Autopilot Selection Guide Choosing the Right Autopilot for Your Aircraft
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
ALT / VS Selector/Alerter
ALT / VS Selector / Alerter PN 01279-( ) Pilot’s Operating Handbook ENT ALT SEL ALR DH VS BARO S–TEC * Asterisk indicates pages changed, added, or deleted by List of Effective Pages current revision. Retain this record in front of handbook. Upon receipt of a Record of Revisions revision, insert changes and complete table below. Revision Number Revision Date Insertion Date/Initials 1st Ed. Oct 26, 00 2nd Ed. Jan 15, 08 3rd Ed. Jun 24, 16 3rd Ed. Jun 24, 16 i S–TEC Page Intentionally Blank ii 3rd Ed. Jun 24, 16 S–TEC Table of Contents Sec. Pg. 1 Overview...........................................................................................................1–1 1.1 Document Organization....................................................................1–3 1.2 Purpose..............................................................................................1–3 1.3 General Control Theory....................................................................1–3 1.4 Block Diagram....................................................................................1–4 2 Pre-Flight Procedures...................................................................................2–1 2.1 Pre-Flight Test....................................................................................2–3 3 In-Flight Procedures......................................................................................3–1 3.1 Selector / Alerter Operation..............................................................3–3 3.1.1 Data Entry.............................................................................3–3 -
How Doc Draper Became the Father of Inertial Guidance
(Preprint) AAS 18-121 HOW DOC DRAPER BECAME THE FATHER OF INERTIAL GUIDANCE Philip D. Hattis* With Missouri roots, a Stanford Psychology degree, and a variety of MIT de- grees, Charles Stark “Doc” Draper formulated the basis for reliable and accurate gyro-based sensing technology that enabled the first and many subsequent iner- tial navigation systems. Working with colleagues and students, he created an Instrumentation Laboratory that developed bombsights that changed the balance of World War II in the Pacific. His engineering teams then went on to develop ever smaller and more accurate inertial navigation for aircraft, submarines, stra- tegic missiles, and spaceflight. The resulting inertial navigation systems enable national security, took humans to the Moon, and continue to find new applica- tions. This paper discusses the history of Draper’s path to becoming known as the “Father of Inertial Guidance.” FROM DRAPER’S MISSOURI ROOTS TO MIT ENGINEERING Charles Stark Draper was born in 1901 in Windsor Missouri. His father was a dentist and his mother (nee Stark) was a school teacher. The Stark family developed the Stark apple that was popular in the Midwest and raised the family to prominence1 including a cousin, Lloyd Stark, who became governor of Missouri in 1937. Draper was known to his family and friends as Stark (Figure 1), and later in life was known by colleagues as Doc. During his teenage years, Draper enjoyed tinkering with automobiles. He also worked as an electric linesman (Figure 2), and at age 15 began a liberal arts education at the University of Mis- souri in Rolla. -
Development and Flight Test Experiences with a Flight-Crucial Digital Control System
NASA Technical Paper 2857 1 1988 Development and Flight Test Experiences With a Flight-Crucial Digital Control System Dale A. Mackall Ames Research Center Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, Calgornia I National Aeronautics I and Space Administration I Scientific and Technical Information Division I CONTENTS Page ~ SUMMARY ................................... 1 I 1 INTRODUCTION . 1 2 NOMENCLATURE . 2 3 SYSTEM SPECIFICATION . 5 3.1 Control Laws and Handling Qualities ................. 5 3.2 Reliability and Fault Tolerance ................... 5 4 DESIGN .................................. 6 4.1 System Architecture and Fault Tolerance ............... 6 4.1.1 Digital flight control system architecture .......... 6 4.1.2 Digital flight control system computer hardware ........ 8 4.1.3 Avionics interface ...................... 8 4.1.4 Pilot interface ........................ 9 4.1.5 Actuator interface ...................... 10 4.1.6 Electrical system interface .................. 11 4.1.7 Selector monitor and failure manager ............. 12 4.1.8 Built-in test and memory mode ................. 14 4.2 ControlLaws ............................. 15 4.2.1 Control law development process ................ 15 4.2.2 Control law design ...................... 15 4.3 Digital Flight Control System Software ................ 17 4.3.1 Software development process ................. 18 4.3.2 Software design ........................ 19 5 SYSTEM-SOFTWARE QUALIFICATION AND DESIGN ITERATIONS ............ 19 5.1 Schedule ............................... 20 5.2 Software Verification ........................ 21 5.2.1 Verification test plan .................... 21 5.2.2 Verification support equipment . ................ 22 5.2.3 Verification tests ...................... 22 5.2.4 Reverifying the design iterations ............... 24 5.3 System Validation .......................... 24 5.3.1 Validation test plan . ............... 24 5.3.2 Support equipment ....................... 25 5.3.3 Validation tests ....................... 25 5.3.4 Revalidation of designs ................... -
Installation Manual, Document Number 200-800-0002 Or Later Approved Revision, Is Followed
9800 Martel Road Lenoir City, TN 37772 PPAAVV8800 High-fidelity Audio-Video In-Flight Entertainment System With DVD/MP3/CD Player and Radio Receiver STC-PMA Document P/N 200-800-0101 Revision 6 September 2005 Installation and Operation Manual Warranty is not valid unless this product is installed by an Authorized PS Engineering dealer or if a PS Engineering harness is purchased. PS Engineering, Inc. 2005 © Copyright Notice Any reproduction or retransmittal of this publication, or any portion thereof, without the expressed written permission of PS Engi- neering, Inc. is strictly prohibited. For further information contact the Publications Manager at PS Engineering, Inc., 9800 Martel Road, Lenoir City, TN 37772. Phone (865) 988-9800. Table of Contents SECTION I GENERAL INFORMATION........................................................................ 1-1 1.1 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................... 1-1 1.2 SCOPE ............................................................................................................................. 1-1 1.3 EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.4 APPROVAL BASIS (PENDING) ..................................................................................... 1-1 1.5 SPECIFICATIONS......................................................................................................... 1-2 1.6 EQUIPMENT SUPPLIED ............................................................................................ -
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. -
Boeing 737 Postmaintenance Test Flight Encounters Uncommanded Roll-And-Yaw Oscillations
FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION Accident Prevention Vol. 55 No. 5 For Everyone Concerned with the Safety of Flight May 1998 Boeing 737 Postmaintenance Test Flight Encounters Uncommanded Roll-and-yaw Oscillations Fluid leaking from the cabin onto the yaw-damper coupler in the electronic-and-equipment bay affected electronic signals transmitted to the yaw-damper actuator and caused a dutch-roll oscillation. FSF Editorial Staff On Oct. 22, 1995, a Boeing 737-236 Advanced was • “Sufficiently conductive contaminant paths in straight-and-level flight at Flight Level (FL) 200 between certain adjacent pins had affected the (20,000 feet), at an indicated airspeed of 290 knots phase and magnitude of the signals transmitted when roll-and-yaw oscillations began. The flight crew to the yaw-damper actuator, thereby stimulating disengaged the autopilot, autothrottles and yaw a forced dutch-roll mode of the aircraft; damper, but the uncommanded roll-and-yaw oscillations continued. • “The location of the E&E bay — beneath the cabin floor in the area of the aircraft doors, galleys The crew declared an emergency and descended to and toilets — made it vulnerable to fluid ingress 7,000 feet. The oscillations stopped when airspeed was from a variety of sources; [and,] reduced to about 250 knots. After a satisfactory check of the aircraft’s low-speed handling characteristics, the • “The crew actions immediately following the crew returned to London (England) Gatwick Airport onset of the dutch-roll oscillations did not result and landed without further incident. in the disengagement of the malfunctioning yaw- damper system.” The U.K. Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB), in its final report on the incident, identified four causal factors: The B-737, operated by British Airways, was built in 1980 and had accumulated 37,871 hours in service. -
Basic Principles of Inertial Navigation
Basic Principles of Inertial Navigation Seminar on inertial navigation systems Tampere University of Technology 1 The five basic forms of navigation • Pilotage, which essentially relies on recognizing landmarks to know where you are. It is older than human kind. • Dead reckoning, which relies on knowing where you started from plus some form of heading information and some estimate of speed. • Celestial navigation, using time and the angles between local vertical and known celestial objects (e.g., sun, moon, or stars). • Radio navigation, which relies on radio‐frequency sources with known locations (including GNSS satellites, LORAN‐C, Omega, Tacan, US Army Position Location and Reporting System…) • Inertial navigation, which relies on knowing your initial position, velocity, and attitude and thereafter measuring your attitude rates and accelerations. The operation of inertial navigation systems (INS) depends upon Newton’s laws of classical mechanics. It is the only form of navigation that does not rely on external references. • These forms of navigation can be used in combination as well. The subject of our seminar is the fifth form of navigation – inertial navigation. 2 A few definitions • Inertia is the property of bodies to maintain constant translational and rotational velocity, unless disturbed by forces or torques, respectively (Newton’s first law of motion). • An inertial reference frame is a coordinate frame in which Newton’s laws of motion are valid. Inertial reference frames are neither rotating nor accelerating. • Inertial sensors measure rotation rate and acceleration, both of which are vector‐ valued variables. • Gyroscopes are sensors for measuring rotation: rate gyroscopes measure rotation rate, and integrating gyroscopes (also called whole‐angle gyroscopes) measure rotation angle. -
P:\Dokumentation\Manual-O\DA 62\7.01.25-E
DA 62 AFM Ice Protection System Supplement S03 FIKI SUPPLEMENT S03 TO THE AIRPLANE FLIGHT MANUAL DA 62 ICE PROTECTION SYSTEM FOR FLIGHT INTO KNOWN ICING Doc. No. : 7.01.25-E Date of Issue of the Supplement : 01-Apr-2016 Design Change Advisory : OÄM 62-003 This Supplement to the Airplane Flight Manual is EASA approved under Approval Number EASA 10058874. This AFM - Supplement is approved in accordance with 14 CFR Section 21.29 for U.S. registered aircraft and is approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. DIAMOND AIRCRAFT INDUSTRIES GMBH N.A. OTTO-STR. 5 A-2700 WIENER NEUSTADT AUSTRIA Page 9-S03-1 Ice Protection System DA 62 AFM FIKI Supplement S03 Intentionally left blank. › Page 9-S03-2 05-May-2017 Rev. 2 Doc. # 7.01.25-E DA 62 AFM Ice Protection System Supplement S03 FIKI 0.1 RECORD OF REVISIONS Rev. Chap- Date of Approval Date of Date Signature Reason Page(s) No. ter Revision Note Approval Inserted Rev. 1 to AFM Supplement S03 to AFM 9-S03-1, Doc. No. FAA 7.01.25-E is 1 0 9-S03-3, 10 Oct 2016 14 Oct 2016 Approval approved by 9-S03-4 EASA with Approval No. EASA 10058874 › Rev. 2 to AFM › Supplement › S03 to AFM › Doc. No. › TR-MÄM › All, except 7.01.25-E is › 2 62-254, 05 May 2017 › All approved 13 Nov 2017 › Corrections Cover Page › under the › authority of › DOA › No.21J.052 › Doc. # 7.01.25-E Rev. 2 05-May-2017 Page 9-S03-3 Ice Protection System DA 62 AFM FIKI Supplement S03 0.3 LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Chapter Page Date 9-S03-1 10-Oct-2016 › 9-S03-2 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-3 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-4 05-May-2017 0 › 9-S03-5 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-6 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-7 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-8 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-9 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-10 05-May-2017 1 › 9-S03-11 05-May-2017 › 9-S03-12 05-May-2017 › appr. -
FS/OAS A-24, Avionics Operational Test Standards for Contractually
Avionics Operational Test Standards FS/OAS A-24 Revision F September 10, 2018 The following standards apply to all contractually required/offered avionics equipment under US Forest Service contracts and Department of the Interior interagency fire contracts. Abbreviations and Selected Definitions are in Section 7. 1. Communications Systems Interference No squelch breaks or interference with other transceivers with 1 MHz separation. No transmit interlock functions for communications transceivers on fire aircraft. VHF-AM Transceiver Type TSO approved, selectable frequencies in 25 kHz increments, 760 channel minimum, operation from 118.000 to 136.975 MHz, 720 channel acceptable for DOI if contractually permitted Display Visible in direct sunlight Operation To and from service monitor Transmitter System modulation from 50% to 95% and clear, 5 watts minimum output power, frequency within 20 PPM (+2.46 kHz @ 122.925 MHz) (47 CFR 87.133) Receiver Squelch opens when receiving a signal from 50 Nautical Miles or (All Aircraft) greater when no other radios on the aircraft are transmitting. (See FS/OAS A-30 Radio Interference Test Procedures) Receiver Squelch opens when receiving a signal from 24 Nautical Miles or (Fire aircraft approved greater while other radios on the aircraft are transmitting with a for passengers or aircraft spacing of 2 MHz or greater. (See FS/OAS A-30 Radio Interference requiring two pilots) Test Procedures) 1 Aeronautical VHF-FM Transceiver (P25 required for Fire) Type Listed on Approved Radios list, P25 meets FS/AMD A-19 -
Ac 120-67 3/18/97
Advisory u.s. Department ofTransportation Federal Aviation Circular Ad.nnlstratlon Subject: CRITERIA FOR OPERATIONAL Date: 3/18/97 AC No: 120-67 APPROVAL OF AUTO FLIGHT Initiated By: AFS-400 Change: GUIDANCE SYSTEMS 1. PURPOSE. This advisory circular (AC) states an acceptable means, but not the only means, for obtaining operational approval of the initial engagement or use of an Auto Flight Guidance System (AFGS) under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) part 121, section 121.579(d); part 125, section 125.329(e); and part 135, section 135.93(e) for the takeoff and initial climb phase of flight. 2. APPLICABILITY. The criteria contained in this AC are applicable to operators using commercial turbojet and turboprop aircraft holding Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) operating authority issued under SPAR 38-2 and 14 CFR parts 119, 121, 125, and 135. The FAA may approve the AFGS operation for the operators under these parts, where necessary, by amending the applicant's operations specifications (OPSPECS). 3. BACKGROUND. The purpose of this AC is to take advantage of technological improvements in the operational capabilities of autopilot systems, particularly at lower altitudes. This AC complements a rule change that would allow the use of an autopilot, certificated and operationally approved by the FAA, at altitudes less than 500 feet above ground level in the vertical plane and in accordance with sections 121.189 and 135.367, in the lateral plane. 4. DEFINITIONS. a. Airplane Flight Manual (AFM). A document (under 14 CFR part 25, section 25.1581) which is used to obtain an FAA type certificate. -
Radar Altimeter True Altitude
RADAR ALTIMETER TRUE ALTITUDE. TRUE SAFETY. ROBUST AND RELIABLE IN RADARDEMANDING ENVIRONMENTS. Building on systems engineering and integration know-how, FreeFlight Systems effectively implements comprehensive, high-integrity avionics solutions. We are focused on the practical application of NextGen technology to real-world operational needs — OEM, retrofit, platform or infrastructure. FreeFlight Systems is a community of respected innovators in technologies of positioning, state-sensing, air traffic management datalinks — including rule-compliant ADS-B systems, data and flight management. An international brand, FreeFlight Systems is a trusted partner as well as a direct-source provider through an established network of relationships. 3 GENERATIONS OF EXPERIENCE BEHIND NEXTGEN AVIONICS NEXTGEN LEADER. INDUSTRY EXPERT. TRUSTED PARTNER. SHAPE THE SKIES. RADAR ALTIMETERS FreeFlight Systems’ certified radar altimeters work consistently in the harshest environments including rotorcraft low altitude hover and terrain transitions. RADAROur radar altimeter systems integrate with popular compatible glass displays. AL RA-4000/4500 & FreeFlight Systems modern radar altimeters are backed by more than 50 years of experience, and FRA-5500 RADAR ALTIMETERS have a proven track record as a reliable solution in Model RA-4000 RA-4500 FRA-5500 the most challenging and critical segments of flight. The TSO and ETSO-approved systems are extensively TSO-C87 l l l deployed worldwide in helicopter fleets, including ETSO-2C87 l l l some of the largest HEMS operations worldwide. DO-160E l l l DO-178 Level B l Designed for helicopter and seaplane operations, our DO-178B Level C l l radar altimeters provide precise AGL information from 2,500 feet to ground level. -
11ADOBL04 December 2010
11ADOBL04 December 2010 Use of rudder on Airbus A300-600/A310 (extracted from former FCOM Bulletin N°15/1 – Subject N°40) Reason for issue On February 8th, 2002, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB), in cooperation with the French Bureau d'Enquêtes et d'Analyses (BEA), issued recommendations that aircraft manufacturers re-emphasize the structural certification requirements for the rudder and vertical stabilizer, showing how some maneuvers can result in exceeding design lim- its and even lead to structural failure. The purpose of this Bulletin is to re-emphasize proper operational use of the rudder, highlight certification requirements and rud- der control design characteristics. Yaw control General In flight, yaw control is provided by the rudder, and directional stability is provided by the vertical stabilizer. The rudder and vertical stabilizer are sized to meet the two following objectives: Provide sufficient lateral control of the aircraft during crosswind takeoffs and landings, within the published crosswind limits (refer to FCOM Operating Limitations chapter). Provide positive aircraft control under conditions of engine failure and maximum asymmetric thrust, at any speed above Vmcg (minimum control speed - on ground). The vertical stabilizer and the rudder must be capable of generating sufficient yawing moments to maintain directional control of the aircraft. The rudder deflection, necessary to achieve these yawing moments, and the resulting sideslip angles place significant aerodynamic loads on the rudder and on the vertical stabilizer. Both are designed to sustain loads as prescribed in the JAR/FAR 25 certification requirements which define several lateral loading conditions (maneuver, gust loads and asymmetric loads due to engine failure) leading to the required level of structural strength.