DOCSLIB.ORG

Vpa Report 2002-12-05

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Vpa Report 2002-12-05 UNCLASSIFIED NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND TECHNICAL REPORT REPORT NO: NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Robert Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. UNCLASSIFIED DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY NAVAL AIR WARFARE CENTER AIRCRAFT DIVISION PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REVIEW OF THE CARRIER APPROACH CRITERIA FOR CARRIER-BASED AIRCRAFT - PHASE I; FINAL REPORT by Thomas Rudowsky Stephen Cook Marshall Hynes Robert Heffley Melvin Luter Thomas Lawrence CAPT Robert Niewoehner Douglas Bollman Page Senn Dr. Wayne Durham Henry Beaufrere Michael Yokell Albert Sonntag NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 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 this 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 Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. 1. REPORT DATE 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED Technical Report November 1999 – October 2001 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER N/A Review of the Carrier Approach Criteria used in the Prediction of Approach 5b. GRANT NUMBER Speed for Carrier-Based Aircraft - Phase I; Final Report 5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER Thomas Rudowsky, Stephen Cook, Marshall Hynes, Robert Heffley 5e. TASK NUMBER Melvin Luter, Thomas Lawrence, CAPT Robert Niewoehner, Douglas Bollman, Carroll Senn, Dr. Wayne Durham, Henry Beaufrere, Albert Sonntag 5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER Michael Yokell 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NUMBER Naval Air Systems Command 48110 Shaw Road, Unit 5, Suite 1320B NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 Patuxent River, Maryland 20670-1906 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S) Naval Air Systems Command NAVAIRSYSCOM, PEO(JSF) 48110 Shaw Road, Unit 5, Suite 1320B 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S) Patuxent River, Maryland 20670-1906 12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 14. ABSTRACT The approach speed criteria used in the design and development of carrier-based aircraft was investigated. This report provides a historical review, analysis of requirements, and an analysis of legacy aircraft relative to the approach speed criteria. The relevancy and adequacy of the carrier approach speed criteria are assessed. Recommendations for future investigations and assessment are presented. 15. SUBJECT TERMS Carrier Approach Speed, Design Criteria 16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON OF ABSTRACT OF PAGES Tom Rudowsky a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code) Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified SAR 301-342-8526 i NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 SUMMARY The Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) Program Office sponsored a study to review the existing Carrier Approach Criteria (CAC). These criteria are also commonly referred to as the Approach Speed Criteria or Vpa Criteria. The study’s motivation was based on questions surrounding the applicability of the CAC, which have evolved over the past 30+ years, as design tools for the prediction of approach speed. With significant technological advancements during this period, it was questioned if the criteria’s assumptions and application were still valid for design purposes. It is clear that these criteria considerably affect the design space of Naval carrier-based aircraft and reduce the flexibility of the designer for satisfying other mission critical requirements. For these reasons, it is imperative that the Navy have a full understanding of the design impact of these criteria and can clearly justify their application in predicting Vpa. The Joint Service Specification Guide (JSSG) criteria definitions were used as the basis of this study. The CAC include the glide slope transfer (popup) maneuver, small and large throttle response, field of view (FOV), Level 1 flying qualities (FQ) (primarily roll control and flightpath stability), stall margin, and flight control limit speed. Waveoff and bolter performance were also considerations in the Vpa definition and are included as part of the CAC. The results documented in this report represent the first of several planned phases. The focus of this phase was to research and analyze the assumptions behind the JSSG criteria. It is recognized that a variation of the JSSG definitions was used for the JSF Joint Model Specification and those variations are discussed. It was the intent of this phase to identify shortcomings with the existing criteria, conduct analysis and research for criteria development for low risk, high payoff areas that were clearly seen as inadequate, and identify areas for future research and assessment. It was not the intent to emerge from this phase with a new set of criteria. However, with the background information provided, the designer and the acquisition community are in a better position to make informed program decisions relative to the criticality of the individual criteria. It is intended that further investigation will yield new and/or improved criteria. The study developed formal definitions to rate the adequacy and relevancy of each of the criteria. In general, the criteria were found to lack traceability to the approach task. Based on these definitions, the FOV criterion was found to be adequate. The stall speed margin, GS transfer (popup) maneuver, and small throttle response were rated as inadequate. The remaining criteria were rated as marginally adequate. Significant conclusions from this phase of the investigation are: a) Many of the existing criteria are not well-founded. The majority of the criteria are based on empirical data from aircraft designs that are in some cases 40 years old. b) Current application of the CAC (to define Vpa) is not consistent with the intent of early pioneers of CAC development. iii NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 c) Analysis of Naval Safety Center data from January 1980 through May 2001 concluded that there is no longer a credible correlation between mishap rate and Vpa within the scope of aircraft reviewed and therefore should not be used as an indicator of safety. d) Because Naval aircraft programs almost always involve competition between two or more design concepts, it becomes extremely difficult from an industry perspective to fail to satisfy any of the CAC to meet the Vpa requirement prior to System Development and Demonstration (SDD). Therefore, the criteria, although not specifically defined as requirements, in practice become “hard requirements” to the designer. e) The practice of separately defining a limit Vpa, arresting gear limit speed, and the wind over deck limit overspecifies the problem, which leads to incompatible requirements. The key recommendations from this phase of the investigation are: a) A Phase II investigation should be conducted to develop criteria that are traceable to the approach task. b) NAVAIRSYSCOM should define a process for periodic review and assessment of the CAC that includes both government and industry representatives. c) Further analysis of Key Performance Parameter (KPP) selection should be conducted in a Phase II study. Further discussion between the program manager, requirements community, and engineering should address KPP selection if it is desired that a KPP is warranted for the approach task. iv NAWCADPAX/TR-2002/71 Contents Page No. Summary......................................................................................................................................iii List of Figures ............................................................................................................................xiii List of Tables .............................................................................................................................. xv Acknowledgements...................................................................................................................xvii Introduction...................................................................................................................................1 Background .............................................................................................................................1 Purpose....................................................................................................................................3 Scope.......................................................................................................................................3
Load more

Recommended publications
  • US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes
    US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes BRAD ELWARD ILLUSTRATED BY PAUL WRIGHT © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com NEW VANGUARD 211 US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS Forrestal, Kitty Hawk and Enterprise Classes BRAD ELWARD ILLUSTRATED BY PAUL WRIGHT © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 ORIGINS OF THE CARRIER AND THE SUPERCARRIER 5 t World War II Carriers t Post-World War II Carrier Developments t United States (CVA-58) THE FORRESTAL CLASS 11 FORRESTAL AS BUILT 14 t Carrier Structures t The Flight Deck and Hangar Bay t Launch and Recovery Operations t Stores t Defensive Systems t Electronic Systems and Radar t Propulsion THE FORRESTAL CARRIERS 20 t USS Forrestal (CVA-59) t USS Saratoga (CVA-60) t USS Ranger (CVA-61) t USS Independence (CVA-62) THE KITTY HAWK CLASS 26 t Major Differences from the Forrestal Class t Defensive Armament t Dimensions and Displacement t Propulsion t Electronics and Radars t USS America, CVA-66 – Improved Kitty Hawk t USS John F. Kennedy, CVA-67 – A Singular Class THE KITTY HAWK AND JOHN F. KENNEDY CARRIERS 34 t USS Kitty Hawk (CVA-63) t USS Constellation (CVA-64) t USS America (CVA-66) t USS John F. Kennedy (CVA-67) THE ENTERPRISE CLASS 40 t Propulsion t Stores t Flight Deck and Island t Defensive Armament t USS Enterprise (CVAN-65) BIBLIOGRAPHY 47 INDEX 48 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com US COLD WAR AIRCRAFT CARRIERS FORRESTAL, KITTY HAWK AND ENTERPRISE CLASSES INTRODUCTION The Forrestal-class aircraft carriers were the world’s first true supercarriers and served in the United States Navy for the majority of America’s Cold War with the Soviet Union.
    [Show full text]
  • FAA Advisory Circular AC 91-74B
    U.S. Department Advisory of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration Circular Subject: Pilot Guide: Flight in Icing Conditions Date:10/8/15 AC No: 91-74B Initiated by: AFS-800 Change: This advisory circular (AC) contains updated and additional information for the pilots of airplanes under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) parts 91, 121, 125, and 135. The purpose of this AC is to provide pilots with a convenient reference guide on the principal factors related to flight in icing conditions and the location of additional information in related publications. As a result of these updates and consolidating of information, AC 91-74A, Pilot Guide: Flight in Icing Conditions, dated December 31, 2007, and AC 91-51A, Effect of Icing on Aircraft Control and Airplane Deice and Anti-Ice Systems, dated July 19, 1996, are cancelled. This AC does not authorize deviations from established company procedures or regulatory requirements. John Barbagallo Deputy Director, Flight Standards Service 10/8/15 AC 91-74B CONTENTS Paragraph Page CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1. Purpose ..............................................................................................................................1 1-2. Cancellation ......................................................................................................................1 1-3. Definitions.........................................................................................................................1 1-4. Discussion .........................................................................................................................6
    [Show full text]
  • PROPULSION SYSTEM/FLIGHT CONTROL INTEGRATION for SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT Paul J
    PROPULSION SYSTEM/FLIGHT CONTROL INTEGRATION FOR SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT Paul J. Reukauf and Frank W. Burcham , Jr. NASA Dryden Flight Research Center SUMMARY The NASA Dryden Flight Research Center is engaged in several programs to study digital integrated control systems. Such systems allow minimization of undesirable interactions while maximizing performance at all flight conditions. One such program is the YF-12 cooperative control program. In this program, the existing analog air-data computer, autothrottle, autopilot, and inlet control systems are to be converted to digital systems by using a general purpose airborne computer and interface unit. First, the existing control laws are to be programed and tested in flight. Then, integrated control laws, derived using accurate mathematical models of the airplane and propulsion system in conjunction with modern control techniques, are to be tested in flight. Analysis indicates that an integrated autothrottle-autopilot gives good flight path control and that observers can be used to replace failed sensors. INTRODUCTION Supersonic airplanes, such as the XB-70, YF-12, F-111, and F-15 airplanes, exhibit strong interactions between the engine and the inlet or between the propul- sion system and the airframe (refs. 1 and 2) . Taking advantage of possible favor- able interactions and eliminating or minimizing unfavorable interactions is a chal- lenging control problem with the potential for significant improvements in fuel consumption, range, and performance. In the past, engine, inlet, and flight control systems were usually developed separately, with a minimum of integration. It has often been possible to optimize the controls for a single design point, but off-design control performance usually suffered.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Carrier Operating Procedures
    This document belongs to “Speed & Angels” and shall not be reproduced. Created by: DCS-Sn@k3Sh!t for educational and training purposes only. Aircraft Carrier Operating Procedures This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- ShareAlike 4.0 International License. For DCS World 2.5 Revision 01 © Copyright Act R.S.C. 1985 c. C-42. This document belongs to “Speed & Angels” and shall not be reproduced. Foreword: Created by: DCS-Sn@k3Sh!t for educational and training purposes only. The goal of every Naval Officer who is selected for jet pilot training is to become a tactical carrier pilot. Carrier pilots are the best because they must be the best. The carrier environment will not tolerate anything less. Landing and launching aircraft as well as moving equipment and personnel in a relatively small area requires precise coordination for safe operation. Handling aircraft on a flight deck is more complicated than at a field due to the high winds across the deck, small crowded deck, the proximity of the deck edge and the ship's movement. Successful and safe operations in and around the carrier depend on a coordinated team effort in which all team members do their job properly. There is no excuse for not knowing and not using correct procedures around the ship and there are no exceptions to this rule. This manual is written with the intent to achieve the highest possible standard of “Carrier Operations” within DCS World. After studying this manual, you should be able to operate safely and expeditiously on and in proximity of the carrier.
    [Show full text]
  • Using an Autothrottle to Compare Techniques for Saving Fuel on A
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2010 Using an autothrottle ot compare techniques for saving fuel on a regional jet aircraft Rebecca Marie Johnson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Johnson, Rebecca Marie, "Using an autothrottle ot compare techniques for saving fuel on a regional jet aircraft" (2010). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 11358. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/11358 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Using an autothrottle to compare techniques for saving fuel on A regional jet aircraft by Rebecca Marie Johnson A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Electrical Engineering Program of Study Committee: Umesh Vaidya, Major Professor Qingze Zou Baskar Ganapathayasubramanian Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2010 Copyright c Rebecca Marie Johnson, 2010. All rights reserved. ii DEDICATION I gratefully acknowledge everyone who contributed to the successful completion of this research. Bill Piche, my supervisor at Rockwell Collins, was supportive from day one, as were many of my colleagues. I also appreciate the efforts of my thesis committee, Drs. Umesh Vaidya, Qingze Zou, and Baskar Ganapathayasubramanian. I would also like to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Pilot Stories
    PILOT STORIES DEDICATED to the Memory Of those from the GREATEST GENERATION December 16, 2014 R.I.P. Norm Deans 1921–2008 Frank Hearne 1924-2013 Ken Morrissey 1923-2014 Dick Herman 1923-2014 "Oh, I have slipped the surly bonds of earth, And danced the skies on Wings of Gold; I've climbed and joined the tumbling mirth of sun-split clouds - and done a hundred things You have not dreamed of - wheeled and soared and swung high in the sunlit silence. Hovering there I've chased the shouting wind along and flung my eager craft through footless halls of air. "Up, up the long delirious burning blue I've topped the wind-swept heights with easy grace, where never lark, or even eagle, flew; and, while with silent, lifting mind I've trod the high untrespassed sanctity of space, put out my hand and touched the face of God." NOTE: Portions Of This Poem Appear On The Headstones Of Many Interred In Arlington National Cemetery. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 – Dick Herman Bermuda Triangle 4 Worst Nightmare 5 2 – Frank Hearne Coming Home 6 3 – Lee Almquist Going the Wrong Way 7 4 – Mike Arrowsmith Humanitarian Aid Near the Grand Canyon 8 5 – Dale Berven Reason for Becoming a Pilot 11 Dilbert Dunker 12 Pride of a Pilot 12 Moral Question? 13 Letter Sent Home 13 Sense of Humor 1 – 2 – 3 14 Sense of Humor 4 – 5 15 “Poopy Suit” 16 A War That Could Have Started… 17 Missions Over North Korea 18 Landing On the Wrong Carrier 19 How Casual Can One Person Be? 20 6 – Gardner Bride Total Revulsion, Fear, and Helplessness 21 7 – Allan Cartwright A Very Wet Landing 23 Alpha Strike
    [Show full text]
  • Writing to Think
    U.S. Naval War College U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons Newport Papers Special Collections 2-2014 Writing to Think Robert C. Rubel Follow this and additional works at: https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers Recommended Citation Rubel, Robert C., "Writing to Think" (2014). Newport Papers. 41. https://digital-commons.usnwc.edu/usnwc-newport-papers/41 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Special Collections at U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Newport Papers by an authorized administrator of U.S. Naval War College Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. NAVAL WAR COLLEGE NEWPORT PAPERS 41 NAVAL WAR COLLEGE WAR NAVAL Writing to Think The Intellectual Journey of a Naval Career NEWPORT PAPERS NEWPORT 41 Robert C. Rubel Cover This perspective aerial view of Newport, Rhode Island, drawn and published by Galt & Hoy of New York, circa 1878, is found in the American Memory Online Map Collections: 1500–2003, of the Library of Congress Geography and Map Division, Washington, D.C. The map may be viewed at http://hdl.loc.gov/ loc.gmd/g3774n.pm008790. Writing to Think The Intellectual Journey of a Naval Career Robert C. Rubel NAVAL WAR COLLEGE PRESS Newport, Rhode Island meyers$:___WIPfrom C 032812:_Newport Papers:_NP_41 Rubel:_InDesign:000 NP_41 Rubel-FrontMatter.indd January 31, 2014 10:06 AM Naval War College The Newport Papers are extended research projects that Newport, Rhode Island the Director, the Dean of Naval Warfare Studies, and the Center for Naval Warfare Studies President of the Naval War College consider of particular Newport Paper Forty-One interest to policy makers, scholars, and analysts.
    [Show full text]
  • Boeing Submission for Asiana Airlines (AAR) 777-200ER HL7742 Landing Accident at San Francisco – 6 July 2013
    Michelle E. Bernson The Boeing Company Chief Engineer P.O. Box 3707 MC 07-32 Air Safety Investigation Seattle, WA 98124-2207 Commercial Airplanes 17 March 2014 66-ZB-H200-ASI-18750 Mr. Bill English Investigator In Charge National Transportation Safety Board 490 L’Enfant Plaza, SW Washington DC 20594 via e-mail: [email protected] Subject: Boeing Submission for Asiana Airlines (AAR) 777-200ER HL7742 Landing Accident at San Francisco – 6 July 2013 Reference: NTSB Tech Review Meeting on 13 February 2014 Dear Mr. English: As requested during the reference technical review, please find the attached Boeing submission on the subject accident. Per your request we are sending this electronic version to your attention for distribution within the NTSB. We would like to thank the NTSB for giving us the opportunity to make this submission. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us. Best regardsregards,, Michelle E. E Bernson Chief Engineer Air Safety Investigation Enclosure: Boeing Submission to the NTSB for the subject accident Submission to the National Transportation Safety Board for the Asiana 777-200ER – HL7742 Landing Accident at San Francisco 6 July 2013 The Boeing Company 17 March 2014 INTRODUCTION On 6 July 2013, at approximately 11:28 a.m. Pacific Standard Time, a Boeing 777-200ER airplane, registration HL7742, operating as Asiana Airlines Flight 214 on a flight from Seoul, South Korea, impacted the seawall just short of Runway 28L at San Francisco International Airport. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident with clear visibility and sunny skies.
    [Show full text]
  • Mk 7 Aircraft Recovery Equipment
    CHAPTER 3 MK 7 AIRCRAFT RECOVERY EQUIPMENT Present-day aircraft normally require the use of then opened, allowing fluid to be forced from the runways that are 5,000 to 8,000 feet long in order to accumulator back into the engine cylinder, forcing the land ashore. On an aircraft carrier, these same aircraft ram out. As the ram moves out of the cylinder, the are stopped within 350 feet after contacting the deck. crosshead is forced away from the fixed sheave This feat is accomplished through the use of aircraft assembly, pulling the purchase cables back onto the recovery equipment, including an emergency barricade engine until the crosshead is returned to its BATTERY that brings a landing aircraft to a controlled stop by position and the crossdeck pendant is in its normal absorbing and dispelling the energy developed by the position on the flight deck. landing aircraft. This recovery equipment is commonly called arresting gear. PRERECOVERY PREPARATIONS The sole purpose of an aircraft carrier is to provide Prior to recovery of aircraft, all recovery equipment a means of launching a strike against an enemy and landing area must be made ready and all personnel anywhere in the world. After the aircraft complete their properly positioned. The following is a general listing mission, the carrier must provide a means of safely of the events that must be accomplished prior to the recovering them. The Mk 7 arresting gear provides this recovery of aircraft: means. • All operational retractable sheaves raised to the full up position AIRCRAFT RECOVERY • LEARNING OBJECTIVE: Describe aircraft All aft deckedge antennas positioned, as arrestments aboard aircraft carriers.
    [Show full text]
  • Twins in an Ever-Changing Business Aviation World, Turboprops
    Textron is betting big 16 with the Cessna Denali that turboprops have a solid future. Twins Dornier Seastar After several years of uncer- tainty, the centerline push-pull, all-composite amphibian twin appears back on track after the Dornier family formed a new joint venture (Dornier Seawings) to manufacture the aircraft with China’s Wuxi Industrial Development Group and the Wuxi Communications Industry Group. It then struck a deal in February this year for component airframe parts for the first 10 aircraft to be manu- factured at Diamond Aircraft’s by Mark Huber plant in London, Ontario, and shipped to Dornier Seawings in 16 Oberpfaffenhofen, Germany, In an ever-changing business aviation world, turboprops for final assembly. Produc- represent timeless value in a steady market segment. tion eventually will be shifted to China. The interior of the Seastar Perhaps it is appropriate that things do not move very fast in the turboprop segment. Consider this: can be tailored to many dif- the Dornier Seastar first flew in 1984, was certified in 1991 and apparently will at last enter production ferent operations: personal, later this year. Or that Cessna, after dipping its toes in the pressurized turboprop single market for the commercial, government or better part of a decade, finally decided to jump into the pool this year—with the Denali—and likely will corporate missions. It fea- tures a light and spacious have an aircraft to customers by 2020. Or India’s NAL Saras. After three decades of development, two cabin that can be equipped flying prototypes and reportedly nearly half a billion dollars, the Indian government finally decided to with various configurations, pull the financial feeding tube and kill it.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Fixed Wing Aircraft in the Aircraft Carrier Environment
    EVALUATING FIXED WING AIRCRAFT IN THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER ENVIRONMENT by Mr. C. P.Senn STIKE AIRCRAFT TEST DIRECTORATE NAVAL AIR TEST CE/TER PATUXENT RIVER, MARYLAND 20670-5304 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA The Aircraft Carrier Flieht Deck Layout Operating fixed wing aircraft from today's modern aircraft carrier is a demanding task. Evaluation of aircraft/ship compafi- The flight deck layout of today's modem aircraft carrier is bility, both during the concept development phase and FullScale shown in figure 1. Two steam powered catapults are located Development (FSD) ground and flight tests presents the evaluation forward (bow catapults) and two catapults are located amidships on team with unique challenges. The capabilities and characteristics the port side (waist catapults). Retractable let Blast Deflector of high performance carrier based tactical aircraft must be quanti- (JBD)panels are located aft of each catapult. The centerline of the flied for the catapult launch and subsequent flyaway, and the carrier landing area is angled relative to the ship's centerline, permitting approach and arrested landing tasks. Catapult launching involves simultaneous catapult launch operations from the bow catapults determining the minimum safe launch airspeeds while maintaining and arrested landing operations. Four arresting gear cables, acceptable flight characteristics in this low altitude, high angle of connected to arresting engines are located in the landing area. The attack (AOA) regime. Approach and landing requires the slowest first is approximately 170 ft (51.8 m) from the stern with approx. possible approach airspeeds while retaining the performance and imately 50 ft (15.2 m) between each arresting gear cable.
    [Show full text]
  • Dodig-2016-107 for Official Use Only
    Report No. DODIG-2016-107 FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY U.S. Department of Defense InspectorJULY 5, 2016 General Advanced Arresting Gear Program Exceeded Cost and Schedule Baselines INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY EXCELLENCE The document contains information that may be exempt from mandatory disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY INTEGRITY EFFICIENCY ACCOUNTABILITY EXCELLENCE Mission Our mission is to provide independent, relevant, and timely oversight of the Department of Defense that supports the warfighter; promotes accountability, integrity, and efficiency; advises the Secretary of Defense and Congress; and informs the public. Vision Our vision is to be a model oversight organization in the Federal Government by leading change, speaking truth, and promoting excellence—a diverse organization, working together as one professional team, recognized as leaders in our field. Fraud, Waste, & Abuse HOTLINE Department of Defense dodig.mil/hotline|800.424.9098 For more information about whistleblower protection, please see the inside back cover. FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Advanced Arresting Gear Program Exceeded Cost Resultsand Schedule Baselinesin Brief July 5, 2016 Finding (cont’d) Objective As a result, major AAG system components required costly redesign, which delayed developmental testing and will Our objective was to determine whether further postpone delivery of the full AAG system capability the Navy was effectively managing the to the CVN-78 aircraft carrier. AAG hardware and software acquisition requirements and testing for the component failures and test site preparation led to the AAG Advanced Arresting Gear (AAG) program. program exceeding the Acquisition Category I threshold The arresting gear is the system responsible for Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E) for stopping aircraft while landing on the costs.
    [Show full text]