DOCSLIB.ORG

U.S. Jet Fuel Use and CO2 Emissions Inventory for Aircraft Below ICAO CO2 Standard Thresholds

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
U.S. Jet Fuel Use and CO2 Emissions Inventory for Aircraft Below ICAO CO2 Standard Thresholds U.S. Jet Fuel Use and CO2 Emissions Inventory for Aircraft below ICAO CO2 Standard Thresholds Final Report Prepared for: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Laurel Driver U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Standards and Planning 109 TW Alexander Drive Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 Prepared by: Eastern Research Group, Inc. 1600 Perimeter Park Drive Suite 200 Morrisville, NC 27560 May 7, 2015 EPA Contract No. EP-D-11-006 Work Assignment 5-05 This page is intentionally left blank. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 2.0 T-100 ....................................................................................................................... 4 3.0 GAATA................................................................................................................. 15 4.0 COMPARISONS ....................................................................................................... 18 5.0 BACKCASTING AND FORECASTING ......................................................................... 19 6.0 QA/QC .................................................................................................................. 21 7.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 26 APPENDIX A. AIR TAXI MODELS BY AIRCRAFT CATEGORY FOR EDMS/T-100 DATA ................ A-1 i LIST OF TABLES Page Table 2-1. Number of Aircraft in each Aircraft Category ...............................................................5 Table 2-2. Time and Mode Data ......................................................................................................6 Table 2-3. Engine Assignments by Aircraft Make and Model ........................................................8 Table 2-4. Summary ofT-100Activity Data ...................................................................................10 Table 2-5. Aircraft and Engine Specific Emission Factors from EDMS Run ...............................11 Table 2-6. Aircraft and Engine Specific Cruising Fuel Consumption Rates .................................12 Table 2-7. 2012 T-100AircraftandEngine Specific Fuel Use and CO2Emissions .........................14 Table 3-1. FAA Registry Aircraft Population by MTOM Range ..................................................15 Table 3-2. Finalized GAATA Activity for Aircraft Below the MTOM CO2 Standard Thresholds ..............................................................................................................16 Table 3-3. GAATA Fuel Consumption Rates by Aircraft Type (Block fuel/Block time) ............16 Table 3-4. 2012 Fuel Use and CO2 Emission Estimates by Aircraft Below the CAEP MTOM Thresholds by Type and Mode ..............................................................................17 Table 4-1. T-100 and GAATA Combine CO2 Emissions (tons) Summary ...................................18 Table 5-1. Historical Fraction of Jet, Turboprop Powered Aircraft, and Helicopters Below the CAEP MTOM Thresholds for the ICAO CO2 Standards ......................................19 Table 5-2. Adjustment Factors for General Aviation Aircraft Based on Jet Fuel Energy Consumption ..........................................................................................................20 Table 5-3. Growth Factors Based on Forecasted Jet Fuel Energy Consumption ..........................20 Table 5-4. Backcasted/Forecasted Small Jet, Turboprop, and Helicopter CO2 Emissions (tons) .21 Table 6-1. QA Summary Table ......................................................................................................23 ii LIST OF FIGURE Page Figure 1-1. Summary of Activity Data Used to Quantify Fuel and CO2 Emissions from Aircraft Below ICAO Reporting Thresholds.........................................................................3 iii 1.0 Introduction In 2010, the International Civil Aviation Organization’s Committee on Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP), with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) participation, agreed to develop an aircraft carbon dioxide (CO2) standard, and CAEP expects to finalize the standard in February 2016. In November 2010, CAEP decided that the CO2 standard will be applicable to subsonic jets with a weight threshold of maximum takeoff mass (MTOM)1 greater than 5,700 kg (12,566 lbs) and aircraft equipped with turboprop engines with a MTOM greater than 8,618 kg (19,000 lbs). Applying these MTOM thresholds, ERG identified four categories of aircraft, large transport jets, regional jets, large turboprops, and large business jets2 that correspond to the above applicability thresholds that CAEP has agreed to for the aircraft CO2 standard. We have also identified the aircraft categories that do not meet the CAEP applicability thresholds into the following aircraft classes: small turboprops and small business jets. In addition, CAEP’s 3 4 applicability exclude piston-engine aircraft and helicopters, and because CAEP requirements apply only to civil aircraft, the aircraft CO2 standard also does not apply to military aircraft. The objective of this study is to estimate jet fuel usage and CO2 emissions (from this jet fuel usage) in the United States for aircraft below the CAEP MTOM thresholds (excluding jet fuel usage by military aircraft). To evaluate the current and projected CO2 emissions for the aircraft (that use jet fuel) below the CAEP MTOM thresholds, fuel use and CO2 emissions were developed for these aircraft (below the MTOM thresholds) for domestic flights and international flights that originate from a U.S. airport. Emissions estimates were calculated for the base year 2012 and projected for years 2020, 2030, and 2040 using Federal Aviation Administration Forecast data. The 2015 EPA Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (EPA, 2015) report includes a category for emissions from general aviation aircraft jet fuel. The category includes large and small business jets, large and small turboprops, and helicopters (with gas turbine engines), which is more inclusive than the CAEP applicability thresholds. Data from the 2015 EPA Inventory of U.S. 1 The terms maximum takeoff mass and maximum takeoff weight are used interchangeably throughout the report. 2 The classes of aircraft are broken down in a general manner for the purpose of showing which aircraft are included and excluded from the ICAO aircraft CO2 standard. As described earlier, CAEP has specifically identified MTOM thresholds for subsonic jet and turboprop aircraft that clearly indicate which aircraft will be covered by the international CO2 standard being developed (and which aircraft will not be covered by the international standard). For the aircraft classes that will be covered by the CAEP CO2 standard, ICAO generally refers to them as follows: turboprops, business jets, regional jets, single aisle aircraft, small twin aisle aircraft, large twin aisle aircraft, and large quad aircraft. However, a subset of turboprops and business jets will not be included in the CO2 standard (based on the MTOM thresholds). 3 Piston-engine aircraft primarily operate using aviation gasoline, though it is recognized that a small number use Jet A fuel (i.e., diesel-powered piston aircraft). 4 There are both piston-engine and turbine-engine helicopters. CAEP’s applicability thresholds exclude both types of helicopters. 1 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (EPA, 2015) was used to back cast 2012 emissions to 1990, 1995, 2000, 2005, 2010 and to develop 2013 estimates. The 2015 EPA Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (EPA 2015) states that U.S. aircraft emissions include emissions from the U.S. international aviation bunker fuels category, and this U.S. international aviation bunker fuels category includes emissions from combustion of fuel purchased in and used by aircraft departing from the United States (regardless of whether they are a U.S. flagged carrier). To ensure the products of this project align with data used in the 2015 GHG Emission and Sinks document, data obtained from the Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) 2012 General Aviation Part 135 Activity Surveys (GAATA, 2013) was assumed to be fuel purchased and used within the United States. Data obtained from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) T-100 Domestic Segment also accounted of activity within the United States; while the International Segment accounted for aircraft departing from the U.S. (assumed to be included in the U.S. international aviation bunker fuel category) (FAA, 2012). In general, aviation activities can be classified as: • Part 915 – non-commercial general aviation, corporate flight departments, limited for- hire activity (flight training, etc.) • On-Demand Part 1356 operations • Scheduled Part 135 operations • Part 1217 (large aircraft) The GAATA survey covers Part 91 and On-Demand Part 135, while the T-100 dataset covers Part 121 and Part 135 operators with more than $20 Million in annual revenue. This provides both an overlap and a gap between the two datasets. The overlap occurs between GAATA and T-100 for large On-Demand Part 135 operators with more than $20M in annual revenue that include commercial air taxi operations. Conversely, neither database covers smaller Part 135 Scheduled operators with less than $20 million in revenue. Regarding the overlap, adjustments were made to the GAATA data to account for air taxis reported in the T-100 data. However, note
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Technical Supplements
    Technical Supplements S1 The IG JAS Investment In this Technical Supplement the JAS 39 Gripen product concept is outlined, the procurement process documented, the Industry Group IG JAS presented and the critical role of the competent public procurement agency, the FMV, highlighted. S1.1 The Procurement of the JAS 39 Gripen Aircraft with Swing-Role Capabilities The JAS 39 Gripen multirole combat aircraft (J stands for fighter, A for Attack and S for Surveillance/reconnaissance) is a fourth generation aircraft that entered operational service in 1997. It replaced the Viggen, the last of which was taken out of service in 2006. JAS 39 Gripen is a combat aircraft with swing-role capabilities that can change mission in flight. This swing-role capability was unique when Gripen was launched but has later been introduced on the French Rafale and the Eurofighter. Other competing multirole aircraft first have to land to reconfigure its information, guidance, and weapons systems for a new role. Gripen was the first “unstable” aircraft in the world which meant that in order for the aircraft to be stable at all speeds and in all maneuvers many more navigation surfaces are needed than the pilot can possibly control himself to minimize air friction at each moment. He needs incredibly sophisticated computer systems support to maneuver the aircraft effectively and safely. Competing fourth generation combat aircraft are F-35/JSF (the USA, not yet (2009) delivered to market), the Eurofighter Typhoon (the UK, etc.) and Rafale (Dassault, France). JAS 39 Gripen also competes with upgraded versions of the third generation aircraft of Lockheed Martin F-16 (the USA, first delivered in 1978), Boeing F/A18 Hornet (the USA, first delivered in 1983), Dassault Mirage 2000 (France, first delivered in 1983), and Mig-29 (the former Soviet Union, first delivered in 1977).
    [Show full text]
  • Market Report a Publication of Saab Aircraft Leasing
    Issue 27 December 2011 MARKET REPORT A PUBLICATION OF SAAB AIRCRAFT LEASING DARWIN DEVELOPS EUROPEAN NETWORK PlottING A NEW COURSE GULFSTREAM INTERNATIONAL ADDS SAAB 340Bplus AIRCRAFT AND BECOMES SILVER AIRWAYS messaGE FROM CONTENTS Michael Magnusson Golden Air shines as niche Swedish carrier ......................... 3-5 Reflecting on 2011 activity and Darwin develops European network .................................... 6-9 readying for next year’s priorities Flying to the finish line. .................................................... 10-12 Pinnacle positions .................................................................13 As 2011 draws to a close, we can look back over a busy year during which Lakeshore luxury ..................................................................13 we transacted business on many Saab Plotting a new course 340Bplus aircraft. As we have taken Gulfstream International adds Saab 340Bplus aircraft aircraft back from Mesaba, we have found and becomes Silver Airways ........................................... 14-16 new homes for them with both old and new customers. The 30-seat turboprop Saab 340 operators in Thailand expand regional airline service ...........................................................17 continues to be a perfect regional aircraft choice on many regional routes. Saab Destination: Scatsta Airport, Shetland – Scotland. ......18 We are especially pleased that a revitalized Gulfstream International Airlines in Saab 340 Global Operators Conference set for 2012 ...........19 Florida, soon
    [Show full text]
  • 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
    [Show full text]
  • AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT Cessna 208 Caravan: Registration – 8R-GAB at Matthews Ridge Airstrip Region No
    AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT Cessna 208 Caravan: Registration – 8R-GAB At Matthews Ridge Airstrip Region No. 1 Guyana 07 29 13.30N 060 11.17.10W 9th January, 2015. REPORT # GCAA: 2/5/1/78 This report represents the conclusions reached by the Guyana Aircraft Accident Investigation Team on the circumstances surrounding the aircraft accident, involving Guyana registered aircraft – Cessna 208, 8R-GAB. This investigation was done in accordance with Annex 13 to the Convention on International Civil Aviation. The investigation is intended neither to apportion blame, nor to assess individual or collective liability. Its sole objective is to draw lessons from the occurrence which may help to prevent future accidents. Consequently, the use of this report for any purpose other than for the prevention of future accidents could lead to erroneous conclusions. 1 Contents ABBREVIATIONS and GLOSSARY.......................................................................................................... 4 SYNOPSIS ................................................................................................................................................... 6 1. FACTUAL INFORMATION .......................................................................................................... 7 1.1. History of the Flight .......................................................................................................................... 7 1.2. Injuries to Persons............................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Connection
    The Connection ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY 2 The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the contributors concerned and are not necessarily those held by the Royal Air Force Historical Society. Copyright 2011: Royal Air Force Historical Society First published in the UK in 2011 by the Royal Air Force Historical Society All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical including photocopying, recording or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission from the Publisher in writing. ISBN 978-0-,010120-2-1 Printed by 3indrush 4roup 3indrush House Avenue Two Station 5ane 3itney O72. 273 1 ROYAL AIR FORCE HISTORICAL SOCIETY President 8arshal of the Royal Air Force Sir 8ichael Beetham 4CB CBE DFC AFC Vice-President Air 8arshal Sir Frederick Sowrey KCB CBE AFC Committee Chairman Air Vice-8arshal N B Baldwin CB CBE FRAeS Vice-Chairman 4roup Captain J D Heron OBE Secretary 4roup Captain K J Dearman 8embership Secretary Dr Jack Dunham PhD CPsychol A8RAeS Treasurer J Boyes TD CA 8embers Air Commodore 4 R Pitchfork 8BE BA FRAes 3ing Commander C Cummings *J S Cox Esq BA 8A *AV8 P Dye OBE BSc(Eng) CEng AC4I 8RAeS *4roup Captain A J Byford 8A 8A RAF *3ing Commander C Hunter 88DS RAF Editor A Publications 3ing Commander C 4 Jefford 8BE BA 8anager *Ex Officio 2 CONTENTS THE BE4INNIN4 B THE 3HITE FA8I5C by Sir 4eorge 10 3hite BEFORE AND DURIN4 THE FIRST 3OR5D 3AR by Prof 1D Duncan 4reenman THE BRISTO5 F5CIN4 SCHOO5S by Bill 8organ 2, BRISTO5ES
    [Show full text]
  • Saab 340 the VERSATILE TURBOPROP Saab 340 > the Versatile TURBOPROP
    SAAB 340 THE VERSATILE TURBOPROP SAAB 340 > THE VERSATILE TURBOPROP 2 SAAB 340 > THE VERSATILE TURBOPROP ”WE ARE A NICHE MARKET operator...THE SAAB 340 IS A WORKHORSE AIRCRAFT AND very RELIABLE.” GEORG POMMER ROBIN HOOD Aviation CEO THE FLEXIBLE PERFORMER To safeguard against today’s rapidly changing environment and improve profitability, successful airlines must choose an aircraft that minimizes risk and is adaptable to an ever-changing market environment. In addition, passengers demand comfort and service similar to that offered by major carriers. The Saab 340 is a favorite among airline passengers due to its flexibility, comfort and reliable performance. With about half the operating costs of a regional jet, the Saab 340 can offer service in a variety of markets, large or small. RELIABILITY IN A VARIETY OF OPERATIONS The cost-effective Saab 340 consistently generates profits for a wide range of regional air transport services. With the right blend of technologies, the Saab 340 combines high productivity with dependability. THE “FACTS” @ 4Q – 2009 • 25-year track record • best selling 30-seat turboprop • more than 410 operational aircraft found on six continents and in 30 countries • over 13 million hours flown and an estimated 250 million passengers • consistent 99% dispatch reliability • award winning customer support services 3 SAAB 340 > THE VERSATILE TURBOPROP THE BIG AIRLINE CHOICE 4 SAAB 340 > THE VERSATILE TURBOPROP WORLD’S LARGEST 340BPLUS OPERATOR ”...OUR OVERALL OBJECTIVE IS TO PROVIDE A SEAMLESS The red, white and blue Delta livery is replacing Northwest colors service PRODUCT TO OUR on all aircraft and airport signage as the newly merged airline is passengers.
    [Show full text]
  • Hold for Release Until July 21, 2017 Wipaire's Laser Gear Advisory
    WIPLINE FLOATS • SKIS • MODIFICATIONS • AIRCRAFT SALES AVIONICS • INTERIOR • MAINTENANCE • PAINT REFINISHING Hold For Release Until July 21, 2017 Wipaire’s Laser Gear Advisory System Now Standard and Available for Retrofit South Saint Paul, Minnesota, July 21, 2017 – Wipaire, Inc.’s exclusive, safety-enhancing Laser Gear Advisory system is now included at no additional cost on new Wipline float purchases, and is available for retrofit on Wipline-equipped aircraft. Introductory pricing for retrofit kits is $4,995 uninstalled. The laser system may be installed at one of Wipaire’s two locations in South St. Paul, Minnesota, or Leesburg, Florida. Installation is $1,300-$1,500 depending upon aircraft model. “Designing exclusive, innovative product improvements has always been at the heart of what we do,” commented Clint Clouatre, Vice President of Marketing and Sales for Wipaire, Inc. “The Laser Gear Advisory system continues that tradition by enhancing the safety of Wipline floats. It gives busy pilots intelligent alerts of incorrect gear settings instead of repetitive statements that become easy to ignore. Utilizing laser technology accurate over various terrains, our new Laser Gear Advisory decreases the chance of an accident due to improper gear position.” Wipaire’s Amphibian Gear Advisory system, well-known for its “Gear is up for water landing” and “Gear is down for runway landing” annunciations, has long been standard equipment on all amphibious Wipline floats. The Laser Gear Advisory system, in contrast, remains quiet when the landing gear and detected surface are in agreement. The laser becomes active at approximately 400 feet above ground level and compares the gear position with the detected landing surface.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Horizons
    3 F R To properly plan for the future of Coolidge facilities will be evaluated in Chapter Four Municipal Airport, it is necessary to trans- to determine the most cost-effective and late forecast aviation demand into the efficient means for implementation. specific types and quantities of facilities that can adequately serve this identified demand. This chapter uses the results of the PLANNING HORIZONS forecasts conducted in Chapter Two, as well as established planning criteria, to The cost-effective, efficient, and orderly determine the airside (i.e., runways, development of an airport should rely more taxiways, navigational aids, marking and upon actual demand at an airport than on a lighting) and landside (i.e., terminal build- time-based forecast figure. In order to ing, hangars, aircraft parking apron, and develop a Master Plan that is demand-based automobile parking) facility requirements. rather than time-based, a series of planning horizon milestones have been established The objective of this effort is to identify, in for Coolidge Municipal Airport that take general terms, the adequacy of the existing into consideration the reasonable range of airport facilities, outline what new facilities aviation demand projections prepared in the may be needed, and when these may be previous chapter. needed to accommodate forecast demands. Having established these facility require- ments, alternatives for providing these 3-1 It is important to consider that the ac- airport to develop facilities according tual activity at the airport may be to need generated by actual demand higher or lower than projected activity levels. The demand-based schedule levels. By planning according to activ- provides flexibility in development, as ity milestones, the resulting plan can development schedules can be slowed accommodate unexpected shifts, or or expedited according to actual de- changes, in the area’s aviation de- mand at any given time during the mand.
    [Show full text]
  • Portola Valley Aircraft Noise Monitoring
    Portola Valley Aircraft Noise Monitoring Prepared by San Francisco International Airport Aircraft Noise Abatement Office Technical Report #012017-978 January 2017 San Francisco International Airport Portola Valley Aircraft Noise Monitoring Report Page | 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 3 Community and SFO Operations............................................................................................................ 3 Equipment ............................................................................................................................................... 3 Aircraft Noise Analysis........................................................................................................................... 4 Aircraft Operations ................................................................................................................................. 6 Track Density.......................................................................................................................................... 8 Noise Reporters....................................................................................................................................... 9 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 1 ................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2016 Feb SD Caravan 208-0580 Rev.D.Indd
    SPECIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION CARAVAN February 2016 Revision D Units 208-0580 to TBD CARAVAN SPECIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION UNITS 208-0580 FEBRUARY 2016 REVISION D Cessna Aircraft Company P.O. Box 7706 Wichita, Kansas 67277-7706 CARAVAN INTRODUCTION This “Specifi cation and Description” is published for the Also included is the Cessna warranty applicable to the purpose of providing general information for the evaluation Cessna Model 208 Caravan aircraft and the Caravan Crew of the design, performance and equipment of the Cessna Training Agreement. In the event of any confl ict or discrep- Caravan aircraft. Should more detailed data be required, it ancy between this document and the basic purchase agree- can be obtained by contacting: ment to which it may be appended, terms specifi ed in the basic purchase agreement govern. Cessna Aircraft Company P.O. Box 7704 Due to the time span between the date of this Specifi cation Wichita, Kansas 67277 and Description and the scheduled delivery date of the air- Telephone: 316-517-6081 craft, Cessna reserves the right to revise the “Specifi cation Fax: 316-517-7850 and Description” whenever occasioned. This document describes only the Cessna Model 208 Cara- van aircraft, Unit Serial Number 0580 and on, and its power- plant and equipment. WARNING: This product contains Halon 1211, Halon 1301, and also R-134A. Furthermore, the product was manufactured with CFC-12 and 1-1-1 Trichloroethane, substances which harm public health and environment by destroying ozone in the upper atmosphere. February 2016, Revision D 1 CARAVAN TABLE OF CONTENTS CESSNA CARAVAN SPECIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION SECTION PAGE 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Type-Certificate Data Sheet
    TCDS No.: IM.A.226 Cessna 208 (Caravan) Date: 10 February 2021 Issue: 11 TYPE-CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET NO. EASA.IM.A.226 for Cessna 208 (Caravan) Type Certificate Holder Textron Aviation Inc. One Cessna Boulevard P.O. Box 7704 Wichita, Kansas 67277 USA For models: 208 208B TE.CERT.00048-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2021. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 1 of 26 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union TCDS No.: IM.A.226 Cessna 208 (Caravan) Date: 10 February 2021 Issue: 11 Intentionally left blank TE.CERT.00048-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2021. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 2 of 26 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union TCDS No.: IM.A.226 Cessna 208 (Caravan) Date: 10 February 2021 Issue: 11 SECTION 1: GENERAL, BASIC MODEL 208 TYPE DESIGN ................................................................... 4 A. General B. EASA Certification Basis C. Technical Characteristics and Operational Limitations D. Operating and Service Instructions E. Operational Suitability Data F. Notes SECTION 2.1: GENERAL, BASIC MODEL 208B TYPE DESIGN (S/N 208B0001 THROUGH 208B2196 AND 208B2198 THROUGH 208B4999) ....................................... 4 A. General B. Certification Basis C. Technical Characteristics and Operational Limitations D. Operating and Service Instructions E. Operational Suitability Data F. Notes SECTION 2.2: GENERAL, BASIC MODEL 208B TYPE DESIGN (S/N 208B2197 AND 208B5000 AND ON) .............................................................................................. 4 A. General B. Certification Basis C. Technical Characteristics and Operational Limitations D. Operating and Service Instructions E.
    [Show full text]
  • CESSNA GRAND CARAVAN by Yoland Grosjean - SPA348 – Bush Ops Manager
    CESSNA GRAND CARAVAN By Yoland Grosjean - SPA348 – Bush Ops Manager CESSNA HISTORY Clyde Vernon Cessna was born in Iowa in 1879 and grew up on a Kansas farm. He became captivated with flying after learning of Louis Blériot's 1909 flight across the English Channel. He purchased a monoplane for himself and spent the next several years travelling to exhibition air shows, meeting many of the daredevil pilots of the era, including Roland Garros, René Simon, Charles Hamilton, and René Barrier. Travelling east to New York, Cessna spent a month at the Queen Airplane Company factory, learning the fundamentals of flight and the art of plane building. He became so enthusiastic about flying that he spent his life savings of $7,500 to buy an exact copy of the Blériot XI monoplane, shipping it west to his home in Enid, Oklahoma. Cessna flew this aircraft, along with others he designed and built, in exhibition flights throughout the Midwest, continuously modifying the planes to improve their performance. In 1924, Clyde partnered with fellow aviation pioneers Lloyd C. Stearman and Walter H. Beech to form the Travel Air Manufacturing Co., Inc., a biplane-manufacturing firm, in Wichita, Kansas. Clyde infused the fledgling company with cash and equipment and became its president. But Clyde always preferred monoplanes, so in 1927, he left Travel Air to form his own company, the Cessna Aircraft Company. There he would build his vision of the ideal aircraft, a full-cantilever-winged monoplane dubbed the Phantom. Commercially successful, the Phantom, along with the Model AW and DC-6, sold well until the start of the Great Depression.
    [Show full text]