August 2020 Aviationweek.Com/BCA Case Study: Turkish Well, Maybe They Were

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

August 2020 Aviationweek.Com/BCA Case Study: Turkish Well, Maybe They Were Safety The Human-Engine Interface Many problems, one easy solution BY JAMES ALBRIGHT [email protected] y first piece of aircraft auto- you to engage the autothrottles for autothrottles had a role to play leading SAICLE/GETTY IMAGES mation was a flight director in takeoff and then simply forget about up to the scene of the accident. Four fol- the Northrop T-38. It was pure them until after landing. And, I must low — each with an autothrottle prob- magic: Two mechanical needles admit, sometimes I forget about them. lem. Let’s see if we can come up with a Mcame into view, one for course and an- But these days, I mostly don’t trust solution. other for glidepath, and you simply flew them during the climb because with the airplane so as to center them. Over the wrong mode of the autopilot they Case Study: Gulfstream the next few years the crossbars turned can result in a stall. Oh yes, I don’t trust GIV, G-GMAC to vee bars, but there was nothing them en route because changing envi- earthshaking until one of my airplanes ronmental conditions can leave us short Problem: There has been a divergence of allowed us to couple those bars to the of thrust. And then there is the descent. opinion in the Gulfstream world on the autopilot. Now, that was neat. And don’t get me started about the ap- proper way to engage and disengage Then came an autothrottle system proach phase! OK, OK. I guess I just the autothrottles. There are two sets of that was good for an ILS approach and don’t trust them. But I do use them from switches, forward and aft of what are autoland, but not much else. (It could not takeoff to landing; they free up my brain called throttles, power levers or thrust be trusted for takeoff or climb.) for other things. levers. The type of switches used has It wasn’t until I got to the Gulfstream Why so paranoid? There have been a changed but their locations remain the GV that I had an airplane that allowed lot of accidents over the years in which same. The forward switches will only disengage and the aft switches will en- gage or disengage. You can only engage with the switches aft of the throttle stems, so no debate there. I believe you U.S. AIR FORCE should only disengage using the forward switches, since there is no chance you will engage the autothrottles with a “double click.” But Gulfstream gives us the option and it seems many pilots use the aft switches for everything. On Dec. 1, 2004, a crew destroyed a perfectly good airplane while land- ing at Teterboro Airport (KTEB), New Jersey. The pilot disengaged the auto- throttles at 570 ft. AGL. It is unclear as to who or why, but the autothrottles were re-engaged at 38 ft. The GIV can- not be landed with the autothrottles en- gaged and I speculate that the pilot hit Northrop T-38 attitude director indicator, circa 1979 the aft engage/disengage switches at 56 Business & Commercial Aviation | August 2020 AviationWeek.com/BCA Case Study: Turkish Well, maybe they were. Here’s my Airlines Flight 1951 take: The radio altimeter system was one of the leading maintenance squawks KEVIN KNECHT Problem: Does this sound topi- for the Boeing 737-800 of the time — in cal? A Boeing 737 equipped fact, it was the top squawk at Turkish with two sensors used by the Airlines. Boeing knew a faulty radio al- automated flight system was timeter could cause an autothrottle “re- designed to use only one of tard” mode while in flight but reasoned those sensors at a time, ignor- that the cockpit had more than enough ing the opposite sensor. Then warning systems to alert the crew. one day the sensor being used Actually, the very airplane involved in went bad and the airplane this crash had the “retard” mode occur crashed, even though the op- in two previous flights in the previous posite sensor could have saved 48 hr. But each crew noticed the “RE- the day. It has nothing to do TARD” annunciation, the decaying air- Gulfstream GIV autothrottle switches with the 737 MAX of the Lion speed, the low-speed cue and the higher the last moment to ensure they were Air Flight 610 era; this was 10 years ago. than usual deck angle. Each crew dis- disengaged. Of course, that caused them In a nutshell, here is what happened connected the autothrottles and flew the to re-engage. to Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 on Feb. jet to a successful landing. This crew After landing when the speed de- 25, 2009: The captain’s radio altimeter did not. Rather, the captain was busy cayed below the target approach speed, malfunctioned to read -8 ft. in flight. training a new first officer, but there the autothrottles pushed the thrust le- DUTCH SAFETY BOARD vers forward, making it impossible for the pilot to lift the reverse levers out of their stowed detent. With available runway disappearing, the pilot activated the emergency brake, which does not have anti-skid protec- tion, and the airplane departed the run- way. All survived the landing except the airplane. The NTSB blames the crew’s inad- vertent engagement of the autothrot- tles and failure to recognize that during landing. The Safety Board also notes the lack of autothrottle switch guards and a lack of an audible engagement tone. But Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 flight mode all of that misses the point. annunciations during approach Once the airplane had been landed the pilot should have noticed the throt- tles moving forward and he should have The crew were slam-dunked into Schi- was a third pilot on the flight deck as slapped them back. I am speculating phol Airport, a common occurrence. A a safety pilot. Nevertheless, they got that the pilot’s right hand was not on the poor design allowed the autothrottles rushed with the slam dunk and nobody throttles during the final phase of the to use the left radio altimeter while the noticed the visual cues and five audible approach and landing until he wanted first officer flew the ILS with the autopi- warnings until the stick shaker alerted the reversers. lot coupled to the right autopilot. As the them, too late. Solution: Keep your hands on the aircraft intercepted the ILS from above, Solution: Keep your hands on the the autothrottles had all they needed throttles during approach and landing, NTSB to go into “retard” mode. Neither pilot DUTCH SAFETY BOARD seemed to correlate a cascading series of warnings, including one for low air- speed, and the resulting high deck angle, with the radio altimeter failure. The 737 ran itself out of speed at about 500 ft., at which time it stalled. The airplane impacted short of the run- way. Nine of the 135 people on board were killed. The airplane was destroyed. Gulfstream GIV G-GMAC The Dutch accident investigators Turkish Airlines Flight 1951 wreckage throttles during approach and landing, placed the blame on Boeing for the de- and mentally connect what they are do- sign of the radio altimeter/autothrottle and mentally connect what they are do- ing against what you want them to do. If interface while giving the crew an addi- ing against what you want them to do. If there is a disagreement, put the throt- tional mention, as if they were bystand- there is a disagreement, put the throt- tles where you want them. ers to the crash. tles where you want them. AviationWeek.com/BCA Business & Commercial Aviation | August 2020 57 Safety Case Study: Asiana mode control panel or flight manage- will be surrounded by a green box for Airlines Flight 214 ment computer. 10 sec. The A/T will remain in HOLD υ࠙Thrust (THR) — Thrust applied to mode until one of the following condi- Problem: Airlines in South Korea have maintain the climb/descent rate re- tions is met: a long history of crashing airplanes be- quired by AFDS (autopilot flight direc- (1) The airplane reaches the MCP tar- cause their pilots had difficulty when tor system) pitch mode. get altitude. they were deprived of an ILS signal and υ࠙Idle (IDLE) — Occurs when A/T (au- (2) The pilot engages a new AFDS their crews were unwilling to challenge tothrottle) controls the thrust levers to pitch mode or new A/T mode. the most senior pilot on the flight deck. the aft stop. (3) The A/T arm switches are turned This particular crash fits that mold, but υ࠙Hold (HOLD) — Occurs when A/T re- off. the design of the autothrottle system moves power from the servo motors. In (4) The thrust is manually com- combined with poor pilot technique was this mode, A/T will not move the thrust manded to increase past the thrust certainly a factor. levers. limit. On July 6, 2013, Asiana Flight 214, υ࠙Flight level change (FLCH) — A mode (5) The A/P is disconnected, and both a Boeing 777, was on approach to on many autopilots that holds speed by F/D switches are turned off. San Francisco International Airport either bringing the throttles to idle or This seems nonsensical at first. If (KSFO) on a clear day with no real chal- climb thrust while controlling speed you are in an idle descent why do you lenges to speak of, except maybe one. with the elevator. want the autothrottles to essentially The ILS glideslope was out of service. I am familiar with all of these modes stop moving once they hit idle? To ra- While many U.S.
Recommended publications
  • Pitot-Static System Blockage Effects on Airspeed Indicator
    The Dramatic Effects of Pitot-Static System Blockages and Failures by Luiz Roberto Monteiro de Oliveira . Table of Contents I ‐ Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….1 II ‐ Pitot‐Static Instruments…………………………………………………………………………………………..3 III ‐ Blockage Scenarios – Description……………………………..…………………………………….…..…11 IV ‐ Examples of the Blockage Scenarios…………………..……………………………………………….…15 V ‐ Disclaimer………………………………………………………………………………………………………………50 VI ‐ References…………………………………………………………………………………………….…..……..……51 Please also review and understand the disclaimer found at the end of the article before applying the information contained herein. I - Introduction This article takes a comprehensive look into Pitot-static system blockages and failures. These typically affect the airspeed indicator (ASI), vertical speed indicator (VSI) and altimeter. They can also affect the autopilot auto-throttle and other equipment that relies on airspeed and altitude information. There have been several commercial flights, more recently Air France's flight 447, whose crash could have been due, in part, to Pitot-static system issues and pilot reaction. It is plausible that the pilot at the controls could have become confused with the erroneous instrument readings of the airspeed and have unknowingly flown the aircraft out of control resulting in the crash. The goal of this article is to help remove or reduce, through knowledge, the likelihood of at least this one link in the chain of problems that can lead to accidents. Table 1 below is provided to summarize
    [Show full text]
  • Airspeed Indicator Calibration
    TECHNICAL GUIDANCE MATERIAL AIRSPEED INDICATOR CALIBRATION This document explains the process of calibration of the airspeed indicator to generate curves to convert indicated airspeed (IAS) to calibrated airspeed (CAS) and has been compiled as reference material only. i Technical Guidance Material BushCat NOSE-WHEEL AND TAIL-DRAGGER FITTED WITH ROTAX 912UL/ULS ENGINE APPROVED QRH PART NUMBER: BCTG-NT-001-000 AIRCRAFT TYPE: CHEETAH – BUSHCAT* DATE OF ISSUE: 18th JUNE 2018 *Refer to the POH for more information on aircraft type. ii For BushCat Nose Wheel and Tail Dragger LSA Issue Number: Date Published: Notable Changes: -001 18/09/2018 Original Section intentionally left blank. iii Table of Contents 1. BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................... 1 2. DETERMINATION OF INSTRUMENT ERROR FOR YOUR ASI ................................................ 2 3. GENERATING THE IAS-CAS RELATIONSHIP FOR YOUR AIRCRAFT....................................... 5 4. CORRECT ALIGNMENT OF THE PITOT TUBE ....................................................................... 9 APPENDIX A – ASI INSTRUMENT ERROR SHEET ....................................................................... 11 Table of Figures Figure 1 Arrangement of instrument calibration system .......................................................... 3 Figure 2 IAS instrument error sample ........................................................................................ 7 Figure 3 Sample relationship between
    [Show full text]
  • Sept. 12, 1950 W
    Sept. 12, 1950 W. ANGST 2,522,337 MACH METER Filed Dec. 9, 1944 2 Sheets-Sheet. INVENTOR. M/2 2.7aar alwg,57. A77OAMA). Sept. 12, 1950 W. ANGST 2,522,337 MACH METER Filed Dec. 9, 1944 2. Sheets-Sheet 2 N 2 2 %/ NYSASSESSN S2,222,W N N22N \ As I, mtRumaIII-m- III It's EARAs i RNSITIE, 2 72/ INVENTOR, M247 aeawosz. "/m2.ATTORNEY. Patented Sept. 12, 1950 2,522,337 UNITED STATES ; :PATENT OFFICE 2,522,337 MACH METER Walter Angst, Manhasset, N. Y., assignor to Square D Company, Detroit, Mich., a corpora tion of Michigan Application December 9, 1944, Serial No. 567,431 3 Claims. (Cl. 73-182). is 2 This invention relates to a Mach meter for air plurality of posts 8. Upon one of the posts 8 are craft for indicating the ratio of the true airspeed mounted a pair of serially connected aneroid cap of the craft to the speed of sound in the medium sules 9 and upon another of the posts 8 is in which the aircraft is traveling and the object mounted a diaphragm capsuler it. The aneroid of the invention is the provision of an instrument s: capsules 9 are sealed and the interior of the cas-l of this type for indicating the Mach number of an . ing is placed in communication with the static aircraft in fight. opening of a Pitot static tube through an opening The maximum safe Mach number of any air in the casing, not shown. The interior of the dia craft is the value of the ratio of true airspeed to phragm capsule is connected through the tub the speed of sound at which the laminar flow of ing 2 to the Pitot or pressure opening of the Pitot air over the wings fails and shock Waves are en static tube through the opening 3 in the back countered.
    [Show full text]
  • Beforethe Runway
    EDITORIAL Before the runway By Professor Sidney dekker display with fl ight information. My airspeed is leaking out of Editors Note: This time, we decided to invite some the airplane as if the hull has been punctured, slowly defl at- comments on Professor Dekker’s article from subject ing like a pricked balloon. It looks bizarre and scary and the matter experts. Their responses follow the article. split second seems to last for an eternity. Yet I have taught myself to act fi rst and question later in situations like this. e are at 2,000 feet, on approach to the airport. The big So I act. After all, there is not a whole lot of air between me W jet is on autopilot, docile, and responsively follow- and the hard ground. I switch off the autothrottle and shove ing the instructions I have put into the various computer the thrust levers forward. From behind, I hear the engines systems. It follows the heading I gave it, and stays at the screech, shrill and piercing. Airspeed picks up. I switch off altitude I wanted it at. The weather is alright, but not great. the autopilot for good measure (or good riddance) and fl y Cloud base is around 1000 feet, there is mist, a cold driz- the jet down to the runway. It feels solid in my hands and zle. We should be on the ground in the next few minutes. docile again. We land. Then everything comes to a sudden I call for fl aps, and the other pilot selects them for me.
    [Show 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.
    [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]
  • 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]
  • Safe Flight Autopower® for Hawker 800 Series Aircraft
    ® Safe Flight AutoPower For ® Hawker 800 Series Aircraft Chesterfield, MO 636-681-5600 Safe Flight AutoPower® Installed With Experience By West Star Aviation Safe Flight AutoPower® Installed With Experience By West Star Aviation The Mission To deliver the precise management of speed through the control of thrust during all phases of flight to maximize safety, performance and efficiency to the Hawker 800 series of aircraft. The Solution AutoPower® – the automatic throttle system (ATS) from Safe Flight Instrument Corporation. In cruise, the Auto Throttle system is continuously Safe Flight pioneered the development of automatic throttle technology which is now monitoring and adjusting the power levers to standard equipment on most large and medium business jets. AutoPower® systems and offset acceleration due to fuel burn. This results components from Safe Flight are installed on more than 9,000 corporate, commercial, in a fuel saving of 3% or more depending on the length of the flight. and military aircraft worldwide. The Benefits From takeoff to touchdown, AutoPower® ATS is designed to provide precise air speed control and engine target settings. The results are significant performance and safety advantages ranging from reduced crew workload and improved situational awareness to greater passenger comfort and increased aircraft value. Operators also report a 3.5 percent increase in range with the system by better controlling speed at cruise and maximizing fuel burn. The AutoPower® system manages engine power by automatically moving the thrust levers, When the flight crew selects a lower altitude on keeping the pilot aware of the adjustments at all times. Overriding the throttles never takes the Proline 21 system, the Auto Throttle system more force than when the system is not engaged.
    [Show full text]
  • SERVICE ALERT Avidyne Primary Flight Display {P/Ns: 700-00006-000,-001,-002,-003,-100}
    SA-08-001 12 February 2008 SERVICE ALERT Avidyne Primary Flight Display {P/Ns: 700-00006-000,-001,-002,-003,-100} This SERVICE ALERT communicates important safety information concerning aircraft equipped with certain Avidyne EXP5000 Primary Flight Displays (PFDs). BACKGROUND INFORMATION Avidyne has received a limited number of field reports of PFDs displaying incorrect altitude and airspeed information. None of these occurrences led to an accident or incident. These occurrences included incorrect display of information at system startup, including one or more of the following: • Altitude significantly in error when compared to field elevation with local barometric correction setting entered on PFD. • Altitude significantly in error when compared to backup altimeter with identical barometric correction settings on both. • Non-zero airspeed (inconsistent with high winds or propwash from a nearby airplane) indicated at system startup. • Altitude or airspeed indications that vary noticeably after startup under static conditions. • Erroneous airspeed indications in combination with erroneous attitude indications. • A steady or intermittent “red X” in place of the airspeed indicator, altimeter, VSI or attitude indicator. Aircraft exhibiting any of these incorrect indications should not be flown. In any case where an erroneous indication is present at system startup (without an identifiable external cause such as surface winds or propwash) and this indication subsequently returns to normal, the PFD should nonetheless be considered unreliable and the aircraft should not be flown. As a normal practice, all pilots should be vigilant in conducting proper preflight and in- flight checks of instrument accuracy, including: • Preflight check of the accuracy of both the primary and backup altimeter against known airfield elevation and against each other.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting to Grips with A320 Family Performance Retention and Fuel Savings
    Flight Operations Support & Services Customer Services 1, rond-point Maurice Bellonte, BP 33 31707 BLAGNAC Cedex FRANCE Telephone (+33) 5 61 93 33 33 65 getting to grips with A320 Family performance retention and fuel savings Issue 2 - January 2008 Getting to grips with A320 Family Performance Preface Retention and Fuel Saving TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 Scope .................................................................................................................... 4 2 Introduction....................................................................................................... 4 3 Industry issues................................................................................................. 9 3.1 Environmental Issues..........................................................................10 4 Initiatives ......................................................................................................... 12 4.1 Introduction ........................................................................................12 4.2 Operational Initiatives ........................................................................14 4.2.1 Aircraft operations ..............................................................................14 4.2.2 Cost index ...........................................................................................14 4.2.3 Fuel economy ......................................................................................15 4.2.3.1 Cruise speed.........................................................................................15
    [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]