DOCSLIB.ORG

The Difference Between Higher and Lower Flap Setting Configurations May Seem Small, but at Today's Fuel Prices the Savings Can Be Substantial

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Difference Between Higher and Lower Flap Setting Configurations May Seem Small, but at Today's Fuel Prices the Savings Can Be Substantial THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HIGHER AND LOWER FLAP SETTING CONFIGURATIONS MAY SEEM SMALL, BUT AT TODAY'S FUEL PRICES THE SAVINGS CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. 24 AERO QUARTERLY QTR_04 | 08 Fuel Conservation Strategies: Takeoff and Climb By William Roberson, Senior Safety Pilot, Flight Operations; and James A. Johns, Flight Operations Engineer, Flight Operations Engineering This article is the third in a series exploring fuel conservation strategies. Every takeoff is an opportunity to save fuel. If each takeoff and climb is performed efficiently, an airline can realize significant savings over time. But what constitutes an efficient takeoff? How should a climb be executed for maximum fuel savings? The most efficient flights actually begin long before the airplane is cleared for takeoff. This article discusses strategies for fuel savings But times have clearly changed. Jet fuel prices fuel burn from brake release to a pressure altitude during the takeoff and climb phases of flight. have increased over five times from 1990 to 2008. of 10,000 feet (3,048 meters), assuming an accel­ Subse quent articles in this series will deal with At this time, fuel is about 40 percent of a typical eration altitude of 3,000 feet (914 meters) above the descent, approach, and landing phases of airline’s total operating cost. As a result, airlines ground level (AGL). In all cases, however, the flap flight, as well as auxiliary­power­unit usage are reviewing all phases of flight to determine how setting must be appropriate for the situation to strategies. The first article in this series, “Cost fuel burn savings can be gained in each phase ensure airplane safety. Index Explained,” appeared in the second­quarter and in total. Higher flap setting configurations use more fuel 2007 AERO. It was followed by “Cruise Flight” in This article examines the takeoff and climb than lower flap configurations.T he difference is the fourth­quarter 2007 issue. phase for four types of commercial airplanes small, but at today’s prices the savings can be to illustrate various takeoff and climb scenarios sub stantial — especially for airplanes that fly a and how they impact fuel usage. These analyses high number of cycles each day. takeoff and climB fuel conServation StrategieS look at short­range (e.g., 717), medium­range For example, an operator with a small fleet of (e.g., 737­800 with winglets), and long­range (e.g., 717s which flies approximately 10 total cycles per 777­200 Extended Range and 747­400) airplanes. day could save 320 pounds (145 kilograms) of fuel In the past, when the price of jet fuel increased An important consideration when seeking fuel per day by changing its normal takeoff flaps set­ by 20 to 30 cents per U.S. gallon, airlines did not savings in the takeoff and climb phase of flight is ting from 18 to 5 degrees. With a fuel price of concern themselves with fuel conservation in the the takeoff flap setting.T he lower the flap setting, US$3.70 per U.S. gallon, this would be approxi­ takeoff and climb segment of the flight because it the lower the drag, resulting in less fuel burned. mately US$175 per day. Assuming each airplane represents only 8 to 15 percent of the total time Figure 1 shows the effect of takeoff flap setting on of a medium­ to long­range flight. 25 WWW.BOEING.COM/COMMERCIAL/AEROMAGAZINE ThE ROLE OF THE Every area of an airline has a part to play in Top fuel conservation strategies for flight FLIGHT CREW IN FUEL reducing the cost of the operation. But the flight crews include: CONSERVATION crew has the most direct role in cutting the n Take only the fuel you need. amount of fuel used on any given flight. n Minimize the use of the auxiliary power unit. The flight crew has opportunities to affect the n Taxi as efficiently as possible. amount of fuel used in every phase of flight n Take off and climb efficiently. without compromising safety. These phases n Fly the airplane with minimal drag. include planning, ground operations, taxi out, n Choose routing carefully. takeoff, climb, cruise, descent, approach, landing, n Strive to maintain optimum altitude. taxi in, and maintenance debrief. n Fly the proper cruise speed. n Descend at the appropriate point. n Configure in a timely manner. is flown 350 days per year, the airline could save Operators need to determine whether their comparing the fuel uSage of approxi mately US$61,000 a year. If an airline fleet size and cycles are such that the savings two Standard climB profileS makes this change to a fleet of 717 airplanes would make it worthwhile to change procedures that averages 200 cycles a day, it could save and pilot training. Other important factors that Figure 2 shows two standard climb profiles for more than US$1 million per year in fuel costs. determine whether or not it is advisable to change each airplane. These simplified profiles are based Using these same assumptions on fuel price, standard takeoff settings include obstacles on the International Civil Aviation Organization the potential fuel savings for an operator of a small clearance, runway length, airport noise, and (ICAO) Procedures for Air Navigation Services fleet of 747­400s whose airplanes average a total departure procedures. Aircraft Operations (PANS­opS) Noise Abatement of three cycles per day would be approximately Another area in the takeoff and climb phase Departure Procedures (NADP) NADP 1 and NADP 2 420 U.S. pounds (191 kilograms) of fuel per day, where airlines can reduce fuel burn is in the profiles. Profile 1 is a climb with acceleration and flap or approximately US$230. During a year, the climb­out and cleanup operation. If the flight retraction beginning at 3,000 feet (914 meters) operator could save approximately US$84,000. crew per forms acceleration and flap retraction AGL, which is the noise climb­out procedure for These savings are not as dramatic as the short­ at a lower altitude than the typical 3,000 feet close­in noise monitors. Profile 2 is a climb with range transport airplane, but clearly they increase (914 meters), the fuel burn is reduced because accelera tion to flap retraction speed beginning at as the fleet size or number of cycles grows. the drag is being reduced earlier in the climb­ 1,000 feet (305 meters) AGL, which is the noise out phase. climb­out proce dure for far­out noise monitors. As a general rule, when airplanes fly Profile 2, 26 AERO QUARTERLY QTR_04 | 08 Impact OF takeoFF FLAPS SELECTION ON FUEL BURN Figure 1 AIRPLANE TAKEOFF TAKEOFF FUEL FUEL ModeL FLap SettING GroSS WEIGht USED DIFFERENTIAL Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) 5 933 (423) – 717­200 13 113,000 (51,256) 950 (431) 17 (8) 18 965 (438) 32 (15) 5 1,274 (578) – 737­800 Winglets 10 160,000 (72,575) 1,291 (586) 17 (8) 15 1,297 (588) 23 (10) 5 3,605 (1,635) – 777­200 Extended Range 10 555,000 (249,476) 3,677 (1,668) 72 (33) 20 3,730 (1,692) 125 (57) 10 5,633 (2,555) – 747­400 725,000 (328,855) 20 5,772 (2,618) 139 (63) 10 6,389 (2,898) – 747­400 Freighter 790,000 (358,338) 20 6,539 (2,966) 150 (68) FUEL-SAVING POTENTIAL OF TWO CLIMB PROFILES Figure 2 AIRPLANE TAKEOFF PROFILE TAKEOFF FUEL FUEL MODEL GroSS WEIGht TYPE FLAP SETTING USED DIFFERENTIAL Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) 1 4,025 (1,826) – 717­200 113,000 (51,256) 13 2 3,880 (1,760) 145 (66) 1 5,234 (2,374) – 737­800 Winglets 160,000 (72,575) 10 2 5,086 (2,307) 148 (67) 1 14,513 (6,583) – 777­200 Extended Range 555,000 (249,476) 15 2 14,078 (6,386) 435 (197) 1 21,052 (9,549) – 747­400 725,000 (328,855) 10 2 20,532 (9,313) 520 (236) 1 23,081 (10,469) – 747­400 Freighter 790,000 (358,338) 10 2 22,472 (10,193) 609 (276) 27 WWW.BOEING.COM/COMMERCIAL/AEROMAGAZINE EFFECT OF COMBINING takeoFF AND CLIMB STRATEGIES Figure 3 AIRPLANE TAKEOFF PROFILE TAKEOFF FUEL FUEL MODEL GroSS WEIGht TYPE FLAP SETTING USED DIFFERENTIAL Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) Pounds (kilograms) 1 18 4,061 (1,842) – 717­200 113,000 (51,256) 2 5 3,859 (1,750) 202 (92) 1 15 5,273 (2,392) – 737­800 Winglets 160,000 (72,575) 2 5 5,069 (2,299) 204 (93) 1 20 14,710 (6,672) – 777­200 Extended Range 555,000 (249,476) 2 5 14,018 (6,358) 692 (314) 1 20 21,419 (9,715) – 747­400 725,000 (328,855) 2 10 20,532 (9,313) 887 (403) 1 20 23,558 (10,686) – 747­400 Freighter 790,000 (358,338) 2 10 22,472 (10,193) 1,086 (493) they use 3 to 4 percent less fuel than when zero in the FMC. (See “Cost Index Explained” in the Summary flying Profile 1. second­quarter 2007 AERO.) Figure 3 shows the combined effect of using In a time when airlines are scrutinizing every a lower takeoff flap setting and flying Profile 2, aspect of flight to locate possible opportunities to other conSiderationS compared to using a higher takeoff flap setting save fuel, the takeoff and climb phases of flight and flying Profile 1. Combining a lower takeoff should be considered as part of an overall fuel From a fuel consumption perspective, a full­thrust flap setting with Profile 2 saves approximately savings effort.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • E6bmanual2016.Pdf
    ® Electronic Flight Computer SPORTY’S E6B ELECTRONIC FLIGHT COMPUTER Sporty’s E6B Flight Computer is designed to perform 24 aviation functions and 20 standard conversions, and includes timer and clock functions. We hope that you enjoy your E6B Flight Computer. Its use has been made easy through direct path menu selection and calculation prompting. As you will soon learn, Sporty’s E6B is one of the most useful and versatile of all aviation computers. Copyright © 2016 by Sportsman’s Market, Inc. Version 13.16A page: 1 CONTENTS BEFORE USING YOUR E6B ...................................................... 3 DISPLAY SCREEN .................................................................... 4 PROMPTS AND LABELS ........................................................... 5 SPECIAL FUNCTION KEYS ....................................................... 7 FUNCTION MENU KEYS ........................................................... 8 ARITHMETIC FUNCTIONS ........................................................ 9 AVIATION FUNCTIONS ............................................................. 9 CONVERSIONS ....................................................................... 10 CLOCK FUNCTION .................................................................. 12 ADDING AND SUBTRACTING TIME ....................................... 13 TIMER FUNCTION ................................................................... 14 HEADING AND GROUND SPEED ........................................... 15 PRESSURE AND DENSITY ALTITUDE ...................................
    [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]
  • Self-Actuating Flaps on Bird and Aircraft Wings 437
    Self-actuating flaps on bird and aircraft wings D.W. Bechert, W. Hage & R. Meyer Department of Turbulence Research, German Aerospace Center (DLR), Berlin, Germany. Abstract Separation control is also an important issue in biology. During the landing approach of birds and in flight through very turbulent air, one observes that the covering feathers on the upper side of bird wings tend to pop up. The raised feathers impede the spreading of the flow separation from the trailing edge to the leading edge of the wing. This mechanism of separation control by bird feathers is described in detail. Self-activated movable flaps (= artificial bird feathers) represent a high-lift system enhancing the maximum lift of airfoils up to 20%. This is achieved without perceivable deleterious effects under cruise conditions. Several data of wind tunnel experiments as well as flight experiments with an aircraft with laminar wing and movable flaps are shown. 1 Movable flaps on wings: artificial bird feathers The issue of artificial feathers on wings, has an almost anecdotal origin. Wolfgang Liebe, the inventor of the boundary layer fence once observed mountain crows in the Alps in the 1930s. He noticed that the covering feathers on the upper side of the wings tend to pop up when the birds were on landing approach or in other situations with high angle of attack, like flight through gusts. Once the attention of the observer is drawn to it, it is comparatively easy to observe this behaviour in almost any bird (see, for example, the feathers on the left-hand wing of a Skua in Fig.
    [Show full text]
  • Emergency Procedures C172
    EMERGENCY PROCEDURES NON CRITICAL ACTION June 2015 1. Maintain aircraft control. Table of Contents 2. Analyze the situation and take proper action. C 172 3.Land as soon as conditions permit NON CRITICAL ACTION PROCEDURES E-2 GROUND OPERATION EMERGENCIES GROUND OPERATION EMERGENCIES E-2 Emergency Engine Shutdown on the Ground Emergency Engine Shutdown on the Ground E-2 1. FUEL SELECTOR -------------------------------- OFF Engine Fire During Start E-2 2. MIXTURE ---------------------------- IDLE CUTOFF TAKEOFF EMERGENCIES E-2 3. IGNITION ------------------------------------------ OFF Abort E-2 4. MASTER SWITCH ------------------------------- OFF IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES E-3 Engine Failure Immediately After T/O E-3 Engine Fire during Start Engine Failure In Flt - Forced Landing E-3 If Engine starts Engine Fire During Flight E-4 1. POWER ------------------------------------- 1700 RPM Emergency Descent E-4 2. ENGINE -------------------------------- SHUTDOWN Electrical Fire/High Ammeter E-4 If Engine fails to start Negative Ammeter Reading E-4 1. CRANKING ----------------------------- CONTINUE Smoke and Fume Elimination E-5 2. MIXTURE --------------------------- IDLE CUT-OFF Oil System Malfunction E-4 3 THROTTLE ----------------------------- FULL OPEN Structural Damage or Controllability Check E-5 4. ENGINE -------------------------------- SHUTDOWN Recall E-6 FUEL SELECTOR ------ OFF Lost Procedures E-6 IGNITION SWITCH --- OFF Radio Failure E-7 MASTER SWITCH ----- OFF Diversions E-8 LANDING EMERGENCIES E-9 TAKEOFF EMERGENCIES Landing with flat tire E-9 ABORT E-9 LIGHT SIGNALS 1. THROTTLE -------------------------------------- IDLE 2. BRAKES ----------------------------- AS REQUIRED E-2 E-1 IN-FLIGHT EMERGENCIES Engine Fire During Flight Engine Failure Immediately After Takeoff 1. FUEL SELECTOR --------------------------------------- OFF 1. BEST GLIDE ------------------------------------ ESTABLISH 2. MIXTURE------------------------------------ IDLE CUTOFF 2. FUEL SELECTOR ----------------------------------------- OFF 3.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Performance (R18a2110)
    AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING – MRCET (UGC Autonomous) AIRCRAFT PERFORMANCE (R18A2110) COURSE FILE II B. Tech II Semester (2019-2020) Prepared By Ms. D.SMITHA, Assoc. Prof Department of Aeronautical Engineering MALLA REDDY COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY (Autonomous Institution – UGC, Govt. of India) Affiliated to JNTU, Hyderabad, Approved by AICTE - Accredited by NBA & NAAC – ‘A’ Grade - ISO 9001:2015 Certified) Maisammaguda, Dhulapally (Post Via. Kompally), Secunderabad – 500100, Telangana State, India. AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING – MRCET (UGC Autonomous) MRCET VISION • To become a model institution in the fields of Engineering, Technology and Management. • To have a perfect synchronization of the ideologies of MRCET with challenging demands of International Pioneering Organizations. MRCET MISSION To establish a pedestal for the integral innovation, team spirit, originality and competence in the students, expose them to face the global challenges and become pioneers of Indian vision of modern society . MRCET QUALITY POLICY. • To pursue continual improvement of teaching learning process of Undergraduate and Post Graduate programs in Engineering & Management vigorously. • To provide state of art infrastructure and expertise to impart the quality education. [II year – II sem ] Page 2 AERONAUTICAL ENGINEERING – MRCET (UGC Autonomous) PROGRAM OUTCOMES (PO’s) Engineering Graduates will be able to: 1. Engineering knowledge: Apply the knowledge of mathematics, science, engineering fundamentals, and an engineering specialization to the solution
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter: 4. Approaches
    Chapter 4 Approaches Introduction This chapter discusses general planning and conduct of instrument approaches by pilots operating under Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) Parts 91,121, 125, and 135. The operations specifications (OpSpecs), standard operating procedures (SOPs), and any other FAA- approved documents for each commercial operator are the final authorities for individual authorizations and limitations as they relate to instrument approaches. While coverage of the various authorizations and approach limitations for all operators is beyond the scope of this chapter, an attempt is made to give examples from generic manuals where it is appropriate. 4-1 Approach Planning within the framework of each specific air carrier’s OpSpecs, or Part 91. Depending on speed of the aircraft, availability of weather information, and the complexity of the approach procedure Weather Considerations or special terrain avoidance procedures for the airport of intended landing, the in-flight planning phase of an Weather conditions at the field of intended landing dictate instrument approach can begin as far as 100-200 NM from whether flight crews need to plan for an instrument the destination. Some of the approach planning should approach and, in many cases, determine which approaches be accomplished during preflight. In general, there are can be used, or if an approach can even be attempted. The five steps that most operators incorporate into their flight gathering of weather information should be one of the first standards manuals for the in-flight planning phase of an steps taken during the approach-planning phase. Although instrument approach: there are many possible types of weather information, the primary concerns for approach decision-making are • Gathering weather information, field conditions, windspeed, wind direction, ceiling, visibility, altimeter and Notices to Airmen (NOTAMs) for the airport of setting, temperature, and field conditions.
    [Show full text]
  • Trailing Vortex Attenuation Devices
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 1985 Trailing vortex attenuation devices. Heffernan, Kenneth G. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/21590 DUDLEY KNOX LIBRARY NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA 93^43 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California THESIS TRAILING VORTEX ATTENUATION DEVICES by Kenneth G. Heffernan June 1985 Thesis Advisor: T. Sarpkaya Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited, T223063 Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (Whan Data Entered) REPORT READ INSTRUCTIONS DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM 1. REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER 4. TITLE (and Subtitle) 5. TYPE OF REPORT A PERIOD COVERED Dual Master's Thesis; Trailing Vortex Attenuation Devices June 1985 S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER 7. AUTHORC»> 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBERC*.) Kenneth G. Heffernan 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND AODRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS Naval Postgraduate School Monterey, California 93943 I. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE June 1985 Naval Postgraduate Schodl 13. NUMBER OF PAGES Monterey, California 93943 109 U. MONITORING AGENCY NAME 4 ADDRESSf/f different from Controlling OHicm) 15. SECURITY CLASS, (ol (his report) Unclassified 15a. DECLASSIFICATION/ DOWNGRADING SCHEDULE 16. DISTRIBUTION ST ATEMEN T (of this Report) Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited. 17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (ol the abstract entered In Block 20, If different from Report) 18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse aide It necessary and Identify by block number) Trailing Vortices 20. ABSTRACT fConl/nu» on reverse side It necessary and Identity by block number) Trailing vortices generated by large aircraft pose a serious hazard to other planes.
    [Show full text]
  • Go-Around Decision-Making and Execution Project
    Final Report to Flight Safety Foundation Go-Around Decision-Making and Execution Project Tzvetomir Blajev, Eurocontrol (Co-Chair and FSF European Advisory Committee Chair) Capt. William Curtis, The Presage Group (Co-Chair and FSF International Advisory Committee Chair) MARCH 2017 1 Acknowledgments We would like to acknowledge the following people and organizations without which this report would not have been possible: • Airbus • Johan Condette — Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses • Air Canada Pilots Association • Capt. Bertrand De Courville — Air France (retired) • Air Line Pilots Association, International • Capt. Dirk De Winter — EasyJet • Airlines for America • Capt. Stephen Eggenschwiler — Swiss • The Boeing Company • Capt. Alex Fisher — British Airways (retired) • Eurocontrol • Alvaro Gammicchia — European Cockpit Association • FSF European Advisory Committee • Harald Hendel — Airbus • FSF International Advisory Committee • Yasuo Ishihara — Honeywell Aerospace Advanced • Honeywell International Technology • International Air Transport Association • David Jamieson, Ph.D. — The Presage Group • International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations • Christian Kern — Vienna Airport • The Presage Group • Capt. Pascal Kremer — FSF European Advisory Committee • Guillaume Adam — Bureau d’Enquêtes et d’Analyses • Richard Lawrence — Eurocontrol • John Barras – FSF European Advisory Committee • Capt. Harry Nelson — Airbus • Tzvetomir Blajev — Eurocontrol • Bruno Nero — The Presage Group • Karen Bolten — NATS • Zeljko Oreski — International
    [Show full text]
  • Practical Application of Pressurization Systems
    Practical Application of Pressurization Systems Pressurization Instruments A B 1 2 A. Cabin Rate of Climb Indicator – Similar to VSI, shows rate at which cabin altitude is climbing or descending (in this example the cabin is descending at 700 feet per minute). B. Cabin Altitude and Pressure Differential Indicator 1. Outside ring (long needle) shows cabin altitude in thousands of feet (in this example cabin altitude is a little over 3,000 feet. 2. Inside ring (short needle) shows the pressure differential in inches of mercury between the air in the cabin and the outside atmosphere (in this example, pressure differential is 4.8 inches) Pressurization Controller Setting Prior To Takeoff C A B A. Cabin Altitude Control – Prior to takeoff, set to 1,000 feet above cruise altitude on the inner ring.* The outer ring indicates what the cabin altitude will be when reaching cruise altitude. In this example the aircraft is climbing to 16,000 feet, so the altitude is set at 17,000 feet. The cabin altitude at cruise will be 4,100 feet. B. Cabin Rate of Climb/Descent Control: Usually set in the “12 O’clock” position which causes the cabin to climb at about ½ the rate at which the aircraft climbs. C. Cabin Pressure Dump Valve – Dumps cabin pressure * Setting altitude 1,000 feet above cruise altitude will prevent the cabin from climbing or descending if the aircraft climbs or descends a few hundred feet when at max pressure differential. This prevents cabin pressure changes and discomfort the crew and passengers. Pressurization Controller Setting Prior to Descent C B A A.
    [Show full text]
  • FSF ALAR Briefing Note 7.1 -- Stabilized Approach
    Flight Safety Foundation Approach-and-landing Accident Reduction Tool Kit FSF ALAR Briefing Note 7.1 — Stabilized Approach Unstabilized approaches are frequent factors in approach-and- causal factor in 45 percent of the 76 approach-and-landing landing accidents (ALAs), including those involving controlled accidents and serious incidents. flight into terrain (CFIT). The task force said that flight-handling difficulties occurred Unstabilized approaches are often the result of a flight crew who in situations that included rushing approaches, attempts to conducted the approach without sufficient time to: comply with demanding ATC clearances, adverse wind conditions and improper use of automation. • Plan; • Prepare; and, Definition • Conduct a stabilized approach. An approach is stabilized only if all the criteria in company standard operating procedures (SOPs) are met before or when Statistical Data reaching the applicable minimum stabilization height. The Flight Safety Foundation Approach-and-landing Accident Table 1 (page 134) shows stabilized approach criteria Reduction (ALAR) Task Force found that unstabilized recommended by the FSF ALAR Task Force. approaches (i.e., approaches conducted either low/slow or high/ fast) were a causal factor1 in 66 percent of 76 approach-and- Note: Flying a stabilized approach that meets the recommended landing accidents and serious incidents worldwide in 1984 criteria discussed below does not preclude flying a delayed- through 1997.2 flaps approach (also referred to as a decelerated approach) to comply with air traffic control (ATC) instructions. The task force said that although some low-energy approaches (i.e., low/slow) resulted in loss of aircraft control, most involved The following minimum stabilization heights are CFIT because of inadequate vertical-position awareness.
    [Show full text]
  • The Pennsylvania State University
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School Department of Aerospace Engineering REAL-TIME PATH PLANNING AND AUTONOMOUS CONTROL FOR HELICOPTER AUTOROTATION A Dissertation in Aerospace Engineering by Thanan Yomchinda 2013 Thanan Yomchinda Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2013 The dissertation of Thanan Yomchinda was reviewed and approved* by the following: Joseph F. Horn Associate Professor of Aerospace Engineering Dissertation Co-Advisor Co-Chair of Committee Jacob W. Langelaan Associate Professor of Aerospace Engineering Dissertation Co-Advisor Co-Chair of Committee Edward C. Smith Professor of Aerospace Engineering Christopher D. Rahn Professor of Mechanical Engineering George A. Lesieutre Professor of Aerospace Engineering Head of the Department of Aerospace Engineering *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT Autorotation is a descending maneuver that can be used to recover helicopters in the event of total loss of engine power; however it is an extremely difficult and complex maneuver. The objective of this work is to develop a real-time system which provides full autonomous control for autorotation landing of helicopters. The work includes the development of an autorotation path planning method and integration of the path planner with a primary flight control system. The trajectory is divided into three parts: entry, descent and flare. Three different optimization algorithms are used to generate trajectories for each of these segments. The primary flight control is designed using a linear dynamic inversion control scheme, and a path following control law is developed to track the autorotation trajectories. Details of the path planning algorithm, trajectory following control law, and autonomous autorotation system implementation are presented.
    [Show full text]
  • Cessna Model 150M Performance- Cessna Specifications Model 150M Performance - Specifications
    PILOT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK ssna 1977 150 Commuter CESSNA MODEL 150M PERFORMANCE- CESSNA SPECIFICATIONS MODEL 150M PERFORMANCE - SPECIFICATIONS SPEED: Maximum at Sea Level 109 KNOTS Cruise, 75% Power at 7000 Ft 106 KNOTS CRUISE: Recommended Lean Mixture with fuel allowance for engine start, taxi, takeoff, climb and 45 minutes reserve at 45% power. 75% Power at 7000 Ft Range 340 NM 22.5 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 3.3 HRS 75% Power at 7000 Ft Range 580 NM 35 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 5. 5 HRS Maximum Range at 10,000 Ft Range 420 NM 22. 5 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 4.9 HRS Maximum Range at 10,000 Ft Range 735 NM 35 Gallons Usable Fuel Time 8. 5 HRS RATE OF CLIMB AT SEA LEVEL 670 FPM SERVICE CEILING 14, 000 FT TAKEOFF PERFORMANCE: Ground Roll 735 FT Total Distance Over 50-Ft Obstacle 1385 FT LANDING PERFORMANCE: Ground Roll 445 FT Total Distance Over 50-Ft Obstacle 107 5 FT STALL SPEED (CAS): Flaps Up, Power Off 48 KNOTS Flaps Down, Power Off 42 KNOTS MAXIMUM WEIGHT 1600 LBS STANDARD EMPTY WEIGHT: Commuter 1111 LBS Commuter II 1129 LBS MAXIMUM USEFUL LOAD: Commuter 489 LBS Commuter II 471 LBS BAGGAGE ALLOWANCE 120 LBS WING LOADING: Pounds/Sq Ft 10.0 POWER LOADING: Pounds/HP 16.0 FUEL CAPACITY: Total Standard Tanks 26 GAL. Long; Range Tanks 38 GAL. OIL CAPACITY 6 QTS ENGINE: Teledyne Continental O-200-A 100 BHP at 2750 RPM PROPELLER: Fixed Pitch, Diameter 69 IN. D1080-13-RPC-6,000-12/77 PILOT'S OPERATING HANDBOOK Cessna 150 COMMUTER 1977 MODEL 150M Serial No.
    [Show full text]