DOCSLIB.ORG

(V/STOL Handling-Qualities Criteria and Specifications Apply

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
(V/STOL Handling-Qualities Criteria and Specifications Apply 171000 1 P 171000 1 AGA RD-R-5779' AGARD REPORT No. 577 on (V/STOLHandling I -Criteria and Discussion DlSTRlBUT10 N AND AVAl LAB1LlTY ON BACK COVER NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION ADVISORY GROUP FOR AEROSPACE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT (ORGANISATION DU TRAITE DE L’ATLANTIQUE NORD) ,//- V/STOL HANDLING-QUALITIES CRITERIA This report was prepared at the request of the Flight Mechanics Panel of AGARD-NATO. Published December 1970 629.7.014.16:629.7.0a3 Printed by Technical Editing and Reproduction Ltd Harford House, 7-9 Charlotte St, London. WiP iHD This report prepared by a V/STOL Handling Qualities Committee sponeored by the ACARD Fqght Mechanics PanelGsents criteria on handling-7 qualities for VTOL and'STOL aircraft. Included wlth each criterion is a discussion pointing out the pilot's reasons for including a particular handling quality feature. The criteria are based on results of tests using piloted ground-based simulators, variable stability aircraft, particular models of VTOL and STOL aircraft, ani variable stability helicopters. -I ii i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The following personnel were members of the V/STOL Handling Qualities Committee who helped prepare this report: Seth B. Anaerson, U.S.A., NASA, Ames Research Center , H. William Chinn, U.K., RAE, Bedford Antonio Filisetti, Italy, Fiat Dr. Xavier Hafer, W. Germany, Lehrstuhl und Institut fiir Flugtechnik Douglas M. McGregor, Canada, NAE Laurel G. Schroers, U.S.A., Army Aeronautical Laboratory George Ville, France, Service Technique de 1’ Aeronautique iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 1 Background 1 Revision Procedures 1 Report Format 1 Criteria Ap p 1i c a t i on 2 Interpretation 2 Level of Criteria 2 Wind Conditions 2 Classification of Aircraft 2 Terminology 2 Basic Terms 2 Flight Regimes . 3 Control Systems 3 Engineering Terms 3 Symbols 4 Pilot Rating Scale 5 References 5 1.0 Characteristics of the Control Systems 6 1.1 General 6 1.2 Control Breakout Forces 6 1.3 Control Force Gradients 6 1.4 Control System Free Play 8 1.5 Powered Control Systems 8 1.6 Trim Systems 8 1.7 Height Control Systems 8 1.8 Thrust Vector Controls 8 1.9 Control Travel Limits 9 1.10 Augmentation Systems 9 2.0 Longitudinal Stability and Control 11 2.1 General 11 2.2 Pitch Control Power 11 2.3 Control Sensitivity 12 2.4 Pitch Damping 13 2.5 Control System Time Lags 13 . 2.6 Static Longitudinal Stability Characteristics 14 2.6.1 Trim Speed Stability 14 2.6.2 Stability with Respect to Speed 14 2.6.3 Thrust Vector Stability 14 2.7 Longitudinal Control Characteristics in Maneuvering Flight 14 2.8 Dynamic Stability 15 . 2.9 Longitudinal Control Characteristics in Takeoff 15 2.10 Longitudinal Control Characteristics in Sideslip 15 2.11 Longitudinal Control Characteristics in Landing 16 3.0 Lateral Directional Stability and Control 17 3.1 General 17 3.2 Roll Control Power 17 3.3 Translational Control 18 3.4 Roll Control Sensitivity 18 3.5 Cross-Coupling 19 3.6 Roll Angular Damping 19 3.7 Roll Control System Time Lags 20 3.8 Peak Roll Control Forces 20 3.9 Spiral Stability 20 3.10 Dihedral Effect 21 3.11 Yaw Control Characteristics - General 21. 3.12 Yaw Control Power 21 3.13 Yaw Control Sensitivity 22 3.14 Control System Time Lag 23 3.15 Peak Yaw Control Forces 23 3 :16 Cross-Coupling 23 3.17 Directional Characteristics in Steady Sideslip 24 3.18 Side Force Characteristics in Steady Sideslips 24 3.19 Lateral-Directional Dynamic Stability 24 4.0 Hovering and Vertical Flight Path Characteristics 26 4.1 General 26 4.2 Ground Effect 26 4.3 Vertical Flight Path Control 26 4.4 Hovering Precision 27 4.5 Vertical Thrust Margins 27 4.6 Vertical Velocity and Thrust Response 28 V 5.0 Transition Characteristics 29 5.1 General 29 5.2 Acceleration-Deceleration 29 5.3 Flexibility of Operation 29 5.4 Tolerance in Conversion 29 5.5 Control Margins 30 5.6 Trim Changes 30 5.7 Rate of Control Movement 30 6.0 Miscellaneous Characteristics 31 6.1 General 31 6.2 Ground Handling - General 31 6.2.1 Landing Gear 31 6.2.2 Control Effectiveness During Takeoff, Landing Rollout, and Taxi 31 6.2.3 Power Checks Prior to Takeoff 31 6.3 Cross-Coupling Effects - General 31 6.3.1 Gyroscopic Effects 31 6.3.2 Inertial Cross-Coupling Effects 32 6.3.3 Mechanical Cross-Coupling 32 6.4 Minimum Flight Speeds - General 32 6.4.1 Loss of Lift 32 6.4.2 Warning of Approach of Vmin 32 6.5 Warning of Approach to Hazardous Flight Condition 33 6.6 Aircraft Behavior Following Systems Failure 33 Appendix 34 Maneuvers for V/STOL Aircraft Handling Qualities Evaluation 34 Summary of Criteria Tables 39 TABLE INDEX* 1.1 6 V/STOL Control Breakout Force Criteria 1.2 7 Control Force Gradients (lb/in.) for Hover 1.3 7 Control Force Gradients for STOL 1.4 7 Control Force Harmony Ratio Criteria 1.5 9 Cockpit Control Travel Limits (in.) 2.1 11 Pitch Control Power Characteristics 2.2 12 Pitch Control Sensitivity Characteristics 2.3 13 Pitch Angular Velocity Damping Criteria 2.4 13 Pitch Control System Time Lag Criteria 3.1 17 Roll Control Power Characteristics 3.2 18 Roll Control Sensitivity Characteristics 3.3 19 Cross-Coupling Characteristics in STOL Operation (Yaw Control Free) 3.4 19 Roll Angular Velocity Damping 3.5 20 Roll Control Lags 3.6 22 Yaw Control Power characteristics 3.7 23 Yaw Control Sensitivity Characteristics 3.8 24 Yaw Cross-Coupling Characteristics 4.1 26 Minimum Vertical Flight Path Control Characteristics in (STOL) Operation 4.2 28 Vertical Velocity and Thrust Response Characteristics FIGURE INDEX* 2.1 15 Longitudinal Dynamic Stability Criteria 3.1 25 Lateral-Directional Dynamic Stability Criteria 4.1 27 Vertical Thrust Margins Criteria *All tables and figures are summarized in the Appendix, Page 39. vi 1 V/STOL HANDLING-QUALITIES CRITERIA I - CRITERIA AND DISCUSSION INTRODUCTION Background. The first AGARD work relating to V/STOL handling-qualities criteria began in 1960; this work is documented in reference 1, published in October 1962. Following a general review in 1963, the report was revised to include comments on recommendations from industry, military services, and government agencies. This report (ref. 2), published in October 1964, has been used extensively as a guide in design-. ing new V/STOL aircraft. The report has received criticism, not unexpected, in two areas: scope and speci- fic recommendations. It was directed primarily toward VTOL aircraft and did not clarify a large number of requirements for STOL aircraft. In addition, recommendations did not include both VFR and IFR operation for all types of VTOL and STOL aircraft, because the background data used to establish many of the recommenda- tions had been obtained chiefly from helicopters. Perhaps the most serious deficiency was that the report attempted to provide quantitative requirements based on limited flight experience obtained for the most part from test-bed type aircraft. As a result, some inconsistencies would be expected when applications were made to operational V/STOL designs. In particular, the effect of vehicle gross weight or size on air- craft response was continually a source of disagreement. Further, the consequence of providing only minimum acceptable values of each handling-quality item was not fully appreciated (and perhaps is not yet under- stood); a VTOL aircraft that individually met all the recommendations could still be too demanding of pilot skill. In many cases, achieving a given set of numbers did not ensure a completely satisfactory aircraft, At the request of the Flight Mechanics Panel, a second AGARD V/STOL handling-qualities committee was organized in 1966 for the following purposes: 1. To revise and update AGARD Report No. 408A, changing its emphasis to reflect criteria rather than specifications. 2. To explore the latest VTOL flight-test techniques and recommend how to prepare a report on this activity . The committee consisted of one representative each from Canada, France, United Kingdom, West Germany, and Italy; the chairman and technical secretary were from the United States. Item (1) above was accomplished by (a) reviewing comments from users of TR No. 408A, (b) examining data from second-generation V/STOL air- craft, and (c) incorporating results from recent piloted simulator tests and analytical studies, Work directed at item (2) indicated an urgent need to standardize flight-test techniques to help reduce incon- sistencies in measurements of flight-test data. Although it was beyond the scope of this comittee to set up flight-test techniques, a set of standardized flight-test maneuvers was devised for pilots to use in evaluating handling qualities during flight tests of V/STOL aircraft. Revision Procedures. In revising TR 408A it was agreed that a more meaningful and useful document would include: 1. Evaluation of the various handling-qualities items in terms of criteria, rather than requirements or specifications 2. A discussion section to explain the purpose of each criterion 3. Data and reference material to support the criteria. Criteria can be defined as evaluation standards based on numbers that are meant only to be typical and can vary widely. Meaningful criteria can serve as a guide in establishing specifications to be used by a contractor for the design and testing of a particular aircraft. In the past, handling-qualities requirements have been presented without an explanation of why the pilot desires a particular characteristic; in many cases neither the purpose nor the various factors related to the requirements were understood.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Brief Review on Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System
    International Journal of Mechanical And Production Engineering, ISSN: 2320-2092, Volume- 5, Issue-6, Jun.-2017 http://iraj.in A BRIEF REVIEW ON ELECTROMAGNETIC AIRCRAFT LAUNCH SYSTEM 1AZEEM SINGH KAHLON, 2TAAVISHE GUPTA, 3POOJA DAHIYA, 4SUDHIR KUMAR CHATURVEDI Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Petroleum and Energy Studies, Dehradun, India E-mail: [email protected] Abstract - This paper describes the basic design, advantages and disadvantages of an Electromagnetic Aircraft Launch System (EMALS) for aircraft carriers of the future along with a brief comparison with traditional launch mechanisms. The purpose of the paper is to analyze the feasibility of EMALS for the next generation indigenous aircraft carrier INS Vishal. I. INTRODUCTION maneuvering. Depending on the thrust produced by the engines and weight of aircraft the length of the India has a central and strategic location in the Indian runway varies widely for different aircraft. Normal Ocean. It shares the longest coastline of 7500 runways are designed so as to accommodate the kilometers amongst other nations sharing the Indian launch for such deviation in takeoff lengths, but the Ocean. India's 80% trade is via sea routes passing scenario is different when it comes to aircraft carriers. through the Indian Ocean and 85% of its oil and gas Launch of an aircraft from a mobile platform always are imported through sea routes. Indian Ocean also requires additional systems and methods to assist the serves as the locus of important international Sea launch because the runway has to be scaled down, Lines Of Communication (SLOCs) . Development of which is only about 300 feet as compared to 5,000- India’s political structure, industrial and commercial 6,000 feet required for normal aircraft to takeoff from growth has no meaning until its shores are protected.
    [Show full text]
  • Adventures in Low Disk Loading VTOL Design
    NASA/TP—2018–219981 Adventures in Low Disk Loading VTOL Design Mike Scully Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California Click here: Press F1 key (Windows) or Help key (Mac) for help September 2018 This page is required and contains approved text that cannot be changed. NASA STI Program ... in Profile Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. to the advancement of aeronautics and space Collected papers from scientific and science. The NASA scientific and technical technical conferences, symposia, seminars, information (STI) program plays a key part in or other meetings sponsored or co- helping NASA maintain this important role. sponsored by NASA. The NASA STI program operates under the • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, auspices of the Agency Chief Information technical, or historical information from Officer. It collects, organizes, provides for NASA programs, projects, and missions, archiving, and disseminates NASA’s STI. The often concerned with subjects having NASA STI program provides access to the NTRS substantial public interest. Registered and its public interface, the NASA Technical Reports Server, thus providing one of • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. the largest collections of aeronautical and space English-language translations of foreign science STI in the world. Results are published in scientific and technical material pertinent to both non-NASA channels and by NASA in the NASA’s mission. NASA STI Report Series, which includes the following report types: Specialized services also include organizing and publishing research results, distributing • TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of specialized research announcements and feeds, completed research or a major significant providing information desk and personal search phase of research that present the results of support, and enabling data exchange services.
    [Show full text]
  • Constraints for STOL Operations in South Florida Conurbation Cedric Y
    Constraints for STOL Operations in South Florida Conurbation Cedric Y. Justin June 2021 Based on research previously published: Development of a Methodology for Parametric Analysis of STOL Airpark Geo-Density, Robinson et al. AIAA AVIATION 2018 Door-to-Door Travel Time Comparative Assessment for Conventional Transportation Methods and Short Takeoff and Landing On Demand Mobility Concepts, Wei et al. AIAA AVIATION 2018 Wind and Obstacles Impact on Airpark Placement for STOL-based Sub-Urban Air Mobility, Somers et al., AIAA AVIATION 2019 Optimal Siting of Sub-Urban Air Mobility (sUAM) Ground Architectures using Network Flow Formulation, Venkatesh et al, AIAA AVIATION 2020 Comparative Assessment of STOL-based Sub-Urban Air Mobility Operations in Massachusetts and South Florida, Justin et al. AIAA AVIATION 2020 Current Market Segmentation ? VTOL CTOL CTOL CTOL CTOL Capacity ? 200-400+ pax Twin Aisle Are there 120-210 pax scenarios where Single Aisle an intermediate solution using 50-90 pax STOL vehicles and Regional Aircraft sitting in- Design range below 300 nm Commuters between UAM 9-50 pax Flight time below 1.5 hours Thin-Haul and thin-haul 9 to 50 seat capacity operations exists? 4-9 pax Sub-Urban Missions 50-150 nm Air Mobility 4 to 9 revenue-seats Missions below 50 nm Urban Air Mobility 1-4 pax 1 to 4 revenue-seats 50 nm 300 nm 500 nm 3000 nm 6000+ nm Artwork Credit Uber Design Range 2 Introduction • Population, urbanization, and congestion Atlanta, GA Miami, FL Dallas, TX Los Angeles, CA have increased steadily over the past several decades • Increasing delays damage the environment and substantially impact the economy Driving time: 8 min.
    [Show full text]
  • Flow Visualization Studies of VTOL Aircraft Models During Hover in Ground Effect
    NASA Technical Memorandum 108860 Flow Visualization Studies of VTOL Aircraft Models During Hover In Ground Effect Nikos J. Mourtos, Stephane Couillaud, and Dale Carter, San Jose State University, San Jose, California Craig Hange, Doug Wardwell, and Richard J. Margason, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California Janua_ 1995 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 Flow Visualization Studies of VTOL Aircraft Models During Hover In Ground Effect NIKOS J. MOURTOS,* STEPHANE COUILLAUD,* DALE CARTER,* CRAIG HANGE, DOUG WARDWELL, AND RICHARD J. MARGASON Ames Research Center Summary fountain fluid flows along the fuselage lower surface toward the jets where it is entrained by the jet and forms a A flow visualization study of several configurations of a vortex pair as sketched in figure 1(a). The jet efflux and jet-powered vertical takeoff and landing (VTOL) model the fountain flow entrain ambient temperature air which during hover in ground effect was conducted. A surface produces a nonuniform temperature profile. This oil flow technique was used to observe the flow patterns recirculation is called near-field HGI and can cause a on the lower surfaces of the model. Wing height with rapid increase in the inlet temperature which in turn respect to fuselage and nozzle pressure ratio are seen to decreases the thrust. In addition, uneven temperature have a strong effect on the wing trailing edge flow angles. distribution can result in inlet flow distortion and cause This test was part of a program to improve the methods compressor stall. In addition, the fountain-induced vortex for predicting the hot gas ingestion (HGI) for jet-powered pair can cause a lift loss and a pitching-moment vertical/short takeoff and landing (V/STOL) aircraft.
    [Show full text]
  • Supersonic STOVL Ejector Aircraft from a Propulsion Point of View
    N84-24581 NASA Technical Memorandum 83641 9 Supersonic STOVL Ejector Aircraft from a Propulsion Point of View R. Luidens, R. Plencner, W. Haller, and A. blassman Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio Prepared for the Twentieth Joint Propulsion Coiiference cosponsored by the AIAA, SAE, and ASME i Cincinnati, Ohio, June 11-13, 1984 I 1 1 SUPERSONIC STOVL EJECTOR AIRCRAFT FROH A PROPULSION POINT OF VIEW R hidens,* R. Plencner,** W. Hailer.** and A Glassman+ National Aeronautics and Space Administration Lewis Research Center Cleveland, Ohio Abstract 1 Higher propulsion system thrust for greater lift-off acceleration. The paper first describes a baseline super- sonic STOVL ejector aircraft, including its 2 Cooler footprint, for safer, more propulsion and typical operating modes, and convenient handllng, and lower observability identiftes Important propulsion parameters Then a number of propulsion system changes are 3. Alternattve basic propulsion cycles evaluated in terms of improving the lift-off performance; namely, aft deflection of the ejec- The approach of this paper is to use the tor jet and heating of the ejector primary air aircraft of reference 5 as a baseline. and then either by burning or using the hot englne core to consider some candidate propulsion system flow The possibility for cooling the footprint growth options The vehicle described in refe- is illustrated for the cases of mixing or lnter- rence 5 was selected on the basis of detailed changlng the fan and core flows, and uslng a alrcraft design and performance analyses The
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling and Analysis of Disc Rotor Wing
    © 2020 JETIR March 2020, Volume 7, Issue 3 www.jetir.org (ISSN-2349-5162) MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF DISC ROTOR WING 1 2 3 G. MANJULA , L. BALASUBRAMANYAM , S. JITHENDRA NAIK 1PG scholor, 2Asso.Professor, 3Asso.Professor Mechanical Engineering Department 1P.V.K.K Engineering College, Anantapur, AP, INDIA. Abstract-Disc rotor configuration may be a conceptual design. the aim of the Project is to guage the merits of the DiscRotor concept that combine the features of a retractable rotor system for vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) with an integral, circular wing for high-speed flight. The primary objective of this project is to style such a configuration using the planning software Unigraphics and afterward analyzing the designed structure for its structural strength in analysis software ANSYS. This project deals with the all the required aerodynamic requirements of the rotor configuration. In today’s world most the vtol/stol largely depends upon the thrust vectoring that needs huge amounts of fuel and separate devices like nozzles etc., whose production is extremely much tedious and dear. this is often an effort to use a rotor as within the case of helicopters for vtol/stol thus reducing the foremost of the value though weight would be considered as a hindrance to the project. Keywords: Disc rotor wing, vertical take-off and landing (VTOL), UNIGRAPHICS, ANSYS software, Force, Coefficients, Wall and Wing. I. INTRODUCTION A circular wing, or disc, is that the primary lifting surface of the Disc Rotor aircraft during high-speed flight (approx. 400knots). During the high-speed flight, the disc are going to be fixed (i.e.
    [Show full text]
  • A Conceptual Design of a Short Takeoff and Landing Regional Jet Airliner
    A Conceptual Design of a Short Takeoff and Landing Regional Jet Airliner Andrew S. Hahn 1 NASA Langley Research Center, Hampton, VA, 23681 Most jet airliner conceptual designs adhere to conventional takeoff and landing performance. Given this predominance, takeoff and landing performance has not been critical, since it has not been an active constraint in the design. Given that the demand for air travel is projected to increase dramatically, there is interest in operational concepts, such as Metroplex operations that seek to unload the major hub airports by using underutilized surrounding regional airports, as well as using underutilized runways at the major hub airports. Both of these operations require shorter takeoff and landing performance than is currently available for airliners of approximately 100-passenger capacity. This study examines the issues of modeling performance in this now critical flight regime as well as the impact of progressively reducing takeoff and landing field length requirements on the aircraft’s characteristics. Nomenclature CTOL = conventional takeoff and landing FAA = Federal Aviation Administration FAR = Federal Aviation Regulation RJ = regional jet STOL = short takeoff and landing UCD = three-dimensional Weissinger lifting line aerodynamics program I. Introduction EMAND for air travel over the next fifty to D seventy-five years has been projected to be as high as three times that of today. Given that the major airport hubs are already congested, and that the ability to increase capacity at these airports by building more full- size runways is limited, unconventional solutions are being considered to accommodate the projected increased demand. Two possible solutions being considered are: Metroplex operations, and using existing underutilized runways at the major hub airports.
    [Show full text]
  • FINAL Kennedy Space Center Florida Scrub-Jay Compensation Plan
    FINAL Kennedy Space Center Florida Scrub-Jay Compensation Plan February 13, 2014 Prepared for: Environmental Management Branch TA-A4C National Aeronautics and Space Administration John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 Prepared by: Medical and Environmental Support Contract (MESC) CLIN10 Environmental Projects IHA Environmental Services Branch IHA-022 Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 *THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK* ii Kennedy Space Center Florida Scrub-Jay Compensation Plan February 13, 2014 Prepared for: Environmental Management Branch TA-A4C National Aeronautics and Space Administration John F. Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 Prepared by: Medical and Environmental Support Contract (MESC) CLIN10 Environmental Projects IHA Environmental Services Branch IHA-022 Kennedy Space Center, Florida 32899 iii ACRONYMS Ac Acre BO Biological Opinion ADP Area Development Plan CCAFS Cape Canaveral Air Force Station CCF Converter Compressor Facility CCP Comprehensive Conservation Plan EO Executive Order CofF Construction of Facilities EA Environmental Assessment EES Emergency Egress Systems ESA Endangered Species Act FAC Florida Administrative Code FDEP Florida Department of Environmental Protection ft feet ft2 square feet FWC Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission in inches IRL Indian River Lagoon GHe Gaseous Helium ha hectares HIF Horizontal Integration Facility IHA InoMedic Health Applications, Inc. kg kilogram km kilometer KSC Kennedy Space Center lbs pounds LC Launch Complex LH2 Liquid Hydrogen LOX Liquid Oxygen mmeter
    [Show full text]
  • United States Rocket Research and Development During World War II
    United States Rocket Research and Development During World War II Unidentified U.S. Navy LSM(R) (Landing Ship Medium (Rocket)) launching barrage rockets during a drill late in the Second World War. Image courtesy of the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. and jet-assisted takeoff (JATO) units for piston-pow- Over the course of the Second World War, rockets ered attack fighters and bombers. Wartime American evolved from scientific and technical curiosities into rocket research evolved along a number of similar and practical weapons with specific battlefield applications. overlapping research trajectories. Both the U.S. Navy The Allied and Axis powers both pursued rocket re- and Army (which included the Army Air Forces) devel- search and development programs during the war. Brit- oped rockets for ground bombardment purposes. The ish and American rocket scientists and engineers (and services also fielded aerial rockets for use by attack their Japanese adversaries) mainly focused their efforts aircraft. The Navy worked on rocket-powered bombs on tactical applications using solid-propellant rockets, for antisubmarine warfare, while the Army developed while the Germans pursued a variety of strategic and the handheld bazooka antitank rocket system. Lastly, tactical development programs primarily centered on both the Army and Navy conducted research into JATO liquid-propellant rockets. German Army researchers units for use with bombers and seaplanes. Throughout led by Wernher von Braun spent much of the war de- the war, however, limited coordination between the veloping the A-4 (more popularly known as the V-2), armed services and federal wartime planning bodies a sophisticated long-range, liquid-fueled rocket that hampered American rocket development efforts and led was employed to bombard London and Rotterdam late to duplicated research and competition amongst pro- in the war.
    [Show full text]
  • Small-Scale Experiments in STOVL Ground Effects
    NASA Technical Memorandum 102813 Small-Scale Experiments in STOVL Ground Effects Victor R. Corsiglia and Douglas A. Wardwell, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California Richard E. Kuhn, STO-VL Technology, San Diego, California April 1991 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 SMALL-SCALE EXPERIMENTS IN STOVL GROUND EFFECTS Victor R. Corsiglia and Douglas A. Wardwell NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California, 94035 USA Richard E. Kuhn STO-VL Technology San Diego, California, 92128 USA Abstract Pi local static pressure A series of tests has been completed inwhich Pjet total pressure at jet exit suckdown and fountain forces and pressures were measured on circular plates and twin-tandem-jet AM jet induced pitching moment generic STOVL (short takeoff and vertical landing) configurations. The tests were conducted using a Ap local pressure difference; _P = small-scale hover rig, for jet pressure ratios up to 6 Pi- Pamb and jet temperatures up to 700 °F. The measured suckdown force on a circular plate with a central jet S model planform area was greater than that found with a commonly used empidcal prediction method. The present data T thrust, T = 7.0 A( Pamb)[(NPR 0.286) -1], showed better agreement with other sets of data. NPR < 1.893 The tests of the generic STOVL configurations were conducted to provide tome and pressure data with T = A(Pamb)[(1.2679)NPR -1 ], a parametric variation of parameters so that an NPR > 1.893 empirical prediction method could be developed. The effects of jet pressure ratio and temperature T jet temperature were found to be small.
    [Show full text]
  • WYVER Heavy Lift VTOL Aircraft
    WYVER Heavy Lift VTOL Aircraft Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1st June, 2005 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS We would like to thank Professor Nikhil Koratkar for his help, guidance, and recommendations, both with the technical and aesthetic aspects of this proposal. 22ND ANNUAL AHS INTERNATIONAL STUDENT DESIGN COMPETITION UNDERGRADUATE CATEGORY Robin Chin Raisul Haque Rafael Irizarry Heather Maffei Trevor Tersmette 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary.................................................................................................................................. 4 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................................... 9 2. Design Philosophy.............................................................................................................................. 10 2.1 Mission Requirements .................................................................................................................. 11 2.2 Aircraft Configuration Trade Study.............................................................................................. 11 2.2.1 Tandem Design Evaluation.................................................................................................... 12 2.2.2 Tilt-Rotor Design Evaluation ................................................................................................ 15 2.2.3 Tri-Rotor Design Evaluation ................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Advisory Circular 120-62
    fw 3 Advisory U.S.Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Circular ’ AdminisWation Qlbject: TAKEOFF SAFETY TRAINING AID bte: g/Q/g4 AC No. 120-6.2 Announcement Of Availability Initiatedby: AFS-210 Change; 1 PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) announces the availability of a joint industry/Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Takeoff Safety Training Aid to help air carriers and pilots increase safety during the takeoff phase of flight. a. The FAA recommends early consideration of the information contained in the aid and use of the material, as appropriate, for training aircrews. This AC also highlights certain key items, concepts, and definitions that each air carrier or operator should address in their respective operational procedures and crew qualification programs. b This circular applies to Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) Part 121 operators. However, many of the principles, concepts, and procedures described apply to operations under FAR Parts 918 129, and 135 for certain aircraft, and are recommended for use by those operators when applicable. 2 BACKGROUND. Takeoff accidents resulting from improper rejected takeoff (RTO) decisions and procedures are significant contributors to worldwide commercial aviation accident statistics. For those takeoffs that are rejected, and for takeoffs made under certain environmental conditions and with certain system failures, risks could be reduced by a higher level of flightcrew knowledge and by the use of improved procedures. Due to the risks and the accident statistics associated with takeoffs, a joint FAA/industry team studied what actions might be taken to increase takeoff safety. These studies included simulation trials and in-depth analysis of takeoff accidents and incidents.
    [Show full text]