 2010–NE–20–AD] Versions Air transportation, Aircraft, Aviation (f) Once FADEC software version 2.91 is RIN 2120–AA64 safety, Safety. installed, do not install any earlier version of Airworthiness Directives; International FADEC software. The Proposed Amendment Aero Engines V2500–A1, V2522–A5, Accordingly, under the authority FAA AD Differences V2524–A5, V2525–D5, V2527–A5, delegated to me by the Administrator, (g) EASA AD 2010–0137 permits V2527E–A5, V2527M–A5, V2528–D5, the FAA proposes to amend 14 CFR part installation of earlier FADEC software V2530–A5, and V2533–A5 Turbofan 39 as follows: versions, once version 2.91 is installed. This Engines AD does not. AGENCY: Federal Aviation PART 39—AIRWORTHINESS (h) EASA AD 2010–0137 requires Administration (FAA), DOT. DIRECTIVES compliance within 110 flight hours after the effective date of the AD or during next ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking 1. The authority citation for part 39 maintenance, whichever occurs first, but no (NPRM).