DOCSLIB.ORG

This Document Was Created to Make Public Non-Proprietary Data

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Explanatory Note No.: A340 TCDS EASA.A.015 Issue 2 This document was created to make public non-proprietary data contained in Special Conditions (including Deviations, Equivalent Safety Findings) that are part of the applicable Certification Basis as recorded in TCDS EASA.A.015. Table of Content: A-01-CCD: CABIN CREW DATA REQUIREMENTS 4 A-1: DISCRETE GUST REQUIREMENTS 8 A-2: INTERACTION OF SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURE 9 A-3: DESIGN MANOEUVER REQUIREMENTS 10 A-4: DESIGN DIVE SPEED VD 13 A-5: LIMIT PILOT FORCES AND TORQUE 15 A-7: STALLING SPEEDS FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN 16 A-11: AEROELASTIC STABILITY REQUIREMENTS 17 A-1001: REVISED LOADS REQUIREMENTS 20 A-1002: INTERACTION OF SYSTEMS AND STRUCTURE 32 A-1003: DESIGN MANOEUVER REQUIREMENTS 37 A-1004: DESIGN DIVE SPEED VD 39 A-1006: GROUND LOADS AND CONDITIONS FOR CENTRAL LANDING GEAR 41 A-1011: VIBRATION, BUFFET AND AEROELASTIC STABILITY REQUIREMENTS 44 A-1015: CHECKED PITCHING MANOEUVRE LOADS 47 A-1017: BRAKED ROLL CONDITIONS 50 A-1020: LANDING GEAR SHOCK ABSORPTION TESTS 52 A-1021: ENGINE FAILURE LOADS 54 A-1023: CONTINUOUS TURBULENCE LOADS 56 A-1024: CASTING FACTORS 61 A-1026: PROOF OF STRUCTURE 67 CCD-01: DETERMINATION OF CERTIFICATION BASIS FOR CHANGES TO A340 CCD 68 D-100: INSTALLATION OF MINI-SUITE TYPE SEATING 70 D-101: GREEN ARROW AND “OPEN” PLACARD FOR EMERGENCY EXIT MARKING 73 D-102: INCORPORATION OF INERTIA LOCKING DEVICE IN DYNAMIC SEATS 75 E-2: UNDERFLOOR CREW REST COMPARTMENT 78 E-5.1: LOWER DECK LAVATORIES COMPARTMENT 81 E-8.1: LOWER DECK STOWAGE AREA 86 E-11: BULK CREW REST COMPARTMENT 91 E-15: REINFORCED SECURITY COCKPIT DOOR STATUS 94 E-17: TROLLEY LIFT 97 E-18: LOWER DECK GALLEY COMPARTMENT 99 E-19: FIRST CLASS SLIDING SCREENS 101 E-21: EMERGENCY EXIT MARKING REFLECTANCE 104 E-27: FORWARD FACING SEAT, OVER 18 DEGREES TO A/C CENTRELINE 105 E-28: PARTIAL BULK CREW REST COMPARTMENT WITH ATTACHED GALLEY 107 E-29: FUSELAGE BURN THROUGH – AFT PRESSURE BULKHEAD 109 Disclaimer – This document is not exhaustive and it will be updated gradually. TE.CERT.00053-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2019. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 1 of 275 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union Explanatory Note No.: A340 TCDS EASA.A.015 Issue 2 E-30: FUSELAGE BURNTHROUGH SUBSTANTIATION FOR BELLY FAIRING 112 E-31: FUSELAGE BURNTHROUGH SUBSTANTIATION FOR BILGE AREA 114 E-128: IMPROVED FLAMMABILITY STANDARD FOR THERMAL/ACOUSTIC INSULATION MATERIALS – FLAME PENETRATION (EQUIVALENT TO FAR 25.856(B) AT AMENDMENT 111) 116 E-130: APPLICATION OF HEAT RELEASE AND SMOKE DENSITY REQUIREMENTS TO SEAT MATERIALS 131 E-134: INSTALLATION OF SEATS THAT MAKE AN ANGLE OF MORE THAN 18° WITH THE AIRCRAFT LONGITUDINAL AXIS 132 E-1014: HIC COMPLIANCE FOR FRONT ROW SEATING(INFLATABLE RESTRAINTS) 134 E-1022: IMPROVED FLAMMABILITY STANDARDS FOR THERMAL/ACOUSTIC INSULATION MATERIALS 138 E-1023: SIDE FACING SEATS WITH INFLATABLE RESTRAINTS 140 F-1: STALLING AND SCHEDULED OPERATING SPEEDS 144 F-2: MOTION AND EFFECT OF COCKPIT CONTROLS 152 F-3: STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY 153 F-4: STATIC DIRECTIONAL AND LATERAL STABILITY 154 F-5: FLIGHT ENVELOPE PROTECTIONS 155 F-6: NORMAL LOAD FACTOR LIMITING SYSTEM 157 F-8: ACCELERATE STOP DISTANCES 158 F-8.1: ACCELERATE STOP DISTANCES AND RELATED PERFORMANCE 161 F-126: FLIGHT RECORDERS INCLUDING DATA LINK RECORDING 167 F-128: MINIMUM MASS FLOW OF SUPPLEMENTAL OXYGEN 169 F-129: CREW DETERMINATION OF QUANTITY OF OXYGEN IN PASSENGER OXYGEN SYSTEM 170 F-131: FLIGHT INSTRUMENT EXTERNAL PROBES – QUALIFICATION IN ICING CONDITIONS 172 F-137: SECURITY PROTECTION OF AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS AND NETWORKS 176 F-GEN-01: INSTALLATION OF NON-RECHARGEABLE LITHIUM BATTERY 178 F-1001: STALLING AND SCHEDULED OPERATING SPEEDS 180 F-1003: STATIC LONGITUDINAL STABILITY AND LOW ENERGY AWARENESS 187 F-1008: ACCELERATE STOP DISTANCES 188 F-1014: REVISION OF GATE REQUIREMENTS FOR HIGH-LIFT DEVICE CONTROLS 195 G-5: RESISTANCE TO FIRE TERMINOLOGY 196 G-7: FUNCTION AND RELIABILITY TESTING 197 H-01: ENHANCED AIRWORTHINESS PROGRAMME FOR AEROPLANE SYSTEMS - ICA ON EWIS 198 O-1001: FERRYING ONE ENGINE UNSERVICEABLE 201 P-1: FADEC 207 P-2: CENTRE OF GRAVITY CONTROL SYSTEM 208 P-27: FLAMMABILITY REDUCTION SYSTEM 211 P-32: FUEL TANK SAFETY 216 P-1008: FUEL TANK ACCESS COVERS 218 Disclaimer – This document is not exhaustive and it will be updated gradually. TE.CERT.00053-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2019. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 2 of 275 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union Explanatory Note No.: A340 TCDS EASA.A.015 Issue 2 P-1009: ROLLS-ROYCE TRENT 500 TURBINE OVERHEAT DETECTION 219 P-1011: THRUST REVERSER TESTING 220 P-1016: REAR CENTER TANK & TYRE FAILURE 222 P-1018: ENGINE SUSTAINED IMBALANCE 224 P-1020: APU INSTRUMENTS 226 P-1021: WINDMILLING WITHOUT OIL 227 P-1022: FALLING AND BLOWING SNOW 228 P-1024: ECAM EGT INDICATION 230 S-3: LANDING GEAR WARNING 232 S-6: LIGHTNING PROTECTION INDIRECT EFFECTS 234 S-10: EFFECT OF EXTERNAL RADIATION UPON AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS 236 S-10.1: EFFECT OF EXTERNAL RADIATION UPON AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS 238 S-10.2: EFFECT OF EXTERNAL RADIATION UPON AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS 241 S-13: AUTO-THRUST SYSTEM 244 S-16: CONTROL SIGNAL INTEGRITY 245 S-18: ELECTRICAL FLIGHT CONTROLS UNUSUAL FEATURES 246 S-20: EMERGENCY ELECTRICAL POWER 247 S-21: BRAKES WEAR LIMITS 248 S-23: MISCELLANEOUS ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS 252 S-24: DOORS 254 S-38: TOWBARLESS TOWING 255 S-45: OIL TEMPERATURE INDICATION 256 S-48: MINIMUM APPROACH BREAK-OFF HEIGHT 257 S-148: LONGITUDINAL TOUCHDOWN PERFORMANCE LIMIT AND MINIMUM APPROACH BREAK-OFF HEIGHT 259 S-1013: AUTO-THRUST SYSTEM (ATS) 261 S-1021: BRAKES AND BRAKING SYSTEM 262 S-1059: HYDRAULIC SYSTEMS 266 S-1065: PACKS OFF OPERATION 269 S-1066: CAT III OPERATIONS - EXCESS DEVIATION ALERT 271 S-1070 ESF: AFM - RVR LIMITS 273 Disclaimer – This document is not exhaustive and it will be updated gradually. TE.CERT.00053-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2019. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 3 of 275 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union Explanatory Note No.: A340 TCDS EASA.A.015 Issue 2 A-01-CCD: CABIN CREW DATA REQUIREMENTS SPECIAL CONDITION A-01-CCD: Cabin Crew Data Requirements APPLICABILITY: A330 / A340 REQUIREMENTS: Regulation (EU) 748/2012of 03 August 2012, as amended ISSUE: 1 dated 10/12/2015 Special Condition summary BACKGROUND The purpose of this CRI is to establish the certification basis for the grandfathered A330/-340 aircraft family Cabin Crew Operational Suitability Data. There were no applicable certification specifications for operational suitability data issued in accordance with point 21.A.16A, effective on the date of the Type Certificate application for the A330-200/-300; A340-200/-300; A340-500; A340-600. In accordance with Part 21, 21.A.17B (a), the operational suitability data certification basis needs to be defined for the A330/-340 aircraft Family Cabin Crew Operational Suitability Data, transferred from the “A330/-340 Family -OEB Cabin Crew Evaluation Report”. The purpose of the (J) OEB CC evaluations, as requested by Airbus, was to: determine whether the A340-600 is a variant of the A340-300(as per JAR-OPS 1.1030- Operation on more than one type or variant); determine whether the A330-200/-300; the A340-500; the A340-600 are variants of the A340-200/-300(as per JAR-OPS 1.1030- Operation on more than one type or variant), thus constituting the “A330/340 family”; provide recommendations to support the establishment by operators, of cabin crew differences training programs for variants (as per JAR-OPS 1.1010 – Conversion and differences training). NOTE: See also certification basis complement CCD-01 (published in this document), that comes in addition to the present SC A-01-CCD. SPECIAL CONDITION Disclaimer – This document is not exhaustive and it will be updated gradually. TE.CERT.00053-001 © European Aviation Safety Agency, 2019. All rights reserved. ISO9001 Certified. Page 4 of 275 Proprietary document. Copies are not controlled. Confirm revision status through the EASA-Internet/Intranet. An agency of the European Union Explanatory Note No.: A340 TCDS EASA.A.015 Issue 2 Having regard of the applicable JAR-OPS 1 requirements and in accordance with "Part 3-Procedure Document for Joint Operational Evaluation Board (JOEB)-Cabin Crew”, which governed the (J) OEB CC evaluations, the following aircraft type specific elements that would impact normal and/or emergency operations for cabin crew were compared and assessed, in order to fulfil the purpose of the evaluations: aircraft configuration: o number of aisles o number of passenger decks doors and exits o exit arming/disarming o direction of movement of the operating handle o direction of exit opening o power assist mechanism Note: In accordance with JAR-OPS 1.1030/EU-OPS 1.1030 and later on with ORO.CC.250, self- help exits, for example Type III and Type IV exits, need not to be included in the determination of new type or variant. assisting evacuation means aircraft systems for cabin crew duties: o emergency lighting system o smoke detection system o built-in fire extinguishing system o drop-down oxygen system o communication and public address system o control and indication panels Using the above categories as criteria, detailed Operator Differences Tables(ODRs) – the Airbus equivalent of Aircraft Differences Tables (ADTs) – were provided by Airbus, in order to highlight the exiting differences between the A340-200/-300 as the “base” aircraft and the A330-200/-300; the A340-500, the A340-600 as the “”candidate” aircraft within the comparisons.
Recommended publications
  • Mcdonnell Douglas (Boeing) MD-83

    Mcdonnell Douglas (Boeing) MD-83

    Right MLG failure on landing, Douglas (Boeing) MD-83, EC-FXI Micro-summary: The right main landing gear of this Douglas (Boeing) MD-83 failed immediately on landing. Event Date: 2001-05-10 at 1232 UTC Investigative Body: Aircraft Accident Investigation Board (AAIB), United Kingdom Investigative Body's Web Site: http://www.aaib.dft.gov/uk/ Note: Reprinted by kind permission of the AAIB. Cautions: 1. Accident reports can be and sometimes are revised. Be sure to consult the investigative agency for the latest version before basing anything significant on content (e.g., thesis, research, etc). 2. Readers are advised that each report is a glimpse of events at specific points in time. While broad themes permeate the causal events leading up to crashes, and we can learn from those, the specific regulatory and technological environments can and do change. Your company's flight operations manual is the final authority as to the safe operation of your aircraft! 3. Reports may or may not represent reality. Many many non-scientific factors go into an investigation, including the magnitude of the event, the experience of the investigator, the political climate, relationship with the regulatory authority, technological and recovery capabilities, etc. It is recommended that the reader review all reports analytically. Even a "bad" report can be a very useful launching point for learning. 4. Contact us before reproducing or redistributing a report from this anthology. Individual countries have very differing views on copyright! We can advise you on the steps to follow. Aircraft Accident Reports on DVD, Copyright © 2006 by Flight Simulation Systems, LLC All rights reserved.
  • Aviation Wheel Well and Platform Stands Df071556

    Aviation Wheel Well and Platform Stands Df071556

    AVIATION WHEEL WELL AND PLATFORM STANDS DF071556 SA LIFT FE AVIATION WHEEL WELL AND PLATFORM STANDS F . A C L L IN PR N OTECTIO DESCRIPTION The Aviation Wheel Well and Platform Stand has been designed for maintenance access points for multiple aircraft. The lowered position is designed to clear wheel well entry points and has been tested and is operational on both Airbus and Boeing wide body aircraft. Optional telescopic side rails ensure safety compliant access to the forward and AFT lower cargo holds. The Aviation Wheel Well and Platform Stand is hydraulically actuated via a foot pump and has collapsible guardrails. The platform stand can also be used to service engines, pylons, radome and AFT fuselage points. Our Professional Engineers can design custom models based on your specific requirements. PRODUCT FEATURES • Anti-slip, anti-fatigue ladder steps WHAT OUR CUSTOMERS ARE SAYING • Hydraulically actuated “We use them in both the line and hangar maintenance to • Collapsible guardrails accomplish work on the engine and pylons for our wide • Corrosion and Skydrol®-resistant powder coat finish body aircraft. These stands are an excellent solution to a • Fail-safe hydraulic cylinder locks long-standing problem — providing fall safety protection • Optional front and rear guardrails and gates in difficult to access areas.” • Split wheel castors for easy movement • Designed and tested in accordance with ANSI-ASC A14.7 and BS EN 131.7, DIN EN 12312-8, EN 1915-1, and includes CE Certification BENEFITS • Fall restraint tie points • Optional extension
  • (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2013/0099053 A1 Barmichev Et Al

    (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2013/0099053 A1 Barmichev Et Al

    US 2013 0099053A1 (19) United States (12) Patent Application Publication (10) Pub. No.: US 2013/0099053 A1 Barmichev et al. (43) Pub. Date: Apr. 25, 2013 (54) MID-WING MULTI-DECK AIRPLANE B64C 9/00 (2006.01) B64C I/I) (2006.01) (75) Inventors: Sergey D. Barmichev, Kirkland, WA B64C25/10 (2006.01) (US); Mithra M.K.V. Sankrithi, Lake B64C II/00 (2006.01) Forest Park, WA (US); Kevin M. Retz, (52) U.S. Cl. Bothell, WA (US) USPC ........... 244/102 R; 24.4/73 R: 244/65: 244/91 (73) Assignee: THE BOEING COMPANY, Irvine, CA (57) ABSTRACT (US) An airplane comprises a twin-deck fuselage in which an (21) Appl. No.: 13/276,357 upper deck Support structure is utilized for carry-through of a mid-mount main wing box. The main landing gear of the (22) Filed: Oct. 19, 2011 airplane is mounted to the fuselage and is stowed in a non pressurized area below the main wing box (enabled due to an Publication Classification optimized wing box geometry). A pressurized passageway/ cargo/galley complex separates the main landing gear box (51) Int. Cl. and the main wing box. The upper deck is continuous, while B64D II/00 (2006.01) the lower deck is separated by the wheel wells into two B64C I/20 (2006.01) distinct fore and aft areas (for either cargo or passengers). The B64D I3/02 (2006.01) airplane further comprises an integrated vertical fin and an B64D 27/2 (2006.01) aft-extended pressurized deck area for reduced double-deck B64C I/06 (2006.01) wetted area.
  • Specification and Description

    Specification and Description

    CITATION CJ3+ SPECIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION REVISION C JANUARY 2021 SERIAL NUMBER 525B0610 TO TBD SPECIFICATION AND DESCRIPTION CITATION CJ3+ SERIAL NUMBER 525B0610 TO TBD JANUARY 2021 REVISION C TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ..............................................................................................................................iv INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................................1 THE AIRCRAFT................................................................................................................................... 2 1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION ....................................................................................................2 1.1 Certifi cation...................................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Purchaser’s Responsibility......................................................................................... 2 1.3 Approximate Dimensions .......................................................................................... 5 1.4 Design Weights and Capacities .............................................................................. 5 2. PERFORMANCE .................................................................................................................... 5 3. DESIGN LIMITS ...................................................................................................................... 6 4. FUSELAGE ...............................................................................................................................7
  • Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Familiarization Document

    Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Familiarization Document

    '. NASA TECHNICAL NASA TMX-62.407 MEMORANDUM -PTING Y. a c NASA/ARMY TILT ROTOR RESEARCH AIRCRAFT FAMILIARIZATION DOCUMENT Prepared by .Tilt Rotor Project Office .. .. -\ Coordinated by Martin Maid .. Ames Research Center ._ I rJ - ,.. -1 and , 1-1 c. U.S. Amy Air Mobility R&D Laboratory %\\-'?. \ Moffett Field, Calif. 94035 .-, 7 / --_ ---*_ c-, : January 1975 NASMARMY XV-15 TILT ROTOR RESEARCH AIRCRAFT FAMl LIARIZATION DOCUMENT Prepared by: Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Project Office Staff Coordinated by: Martin D. Maisel Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Project Office Approved by : - Dean C. Borgman Deputy Manager, Technical Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Project Office David D. Few Manager Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft Project Office 1. Report No. 2. Ganmnmt hionNo. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. TM X-62,407 4. Titlr md Subtitlo 5. Rqwn D~te NASA/ARMY XV-15 TILT ROTOR RESEARCH AIRCRAFT FAMILIARIZATION DOCUMENT 7. Author(s) 8. PerformingOrgnizrtion Report No. Prepared by Tilt Rotor Project Office Staff, A-5870 coordinated by Martin Maisel 10. Work Unit No. 9. paforming ororriatia, "and MdNI 744-01-01 NASA Ames Research Center and 11. Canmct or Grant No. U.S. Army Air Mobility R&D Laboratory Moffett Field, Calif. 94035 13. Typ of RIpon and hid &ard 12. -nuring N.m md Addnr Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration 1;. Sponsoring Agmcy Code Washington, D.C. 20546 16. Abmrcr , The design features and general characteristics of the NASA/Army XV-15 Tilt Rotor Research Aircraft are described. This aircraft was conceived as a proof-of-concept vehicle and a V/STOL research tool for integrated wind tunnel, flight-simulation, and flight-test investigations.
  • Throttles Only Control.P65

    Throttles Only Control.P65

    INTERpilot – 2004 THROTTLES ONLY CONTROL (TOC) 10 Steps to a Survivable Landing Following Loss of Normal Flight Control Captains Terry Lutz, Air Line Pilots Association, International and Brian Greeves, Hong Kong Air Line Pilots' Association Captain Terry Lutz Captain Brian Greeves Few emergencies in commercial aviation are more terrifying to the flight crew than loss of normal flight control. The July 1989 United Airlines DC-10 accident in Sioux City, Iowa and the November 2003 missile attack on the DHL A-300 departing Baghdad are examples where the crew lost all hydraulically powered flight controls. In both cases, the flight crew regained flight path control using throttles only, and were able to bring the airplane to a less than precise touchdown at an airport. Modern aircraft are exceptionally well designed, numerous systems failures, including rapid particularly from the standpoint of reliability and decompression, the crew had to deal with large pitch redundancy in the flight control system. Using failure oscillations and loss of directional control with throttles analysis techniques that consider all known failure alone. They were able to extend the landing gear, but modes and their subsequent effects on the flight as the crew explored what flight control remained, control system, modern flight control systems are they were unable to avoid hitting a mountain and 520 designed for a failure probability of 10-9 or less. Loss lives were lost. of flight control accidents that have happened over the The Boeing Company conducted their own tests after last 30 years have occurred because of an unpredicted this accident, and were able to successfully slow a event such as fan disk failure, aft pressure bulkhead Boeing B-747-200 from cruise configuration and speed failure, or loss of a cargo door.
  • Large Capacity Oblique All-Wing Transport Aircraft

    Large Capacity Oblique All-Wing Transport Aircraft

    f Large Capacity Oblique All-Wing Transport Aircraft Thomas L. Galloway James A. Phillips Robert A. Kennelly, Jr. NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, CA Mr. Mark H. Waters Thermosciences Institute, ELORET Corp. Palo Alto, CA Transportation Beyond 2000: Engineering Design for the Future September 26-28, 1995 461 INTRODUCTION Dr. R. T. Jones first developed the theory for oblique wing aircraft in 1952, and in subsequent years numerous analytical and experimental projects conducted at NASA Ames and elsewhere have established that the Jones' oblique wing theory is correct. Until the late 1980's all proposed oblique wing configurations were wing/body aircraft with the wing mounted on a pivot. With the emerging requirement for commercial transports with very large payloads, 450 - 800 passengers, Jones proposed a supersonic oblique flying wing in 1988. For such an aircraft all payload, fuel, and systems are carded within the wing, and the wing is designed with a variable sweep to maintain a fixed subsonic normal Mach number. Engines and vertical tails are mounted on pivots supported from the primary structure of the wing. The oblique flying wing transport has come to be known as the Oblique All-Wing transport (OAW). Initial studies of the OAW were conducted by Van der Velden first at U.C. Berkeley(l) in 1989 and then at Stanford in collaboration with Kroo(2) in 1990. A final document summarizing this work is given in the thesis by Van der Velden(3). Many issues regarding the design were identified in these studies, among them the need for the OAW to be an unstable aircraft.
  • ATINER's Conference Paper Series IND2013-0819

    ATINER's Conference Paper Series IND2013-0819

    ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: IND2013-0819 Athens Institute for Education and Research ATINER ATINER's Conference Paper Series IND2013-0819 Optimally Adaptive Oleo Strut Damping for Aircraft and UAV Using MR Fluid Ajinkya A. Gharapurkar Graduate Research Assistant Dept. of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Concordia University Canada Chandra B. Asthana Affiliate Associate Professor Dept. of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Concordia University Canada Rama B. Bhat Professor Dept. of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Concordia University, Canada 1 ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: IND2013-0819 Athens Institute for Education and Research 8 Valaoritou Street, Kolonaki, 10671 Athens, Greece Tel: + 30 210 3634210 Fax: + 30 210 3634209 Email: [email protected] URL: www.atiner.gr URL Conference Papers Series: www.atiner.gr/papers.htm Printed in Athens, Greece by the Athens Institute for Education and Research. All rights reserved. Reproduction is allowed for non-commercial purposes if the source is fully acknowledged. ISSN 2241-2891 23/1/2014 2 ATINER CONFERENCE PAPER SERIES No: IND2013-0819 An Introduction to ATINER's Conference Paper Series ATINER started to publish this conference papers series in 2012. It includes only the papers submitted for publication after they were presented at one of the conferences organized by our Institute every year. The papers published in the series have not been refereed and are published as they were submitted by the author. The series serves two purposes. First, we want to disseminate the information as fast as possible. Second, by doing so, the authors can receive comments useful to revise their papers before they are considered for publication in one of ATINER's books, following our standard procedures of a blind review.
  • T-45C Aircraft

    T-45C Aircraft

    VIRTUAL NATOPS FLIGHT MANUAL NAVY MODEL T-45C AIRCRAFT for Microsoft Flight Simulator by IndiaFoxtEcho Visual Simulations Version 1.00 – March 2021 NOTICE – Although this manual and the simulated aircraft closerly resemble their real-world counterparts in many aspects, neither should be used as source of real-world information about the aircraft. This package is not endorsed or supported by The Boeing Company or by the United States Navy. CHANGE LOG VERSION 1.10 22-Mar-2021 - Redone external engine sounds - Replaced internal engine sound main loop sample - Fixed bug preventing setting the CRS on TACAN (Nav2) - Created "Lite" versions of all aircrafts, with simplified XML code and geometry - Implemented VR mouse collision model - Fixed environmental occlusion geometry - Fixed missing details in rear cockpit harnessing - Fixed bug causing cockpit sounds from other T-45 to play in multiplayer - Fixed formation light switch INOP - Fixed bug causing the HUD throttle indicator not to work - Fixed external lights not working after Sim Update 3 - Changed animation of retractable footstep so that automatically retracts when the canopy closes - Changed HUD ILS logic so that ILS steering bar will only show if ILS is selected on the HSI-MFD - Added TAWS Below Glideslope warning - Added TAWS Check Gear warning - Added TAWS Power Power warning INITIAL RELEASE 8-Mar-2021 WELCOME The T-45 Goshawk is a fully carrier-capable version of the British Aerospace Hawk Mk.60. It was developed as a jet flight trainer for the United States Navy and United States Marine Corps. The Hawk had not originally been designed to perform carrier operations; numerous modifications were required, such as the extensive strengthening of the airframe to withstand the excessive forces imposed by the stresses involved in catapult launches and high sink-rate landings, both scenarios being routine in aircraft carrier operations.
  • Aircraft Energy Efficiency Laminar Flow Control Glove Flight Conceptual Design Study

    Aircraft Energy Efficiency Laminar Flow Control Glove Flight Conceptual Design Study

    IIIIII~IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1III1 3 1176 00133 9846 NASA Technical Memorandum 80054 1 I , NASA-TM-8005419790011929 ! AIRCRAFT ENERGY EFFICIENCY LAMINAR FLOW CONTROL GLOVE FLIGHT CONCEPTUAL DESIGN STUDY Andrew S. Wright JANUARY 1979 NI\S/\ National Aeronautics and Space Administration Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23665 \\\\\\\\\ \\\\ \\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\\ \\\\ \\\\ NF00545 1 Report No I 2 Government Accession No 3 Recipient's Catalog No NASA TM 80054 4 Title and Subtitle 5 Report Date Aircraft Energy Efficiency Laminar Flow Control 6 Performing Organization Code Glove Flight Conceptual Design Study 7 Author(s) 8 Performing Organization Report No Andrew S. Wright I---------------------------~ 10 Work Unit No 9 Performing Organization Name and Address 514 .. 55 .. 03-21 NASA, Langley Research Center Hampton, Virginia 23665 11 Contract or Grant No I-__________________________~ 13 Type of Report and Period Covered 12 Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration Washington, DC 20546 14 Sponsoring Agency Code 15 Supplementary Notes 16 Abstract A conceptual design study of a laminar flow control glove applied to the wing of a short to medium range jet transport with aft mounted engines has been completed. Two suction surfaces were studied--aslotted aluminum glove concept and a woven stainless steel mesh porous glove concept. The laminar flow control glove and a dummy glove with a modified supercritical airfoil, ducting, modified wing leading and trailing edges, modified flaps and an LFC trim tab were applied to the wing after slot spacing suction parameters, and compression power were determined. The results of the study show that a laminar flow control glove can be applied to the wing of a jet transport with an appropriate suction system installed.
  • Introduction to Airplane Performance Prof. AK Ghosh Department Of

    Introduction to Airplane Performance Prof. AK Ghosh Department Of

    NOC: Introduction to Airplane Performance Prof. A. K. Ghosh Department of Aerospace Engineering Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur Module - 01 Lecture - 03 Introduction to airplane and its components (Refer Slide Time: 00:09) This is Sinus 912 aircraft which is a motor glider and its manufacturer is Pipistrel. So, we will today we will discuss about the structure and the instrument panel of this motor glider. This is an all made its construction is of composite material. This is the spinner of the aircraft having a 2 bladed propeller which is vireo. Then, it has a rotex 912 engine installed in it which is a 4 cylinder engine and it is a piston engine 4 stroke. Moving ahead we come to the wing. This is the starboard wing of the aircraft which is containing a pitot tube. This is the pitot tube which senses the pitot pressure and the static pressure from the static veins located just beneath it. It senses the dynamic pressure and gives to the pitot instruments like ASI, altimeter and vertical speed indicator. (Refer Slide Time: 00:59) Then, it has a wing span of 15 meters. For this wing contains a flaperon. Normally all aircrafts have either aileron and a flap, but in this varying motor glider the 2 control surfaces are combined in one and then that is of flaperon which consist of a flap and aileron that helps in rolling and as well as at the time of takeoff and landing. (Refer Slide Time: 01:24) So, this is the impeller section of the aircraft this is the tail section which consist of the vertical stabilizer, the horizontal stabilizer; attached to it is the moving part that is the elevator and the rudder.
  • The Wing Is the Principal Structural Unit of the Airplane. It Has Several Functions Beyond That of Providing Lift. for a Wing To

    The Wing Is the Principal Structural Unit of the Airplane. It Has Several Functions Beyond That of Providing Lift. for a Wing To

    1 WING The wing is the principal structural unit of the airplane. It has several functions beyond that of providing lift. For a wing to produce "lift", it must be oriented at a suitable angle of attack relative to the flow of air past the wing. In aerodynamics, angle of attack (AOA) specifies the angle between the chord line of the wing of a fixed-wing aircraft and the vector representing the relative motion between the aircraft and the atmosphere. On larger airplanes the engines are mounted in nacelles either attached to the wing or mounted in the wing. The nacelles also provide a housing for the landing gear when it is retracted. The space within the wing is usually used for fuel storage. The main geometrical features of a wing are its span; the area of the wing; its dihedral angle; its sweepback angle; and the wing section. Dihedral angle is the upward angle of an aircraft's wing, from the wing root to the wing tip. The amount of dihedral determines the amount of inherent stability along the roll axis. Although an increase of dihedral will increase inherent stability, it will also decrease lift, and increase drag. The design of the wing depends on the size, weight, and use of the airplane. Generally, there are two kinds of wing design: cantilever and semi-cantilever. The semi-cantilever usually has one, or perhaps two, supporting wires or struts attached to each wing and the fuselage. As far as the internal structure is concerned, there are three general types of conventional wings: monospar, two-spar, and multispar.