January - June 2014

January - June 2014 1 THE SOCIETY OF EXPERIMENTAL TEST PILOTS BOARD OF DIRECTORS

President...... Kevin Prosser, Calspan Vice President...... Timothy Morey, Wyle Secretary...... Michael Wallace, Boeing Treasurer...... Todd Ericson, Col, USAF Legal Officer...... Roderick Cregier, Col, USAF Executive Advisor...... Doug Benjamin, Boeing President-Elect...... Mark Stucky, Scaled Composites Technical Advisor...... Patrick Duffy, JT3, LLC Technical Advisor...... Greg Lewis, NTPS Canadian Section Representative...... Maurice Girard, Bombardier Aerospace Central Section Representative...... Dan Hinson, Cessna Aircraft East Coast Section Representative...... John Tougas, Boeing European Section Representative...... Jeremy Tracy, AgustaWestland Great Lakes Section Representative...... Robbie Robinson, Textron Northwest Section Representative...... Ed Kolano, FAA Southeast Section Representative...... David Wright, Col, USAF Southwest Section Representative...... Norm Driscoll, Designet West Coast Section Representative...... Andrew McFarland, CAPT, USN Executive Director...... Paula S. Smith CANADIAN SECTION CENTRAL SECTION Chairman...... Andy Litavniks Chairman...... Dan Hinson Vice Chairman...... Jeff Peer Vice Chairman...... Aaron Tobias Secretary...... Chuck Ellis Secretary...... Steve Long Treasurer...... Maurice Girard Treasurer...... Jeff Karnes Educational Outreach...... Aaron Tobias EUROPEAN SECTION EAST COAST SECTION Chairman...... Gideon Singer Chairman...... Tobias Van Esselstyn NORTHWEST SECTION Secretary...... Brian Sandberg Treasurer...... Scott Dornisch Chairman...... Ed Kolano Educational Outreach...... Eric Mitchell Vice Chairman...... Jennifer Henderson Secretary...... Gerald Whites Treasurer...... Leon Robert GREAT LAKES SECTION Educational Outreach...... Jennifer Henderson Chairman...... Robbie Robinson SOUTHWEST SECTION Vice Chairman...... David Glade Chairman...... Dan Wells Secretary...... Eric Fitz Vice Chairman...... Norm Driscoll Treasurer...... Sam Ryals Secretary...... Jim Acree Educational Outreach...... Gary Konnert Treasurer ...... Jeff Trang WEST COAST SECTION SOUTHEAST SECTION Chairman...... Andrew McFarland Chairman...... David Wright Vice Chairman...... Andrew Thurling Vice Chairman...... Varun Puri Secretary...... Glenn Graham Treasurer...... Ryan Sanford Treasurer...... Richard Zins Educational Outreach...... Timothy McDonald SETP COMMITTEES Flight Test Safety Committee Chairman...... Gerald Whites Membership Committee Chairman...... Eric Hansen 2014 Fellows Coordinating Committee Chairman...... Steve Rainey Publications Committee Chairman...... Allen Peterson Critical Incident Response Committee...... Billie Flynn Constituion/SOP Committee...... Greg Lewis 2 January - June 2014 SETP 2014 CALENDAR 58th Symposium & Banquet Southwest Section Symposium 24-27 September 2014 25 October 2014 Grand Californian Hotel & Spa The Worthington Hotel Anaheim, CA Fort Worth, TX European Flight Test Safety Workshop 4-6 November 2014 Manching, Germany SETP 2015 CALENDAR 8th Southeast Symposium 45th West Coast Symposium TBD 27-28 March 2015 Catamaran Resort, San Diego, CA 31st East Coast Symposium 5th Northwest Symposium 10 April 2015 24 April 2015 NAS Paxtuxent River Area Museum of Flight, Seattle, WA Flight Test Safety Workshop 8th Great Lakes Symposium 3-7 May 2015 TBD Scottsdale, AZ 8th Central Symposium 47th European Symposium TBD 10-13 June 2015 Lucerne, Switzerland 59th Symposium & Banquet 23-26 September 2015 Grand Californian Hotel & Spa Anaheim, CA COCKPIT is published by The Society of Experimental Test Pilots Address all correspondence to SETP Publications Chairman, Post Office Box 986, Lancaster, California 93584-0986 661-942-9574 Statements and opinions advanced in technical papers and letters-to-the-editor are those of the authors and do not necessarily coincide with the tenets of The Society of Experimental Test Pilots. Letters to-the-editor are encouraged whenever there are dissenting opinions. Table of Contents: President’s Memo...... 4 Technical Articles ...... 6 Editor’s Memo...... 22 Membership News...... 34 2014 Symposium Information...... 36 2014 Symposium Highlights...... 38 Scholarship Foundation News...... 50 SETP Foundation News...... 52 New Members and Upgrades...... 58 Who...What...Where...... 65 Book News...... 68 Last Flights...... 70

Cover Photo Picture of the AugustaWestland AW609 Tiltrotor during flight test in Texas. Project test pilots included Pietro Venanzi (F), Dan Wells (AF), and Paul Edwards (M). Photo courtesy of AugustaWestland. January - June 2014 3 PRESIDENT’S MEMO The spring symposium season is complete and I am extremely satisfied with each and every symposium I’ve attended. Thank you to all the members that put in the extra effort to make these events possible. Continuing to provide value through superior technical symposia despite the financial challenges we face was my number one priority as President and I am pleased to see that that objective has been accomplished. Please put the Annual S&B in Anaheim (24-27 Sep) on your calendars, it promises to be a good year and we hope to be welcoming the USAF and Navy TPS classes back to the symposium this year.

Kevin Prosser (AF) One of my other priorities as President was to roll out Calspan the new web-site that would provide increased capability SETP President for our members. The IT challenges were more than anyone expected but I am happy to say the improvements that Steve Rainey championed are finally coming to fruition. The DoD firewall issues appear to be resolved and the problems with the paper and podcast search routines have been corrected. These were two of Steve’s top objectives when he instituted the IT improvement process over two years ago. The first truly new capability will be enhanced member search options. Members will soon be able to search for other members by expertise and experience. If you are in need of advice for an upcoming test, this capability will allow you to more easily connect with the SETP member that has “been there, done that.” Of course, this capability can only be used if our members provide information on their skills and experience so expect an email shortly that will direct you to the web site to populate the new fields in your member profile. I ask you to please take the time to do that as soon as the capability is rolled out so the new guys can start taking advantage of your experience and expertise.

Addressing the financial challenges that budget cuts, sequester, and travel restrictions have imposed was another of my priorities. There are two ways to do this; cut costs and raise revenues. We have been addressing cost issues continually for decades and I am happy to say that we are a pretty lean organization. One area we can still improve on is publication and postage. These two items account for a large portion of our budget so I am focused on reducing these costs without reducing value to our members. Expect to see some changes to those processes that rely heavily on mailings. The Fellows selection process and distribution of technical products in paper form are both being looked at closely. In order to raise revenues we are taking a two-prong approach. First, we are seeking out new members wherever we can. New sections in South America and Asia are being investigated and lost members are being re-engaged. Additionally we have recently enacted changes to the membership committee to help make it easier for new members get through the red tape of the application process. The membership committee will now have a position designated for each SETP section and that position will include a duty to act as liaison to the section represented. Our goal is to have a person in each section on the membership 4 January - June 2014 committee that can mentor and counsel prospective members on the application process. This position will also ensure that qualifying flights flown by members in distant sections are not ignored because the acronym or program name was unfamiliar to the committee members. If you are interested in filling one of these new positions please contact the SETP staff and throw your hat in the ring.

The second prong of raising revenue is member dues. Dues have not been raised for 14 years primarily due to cost cutting measures already taken and the success of the Anaheim symposium. The success of those two efforts has allowed us to balance the budget without a dues increase for an incredible stretch of time but the trend could not be sustained. The revenue from the Anaheim symposium was leveling off and all of the low hanging fruit in the budget had already been trimmed. Even if Sequester did not occur, dues would have had to be raised soon to address the looming budget issues in the upcoming years. Sequester merely accelerated the need. The SETP HQ staff is working now to establish a series of projections for the next few years so that we can prudently raise the dues to ensure financial stability in the next 4 to 5 year range without overly burdening some of our members. We will determine the new membership rate this summer when we have that information but I would expect anywhere from a $20 to $30 increase in annual dues. This would be a great time to consider a lifetime membership by the way.

I am proud and humbled to be your president and would love your feedback and any suggestions or advice you may have on these important SETP issues.

Fly safe

Kevin Prosser President, SETP

January - June 2014 5 TECHNICAL ARTICLES

Flight Testing EFVS Lessons Learned

by Bob Moreau SETP (AF) / SFTE (M)

Introduction The first questions asked by many is “why EFVS?” The second is “what is EFVS (Enhanced Flight Vision System) versus EVS (Enhanced Vision System)?” These are both good questions. This paper answers these questions while providing a number of lessons learned while flight testing EFVS for FedEx.

The why question is straight forward—FedEx sought to increase the situational awareness for its flight crews during flight operations occurring during poor visibility and night-time conditions. As the technology has progressed FedEx has also sought to take advantage of increased approach access utilizing the operational capabilities and credits allowed per FAA EFVS regulations. Currently, FedEx has obtained Supplemental Type Certificates (STCs) for the installation of EFVS and HUDs (Head Up Display) on its fleet of MD- 11, MD-10, 757 and 777 airplanes. As of this writing the 767 program is in work to be followed by the Airbus airplanes.

The distinction between EFVS and EVS is a fine, but critical one. The FAA uses the term Enhanced Flight Vision System to denote an Enhanced Vision System that is approved for operational credit—descending below the minimum descent altitude on a Category I approach based solely on the EFVS video image. EVS is not approved for any such operations. Unfortunately many, including EASA, use the generic term EVS to refer to all such vision enhancement systems--whether approved for operational credit or not-- making it difficult to identify which is which.

Flight Test Lessons Learned Broadly speaking, the flight testing of a HUD/EFVS can be separated into three independent pieces—EFVS sensor, HUD, and airplane interface--before the system is evaluated as a whole. This paper concentrates on the EFVS aspect with details on the other two as necessary.

EFVS Sensor The EFVS sensor may consist of any number of technologies. For those in the commercial environment, the operational credit approval is the fundamental intended function. The definition is defined as the need to provide the pilot with a real-time video image of the actual (not database) outside world field of view, presented on the HUD. The precise design 6 January - June 2014 point is optimizing the display of approach and runway lights as well as the topographic features of the ground surface. To do that the sensor must be optimized to detect and display the reflected, or radiant, energy in the near IR wavelength range of 1.2 to 2.0 microns. This represents the peak luminescence for approach and runway lights. Also, the sensor must detect and display the thermal energy reflected back from the surface— either the roughly 3 to 5 micron IR mid wavelength range or the 8 to 14 micron longer IR wavelength range (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Infrared spectrum

There are two distinct portions of the IR spectrum necessary to meet the operational requirements, the near IR radiant energy and either the mid or long IR range for thermal energy. A designer may choose to utilize a single material to cover either range, or dual sensors, one for each range. The choice of the latter results in a larger physical arrangement both in terms of onboard space for the unit as well as aerodynamically. The sensor must be in the correct position and requires a specialized window to “look” through. Alternately, a single sensor may be utilized, but the choice of sensor material is limited to one with good performance in both the near and mid IR ranges. The sensor material in the system chosen by FedEx is indium antimonide (InSb) which has good performance qualities in the 1 to 5 micron wavelength. This allows for both radiant and thermal energy detection. Figure 2 illustrates this difference. This is a screen shot of an onboard computer screen used for recording various parameters. It was taken aboard a 757 airplane taxiing during heavy rain. Of particular interest is the reflection of the taxiway lights in the water (yellow arrow). This clearly illustrates the ability of the sensor to detect the radiant energy, not thermal, of the reflected light. Obviously, the taxiway light is NOT heating up the water to a thermal heat signature usually associated with IR imaging.

January - June 2014 7

Figure 2. Radiant versus thermal IR imaging

The thermal portion of the image is shown as the ground detail in view including the taxiway, the crossing runway, the grass fields adjacent and a portion of a hangar seen on the left edge. The overall “cauliflower” look to the image is the water drops on the actual EFVS window on the radome of the airplane as it stands still.

It is quite common for the thermal portion of the sensor to be saturated when the droplet size and density are such that the photons in thermal wavelengths cannot make it through to the sensor, but the photons in the radiant wavelengths can. This is shown in Figure 3. The test airplane is approximately 200 feet above the runway with the thermal portion totally saturated while the radiant energy is making it through to the sensor. The result is that pilot was able to see the approach lights and was able to continue the approach below Category I minimums to a point closer in to the runway.

8 January - June 2014

Figure 3. Approach lights coming into view

When flight testing EFVS this is the most critical performance criteria because it verifies the intended function of an EFVS system must be evaluated. It allows the pilot to see what is required to continue an approach. This altitude requirement is currently 100 feet above the runway. This is the point at which time the pilot must be able to see with natural vision, not enhanced flight vision, the necessary features of the runway environment specified in Title 14 CFR Part 91.175 to continue and land the airplane. It is here that the image processing performance is most important. The physical material of the sensor may be good, such as InSb, but without the proper processing software the ability to detect and separate the radiant from the thermal energies might not be usable.

Along with choice of a sensor material the designer must decide on whether to design a cooled or a non-cooled system. The non-cooled system is much less complex with a resulting lower cost. However, the non-cooled system has poor detection performance in anything but clear, relatively dry air. It is for this reason that to date no non-cooled EVS has ever been certified for credit as an EFVS.

Why is cooling so important? Ideally the sensor material is optimized for the desired radiant and thermal IR wavelengths. Also ideally, it is good to keep out as many of the non-optimum photons from creating noise on the sensor analogous to the random noise seen on a television set to a channel with no station reception. By cooling the material of the sensor detector array--77 degrees Kelvin in the case of the sensor unit on FedEx airplanes—only photons with very specific energies can make it across the gap in the semi-conductor.

January - June 2014 9 In addition to the cooling of the sensor is the need to determine the thermal resolution of the sensor. Most non-cooled sensors fall in the range of having a 30 to 60 milli-Kelvins (mK) thermal resolution. This means at worst case there could be 60 different objects in the field of view, each with a 1 mK differential, and the pilot would see only one large object. Therefore, the thermal resolution translates directly to the perceived visual resolution of the video display. Cooled sensors have a thermal resolution in the range of 16 mK to 2 mK with FedEx having chosen the latter.

The operational test conditions for evaluating an EFVS consists of ground level fog as shown in Figure 3, low ceilings (Figures 4 and 5), a combination of the two where the fog merges with an overlaying cloud layer, dry particulate matter such as smog, haze and smoke (Figure 6), various types of precipitation such as rain or snow, and, of course, night operations. In all cases an EFVS should be able to detect and display the runway and approach lights no later than the appearance of the surrounding thermal areas on the image. Ideally, this will occur before the thermal energies are detected and displayed.

Figure 4. Low ceiling approach as seen with EFVS

10 January - June 2014

Figure 5. Same low ceiling approach as seen without EFVS

Figures 4 and 5 graphically illustrate the increase in situational and operational capabilities with an EFVS. Illustrated was a non-precision, non-aligned VOR approach conducted in an MD-10 airplane. As seen in Figure 4 the EFVS allowed the pilot to see the runway lights as well as the PAPI lights (left arrow). It also provided very clear thermal topographic imagery at the point of the minimum descent altitude (MDA) for the approach. This allowed the pilot to continue toward the runway. The view without the EFVS on the same approach at the same point in Figure 5 illustrates the lack of ground situational awareness. Also the lack of the runway environment would have required a missed approach. Notice the difference in area topographic detail (right arrow in Figure 4 and single arrow in Figure 5) between the two images.

Figure 6 illustrates the ability of an EFVS to see very well through dry particulate matter. The left side of the figure was the HUD/EFVS view and the right side of the figure is a raw camera view from the right forward windshield. Again, the view was from an MD-10 test airplane at a point on base leg in Memphis, TN with the ground visibility reported as January - June 2014 11 VFR—above 1000 feet and 3 miles visibility. The airplane was approximately 2500 feet above the ground with very limited horizontal visibility. This level of performance in dry particulate matter is typical for both cooled and non-cooled EFVSs until the temperature and humidity levels reach high levels. At this point the lack of thermal resolution and the noise level render the non-cooled EFVS almost blind. Therefore, if testing such a system hot and humid conditions become part of the test matrix.

Figure 6. Dry Particulate (With EFVS Left, Without EFVS Right)

It should be noted that an evaluator’s previous experience can be a very important factor, both for better or worse. Most pilots (particularly military) view IR as an all-in-one device that responds to thermal energy. This is because most military IR systems and most IR videos seen in television and movies were generated using the long wavelengths of 8 to 14 microns which are purely thermal. When faced with new technology most people draw from as familiar an experience as possible. Many of the testers and regulators with no previous IR experience in systems optimized for EFVS operations (near and mid IR wavelengths) will not have the experience to properly evaluate such systems without some type of training. It is required that knowledgeable testers ascertain the level of knowledge and understanding on the part of those he or she may be dealing with during the test and certification process. This is to avoid onerous or erroneous testing requirements and to avoid systems being certified that do not meet the fundamental intended function of an EFVS for credit. In many cases it is the tester that does such training, and often on the spot.

12 January - June 2014 HUD/EFVS Interface There are a number of issues that must be recognized and evaluated when it comes to the marriage of the EFVS sensor to the HUD system and display. These include the physical display differences between the liquid crystal display (LCD) HUDs and cathode ray tube display (CRT) HUDs, EFVS sensor resolution versus HUD resolution, and the sensor to HUD processing interface.

The physical appearance of an EFVS image from the same sensor on a CRT HUD versus an LCD HUD will be quite dramatic. It is for the simple reason that CRT HUDs have 16 shades of gray (or green if preferred) to an LCD HUD with 256 shades of gray. From an evaluator’s standpoint, especially one with no prior experience in both types of HUDs it can become difficult to determine if a problem lies with the HUD or the sensor when it comes to video image. A spectacular EFVS image can appear to look mediocre on a CRT HUD while a mediocre EFVS image can appear to look good on an LCD HUD.

Added to the CRT versus LCD issue is that of the relative resolutions for the various HUDs and EFVS sensors available. There are low to high, even very high, resolution HUDs. There are low-medium to high-medium resolution sensors available. Not all HUDs and EFVS sensors play well together even though they may be perfectly acceptable as standalone systems.

When mixing and matching systems this is not only where the CRT versus LCD issue comes in, but with the possible permutations of resolution available for both the HUDs and sensors available this is where the critical nature of the interface processing comes in. FedEx ran into exactly this issue when we matched a known EFVS sensor of good video quality to a HUD system of much higher resolution. The quality of the EFVS video image was not acceptable because the processing by the HUD was poor. We rejected the product until the HUD manufacturer could do the proper homework to correct the processing issue.

January - June 2014 13 Figure 7. Processing image variance quality

Figure 7 illustrates the variance in image quality based on various processing applications utilizing a fixed reference image. The middle-upper arrow points to the initial image quality delivered by the HUD manufacturer. We referred to this as “Lego Land.” Beyond a few hundred feet in front of the airplane the detail in the video image merged into indistinguishable block figures. The first attempt to correct the image quality was to apply a smoothing algorithm as shown by the right-upper arrow. The video quality went from Lego Land to Fuzzy Land. Again, this was not an acceptable video image quality. The issue was further complicated by the fact the HUD manufacturer had already certified Lego Land on another airplane. In this case the evaluators were going from a CRT HUD frame of reference to an LCD HUD. The bad video quality on the LCD HUD looked better than what they had been used to on the CRT HUD. Fortunately for us we had flown both CRT and LCD HUDs and had comparative experience on which to base our evaluations.

The HUD manufacturer eventually agreed to examine other processing applications for evaluation. There were two versions of one that seemed to alleviate the problems, shown by the two lower arrows. The middle-lower arrow points to what appears to be a slightly less quality image than the right-lower arrow. Both were tested on a bench setup with a long view across the manufacturer’s facility parking lot. The algorithm noted by the right- lower arrow was better at the ranges represented by the parking lot view. However, while the testing was in progress a number of low clouds floated by at a range of 2 to 5 miles, along with an aircraft or two. It became apparent the algorithm noted by the middle-lower

14 January - June 2014 arrow was slightly better at those ranges. This was important because the optimum range any system must be optimized for is that of the approach environment. The 2 to 5 mile range is the sweet spot for the pilot to pick up the lights and ground detail. FedEx chose the algorithm noted by the middle-lower arrow.

Aircraft Interface The interface of the EFVS camera to the airframe presents a number of issues which may not be readily apparent at the beginning of a program. Although small by Line Replacement Unit (LRU) standards, the EFVS camera has to go somewhere on the nose of the airplane. The physical alignment of the unit to the window is critical, and the aerodynamic effects must be kept to a minimum.

Ideally, the camera will be located as close vertically to the pilot’s line of sight as possible so as to minimize vertical parallax. Lateral offset is a separate issue with pros and cons. In a single HUD installation the closer to the pilot’s line of sight the sensor is, the less the lateral parallax. For a dual HUD installation a centerline mounted camera may be a better choice. There is always the possibility that some feature of the host airplane will dictate the location.

Figure 8. MD-10 icing tests Figure 8 illustrates the icing tests required due to the location of the center engine of the MD-11 and MD-10 airplanes. These tests documented the buildup of ice as well as the ice shedding characteristics of the offset location for the camera. The data showed there would be no ice ingestion issues for the center engine. This location also eliminated the lateral parallax for the pilot.

January - June 2014 15 Figure 9. 757 camera location testing

The photographs in Figure 9 illustrate two of the possible locations tested for the 757 airplane. A molded icing shape can be seen in the top photograph with an offset location. The concern was the possible interference with the high mounted pitot tubes on the airplane. As it turned out the problem was not with the pitot tubes, but the change in airflow on the nose of the airplane with an offset location. The left angle of attack vane was affected to the point the stick shaker activated for the left control column five knots before the one for the right control column in all configurations. The bottom photograph illustrates the final location of the EFVS camera. Also shown is the tufting used to determine any 16 January - June 2014 airflow effects to the operation of the windshield wipers and rain removal. This became the standard location for all FedEx 757, 777, and 767 airplanes.

Simulator Integration The first simulator integration issue is the physical alignment of the HUD to the simulator cab and how it relates to the visual system. As can be seen in Figure 10 almost all modern simulators utilize a wrap-around single piece Mylar mirror (yellow arrow) onto which the visual scene is displayed.

Figure 10. Simulator with wrap-around mirror design

On the actual airplane great pains are gone to ensure the HUD is exactly aligned with the centerline of the fuselage in accordance with the Design Eye Point (DEP) of the airplane. This allows the pilot, when seated at the DEP for that airplane to see the symbology exactly aligned and conformal to the outside Field Of View (FOV). This is not physically possible in the simulator due to the wrap-around mirror design. In the simulator there is one focal point for the visual system, and it lies at the center of the mirror. For the pilot sitting at the proper DEP, as the line of sight is raised from inside the cockpit to the visual scene there is a shift toward the center, away from the airplane centerline, to the single focal January - June 2014 17 point. For example, if the airplane were set at the end of the runway with a takeoff position preset the airplane would be exactly on the centerline of the runway with the fuselage perfectly aligned straight ahead. Were the pilot to start with his/her head looking down into the cockpit and naturally raising their line of sight straight ahead, once the point was reached that the line of sight met the top of the glareshield where the outside visual scene begins, the runway centerline would, at that point, and only at that point, be the same as the inline point on the glareshield. As the pilot further raised his/her line of sight straight ahead he/she would notice the runway centerline does not go straight ahead, but slants to the inboard side toward the single focal point of the visual system.

There are several ramifications of this physical reality to the installation of the HUD. As the HUD symbology and the EFVS video image must both be aligned with, and conformal to the outside FOV the HUD must be physically moved inboard and rotated. This is because the line from the DEP and the visual system focal point must also align with the HUD combiner. The display of the HUD symbology and the EFVS video image may be electronically shifted inboard on the HUD combiner to accomplish the same goal, or a combination of the two techniques is possible.

The problem comes in the form of what is called the Eye Motion Box. The EMB is the amount of eye motion away from the DEP that is acceptable whereby the pilot can still maintain either binocular vision (the ability to see all the symbology at the same time with both eyes) or monocular vision (the ability to see all the symbology at the same time with only one eye). The movement of the HUD (or the symbology) to maintain the correct FOV with the visual system can greatly restrict an already small EMB.

The structural aspects of a particular simulator design can also influence this effect. Simulator cabs are not necessarily the same rigid structures built to the same critical tolerances as the actual airplane. We found the cab structures to be overly flexible requiring additional stiffening for the mounting of the HUD units. Additionally, in one case we found the location of the left pilot seat to be in error by almost one half inch laterally, which hindered getting the pilot’s eyes to the correct DEP.

For the tester without this understanding it is possible to arrive at erroneous conclusions while evaluating a HUD/EFVS system if done so primarily in the simulator. This also holds true for research done in simulators as a whole. FedEx had the experience on a couple of occasions where it was necessary to take the evaluator to the actual airplane to prove that the EMB was really within limits during simulator certification efforts.

Beyond the physical aspects of the HUD installation is the issue of what constitutes a valid IR visual simulation of the EFVS video for display on the HUD. Remembering the importance of an EFVS to discriminate between radiant and thermal energies to gain operational credit it would seem natural that IR simulations used in simulators would also reflect this distinction. Most do not. Most IR simulations are simply a multiple of the existing visibility setting on the main visual system. For example, if the outside view is ¼ mile the EFVS may simply be the main visual system at twice the value, or ½ mile, with no attempt made to differentiate the radiant energy from the topographic thermal energy. Figures 11, 12, and 13 illustrate the IR visual system in use at FedEx (and also adopted 18 January - June 2014 by NASA and the FAA for research purposes) seen on the instructor control screen in the simulator.

Figure 11. Appearance of approach lights at 220 feet radio altitude and 12000 feet visibility

Figure 10 illustrates the airplane on approach at 220 feet radio altitude with the approach lights just beginning to come into view. Per the FAA regulations this would allow the pilot to continue to 100 feet above the runway based purely on the approach lights as seen only on the EFVS. It is important to note the surrounding EFVS view. It is totally saturated in the thermal range and no topographic features are visible. In other words, the radiant energy is making it through but the thermal energy is not. When the thermal portion of the video is saturated, or cannot “see” the video appears as a grainy or burlap-like image.

January - June 2014 19

Figure 12. Appearance of approach lights at 180 feet radio altitude and 12000 feet visibility

Figure 11 illustrates the airplane on approach at 180 feet radio altitude with the entire approach light system in view (left arrow) and the runway end identifier lights in view (right arrow). Also shown in the yellow oval are the beginnings of topographic thermal features just beginning to come into view, although the thermal side remains for the most part saturated. When thermal features begin to appear they will first appear within this texture-like saturated region from bottom to top. As more thermal energies make it through the saturated image will transition to a smooth, opaque image with an increasingly more detailed IR video image of the topographic scene.

This is illustrated in Figure 12 where the thermal features are fully in view with no traces of saturation. The airplane’s position in the figure was at 140 feet radio altitude. The view of the approach lights for the pilot without the HUD through the forward windshield was very similar to the view of the beginning approach lights in Figure 10. As can be seen, an IR visual simulation that does not discriminate between radiant and thermal energy makes it all but impossible to train pilots for the intended function of an EFVS. It also makes it terribly difficult for testers and researchers to conduct valid tests for these systems.

20 January - June 2014 Figure 13. Appearance of approach lights at 140 feet radio altitude and 12000 feet visibility

One other area of note for IR visual simulations is the complete lack of ability of any simulator system to accurately portray a point light source. For those readers old enough to remember what a large photographic negative looks like imagine looking through such a negative at a small pen light or candle at some distance away. It can be easily imagined how that point of light will appear through the negative. This is how lights appear through the EFVS video image on the HUD combiner in the actual airplane, making it very easy to distinguish between the video image lights and the real lights. This is not true in the simulator for the simple reason that the simulator visual system is incapable of reproducing a strong point light source as seen in the real world. Again, any tester, researcher, or trainer should understand these aspects if any valid work is to be done in a simulator environment.

Call the Local Sheriff One last lesson learned concerns real world of trolling for suitable weather for EFVS testing. When we did the 777 HUD/EFVS certification program we had the usual array of instrumentation stations in the cabin of the airplane, including a satellite weather information capability. This allowed us to look at airport and atmospheric data real-time while airborne. This capability allowed us to go to any airport within a given day’s test area, be it the northeast, southeast, or gulf coast for example. We had the ability to change January - June 2014 21 course and drop into deteriorating weather on a moment’s notice to gather EFVS video data. This also meant that many times we were conducting approaches to airports with small enough runways that any attempt at landing a 777 size airplane would be a onetime, and one-way, only exercise.

Surprisingly, there are a number of people that take note of really big airplanes dropping in to really small airports. On two occasions in particular, one in eastern Tennessee and one along the gulf coast, we were visible enough below the weather for people to take notice and flood the local authorities with 911 emergency calls with grave concern about someone trying to crash a big airplane into the local neighborhood. In the case of eastern Tennessee it was 100 plus 911 calls, and 50 plus for the gulf coast location. The lesson learned here was to call the local county sheriff’s department, when planning allows, giving them notice of the planned activities. This can even be done while airborne through the local control tower or FBO Unicom, if either are available.

Editor’s Memo: A Little Help Please!

Greetings SETP Members and associates. I’m AL Peterson the SETP Publications Chairman and I have a favor to ask of all of you. I need your help in finding, soliciting, and sending in good technical articles, RefleXtions style articles, photos, and general member news for publication in Cockpit. Our society members are doing great and fantastic work out there in the world, but you would never know it based on the lack of technical articles and other information that get submitted to Cockpit for consideration for publication. Quite honestly, we struggle every issue to find good technical and RefleXtions articles to publish, and I know we don’t receive a fraction of the news about the great things our members are doing. If you know someone who has written a technical or historical flight test article please encourage them to submit it. If you know someone who has done some interesting flight test work (past or present) but hasn’t written an article, encourage them to hit the keyboard and then send it in. Likewise for sending in news about the great things our members are doing, if you know something interesting that has happened in the flight test world please send it in. Good quality and interesting photos should also be sent in for inclusion in the news section and also for consideration for the cover of Cockpit. Cockpit is sent to and belongs to everyone in the Society and in order to keep it useful and relevant technically, journalistically, and socially we need everyone to actively seek out and send in articles, news, and photos. Thanks in advance for your support. Cheers, AL

22 January - June 2014 H-1 Upgrades Ground Proximity Warning System Flight Test Techniques Evolution Major Erin C. Kellogg (AM) and Mr. Axel Alvarez Naval Air Systems Command, NAWS China Lake, CA, 93555

Nomenclature

Psw = Percentage of successful warnings Pnw = Percentage of nuisance warnings Nsr = Number of warnings received in time to execute a safe recovery Nce = Total number of impending Controlled Flight Into Terrain (CFIT) test events performed

Nuw = Total number of unnecessary warnings which provide negative training Npn = Total number of events which challenge the potential for nuisance warnings Nr = Main rotor speed expressed as a percentage of optimal rotor speed

Nz = Vertical acceleration

I. Introduction In 1996, the Department of the Navy mandated that every naval aircraft be equipped with a CFIT avoidance system. Between February 2000 and November 2001 flight testing was conducted on the AH-1W attack helicopter which incorporated an infant CFIT avoidance system. The system used for that test had been developed for fixed wing aircraft and modified for use in rotary wing aircraft. In 2010 a modified version of that CFIT avoidance system, now called Embedded Terrain Awareness Warning System (eTAWS), was integrated into the AH-1Z and UH-1Y helicopters (known as the H-1 Upgrades). The testing requirements for that system presented some challenges due to the unique characteristics of the H-1 Upgrades’ high offset, rigid rotor systems. Two rounds of flight testing have been completed to date. After the first round of flight testing, the test team was able to develop and execute new tests and techniques using lessons learned and analysis of the first round test results. The new test techniques were validated and refined in a full motion simulator prior to flight test. This process resulted in the second round of testing yielding higher quality data in a shorter amount of flight time.

II. System Description The eTAWS algorithm is composed of two systems: the Terrain Awareness Warn- ing System (TAWS) and the Ground Proximity Warning System (GPWS). The TAWS functionality is the primary operating mode of the eTAWS algorithm. It was designed to provide CFIT protection when the algorithm has access to Digital Terrain Elevation Data (DTED). If the algorithm does not receive DTED from an external source, the algorithm reverts to GPWS functionality only. The GPWS is considered a degraded mode of the eTAWS. The scope of this test encom- passed testing GPWS function- ality only. Currently, the H-1 Upgrades system configuration only enables GPWS functional- ity. The GPWS was designed to Figure 1: Graphical Representation of an eTAWS provide protection in the follow-Recovery. January - June 2014 23 ing flight regimes: flight into level terrain, descending terrain, ascending terrain up to a two percent grade, and hard landings (720 fpm rate of descent and greater). The TAWS was designed to use DTED to provide additional protection against flight into terrain ris- ing at greater than a two percent grade. Figure 1 shows a graphical representation of an eTAWS recovery. The eTAWS algorithm was designed to perform dynamic calculations based on approximately 150 aircraft parameters, including aircraft altitude, energy state, engine-conditions, and supporting sub-systems status. The output of the calculations is referred to as Altitude Loss During Recovery (ALDR). When the algorithm calculates the ALDR plus ten feet to be equivalent to the aircraft’s height above the ground level, it initiates a CFIT warning. The CFIT warning is designed to facilitate the recovery of the aircraft from its current state with a minimum of ten feet of terrain clearance. The algo- rithm assumes a 1.3 sec pilot reaction time between warning initiation to the first flight control input. The algorithm assumes the maneuver required to recover the aircraft will be performed within the aircraft’s normal operating limits. Upon actuation of a warn- ing, eTAWS is designed to provide the aircrew with directive aural and visual cues that specify the optimal initial flight control input for recovery. The pilot is then expected to determine the follow on control inputs and aviate.

OFF NORM NIGHT RPT DAY TEST AUTO

872 AFCS C N P - 0. 1 G

ALT RALT MGT Q

20 SPD 20 GS 10

10 HDG WO 10

10 20 CDI ENG 1 FIRE E T A 20 30 133 G110 30 TCN 045 120X

+ + BRT CONT

- - WCA SYS FLT COM TDC MAP EW TSS WPN

Figure 2: CFIT warning cues on the MFD (left) and helmet mounted display (right).

Figure 3: Graphical Depiction of the Safety Height Buffer Altitude

24 January - June 2014 The aural cues are prioritized voice commands provided over the inter-cockpit communication system (ICS). These commands include: “POWER,” “PULL UP, “ROLL RIGHT,” and “ROLL LEFT.” Additionally, one of the two Multi-Function Displays in each cockpit automatically switches to the flight page where an arrow is superimposed on the attitude direction indicator, shown in Figure 2. Lastly, an arrow is displayed in the pilot’s helmet-mounted display, also shown in Figure 2. The warnings persist until the CFIT condition is no longer calculated to exist. A feature called the Safe Height Buffer Altitude (SHBA) is incorporated to assist in flight test. The aircrew can set the SHBA to any value between 0 and 9,999 ft. The eTAWS algorithm uses the SHBA to bias the ground level, as shown in Figure 3. This allows a CFIT warning to be calculated and activated based on the SHBA and not the actual ground.

III. Test Technique Planning

A. Data Requirements The stated objectives for flight test included determining a quantitative metric called Percentage of Successful Warnings where:

A successful warning was defined as a warning that gave the aircrew sufficient time to perform a maximum performance recovery where no part of the aircraft descended below ten feet above the inputted SHBA. The definition of maximum performance recovery was never quantified. The test team planned to fly a set of engineering test points consisting of descents toward the SHBA at varying airspeeds, angles of bank, rates of descent, and gross weights to collect data for this metric. The aircrew would observe parameters real time during the recovery and would be backed up by recorded message traffic on the aircraft’s data busses. A Psw of 40% or greater was required to meet the system specifications.

The other value measured during the test was the Percentage of Nuisance warnings where:

A nuisance warning was defined as an unnecessary warning that provided negative training. If the flying pilot determined that the warning was not appropriate to the aircraft’s current condition and that warnings under similar circumstances would reinforce an inappropriate habit pattern, it was counted toward the Nnw total. The test team planned to determine Pnw by flying a series of common H-1 training maneuvers with the system operating. The training maneuvers were used to determine if nuisance CFIT warnings would be a common occurrence during early platform training. This could cause desensitization to CFIT warnings early in a pilot’s training, reducing the system’s effectiveness. The Npn value would be the total number of these maneuvers flown. The system specifications called for an objective Pnw value of 2% and a threshold value of 5%.

January - June 2014 25 The test team was also concerned with collecting qualitative data regarding the effectiveness of the warnings provided by the system. This data proved more difficult to come by due to the challenge of creating a realistic, unanticipated CFIT condition where a pilot’s response could be evaluated.

B. Aircraft Characteristics and Limitations

During the initial test planning, the team realized that certain aircraft limita- tions would increase the risk level of test. The H-1 Upgrade’s relatively low Nz lim- its, shown in Table 1, were a major consideration during these tests. Additionally, the H-1 Upgrades exhibit a characteristic where rapid control movements that produce large positive Nz can saturate the Stability Control Augmentation System (SCAS). The SCAS provides rate damping, enhancing aircraft stability. When the SCAS is saturated, rate damping is lost allowing pitch rate to build unpredictably. As the rotor disk is pitched upward, the angle of attack on the blades is increased causing an in- crease in rotor thrust. The rotor thrust vector is perpendicular to the tip path plane. A nose up pitching moment results when the lift vector is rotated aft of the vertical axis. This pitching moment increases pitch rate resulting in a positive feedback loop, which can cause a rapid and unpredictable Nz increase. This rotor instability was foremost on the test team’s mind when planning to test aircraft recoveries requiring a rapid pull up.

Table 1: H-1 Upgrades Aircraft Weight vs. Nz Limits

Another helicopter unique flight characteristic that impacted this test was roll rate to Main Rotor Gear Box (MRGB) torque coupling. The MRGB torque has a ten- dency to increase or decrease due to the changes in angle of attack on the rotor blades during lateral cyclic inputs. This phenomenon has been widely observed in helicopters generally, but specific models exhibit it in varying degrees.1 Left lateral cyclic inputs induce an increase in MRGB torque with a corresponding decrease of Nr in helicop- ters with counter-clockwise (as viewed from above looking down) rotor rotation. Con- versely, right rolling inputs induce a decrease in MRGB torque with a corresponding increase in Nr. This torque increase in the H-1 Upgrades can be upwards of 25% dur- ing aggressive left rolls initiated in level flight. The H-1 Upgrades MRGB continuous torque limit is 100% with transients excursions allowed up to 105% for 10 seconds. 26 January - June 2014 C. First Round Test Results

The first round of eTAWS flight testing produced a data set that was inadequate to determine if the system was meeting the Psw specification. This was due to three fac- tors: how the test team had interpreted the algorithm’s design, which assumed a maximum performance recovery; caution regarding the aircraft’s Nz and MRGB torque limits; and the aircraft’s pitch instability. The first round engineering test points used to determine Psw were conducted over a flat, dry lake bed. A SHBA was entered and verified prior to flying each test point. A series of descents towards the SHBA were flown at various airspeed, rate of descent, roll attitude, and gross weight combinations. When the CFIT warning was initiated, the pilot flew the commanded recovery, remaining within the aircraft’s limits during the recovery. The minimum Radar Altimeter (RADALT) reading was observed by the non-flying pilot to determine if the recovery had encroached below the ten foot buffer above the SHBA. The point was called complete and not flown again when the flying pilot felt the point could not be flown more aggressively without exceeding an aircraft limit.

Post flight data analysis revealed that many of the points flown had not resulted in successful saves. This was attributed to the pilots’ recovery technique yielding insufficient peak Nz and slow Nz-onset rates. The common recovery technique was for the pilot to make an initial control input, observe the aircraft’s response, and then adjust accordingly to maximize

Nz. This resulted in the aircraft reaching peak Nz late in the recovery while altitude decreased. During test planning for round one testing, the design engineers expected the aircrew to re- cover the aircraft by flying to the aircraft’s Nz limit. The pilot’s concern about the handling qualities caused them to cautiously approach the aircraft’s limits. The effect of the aircrew’s compensation due to the aircraft’s handling qualities had not been anticipated in the test plan.

The first round of testing also revealed the danger of roll rate to MRGB torque coupling. The on-condition parameters during one of the right wing down, high airspeed, low rate of descent test points resulted in a MRGB torque setting of 70%. The CFIT warning in this condition commanded a left roll, which was executed rapidly. The col- lective was also raised during the recovery to increase lift. The collective increase re- sulted in an increase in MRGB torque up to 90%. However, as the aircraft rolled left, MRGB torque due to roll rate induced an additional 21% increase causing a MRGB over- torque. The test had to be terminated and the aircraft flown back to base for a mainte- nance inspection. In the aftermath, the test team imposed a restriction limiting control inputs during recoveries to a single axis until wings level. This precluded the addition of power during a pull-up from a dive creating artificiality in the subsequent recoveries flown.

All of the first round engineering test points were performed at SHBAs of 500 ft and higher. The test team had requested to use a minimum SHBA of 250 ft based on lessons learned from an SH-60 eTAWS flight test. The SH-60 test team had observed the pilot’s urgency and control inputs were markedly different at 250 ft than from those at 500 ft. The risk of testing at a SHBA lower than 500 ft was deemed unacceptable for H-1 testing. The test team questioned how realistic a recovery flown at 500 ft AGL would be when compared to a simulated CFIT event occurring in close proximity to the ground.

January - June 2014 27 Finally, the first round of testing consisted primarily of engineering tests. The scripted nature of the test point entries and recoveries did not provide an assessment of the CFIT warning cues in an operational environment. The lingering question was if the CFIT warning was actuated, would it get the aircrew’s attention and be interpreted in time to execute a successful recovery? The effect of the RADALT’s low altitude warning on the pilot’s reaction had also not been evaluated. The first round of testing had been performed with the pilots aware of the SHBA while devoting their full attention to the recovery.

D. Test Techniques Developed and Validated for the Second Round of Tests The original test plan was revised for the second round of testing based on the previous lessons learned. The test team determined that recoveries would have to be flown more aggressively to achieve faster Nz-onset rates in order to accurately mea- sure Psw. The aircrew was not confident flying more aggressive pull-up maneuvers due to the unpredictable nature of SCAS saturation, the rotor instability, and the resultant unpredictable Nz response to aggressive aft cyclic inputs. The proposed solution was to use a control fixture to limit the magnitude of aft cyclic inputs made during are- covery. The control fixture would only be used to limit aft cyclic inputs, allowing all other controls to move through their entire envelope. The control fixture, shown in Fig- ure 4, allows the pilot to make control inputs of targeted magnitudes down to 0.25 in. The points were planned to be flown in buildup fashion starting with a control fixture setting of 0.25 in. and increased by 0.25 in. during each subsequent attempt. The test

Nz limits were established as 0.2 g less than the aircraft limit. If Nz approached or ex- ceeded 90% of the test limit during the recovery, the buildup would cease and a high- er control fixture setting would not be used for subsequent attempts of that point. The point would be flown until 90% of the test zN limit was reached during the recovery.

Figure 4: The control fixture used for this test. A rubber band is placed between the vertical posts to set the targeted control input size in 0.25 in. increments.

The test team also sought to mitigate the over-torque risk and eliminate the single axis con- trol input recovery restriction by establishing procedures for right wing down recoveries. The flying pilot would verbalize MRGB torque once the aircraft was stabilized on condition. If MRGB torque was 75% or greater during a right wing down recovery, the first control input for the recovery would be a reduction in collective to set MRGB torque below 75%.

28 January - June 2014 Prior to the second round of flight testing, the test team decided to utilize the full motion flight simulator to validate the new test techniques. The details of the control fixture technique were transcribed in a detailed method of test, but performing the technique in the simulator provided several advantages. The test team was able to build proficiency using the fixture, refine the crew coordination for using the fixture, and gain insight into the -air craft’s response to control inputs using the buildup procedure. Optimal fixture placement was determined and a method for securing the fixture to the pilot’s flight gear was refined.

The simulator was also used to observe the pilots’ reactions to CFIT warnings in mission representative environments and conditions that were deemed too high risk to perform in the aircraft. The reactions of four different pilots were observed in four differ- ent scenarios each. The scenarios were conducted as single blind experiments where test aircrew, who were familiar with the CFIT warnings provided by the system, were given a scenario and told to evaluate something other than the CFIT warnings. The first scenario simulated a condition where the pilot was fully in control of the aircraft but entered an im- pending CFIT condition due to a lack of visual cues. The pilot was placed on a Precision Approach Radar (PAR) approach in instrument meteorological conditions. The controller intentionally provided glideslope calls that rapidly drove the aircraft towards the ground short of the runway. The flying pilot’s reaction to the CFIT warning was then observed. The second scenario simulated a high workload, communications-heavy environment with degraded visual cues. The non-flying pilot in this scenario was the blind test subject. The pilots were given a Close Air Support (CAS) mission in night Low Light Level (LLL) visual meteorological conditions. The non-flying pilot was tasked with copying a Nine Line CAS brief, entering the Nine Line data into the aircraft’s navigation system and set- ting up the cockpit to conduct an attack. Other members of the test team simulated radio calls throughout the test. When the non-flying pilot was observed to be fully engaged in the CAS task, the flying pilot began a descent into terrain, simulating a pilot with spa- tial disorientation. The non-flying pilot’s reaction to the CFIT warning was observed to determine if the visual and auditory cues were sufficient to capture the non-flying pilot’s attention. The third scenario simulated a condition where both pilots were fully engaged with flying the aircraft in a degraded visual cue environment. Again, the non-flying pilot in this scenario was the blind test subject. The aircraft was placed in the night Charlie pattern aboard an amphibious ship in LLL VMC. At 300 ft Above Ground Level (AGL) in the upwind turn, the flying pilot induced a rapid rate of descent simulating a pilot with spatial disorientation. The non-flying pilot’s reaction to the CFIT warning was then observed. The fourth scenario simulated target fixation in a degraded visual cue environ- ment to again evaluate the CFIT warning’s efficacy. The flying pilot in this scenario was the blind test subject. The pilot was directed to conduct a diving rocket attack. During the dive while the pilot was firing, the SHBA was reset to cause a CFIT warning at a higher altitude than the pilot anticipated. The pilot’s reaction to the CFIT warning was observed. The final objective of the simulator evaluation was to compare recoveries that would be performed during flight test to recoveries performed with the SHBA set to 0 ft. Four different pilots flew the standard engineering test point setups with the 500 ft SHBA. Immediately thereafter, the SHBA was lowered to 0 ft and the points flown again. The differences between the pilot’s control inputs were compared.

January - June 2014 29 IV. Test Results

A. Simulator Test Results

The recoveries flown in the simulator with the SHBA set to 500 and 0 ft yielded significant differences. The recoveries flown with a SHBA of 500 ft or higher tended to be less aggressive than those flown with the SHBA set to 0 ft. Even though the simulator’s graphics over land and close to the ground were not comparable to the view from an actual aircraft, the pilots responded to the ground rush in a dramatically different manner. The pilots were more concerned with monitoring and adhering to the aircraft’s limits when they recovered without the sensation of approaching the ground. However, using a SHBA of 0 ft, when ground rush entered their field of view, they tended to react more instinctively, using flight control inputs to zero out the closure rate with the ground. All four pilots stated they felt a jolt of excitement hearing the CFIT warning go off and seeing the ground rapidly approaching.

The single blind CFIT warning reaction experiments conducted in the simulator produced mixed results. It was difficult to simulate an impending CFIT condition to which the flying pilot could realistically react. In the night Charlie pattern scenario, the non-flying pilot was fully engaged in flying the aircraft and consistently caught the dangerous flight condition before the CFIT warning actuated. The same was true in the PAR approach scenario. Each pilot began a recover upon hearing the RADALT’s low altitude warning, which was activated prior to the CFIT warning. This scenario did, however, provide an opportunity to react to and fly a recovery without outside visual references. Recoveries without visual references tended to be less aggressive and similar to recoveries flown using a higher SHBA. The high workload LLL CAS scenario produced some insightful results. This setup was challenging because the non-flying pilots had to be convinced they were evaluating something other than the CFIT warnings. They also had to be relied upon to act as if they were actually flying in an aircraft. The CFIT warning was sufficient to gain the non-flying pilot’s attention in three of the four runs of this scenario, although no non-flying pilot was able to make a control input in time to recover the aircraft. These three non-flying pilots stated the warning startled them and snapped them away from what they had been doing. One of the non-flying pilots was in the middle of entering target data into the aircraft’s navigation system when the warning actuated. He noted the CFIT warning and returned to his task. This reaction was illustrative of the difficulty in setting up these tests in the simulator as truly single blind. The test subject had to perform realistically in every way without knowing the reason behind the necessity to do so. The solution in the second round of testing was to task saturate the test subject. This technique showed promise but will need to be refined for future tests. The LLL diving rocket attack was more conclusive. All four flying pilots were surprised by the CFIT warning and responded appropriately. All four stated the warnings were sufficient to redirect their attention away from the diving rocket attack task.

B. Flight Test Results A second round of testing was completed totaling 10 flights, 20.5 total flight hours, 197 engineering test points including build-up, and 66 nuisance test points. The 90% test

Nz limit was reached for every point tested in round two. No aircraft limits were exceeded during round two testing. Test points requiring left rolling recoveries from a high torque setting posed no problems for the pilots using the updated test technique. 30 January - June 2014 However, right rolling recoveries that began at a MRGB torque setting below

10% were found to induce an Nr oscillation that approached the aircraft’s Nr limits. This oscillation had not been observed in the first round of testing. Data from both rounds were analyzed to determine the root cause of the oscillation. When test points that had been performed during both rounds of testing were compared, it was observed that recoveries flown using higher collective settings during a right rolling recovery had minimal Nr oscillations. The analysis showed that during the right roll, Nr increased as expected. However, an unanticipated consequence was the engine governor reducing fuel flow to the engines to compensate for the Nr increase. During the recovery, the combination of the restricted fuel flow, low collective setting, and high density altitude combined to cause a rapid deceleration of Nr when the collective was increased. The engine governor was suddenly jerked alive by the decaying Nr causing it to drastically increase fuel flow to the engines. The result was an Nr oscillation that approached the upper and lower power on

Nr limits of the aircraft. The use of the control fixture resulted in much more aggressive aft cyclic inputs. This allowed the flying pilot to delay increasing the collective until later in the recovery when Nr had already accelerated and fuel flow had been reduced. Testing of right rolling recoveries was temporarily suspended while the problem was analyzed. The mitigation implemented was to increase collective and maintain MRGB torque above

10% during right rolling recoveries. This induced sufficient drag on the blades to slow rN acceleration during right rolls and prevented the oscillation from developing.

V. Conclusions The H-1 Upgrades GPWS test team had numerous lessons learned from the first round of testing, which they capitalized on to make the second round of testing successful. The increase in test efficiency as measured by test points completed per flight hour was significant. This was attributed in part to the use of the control fixture which gave the pilots more confidence to fly the aircraft aggressively. The control fixture procedures provided a structured and repeatable method for flying the test points. Despite starting the buildup at very small targeted cyclic input size, only one of the three airspeeds tested required targeted inputs larger than 1 in. before the test Nz limit was reached.

The risk of over-torque was effectively controlled by the procedures developed for the second round of testing without degrading the data collected. When an aircraft was over-torqued in round one testing, the overly restrictive risk mitigation to limit control inputs to one axis was hastily implemented. This limitation ended up compromising the quality of the data collected. An analysis of the over-torque was performed using the data and lessons learned from the first round of testing to develop the mitigation steps used in the second round. A similar deliberate process was used when the test team encountered the Nr oscillation during right rolling recoveries. The test team engaged all its members to analyze the data collected to date and determine the likely cause for the oscillation. They developed procedures to control the risk with the goal of maintaining the integrity of the data collected.

The test team’s preparation in the flight simulator prior to round two testing proved itself to be invaluable and extremely cost effective. The aircrews were familiar and proficient with the control fixture procedures and over-torque mitigation procedures before executing them in flight. Additionally, the Flight Test Engineer (FTE) was able to January - June 2014 31 observe the pilots flying the test points. The FTE gained valuable insight into the tasks required of the pilots during the recovery and observe the control strategies used during the recoveries. This insight helped the FTE standardize the recovery techniques for all the flying pilots involved in the test. Additionally, the test team was able to determine the optimal scan pattern for both the flying and non-flying pilots during the recovery to maximize data collection and aircraft safety. The simulator allowed the test team to perform the test with all the members present to observe. This helped the test team identify and rectify inconsistencies in the procedures real time and develop a high level of understanding and standardization of the test procedures.

The single blind experiments conducted in round two testing showed promise, but the methods and sample sizes were inadequate. Creating an effective test scenario where the blind test subject is truly not anticipating the CFIT warning but is also trained and ready to react to the warning proved to be a challenge. The sample size of pilots used in these experiments will be expanded in the third round of testing. Additionally, using a mix of pilots with varying experience levels will help increase the scope of the test.

The effect of the SHBA on how the recoveries were flown was confirmed in the simulator. The ground rush sensation proved to increase the urgency and aggressiveness of the recoveries. This validated the test team’s assumption that if the recovery could reliably produce a save at altitude, it would likely be flown as or more aggressively near the ground and also result in a save.

Round two testing identified several deficiencies in the eTAWS algorithm that required correction. The lessons learned during the first two rounds of testing will be applied to the next iteration of eTAWS testing. The test team will continue to utilize the full motion simulator to evaluate the system and maximize test efficiency. In addition, the test team is in discussions regarding the request for a minimum SHBA of 250 ft in order to qualitatively evaluate the eTAWS algorithm in a more operational representative environment. The test team will also expand the evaluation to include higher aircraft gross weights, over water and boat operations, and more vegetated environments.

References 1Prouty, R. W. “Torque Increase with Left Roll: Is a Mystery Solved?” Rotor & Wing, May 1997.

32 January - June 2014 REFLEXIONS

I’m Looking For a TPS Flight Instructor

I’m looking for someone to brief, don a poopy-suit, fly, doff the poopy-suit, and debrief twice, even three times, a day and maybe get lunch…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone to pore over technical reports, usually at home, to make sure that every detail is correct, even if it means sacrificing family time…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone who agonizes over questions, and studies hard to find the answers because he has a burning desire to be right…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone to listen to the exact same brief over and over, and still look interested…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone to sit in the airplane in the heat, especially after lunch, while the student takes way too long to go through his checklists, and not fall asleep…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone to ride through countless pulls, pushes, rolls, and departure recoveries without crying “uncle” …I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone who can hold his tongue and let the student deal with the nonsense coming from the control tower…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone who loves a challenge and will relentlessly pursue the truth, even if he risks exposing himself…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone who wants to make a difference, and doesn’t care who gets the credit…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

I’m looking for someone who treats each instructional flight as his one chance to influence the life of an aviator, because he knows that after graduation that student holds the future of naval aviation…I’m looking for a TPS flight instructor.

Jerry Gallagher (M) 18 December 2013, on the occasion of his retirement party after 37 years as an Instructor Pilot at the US Naval Test Pilot School at NAS Pauxent River, MD

January - June 2014 33 MEMBERSHIP NEWS AND UPDATES

The following are Members we have lost contact with. If you have any contact information for them please contact Susan at SETP Headquarters, 661-942-9574 or [email protected].

Arnold, Julian Bull, Gifford Galli, Hans-Rudolf Glendinning, R. J. D. Gordon-Johnson, P. Saeger, Elmar Shultz, William Steckbauer, T. C.

**************************************** A liaison from the Membership Committee is assigned to each SETP Section to assist applicants for membership within that section. The Section liaisons are as follows:

Canadian Section – Al Peterson Central Section – Dan Vanderhorst East Coast Section – Terry Lutz European Section – Rigel Hebmann, Nicola Pecile Northwest Section – Nicola Pecile Southeast Section – Austin Omlie Southwest Section – Jim Richmond West Coast Section – Chris Moss, Don Weiss Great Lakes Section – Terry Lutz Please contact [email protected] for liaisons contact information.

34 January - June 2014 SPECIAL BUSINESS MEETING

Minutes

The Special Business Meeting of The Society of Experimental Test Pilots was held on Friday, 16 May 2014, at the Virgin Galactic FAITH Hangar, Mojave, CA at 6:15pm. In attendance were 30 members, which provided a quorum as required by the SETP Constitution. (Names of attendees are on file at SETP Headquarters.)

President-Elect Stucky introduced the slate of officers for 2014/15 presented by the Nominating Committee.

For President-Elect Roderick Cregier (AF) Col, USAF Terry Lutz (F) Airbus (Ret) Timothy Morey (AF) Wyle

For Vice President: Brett Vance (AF) Federal Aviation Administration Michael Wallace (AF) Boeing

For Secretary: Todd Ericson (AF) Col, USAF Timothy McDonald (AF) USAF Test Pilot School

For Treasurer: Nicola Pecile (AF) National Test Pilot School Dan Vanderhorst (F) JT3

For Legal Officer: Glenn Graham (AF) Col, USAF William Gray (AF) USAF Test Pilot School

President-Elect Stucky then opened the floor for additional nominations for each Office, indicating that individual nominations need not have a second.

Doug Shane (F) made a motion to accept the slate of officers as presented. Steve Rainey (F) seconded the motion and all voted in favor.

There being no further business to discuss President-Elect Stucky adjourned the meeting.

January - June 2014 35 2014 SYMPOSIUM INFORMATION

The Society of Experimental Test Pilots 58th Symposium & Banquet ~ Disney’s Grand Californian Hotel & Spa in Anaheim, CA 24 ~ 27 September 2014

Visit www.SETP.org for more information and to register!

GERRY T. MORTON TECHNICAL TOUR: Wednesday, 24 September: This year’s Technical Tour will include an exclusive tour of the Space Shuttle Endeavour at the California Science Center, followed by visits to Cal Tech’s wind tunnel and nanotech laboratories. Attendees will gather at the SETP registration area for continental breakfast, depart the hotel for the tour at 8:00am, and return by 5:00pm. Lunch will be provided at Buca di Beppo Italian restaurant. The cost is $75.00, which includes continental breakfast, transportation, tour, and lunch. Dress for the tour is business casual with closed toe shoes. Please note that this Tour is limited to 40 attendees only so register early if you plan to attend.

WELCOME RECEPTION: A Welcome Reception will be held in the Sequoia Foyer on Wednesday, 24 September from 6:30pm to 8:00pm. Dress is business casual and there is no cost for this event.

TECHNICAL SESSIONS: Technical Sessions will begin on Thursday, 25 September at 8:30am and conclude on Saturday, 27 September at 12:00pm. All attendees are eligible to receive continuing education credits through Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University. If desired, order a CEU certificate on the symposium registration form when you register for the sessions. Dress code for the Technical Sessions is business attire or military uniform of the day. The Saturday session is open to guests.

SPOUSES EVENT: Thursday, 25 September: The Spouse Event this year will involve a tour of the Gamble House in Pasadena, as well as a visit to the Norton Simon Museum of Art. The Gamble House, designed by Charles and Henry Greene in 1908 for David and Mary Gamble of the Procter & Gamble Company, is a National Historic Landmark and provides an outstanding example of American Arts and Crafts style architecture. Attendees are requested to wear flat shoes to help preserve the house floors. Lunch will be served at Trattoria Neapolis Italian restaurant. Following lunch, the group will visit the Norton Simon Museum of Art, which is known around the world for having one of the most remarkable private art collections ever assembled. The tour bus will leave the Grand Californian hotel at 9:00am and return at approximately 4:30pm. The cost for the event is $90.00. Please note that this Tour is limited to 35 attendees only so register early if you plan to attend.

LUNCHEON: A Luncheon will be held on Friday, 26 September from 12:30pm to 2:00pm. The guest speaker will be Dr. Mark Lewis, the longest serving Chief Scientist of the United States Air Force, and a world-renowned expert on hypersonic flight. The luncheon is included in the full-price registration fee, and guests may purchase additional tickets for $55.00 per person. 36 January - June 2014 FRIDAY NIGHT RECEPTION: On Friday, 26 September, an outdoor dinner reception will be held at the Disneyland hotel, which is a 10-15 minute walk from the Grand Californian hotel. Due to the length of the walk, transportation will be provided for those who desire it. Dress for the event is business casual and a ticket is included in the full registration fee. For those not purchasing a full registration, tickets are $75.00 for adults and $25.00 for children ages 3-9.

SETP ANNUAL BUSINESS MEETING: The SETP Annual Business meeting will be held immediately following the final symposium Technical Session on Saturday, 27 September. This meeting will be open to all grades of membership and corporate representatives. An update on Society activities will be presented and 2014/15 SETP Officers will be installed.

AWARDS BANQUET: The 58th Annual Awards Banquet will be held on Saturday, 27 September at 6:30pm in the Sequoia Ballroom. Social hour will begin at 5:30pm. The program will include installment of new SETP Fellows, and presentation of the Ray E. Tenhoff, Tony LeVier, H. R. Salmon, J. H. Doolittle, and Iven C. Kincheloe Awards. Dress for the event is black tie or military mess dress and appropriate formal wear for ladies. Tickets are $135.00.

REGISTRATION FEES: To enable maximum participation by Society Members and guests, multiple registration options are available to fit attendees’ schedules and budgets. Attendees may register for the full event, which includes Technical Sessions, Continental Breakfast, Friday Luncheon, Friday Reception and Proceedings on DVD; or for a “no frills” package which includes only the Continental Breakfast and Technical Sessions. The no frills package is available for two days (Thursday and Friday), or a single day (Thursday or Friday) at the attendee’s request. Additional events, such as the Technical Tour, Spouse Tour, Friday Lunch, Friday Dinner Reception, and Banquet can be added to the no frills package a la carte.

ACCOMMODATIONS: The Grand Californian and Paradise Pier hotels are now accepting room reservations. The group rate is $202.00 for single/double at the Grand Californian. For those wishing to stay at the Paradise Pier, located across the street from the Grand Californian, the room rate is $168.00 single/double. A very limited block of U.S. military/government rooms has been reserved at the Paradise Pier Hotel, for active duty U.S. military and government employees at a rate of $133.00. Reservations for both hotels can be made by calling 1-714-520-5005 or online at : https://resweb.passkey.com/Resweb.do?mode=welcome_ei_new&eventID=11211643. When booking reservations please indicate that you are with Society of Experimental Test Pilots. The cut-off-date for reservations is Tuesday, 23 August 2014. Reservations after the cut-off-date are subject to availability. CANCELLATIONS: The deadline for refunds on cancellations is 19 September.

ATTIRE FOR EACH EVENT: Welcome Reception Business Casual Technical Tour Business Casual and comfortable shoes Technical Sessions Business/Military uniform of the day Spouses Event Casual and flat shoes Friday Night Reception Business Casual Banquet Black Tie/Military Mess Dress

For discounted tickets to Disneyland or California Adventure, please see the SETP Registration desk at the hotel. January - June 2014 37 2014 SYMPOSIUM HIGHLIGHTS SETP 44th San Diego Symposium

The 44th Annual West Coast Symposium was held at the Catamaran Hotel Resort & SPA in San Diego - California, on March 28-29 2014.

The Chairman for this event was Nicola Pecile (AF) from the National Test Pilot School. Participation to the Symposium was good, with 87 people attending the sessions, including flight test professionals from many Organizations and Military branches, as well as students from the Professional Courses of NTPS and high school students from Pete Knight High School from Palmdale, CA. The High School students’ attendance was funded by The Christopher Weil Foundation. Many Corporate members sponsored the event with generous funding for a record breaking sponsoring of the Symposium and associated social events. The Sponsoring Companies were: Calspan, General Atomics, Gulfstream, JT3, Mojave Air & Space Port, Safe Flight Instrument Corporation, Sage Cheshire Aerospace, Scaled Composites, Sikorsky, WYLE and XCOR Aerospace.

The diversity of technical presentations was excellent, as well as contents; presentations spanned from different areas of flight testing, to include activities performed on combat fighters to tilt rotors, from supersonic parachute testing for Martian probes to aero-modeling research programs.

The technical presentations, chaired by Col. Doug Schueler, USMC (M) and by Mr. Tim Morey (AF) from WYLE included:

• “VTOL Aircraft Thrust Control – Part Deux” (Mr. Daniel Dugan (F), NASA)

• “Old Roy’s Flight Test Lessons Learned” (Mr. Roy Martin (F), Northrop Grumman Corporation)

• “F/A-18E/F Air To Ground Gunnery” (Maj. Zachary McCarley (M), USMC & Lt.Col Timothy Jorris, USAF)

• “Flight Test Program Update of the AgustaWestland AW-609 Civil Tiltrotor Aircraft” (Mr. Dan Wells (AF), AgustaWestland & Mr. Pietro Venanzi (F), AgustaWestland)

• “Simulating PIO for PIO Assessment” (Mr. William Gray (AF), USAF Test Pilot School)

• “Structures and Vibration Test on the AV-8B Speed Brake Reveals Issue with Targeting Pod Placement” (Capt. Aaron Frey (PAM), USMC & Maj. Douglas Rosenstock (PAM), USMC)

• “In-Flight Nonlinear Aerodynamics Modeling” (Mr. Jay Brandon, NASA)

38 January - June 2014 • “NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Low Density Supersonic Deceleration Parachute Design Verification Test Series Using MH-60S” (Lt. Jimmy Hong, US Navy, Lt Chris Webster, US Navy & Michael Meacham, NASA JPL)

• “USAF TPS at 70…and Beyond” (Col. Lars Hoffman (M), USAF)

• “Membership in SETP: Issues, Difficulties and Opportunities” (Mr. Don Weiss (M), Northrop Grumman & Nicola Pecile (AF), National Test Pilot School)

The guest speaker for the Banquet held at the Catamaran Hotel was Col. Roberto Vittori, Astronaut from the European Space Agency and former test pilot of the Italian Air Force, who gave a speech about “Flight Testing of Extra-Atmospheric Re-Entry Vehicles: Lessons Learned from the Space Shuttle Era”. As a member of the Space Shuttle Columbia Accident Investigation Board, Col. Vittori provided an amazing insight about the possibility that the orbiter accident and in flight break-up could have been the first and unique example of a “hypersonic departure” due to Thermal Protection System failure, rather than a structural failure generated by hot gas leaking inside the vehicle. His accounts from the investigation of this sad event led to the conclusion that future flight testing should aim towards understanding hypersonic loss of control, to provide adequate astronaut training for future crews of winged re-entry vehicles.

The “Jack Northrop” Award for the best technical paper, co-presented by retiring Chief Test Pilot of Northrop Grumman Corporation Mr. Roy Martin and the new Chief Test Pilot of NGC Mr.Troy Johnson, went to Maj. Rosenstock (PAM), USMC and Capt. Frey (PAM), USMC for their well presented flight testing activity performed on the speed- brake of the AV-8B.

Special thanks need to be recognized to SETP Headquarters staff, specifically to Laurie Balderas, Susan Gron, Jan Schell and Paula Smith for their amazing dedication and outstanding organization of every single possible detail, and to Jason for running the audio-visual support. The success of this and many other Symposia wouldn’t be possible without their great efforts and patience!

Nicola Pecile (AF), Symposium Chairman

January - June 2014 39 30th Annual East Coast Section Symposium

The 2014 East Coast Symposium was held on Friday, 11 April at the Bay District VFD Social Hall in Lexington Park, MD. Two hundred flight test professionals and students attended, including both the junior (146) and senior (145) United States Naval Test Pilot School classes and First Class Midshipmen (2014) from the Aerospace Department at the United States Naval Academy. Selected from 19 outstanding abstracts, nine papers were presented on diverse subjects from “New Techniques for Understanding and Quantifying Handling Qualities Testing” to “Joint Precision Approach and Landing System Lessons Learned.”

The USNTPS Alumni Association, through generous local corporate sponsors, supported the venue and catering such that all symposium fees were eliminated. A buffet lunch was available at reasonable cost, which helped keep the schedule moving quickly along.

Immediately following the symposium the attendees were invited to a reception at the “Q” Flight Deck Lounge on Naval Air Station Patuxent River. The SETP Leroy Grumman Award was presented for best paper to Capt Robert G. Buck, USMC (PAM) for his report “CH-53E Advanced Threat Warner Live Fire Testing.”

As in years past, the symposium was held in conjunction with the week-long USNTPS Reunion. USNTPSAA sponsored a golf tournament, crawfish boil, reunion brunch and several receptions, all of which symposium attendees were invited to regardless of USNTPS affiliation. This combined effort increases participation and the symbiotic relationship is likely to continue.

The 2015 East Coast Symposium is scheduled for 10 April in the NAS Patuxent River area. Don’t miss it!

40 January - June 2014 4th Annual Northwest Section Symposium

The Northwest section of SETP held its 4th annual symposium at the Museum of Flight, Seattle Washington. There were 136 attendees, all from various areas of aviation. The most noteworthy were students from local high schools and universities. The 10 presentations covered a wide variety of topics to include tilt rotors, FAR Part 25 re-write, 787, aerial refueling conducted in 1948-1950, airplane restoration projects and a speech from a legendary test pilot’s daughter, Becky Wallick; author of “Growing Up Boeing”. To end the day, a Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) panel discussion was held with local school administrators. This was a great day filled with meeting new and old friends, sharing stories, but most of all a shared excitement for flight test. One of the highlights was the Seattle World Cruiser (pictured); one of many airplanes on static display. Session Chairs were Jennifer Henderson (AM) and Paul Newton (AM).

Great Lakes Section Symposium

The Great Lakes Section held its annual Symposium on 22 May 2014 at the Wright- Patterson Club. Participation was fairly light with the impending Memorial Day weekend, with approximately 40 participants in attendance. Nevertheless, half of the presenters graciously traveled in from elsewhere, and a full day was enjoyed by all. The slate of presentations covered development and testing of the replica Wright B Flyer, to the Airbus 380 and the Textron Scorpion jet. The audience also heard about General Atomics’ sense-and-avoid efforts for RPAs, the Thales Visionix Scorpion Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (HMCS), and several Air Force Research Lab flight test projects investigating drag reduction and human vibration exposure ergonometrics.

NASA Glenn Research Center’s test pilot James “JD” Demers gave a very interesting luncheon talk, as well as a post-Symposium S-3 testbed aircraft tour. He covered a variety of NASA Glenn’s previous flight test project successes and its fleet capabilities to conduct diverse types of airborne experimentation and data collection, from multi-spectral aerial

January - June 2014 41 measurements of maritime algae bloom and tropical reef decay, to high-altitude solar panel efficiency data. The development of new flight test techniques, instrumentation and displays to accommodate each of these unique projects was especially interesting. At the Symposium conclusion, the Mitch Cary Award for the Best Paper was awarded to Paul Mancini and Lt Col Vince Sei, USAF, for their extremely informative presentation on the highly successful rapid development and operational integration of the Scorpion HMCS into the A-10 and F-16. Their focus on integrated OT and DT, along with agile software iterations and some innovative investigation into solving accuracy issues produced an under-cost, well-received leap in capability in a very compressed timeframe.

Section members also joined an SFTE-hosted dinner after the Symposium where the former USAF Historian Dr. Dick Hallion gave, as always, a fascinating presentation on the pace of innovation and technological development despite world geopolitical uncertainties throughout the 20th century, with an extrapolation into the future and the implications for flight testing.

42 January - June 2014 SETP/SFTE Flight Test Safety Workshop

So you missed the 2014 edition of the North American Flight Test Safety Workshop? Anyone that’s been in the flight test business has had one or more of those “ah-hah” moments where you discover something unexpected; perhaps it was an unanticipated aircraft or system response, objectionable handling qualities, or even something unplanned with the testing environment. A record-breaking crowd converged on Savannah from 12- 15 May to share their “Ah-hah moments in flight test: discovery and close calls - what we learned and the resulting tactics, techniques and procedures to test safely.”

The DeSoto Hilton Hotel provided the classic low country setting for the Workshop following a Welcome Reception at the Mighty EIGHTH Air Force Museum. The Workshop kicked off with a half-day tutorial from Mr. Pat Daily, President and Founder of Convergent Performance. Pat is an USAFTPS grad and former F-4 and F-16 driver, and his presentation: “Zoology of Flight Test” provided an entertaining, yet informative and relevant look into test team dynamics, testing challenges, and opportunity for lessons learning. Day one also included a panel discussion on “Education, training and certification of Flight Test Engineers.” The panelists provided an exceptional look into academic programs available and addressed the challenges in sustaining a robust training program to best prepare our new crop of FTE’s.

The quality of the presentations was nothing short of impressive! Preaching to the choir, these Workshops are irrelevant without testers willing and eager to share their experiences. The judges had a difficult task to pick just one winner, but well-deserved congratulations to the team of Maj Tucker Hamilton and Lt Michael Brueder who presented: “Break the store and not the airframe: CFP testing in a 30 year old envelope.” These fine Air Force officers drove over from Eglin, changed quickly into their uniforms for their presentation, and then skedaddled back to Eglin to conduct a priority test mission! An honorable mention went to Mr Terry Pearce of Bombardier for his candid presentation: “What we learned about test tactics, techniques and procedures after an inadvertent runway contact event during single engine takeoff.”

Workshop attendees and their spouses were treated to a riverboat dinner cruise on the Savannah River, and the opportunity to hear the exploits of CAPT(Ret) Robert L. “Hoot” Gibson. Hoot described just a small snapshot of his incredible journey, including five trips to space and racing war birds around pylons at Reno. Hoot is a Society Fellow and was recently inducted into the National Aviation Hall of Fame! At the conclusion of the Workshop, a short “technical tour” of the Gulfstream G650 production facility was offered for those that had later departure times.

Workshops could simply not be hosted satisfactorily without the generous help of Corporate sponsors. Many, many thanks to Bell Helicopter, Boeing, Bombardier, Wyle, Northrop Grumman Electronic System Flight Test, and Gulfstream for their financial support! Jerry Whites, Flight Test Safety Committee Chairman, closed out the event with the announcement of the Tony LeVier Flight Test Safety Award winner. Congratulations, and well deserved, to Mr Terry Lutz! The official presentation will take place at the Anaheim January - June 2014 43 banquet in September. As Savannah icon Paula Dean would say for those that attended the 2014 FTSW: “Thanks for coming ya’ll!”

Central Section Symposium

Over 50 members from across the country gathered in Wichita on June 12 and 13 for the 7th Annual Central Section Symposium. With six new model 1st flights in the Central Section since the 2013 symposium, the Central Section membership had much to celebrate. The events kicked off Thursday evening with a well attended social hosted by Textron Aviation at its Cessna Customer Center, featuring static displays of six of its newest market entrants. A BBQ dinner provided by Beechcraft was served in the Citation delivery hangar, with tables flanked by the Textron AirLand Scorpion, Cessna Citation M2 and Skylane JT-A . Members and their guests then toured the Cessna Citation X+ prototype, Beechcraft KingAir 350, and AT-6 sporting a full load of ordnance.

44 January - June 2014 Friday morning the symposium convened at the Hotel Old Town Conference Center in downtown Wichita. As the 2014 symposium and Central Section Chairman, Dan Hinson orchestrated an outstanding variety of eight technical presentations. After exhaustive deliberation over selecting the top presentation out of such an excellent forum, the judges presented the Lloyd Stearman Award for best technical paper to the Bombardier duo of Terry Pearce and Steve Long for their presentation of “Dissimilar Crews in Experimental Flight Test”. Honorable mention was noted for Cessna test pilot Andrew Peters’ presentation of “G5000 Autothrottle: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Automation.”

Attendees enjoyed a luncheon presentation by Doug May, Director of Textron Aviation Engineering Flight Test, on building a “World Class” organization, concluding with a video of highlights from 87 years of flight test at Textron Aviation’s Cessna and Beechcraft companies.

The symposium concluded with a question/answer session of a panel of five senior test pilots that were PIC for new model 1st flights in the past year, sharing lessons learned and personal insight into the preparation and execution of a 1st flight.

The line-up of presenters included:

“Dissimilar Crews in Experimental Flight Test” – Terry Pearce (AM) and Steve Long (M), Bombardier Aerospace.

“Valid Anthropometric Data for Aircraft Design” – Robert Joslin (AF), FAA.

“Minimizing Errors in GPS-denied TSPI Data” – 1 Lt Alex Hillman, USAF.

“AT-6 Stall Testing” – Dr. Lionel Alford (AF), Beechcraft Defense.

“G5000 Autothrottle: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Automation” – Andrew Peters, Cessna Aircraft.

“X-48 First Flight” – Norman Howell (AF), Boeing.

“Performance of Low Cost GA AOA Probe” – Terry LeSage (M) and Jordan Deters, Cirrus Aircraft.

“E530 Scorpion First Flight Testing” – Dave Sitz (M), Textron Aviation.

The 1st Flight PIC panel was moderated by Marc Mannella (AF), and included:

Aaron Tobias (M) – Citation Latitude, Cessna Aircraft Dan Hinson (AF) – Scorpion, Textron AirLand

Steve Schmidt – Advanced Super Hornet, Boeing

January - June 2014 45 Mike Stevens (M) – SF50 Vision, Cirrus Aircraft

Ed Grabman (AF) – Learjet 85, Bombardier Aerospace

The section would like to thank the symposium’s corporate sponsors Beechcraft, Garmin, Textron AirLand and Thales for helping to keep the events affordable for the attendees, and Textron Aviation for hosting the social event and providing the static displays.

46 January - June 2014 46th Annual European Section Symposium

This years European SETP symposium was held together with the SFTE European chapter under the title “Testing Together”. Ever since graduating from TPS 1990, my opinion has been that testing is done in a team and therefore should be reported as a combined effort. Hosting this years event we got the opportunity to do just that! To add a bit of adventure to it we chose our venue in the far north, in Luleå and the Vidsel test range. Timing was chosen to be on midsummer week to allow our guests a non stop daylight experience. Having a last drink at the sky bar watching sunset at 00.05 and sunrise at 01.10 must have been a first for many. We were very pleased that so many chose to attend including ETPS and the German members that arrived in their own aircraft!

A wide variety of papers were presented and due to the large number admitted we opted for parallel sessions for part of the symposium. The venue worked out very well despite opening only 5 months earlier and good discipline allowed for seamless (almost) transit between rooms.

Vidsel test range displayed their capabilities and so did the Gripen air display flown by Wing 21. We experienced some northern temperatures while walking next to the Storfors waterfall and those who were observant grabbed a warm winter coat.

Other activities included a Nordic evening in the Luleå archipelago and the final Banquet at the Elite hotel grand ballroom. The ladies enjoyed our new event organizers Robin and Michael touring the old city and exploring the depths of the Boden fort.

Thanks to our sponsors Saab, FMV and the Swedish airforce we managed to host more than 140 symposium delegates and more than 160 guests at the Banquet at a venue far away from home.

I would like to thank everyone that made an effort coming and hope you have managed to warm up again.

Gideon Singer (F) Chairman , SETP/SFTE European Symposium

January - June 2014 47 48 January - June 2014 January - June 2014 49 SCHOLARSHIP FOUNDATION NEWS

The following notes were received from Scholarship recipients:

Dear Board of Trustees,

Thank you so very much for the scholarship money you have provided me with! Without your generous support, college would have been a challenge financially. So far, my college experience has been wonderful and I am about half way done! I am so grateful for your concern for students in my situation.

Sincerely, Abigail Brown

Dear Scholarship Foundation Trustees,

I have officially graduated from Embry-Riddle and commissioned as a 2d Lt in the Air Force! I am incredibly grateful for your support throughout the years which has contributed to my success. I will be heading to Goodfellow AFB for Intelligence school.

Sincerely, Aaron Evenson

50 January - June 2014 Notes from the Chairman The SETP Scholarship Foundation

For the 2013-2014 academic year, the Trustees approved $115,600 in scholarships to nine students. In the spring of 2014, three of our “students” graduated from college, having received over $143,000 from us in monetary assistance during their academic pursuits.

Donations continue, and through your generosity, we received $17,752.00 for the 2013 calendar year. Our total assets, as of December 31, 2013, total almost $5M. Our direction to Covington Capital Management, our investment firm, is to preserve this investment above everything else. The Scholarship Foundation assets are thus placed in relatively low risk categories, a combination of stocks and bonds, and we do our best to award scholarships from the dividends earned during the year. We try very hard not to withdraw from the capital investment, with our overall goal being the funding of 100% of the college costs of “our children”. We’re not there yet; overall we’re at 61.9% {this percentage includes any additional scholarships our students receive}, and your generous donations are helping us get closer to this goal every year. I personally think this is a great percentage, and I look with anticipation of us exceeding it this year. Presently, three of our students are funded at 100% of their requirements.

In December 2013, the Lockheed Martin Employees Recreation Club was forced to close their doors. I was honored to be available to attend their closing event with our Vice Chairman, James E. {JB} Brown, where they presented the SETP Scholarship Foundation with a generous donation of $13,000.00. This number is not included in the $17,752.00 stated above. I thus offer my sincerest thanks to a fabulous organization for their generosity.

Some foundations have significant overhead costs, which reduce the amount of revenue available to earn interest and dividends. Our overhead costs average 1.10% of the total value of our portfolio. This is a very low percentage, as compared to many other Foundations. I think you will agree with me that the vast majority of your personal donations go directly into generating income for the awarding of scholarships. Your SETP Scholarship Foundation Trustees and Staff have been exceptional in keeping these overhead costs under control.

The Scholarship Foundation Board of Trustees is presently composed of eighteen dedicated men and women. If you would like to be a Trustee, there is a relatively easy process involved. The first step is to let me know of your desire. I’ll be glad to work with you in making this desire a reality. Residence in or near the SETP Headquarters is definitely not required. Many of our Trustees do not live in southern California. All we desire is a commitment to engage.

It is my sincere pleasure to be the newest Chairman of the SETP Scholarship Foundation, and I must thank our Past Chairman, Addison Thompson, for holding such a constant course for so many years. Ad has turned over to me a most-dedicated Board of Trustees, whose primary purpose has been, and continues to be, to maximize educational funding assistance to our students. Everything else they do is secondary. We like it that way, and I will do my best to keep that course which Ad and his predecessors have set.

Respectfully Submitted,

John A. Fergione Chairman, the SETP Scholarship Foundation Past-President and Fellow, the Society of Experimental Test Pilots January - June 2014 51 SETP FOUNDATION NEWS

SETP Members,

Your Society has established a Foundation that is intended to benefit the membership directly or indirectly. The SETP Foundation, a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation, is administered by the SETP Foundation Board of Directors. The Foundation performs the following functions:

1) It maintains the history of the Society by receiving and maintaining memorabilia, written records, oral histories, reports, photographs and other artifacts relating to test pilots and their profession. 2) Enhancing the professional knowledge of test pilots and other aerospace professionals for the purpose of increasing flight test safety. The Flight Test Safety Committee is a joint committee under the SETP Foundation and the Society of Flight Test Engineers. 3) The Foundation provides mentors for educating our youth through the Education/ Mentoring Committee. This includes an academic bridge to the aerospace industry by working with universities to develop flight test-oriented classes and degrees, as well as working with industry to develop internships supporting the university efforts. Recently, the Educational Outreach committee members were successful in getting Flight Test Evaluation/Flight Test Engineering certification courses accredited with Master’s of Science in Flight Test Engineering courses underway at NAVAIR and Florida Institute of Technology. In addition, the Foundation actively participates in and is the only aerospace- specific sponsor for the Intel Science & Engineering Fair, or ISEF. The Foundation provides educational outreach to high schools, and we are striving to support educational outreach in all SETP geographic sections.

A revitalized area of SETP Foundation work is the SETP Building Committee. The Building Committee’s goal is to grow funding sufficient to replace the existing aging building with a new headquarters building, complete with museum-quality storage for the Society’s memorabilia and artifacts. For many years, this effort was stalled, but recent donations have reinvigorated the Building Committee, and there is a possibility of actually moving forward. However, there remains a continuing need for financial support.

Your Society’s goals are supported by the SETP Foundation. The SETP Foundation is not supported by any dues or other regular income; it is solely supported by your tax-deductible contributions. We need your contributions to remain strong, viable and relevant. Please continue to contribute anything you can: you can make a contribution when paying your dues; at a symposium, or sent directly to the SETP Foundation through the SETP staff or on the Foundation page of the SETP website. Something that has the potential to be very powerful and a legacy is to donate to the SETP Foundation or its Building Committee through a trust or living will.

Thank you for your support.

Doug Benjamin (F) SETP Foundation Chairman

52 January - June 2014 “ACADEMIC BRIDGE TO THE AEROSPACE INDUSTRY” ACTIVITY

Flight Test Evaluation Certificate/MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Programs

The Academic Bridge Program’s main goal is to reduce the timeline from graduation to industry productivity by six months. To accomplish this timeline reduction, we asked the Aerospace Industry for their suggestions and their operational academic requirements. This participation by industry complements classroom theory with operational application. So what has happened?

Over the past two years, we have been working with academia (Florida Institute of Technology) to develop a Flight Test Evaluation Certificate and a MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Program. The FTE Certificate has 4 graduate courses (3 credit hour courses) for a total of 12 credit hours. The Flight Test Engineering Certificate courses are: Performance Evaluation with Flight Lab., Stability and Control , Handling Qualities with Flight Lab., Avionics with Flight Lab. and Instrumentation and Measurements.

Students are eligible to take the FTE Certificate courses starting their junior year. These courses recognize the professional discipline, and provide a credential. Students will receive a Transcript with the Certificate which is valid toward the MS Flight Test Engineering Degree for up to 7 years.

The Aerospace Industry is interested in students that take the FTE Certificate for internships that will provide valuable hands on experience with industry professionals, and potential employment opportunities upon graduation since they will have already completed 40 % of the MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Program.

This academic program should be cost effective to the Aerospace Industry (less time to productivity). The academic curriculums will be substantially strengthened by Industry’s suggestions and operational requirements. For the students the program will become a sought after degree for career industry employment opportunities.

The Aerospace Industry is also interested in educational programs for their company personnel to have the opportunity to take FTE Certificate Courses, and the MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Program. This would provide the credentials that recognize the professional discipline and provide promotional opportunities for career enhancement. This also recognizes the value of undergraduate students with the FTE Certificates.

As part of program implementation, Florida Institute of Technology (FIT) met with NAVAIR at Pax River, and other major Aerospace Industry Companies to listen to the educational programs they would like to offer their employee personnel for career enhancement and future promotional opportunities.

(One of the values of a private university is the flexibility to offer programs to fit the industry’s academic and professional requirements.)

NAVAIR requested the MS Flight Test Engineering Degree have the option for Air Vehicle, or Avionics. Another Aerospace Company requested the thesis option so that employees working on projects for the company could use them for a 6 credit thesis. One other Aerospace Company was interested in the short course version of the FTE Certificate to

January - June 2014 53 be taught at their facility.

The MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Courses started this past Spring Semester at NAVAIR Pax River.

The Flight Test and Evaluation Certificate Course (Flight Test Stability and Control and Handling Qualities with Flight Lab) will be offered in the Fall Semester 2014 at the FIT Campus.

A second more operational phase using the Flight Test Evaluation Certificate will integrate these courses into the existing Aeronautical Science flight training curriculum and develop a new advanced academic/flight training that could be utilized by all universities involved in the FAA’s F/O Qualification program for air carriers. This new advanced academic flight training program is called: Airline Pilot Air Carrier Training (ATPACT). The FTE Certificate courses are the foundational courses that will be applied to the students’ flight training. The courses stress how the system works to strengthen students’ knowledge, skills, abilities, competency and proficiency. They also enhance their situational awareness (SA), decreases recognition and response (R&R) time for the decision making.

The Polishing curriculum Flight Simulation segments will use TBO and SBO concepts for jet transition in the National Airspace System environment. Students will be exposed to complex communications, visual and procedural workload management during the critical phases of flight. Once completed, this ATPACT Program will be offered to the universities that have aeronautical/flight training programs. This can be done by utilizing the NIFA Regional competition program which has 67 universities that makeup the 11 Regions. Each region has 6-8 universities that offer flight training programs with flight teams who compete regionally to qualify for NIFA Nationals. The SETP Foundation sponsors the “Challenge Trophy” and “The Spirit of Excellence Trophy” each year for Region 9.

We hope by designing and offering this academic and advanced flight training program ATPACT, that it will assist the 67 universities in further development of their own aviation training programs. It is recommended that some type of FTE Certificate or Minor be included that covers the subject courses in the current FTE Certificate. Our collective goal is to enhance flight safety excellence.

FIT will continue to engage with the Aerospace Industry to develop Flight Test Certificates and MS Flight Test Engineering Degree Programs that satisfy educational development programs for company personnel to further career opportunities.

Capt. Bill Connor, Ph.D., (AF) SETP Foundation Board of Directors Chairman, Academic Bridge to the Aerospace Industry

***************************************************

EDITOR’S NOTE: Both the USAF Test Pilot School and the National Test Pilot School (NTPS) offer accredited Master of Science in Flight Test Engineering (MS FTE) degree programs and have for many years. The NTPS MS FTE is open for enrollment to the general public in addition to students attending TPS. NTPS also offers several certificate programs in flight test subjects that can be used for credit in the MS FTE program. 54 January - June 2014 SETP’s STEM Outreach to the 2014 Intel ISEF

The Intel International Science and Engineering Fair (Intel ISEF) is now in its 65th year and has grown to host over 1750 student finalists from over 70 countries, making it the largest fair of its kind. Finalists are culled from more than 450 regional, county, state, and national affiliate fairs from across the world, though principally from the USA. These finalists represent the finest students gathered under one roof, and as such, offer one of the best opportunities for SETP—home of the “Who’s Who” in aerospace—to leverage its clout to inspire this pre-college demographic to careers in aerospace and predispose them to the flight test profession.

Although the Intel ISEF permits finalists to compete their projects in one of 17 named categories, there is no longer a category specific to aerospace, coincident with the overall decline in the number of aerospace projects competed since the heyday of the space race of the late 1960s. This despite the fact that aerospace remains the USA’s single largest export, valued at over one trillion dollars across all facets of the enterprise. Houston, do we have a problem?

In addition to the grand awards that recognize the best “science” of each category, the Intel ISEF is notable for the numerous Special Awards Organizations (SAOs) that target projects in their parochial interests. In an effort to help steer our nation’s youth back to aerospace, the SETP Foundation approved a STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math) outreach initiative in 2010 to step forward as an SAO to the Intel ISEF. Of the 68 SAOs at the 2014 fair, SETP continues to be the principal SAO that strictly focuses on aerospace projects in whatever category they may be found.

This year’s fair was held at the Los Angeles Convention Center, CA, from 11-16 May 2014, marking SETP’s fifth consecutive year as an SAO to the Intel ISEF. As an SAO, SETP was afforded the opportunity to reach out to these top scientifically-minded pre- collegiates, principally through three venues of interaction: 1) as judges to interact with selected finalists to determine the Society’s award winners, 2) by offering an aerospace Symposium with Q&A, and 3) as an awards presenter during the Special Awards Ceremony.

On “Interview Day,” SETP fielded a team of six judges, five of whom were veterans of previous years: John Fergione, Lars Hoffman, Jon Dietrich, Karl Major, CB Cain and Andre Gerner. Together, they had the difficult challenge of sorting out SETP’s three award winners and three honorable mentions by interviewing a baker’s dozen of our topmost finalists, narrowed down the previous day from a field of 671 projects. Although there were many more commendable projects than could be recognized by our 3+3 awards pool, we did leave behind our limited edition enamel pins and recognition cards with the best 73 projects.

On “Awards Day,” we were fortunate to have SpaceShipTwo Test Pilot, Mark “Forger” Stucky, as our featured awards presenter. Similar to last year, we collaborated with NASA to jointly host a Symposium entitled, “So, you want to be an Astronaut?” Coincidentally, NASA provided one of SETP’s own, Astronaut Jack “2fish” Fischer, to co-present with Forger. Their Back-to-back presentations to an intent audience were well received, judging by the formal and informal Q&A that continued on for yet another hour thereafter.

Later that evening, during the SAO Awards Ceremony, Forger personally awarded our top three finalists on stage, in front of an audience of well over 2000 enthusiastic finalists and

January - June 2014 55 their attending faculty. This year, our awards went to: Jamie McCullough, our third place winner, for her experimentation in optimizing rocket nozzle performance; Scott Bollt, our second place winner, for his design and test of an inflatable airplane idealized for low Reynolds numbers; and Loren Newton, our first place winner, for his construction and test of novel add-on tip devices to ebb wingtip vortices. Not present on stage were our honorable mentions: David Ferrill, for his noise reduction tests of notched propellers inspired by owl feathers; Yenny Dieguez, for her ongoing experimentation to optimize vertical axis wind turbine farms based on the schooling behavior of fish; and Chris Romanoski, for his exacting recreation and analysis of the Wright Brother’s wind tunnel tests.

In the three main categories that host the majority of aerospace projects, we’ve noted the total number of projects increased 9% over the previous year, while the number of aerospace projects in those same categories increased by 19%. We continue to observe modest gains in the number of aerospace projects competed since our initial involvement with the Intel ISEF, something we hope to improve upon through our continued influence and involvement as an SAO at the next Intel ISEF, to be held at the Pittsburgh Convention Center, PA, from 10-15 May 2015. This beneficial STEM outreach is only made possible through the generosity of SETP’s membership. Those wishing to support this outreach financially may do so by donations to the SETP Foundation, while those willing to donate their time and talent may contact Andre Gerner for further details.

SETP Booth at LA County Air Show

56 January - June 2014 SETP Booth at LA County Air Show

The first annual Los Angeles County Airshow was held at Fox Field in Lancaster on 21-22 March -- and SETP was there! Sponsored by the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Company, (LMAERO) SETP West Coast Section volunteers participated in a large ‘Science, Technology, Engineering & Math’ (STEM) tent, designed especially to appeal to local students. The STEM tent contained interesting exhibits in aerospace, robotics, flight simulation – and even a functional WWII Norden Bombsight trainer! SETP volunteers chatted with hundreds of visiting students on a wide variety of aerospace topics -- and on flight test in particular -- while (of course) signing lots of autographs. Performances by the U.S. Navy’s Blue Angels provided a huge draw to what was originally planned to be a relatively small airshow. With the USAF’s Thunderbirds already scheduled for next year’s show, Lancaster officials hope to break this year’s 100,000-attendee mark -- and SETP is already laying plans to be a part. Many thanks to LMAERO’s Ben Marchionna for coordinating this year’s STEM tent, and the numerous West Coast Section SETP volunteers who participated: John Fergione, Dave Kerzie, Mark Stucky, Marlies Van De Pol (and her three boys!), Col. Glenn Graham, Joe Biviano, Evan Thomas and Matt Menza.

January - June 2014 57 NEW MEMBERS AND UPGRADES

The Society would like to welcome the following new Members:

Beeber, Gregg (M) Gilbert, Jonathan (PAM) Lt Col, USAF Capt, USAF Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14

Horton, James (PAM) Jordan, Mike (PAM) LCDR, RN Sqn Ldr. RAF Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 16-Apr-14

Karhpostoles, Christopher (PAM) Koli, Mikko (M) LT, USN Maj, Finnish Air Force Flight Test Joined 15-Jan-14 Centre Joined 16-Apr-14

Lecaplain, Marc (M) Mathys, Roger (PAM) Lt Col, DGA/ French Flight Test Center Capt, Swiss Air Force Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 26-Feb-14

58 January - June 2014

McCurdy, Thomas (PAM) McLean, Jeffrey (PAM) LT, USN LT, USN Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 15-Jan-14

Merriman, Craig (M) Murrell, James (PAM) Maj, USMC MAJ, British Army Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 16-Apr-14

Robarge, Tyler (PAM) Rodrigues, Airton (M) Maj, USAF Embraer Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 16-Apr-14

Thomas, Edmund (M) Scheel, Kim (PAM) Sqn Ldr, RAF Capt, Royal Danish Air Force Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 January - June 2014 59

LeClair, Raven (PAM) Maj, USAF Joined 15-Jan-14

PHOTOS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE FOLLOWING NEW MEMBERS:

Anderson, Steve (M) Bachta, Donald (PAM) Aviat Aircraft Inc. Maj, USMC Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 Blais, Catherine (PAM) Brouze, Thibaud (PAM) Capt, RCAF Maj, Armée de I’Air Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Brunet, Eric (PAM) Corrigan, Davin (PAM) Comdt., French Air Force LCDR, USN Joined 16-Apr-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 Cripps, Russell (M) Culhane, Michael (PAM) Sqn Ldr, RAF Maj, USAF Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Ehler, Shane (PAM) Fagiani, Marco (PAM) LT, USN Capt, Aeronautica Militare Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Fairfax, Bradley (PAM) Fatorelli, Thiago Alexandre (M) LT, USN CPT, Brazilian Army Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Flanigen, Paul (PAM) Guardigu, Stefano (PAM) CPT, USA Capt, Italian Air Force Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Hays, Mitchell (PAM) Heitman, Justin (PAM) LT, USN LT, USN Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 26-Feb-14 Hiratsuka, Satoshi (M) Hurst, David (PAM) Maj, JASDF LT, USN Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 Jaglom, Peter (PAM) Kippert, Lucas (PAM) LT, USN Maj, USAF Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Koether, Stephen (PAM) Lathrop, Frederic (PAM) Capt, USAF Maj, USAF Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 LeBlanc, David (PAM) Lee, Douglas (PAM) Capt, AETE Maj, USMC Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 60 January - June 2014 Lee, Hyun Woo (PAM) Meyer, Christopher (PAM) Maj, ROKAF Maj, USMC Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Moghbeli, Jasmin (PAM) Nilssen, Lars (PAM) Capt, USMC Capt, RNAF Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 Nuse, Will (PAM) Olson, Ryan (PAM) LT, USN NTPS Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Orso, Jonathan (PAM) Ostrye, Matthew (PAM) Capt. USAF LT, USN Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 18-Jun-14 Park, Seongbin (PAM) Pinedo, Carlos (PAM) Maj, ROKAF Capt, USAF Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Putre, Christopher (PAM) Rew, Jason (AM) LT, USN Cessna Aircraft Company Joined 26-Feb-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Scopa, Andrea (PAM) Searcy, Jeffrey (PAM) LCDR, USN Capt, USAF Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Sinclair, Brian (PAM) Slayton, James (PAM) CDR, USN Capt, USAF Joined 15-Jan-14 Joined 15-Jan-14 Towner, John (M) Tschanz, Steven (PAM) Boeing LT, USN Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 26-Feb-14 Wandt, Marcus (PAM) Wiggins, Thomas (PAM) Capt, SWAF CW2, USA Joined 18-Jun-14 Joined 15-Jan-14

Congratulations to those members who have upgraded their membership!

Lionel, Alford (AF) Bender, Jeffrey (AF) Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Boeing Upgraded 26-Feb-14

January - June 2014 61

Berset, Bernhard (AF) Bryant, Lee (M) Armasuisse Maj, USAF Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Carrothers, Bryan (M) Escher, Charles (AM) Lt Col, CAF LCDR, USN Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Hill, Mike (AF) Hoff, Rein (M) NTPS Brunel Flight Safety Laboratory Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Holmberg, Eric (AF) Howard, James M. (M) Gulfstream Maj, USAF Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Jespersen, Allan (AM) Kellogg, Erin (AM) LT, USN Maj, USMC Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 16-Apr-14 62 January - June 2014

Kinney, Eric (AF) Kolano, Edward (AF) FAA FAA Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 26-Feb-14

Lamping, Logan (M) Ljungdahl, Magnus (AF) Maj, USAF SAAB Aerosystems Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Lowry, Wilson (M) Reid, Christopher (M) USNTPS MAJ, USA Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Sallam, Hamdy (M) Sanford, Ryan (AM) Capt, Italian Air Force Maj, USAF Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 18-Jun-14

Sibenaler, Andrew (M) Sjöstrand, Johan S. (AF) SQNLDR, RAAF SAAB Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14 January - June 2014 63

Spaulding, Timothy (M) Talbot, Nigel (AF) Maj, USAF Agusta Westland Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 16-Apr-14

Thurston, James (M) Ungerman, Robert (M) LCDR, USN Lt Col, USAF Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

Wagner, Michael (AF) Williams, George (M) Northrop Grumman Flt Lt, RAF Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14

PHOTOS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THE FOLLOWING MEMBERS WHO HAVE UPGRADED THEIR MEMBERSHIP: Calhoun, David (M) Elliott, Olivia (M) LCDR, USN Maj, USAF Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 18-June-14

Gentile, Chris (AM) Goodpasture, Adam (AM) Maj, USAF Maj, USAF Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 Hathaway, Jack (M) Jensen, Claes (AF) LT, USN SAAB Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Keeble, Mark (M) Kipp, Timothy (M) Keeble Consulting Maj. USAF Upgraded 18-June-14 Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Lukkien, Ralf (AM) Mangini, Marco (M) Maj, RNLAF Capt, Italian AF Upgraded 18-June-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 64 January - June 2014 Marten, David (M) Meagher, Thomas (M) Maj, USAF Capt, USAF Upgraded 26-Feb-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 Mentges, William (AM) Mikal, John (M) CW5, USA Maj, USAF Upgraded 18-June-14 Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Naddy, Cory (M) Rosenstock, Douglas (M) Maj, USAF Maj, USMC Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Schofield, Jacob (AM) Seymour, Christopher (AF) LCDR, USN Bell Helicopter Upgraded 15-Jan-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 Sorenson, Daniel (M) Soukup, Joel (M) Maj, USAF Maj, USAF Upgraded 18-June-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 Steinfort, Edward (M) Taliaferro, Brian (M) Maj, USAF Maj, USAF Upgraded 18-June-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 Weaver, Christopher (M) Wimer, Jeremy (AM) LCDR, USN Maj, USAF Upgraded 16-Apr-14 Upgraded 18-June-14 WHO...WHAT...WHERE The Korean War Memorial Park Committee in Korea held an essay contest and selected Drury W. Wood (F) as the first place winner for his essay in the category of Living through the Korean War. He received a beautiful trophy and a cash prize of ten million Korean Won, which is about $10,000. Drury and his wife Jackie visited the U.N. War Memorial in Korea last October in honor of the 63rd anniversary of the Korean War.

The Rotary National Award for Space Achievement (RNASA) Foundation selected former Canadian Space Agency astronaut, Chris A. Hadfield (M) to receive the prestigious 2014 Space Communicator Award. Hadfield was honored with the 2014 Space Communicator Award at the RNASA annual black-tie gala on 11 April 2014.

Peter Reynolds (F) was enshrined posthumously into the Kansas Aviation Hall of Fame at the Kansas Aviation Museum on 15 April 2014. January - June 2014 65 Legendary fighter pilot, test pilot and airshow pilot Robert A. “Bob” Hoover (F) was honored by the aviation community this past February at The Paramount Studios in Hollywood, CA for his 60-plus year career. Events included the premier of the documentary, “Perfecting Flight: Bob Hoover,” along with the inauguration of the Bob Hoover Hall of Honor. The charter inductees for the prestigious Hoover Hall of Honor include Neil Armstrong (F), Lee Atwood, Capt. Eugene Cernan, Jacqueline “Jackie” Cochran (HF), James H. “Jimmy” Doolittle, Burt Rutan, Dick Rutan (AF), and Drury Wood, Jr. (F). The Hoover Hall of Honor will be on permanent display at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University’s Florida Campus.

Hoover Hall of Honor inductees Gene Cernan (AF), Dick Rutan (AF), Burt Rutan, and Drury Wood (F) with Bob Hoover (F).

STEM Thrives at NTPS Flight Test Camp 2014

The National Test Pilot School (NTPS) completed its second annual Flight Test Camp during the week of 23-28 June 2014. Conducted at NTPS facilities at the Mojave Air and Space Port (MASP), this years camp trained 11 local high school students and 6 local high school teachers. NTPS Flight Test Camp is a STEM program focused on introducing students to flight test engineering as a possible career field and to show them some of the engineering careers located right here in the local area. A typical day at NTPS flight camp consisted of a flight in an aircraft or simulator to gather data or introduce an aerospace concept, several hours of flight test academics and data analysis, and a tour of one of the local MASP aerospace businesses such as Scaled Composites, Virgin Galactic, Masten Rockets, Stratolaunch, MASP, and NTPS. The week finished up with a Saturday morning family day so the students could bring in their parents and families to see what they did for the week. The family’s got a briefing on NTPS and the Flight Test Camp, a tour of the school, a Q&A panel discussion with test pilots, flight test engineers, and recent college engineering graduates, and a BBQ lunch. The camp was a great success again this year with numerous accolades from the students, parents, and teachers alike. NTPS would like to thank all the companies listed above that supported us with tours for the students and a special thanks to our sponsors Union Bank, MASP, and SETP. 66 January - June 2014 A Bad Day Remembered – A Pilot Honored

On March 25, 2009 Dave “Cools” Cooley (AF) perished as the result of a high speed ejection during a F-22 flight test mission northeast of Edwards AFB. His co-workers and fellow test pilots had struggled with how to provide a fitting memorial for their friend. In a stroke of inspiration by Bill Kuhlemeier, F-22 flight test engineer, the concept of installing a radar reflector at the crash site was realized and developed. The radar reflector was donated by the Edwards AFB Range Group, Kuhlemeier had silhouettes of the aircraft that Dave tested cut into the surfaces and Steve Rainey (F) arranged for the reflector to be powder coated. Nearing the 5th anniversary of the accident, a team consisting of Rainey, Kuhlemeier, Jim Brown (F) and Paul Boyd journeyed to the crash site and installed the reflector into a concrete footing. On the 5th anniversary, of the accident, the F-22 Combined Test Force travelled en masse to the crash site for a dedication ceremony of the memorial and then conducted a squadron “Roll Call” to cap the day.

For those of you flying in the R-2515 airspace, throw your air-to-ground radar down on N3509.4118’, W11722.4775’, elevation 2,438 feet MSL and you’ll see the shining light of a true flight test professional.

F-22 Synthetic Aperture Radar Image (073 mag View) January - June 2014 67 BOOK NEWS

Growing Up Boeing: The Early Jet Age Through the Eyes of a Test Pilot’s Daughter By Rebecca Wallick

Part memoir, part biography, Growing Up Boeing tells the story of the pioneers of the Golden Age of commercial jet transports from an insider’s perspective—the daughter of legendary Boeing test pilot Lew Wallick.

Take a nostalgic flight back in time to the dawn of the jet age—1950s through 1980s—when the best experimental test pilots flew by the seat of their pants, putting new commercial jets through tests that stressed and pushed the edge of performance envelopes, discovering their limits and tolerances.

Fly along on demonstration and proving flights as the test pilots help Boeing sell the airplanes to airlines around the world, meeting a few celebrities along the way. See how they lived their lives in the air and on the ground—their adventurous spirits, need for speed, leisure activities and families. Secrets big and small are revealed, as are hair-raising moments when the hazards, the incidents, near accidents, and tragic events inherent in exploring the limits of aeronautical technology and new airplane designs are described.

“You need not have grown up in the Puget Sound region to identify with much of what Rebecca Wallick has so poignantly related for posterity in this highly personal and nearly poetic account. But if you were fortunate enough to have done so, you will embrace this labor of love and honor, and see yourself mirrored in so many of its scenes. Historians have labored to record the evolution of the company we all know as Boeing, but have, for the most part, produced nuts-and-bolts, enthusiast-style publications that do little for the soul or for the unique community that has nurtured and enabled the beautiful aircraft which have resulted. This artfully narrated account breathes life into the extremely personal and human experiences that have, in some magical way, been shared at some level by so many, and provides more than a hint of what has made this aircraft manufacturer legendary.” —Dan Hagedorn, Senior Curator, Museum of Flight

Rebecca Wallick’s delightful story of the lives of the test pilots who served Boeing during that company’s golden years of military and commercial jets will more than excite aviation buffs. She tells her own story in parallel with that of her father, Lew Wallick, one of the 68 January - June 2014 truly great test pilots. There are periods of intense pressure on the flight test community of pilots and engineers, many humorous anecdotes and some downright dangerous moments. From the B-47 to the 767, a well-written sweep of Flight Test history. --Brien Wygle, Boeing test pilot and Vice President of Flight Operations (retired)

Growing Up Boeing: The Early Jet Age Through the Eyes of a Test Pilot’s Daughter is available online at : Amazon; Barnes & Nobel; Smashwords; Kobo; Apple iBooks. ISBN: 978-0-9913648-0-0 (print) $24.95 978-0-9913648-1-7 (ebook) $ 9.99 www.growingupboeing.com

Flight through Fire By Carol Fiore

“Shit happens, and it doesn’t mean it’s somebody’s fault. And in the test flight of an airplane, shit often happens.” - Bombardier Experimental Test Pilot Eric Fiore.

On October 10, 2000, a Challenger 604 experimental test aircraft crashed on takeoff at Wichita’s Mid-Continent Airport, dragging a wing, before turning into a fireball. Barely alive and suffering horrific burns, test pilot Eric Fiore was the only survivor hauled from the wreckage. He has asked his wife to promise him something.

Based on actual events, Flight through Fire is an unforgettable love story centered on a deep devotion to aviation. Carol Fiore vividly describes the aftermath of the accident, the response of a billion dollar company and an entire Kansas town, the intense pressure placed on a hospital, the tragic realities of severe facial burns, the evolution of an eating disorder in her teenage daughter, and the raw emotional pain of her nonreligious family.

Deftly interweaving the past and present, the author takes the reader on a wondrous adventure around the world with a complicated and passionate man who was born to be a pilot. Struggling with the horrors of his injuries, she confronts grief without religion, searching for strength in order to keep her promise to him.

Insightful, brutally honest, and unexpectedly humorous, this is the story of what it takes to be a test pilot, and what it costs to love one.

Flight through Fire is available on Amazon.com ISBN-13: 9780989700405 (Print) $ 17.99 ISBN-13: 9780989700412 (Kindle) $ 5.99 January - June 2014 69 LAST FLIGHTS

Lt Col John Kimberlin “JK” Campbell, USAF (F) passed away by stroke on 25 February 2014 at the age of 92.

John was born in Chattanooga, Tennessee on 24 June 1921 to Winona Hinshaw and George Eugene Campbell. As a youngster John enthusiastically took to the out-of- doors collecting Indian arrowheads and Civil War bullets on Lookout Mountain, fishing, camping, canoeing in a boat he made by hand, defying death on his bicycle, and eventually becoming an Eagle Scout. His older brother teased him endlessly; this may explain JK’s sardonic sense of humor.

His brother George made up for the heckling by taking John on his first flight. (Neither of the boys told their parents beforehand.) This first flying experience hooked JK for life. He used every excuse to fly, especially enjoying the T-39. He was always concerned with safety and has been heard expounding wisdom on the subject: “The problem with the Smoky Mountains is that they are in the wrong place; planes auger in because they are out of gas, or out of oil, or out of luck.”

Holding a Master’s Degree in Mechanical Engineering, and another Master’s in Thermal Engineering from the University of Tennessee, John’s interest (and that of his older brother, George) came from their father who was a registered Design Engineer holding 19 U.S. patents. JK was asked to and stayed on at the University to teach Mechanical Engineering.

Keeping up his scout skills, he built a log cabin for his first home with his new wife, Bette, in Little Switzerland Knoxville, Tennessee and continued to fly whenever possible, being partial to the F-100C.

In 1950 John was called to active duty and went to Korea and Japan. On his return a year and a half later, bringing home a C-140, an engine tore loose. Even with flames licking the plane the entire crew survived, the wreck became famous, and the episode was illustrated in a Steve Canyon comic strip.

JK was then stationed at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, started a family, and was sent to Edwards Air Force Base, where he graduated from USAF Experimental Test Pilot School with class 56A in 1956. His was at Edwards Air Force Base until he was selected to participate in the space program, but John chose alternate orders explaining he would rather be in control of his vehicle while in flight.

Those orders in 1961 led him and his family to England to join the Tripartite Operation of

70 January - June 2014 three countries to test the P1127 Hawker Sydley Harrier, a V/STOL aircraft (a supersonic plane with Vertical, Stall, Take-Off, and Landing capabilities), affectionately called the Jump Jet. That same year JK joined the Society of Experimental Test Pilots.

After years of aiding in the design of the Harrier, John returned to work with NASA testing the 377PG NASA “Pregnant” Guppy transport, and the 377SP Aero Spacelines Super Guppy, a vehicle crucial in getting the United States “to the moon by the end of the decade,” as per President Kennedy’s famous speech, and moved on into the civilian sector as a test pilot for North American Rockwell.

But his favourite was always the Harrier.

John eventually retired from what he called “flying a desk”, to work on his home in Palos Verdes Estates, California, and on a vacation home in Lake Tahoe, Nevada.

On 24 September 1994 John Kimberlin Campbell was made a Fellow of SETP alongside his great friend, A.W. “Bill” Bedford. In appreciation of the work done by the Society, JK became a Trustee of the SETP Scholarship Board in 2000, joining another dear friend, Fred “Fritz” Cuthill, and remained in that capacity for the next 19 years, while keeping up with SETP Symposia world-wide.

John recalled lighting a lot of “acles” referring to being a child acolyte. While this may seem flippant, he so loved to fly that he would also say the closest a man could get to God was to fly over the top of a cloud bank in the moonlight.

He was buried with full honors (Air Medal, Legion of Merit, Korean Service Medal, United Nations Service Medal, Army of Occupation Medal (Japan), Armed Forces Reserve Medal, National Defense Service Medal, Air Force Longevity Service Award Ribbon, and Distinguished Unit Citation Emblem), including a 4-Finger Missing Man fly-over. He rests in Riverside National Cemetery across the road from March Air Base. We are certain we will enjoy the location of his plot – directly under the flight pattern of the main runway.

He is survived by his wife of 60 years and their three daughters, Alexandra, Susan Kimberlin, Katheryn Anne, and by four grandsons, Joshua, Jacob, Ryland, and Zen.

Donations in JK’s name may be made to the SETP Scholarship Fund.

January - June 2014 71 Henry E. (Hank) Chouteau (F) was born on 27 August 1924 and passed away on 15 April 2014.

Hank was an Oklahoman but spent his early years in Wyoming receiving a BS Degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Wyoming. Hank began his flying career in Europe as a member of the Army Air Corps’ 587th Bombardment Squadron. He then joined the Air Force, flying the B -26 Marauders in WWII and P-51 Mustangs during the Korean War.

Hank began working at Northrop in 1952. He was the Northrop Aircraft Division (now Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems) Chief Test Pilot during the 1960 through 1970 period that included the development of fighter aircraft that are still currently in service with the U.S. military and many U.S. Foreign Allies. Hank was Northrop’s lead experimental test pilot during this era, overseeing the flight test development of Northrop fighter aircraft from design through flight test, aerial demonstration and operational employment.

Hank married Betty Ann, a West Virginian, who was a nurse in Germany when Hank was stationed there. He graduated from the U.S. Air Force Test Pilot School in 1958, and then worked on the T-38 trainer and F-5 fighter development programs. Hank flew the first flights on the F-5A, CF-5A, RF-5A and in 1962, flew the first flight on the F-5E International Fighter Aircraft. On all variants of the F-5 series of aircraft, Hank participated as a test pilot on all aspects of flight test to include performance, flying qualities, systems, and ordnance testing.

In June 1974, Hank flew the first flight of the YF-17 advanced fighter design. Hank participated in all aspects of the flight envelope expansion of the YF-17 and developed an air show routine to show the aircraft’s extensive maneuvering characteristics. Hank’s air show routines received much acclaim throughout the international air show world. His efforts were instrumental in convincing the U.S. Navy that a variant of the YF-17 would be ideally suited to their future needs for a carrier based Fighter/Attack aircraft. The follow-on to the YF-17 prototype was the F/A-18 Hornet that is currently in service for the U.S. Navy and other allied countries throughout the world.

Hank was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, the air medal with four clusters, four Battle Stars, the Korean Presidential Unit Citation and the South Vietnamese Cross of Honor, among many other accolades, according to his plaque in the Lancaster Aerospace Walk of Honor.

Hank joined SETP in 1956 and achieved the grade of Fellow in 1979. He retired from Northrop Aircraft in 1982 and lived his retirement years in Santa Fe, New Mexico with his grandson, Graham Chouteau-Lathrop.

72 January - June 2014 James F. “Skeets” Coleman (M) passed away peacefully, of old age, on 13 May 2014. He was just shy of his 96th birthday.

He was born 2 June 1918 in Chicago, IL to Martin L. and Irene “Peggy” (Comiskey) Coleman and was the third of 6 children. The family soon moved to Davenport, IA where he grew up and attended St. Ambrose College and the University of Iowa.

Skeets joined the US Marines in 1941 and served during WWII as a fighter pilot who flew dive bombing missions in the Pacific Theatre. After the war he remained in service in the Marine Reserves and graduated from UCLA with an aeronautical engineering degree. He moved down to Del Mar and ran the Del Mar Airport from 1948 to 1950. As a squadron commander in the Reserves, he eventually rose to the rank of Lt. Colonel and he earned the prestigious Chief of Naval Operations Safety Award in 1960. His squadron flew the swept wing Jet F9F-7 more hours than any squadron, Navy or Marine, regular or reserve, without accident or incident.

During his time in the reserves in the 1950’s, he also became an engineering test pilot for the US Navy and Convair. In this capacity he made history in 1955 by being the first and only pilot to successfully take off and land a VTOL Aircraft. The Convair XFY-1, or “POGO,” as it was unofficially called, was a “tail sitter” jet that took off vertically, straight up and then leveled out, horizontally, for jet speed flight. The awkward and unruly plane is today housed at the Smithsonian’s Air and Space Museum and is presently being refurbished.

During the rest of his test piloting career he also conducted experimental flight tests on the Delta Wing Air Force Fighters, the F102, the R3Y 8 engine flying boat, Convair 340/440/ T29 transport aircraft, and many Navy helicopter and fighter aircraft.

In December of 1955 he was awarded the Harmon International Trophy by President Eisenhower for outstanding achievement as an Aviator for his test flights of the Pogo. For his service as an aviator in WWII he was also awarded two Distinguished Flying Crosses and three Air Medals in 2002.

His civilian career included senior management and marketing positions at several top aerospace companies such as Fairchild and North American Aviation (North American Rockwell). He introduced the first turboprop into the US Airline fleets, the Fokker F-27, and the first jet airplane into the business and corporate fleets, the Saberliner -39(T AF).

As a publisher for Ziff-Davis Publishing in New York, he was responsible for several of their aviation publications including Business and Commercial Aviation. He served on the Board of Directors of National Business Aviation Association, the Aviation/Space Writers Association, and Chapter 14 of the Experimental Aircraft Association. He was one of the founding members of The Society of Experimental Test Pilots and was a lifelong member January - June 2014 73 of the Quiet Birdmen.

Skeets is survived by his two daughters, Nancy Lee Coleman (Don McSorley), Jackie Coleman Remick (Mark), and his son Marty Coleman (Linda). Seven grandchildren, Rebekah Coleman Evans (Patrick) Connie and Chelsea Coleman, Caitlin Reynolds, Tim, John, and Jennifer Remick, and one great grandchild, Vivian Isabel Evans. He is also survived by his sister Betty Coleman McCabe, and over 40 nephews and nieces and their spouses, children and grandchildren.

He follows in death his wife of 37 years, Lee Powell Coleman, his mother and father, three brothers, Robert (Plug) L. Coleman, John (Jack) M. Coleman, Thomas J. Coleman and one sister, Ann Coleman Watson.

William Harvey Dana (F), one of the nation’s most respected aerospace pioneers, passed away on 6 May after a lengthy illness. Born in Pasadena, California, on 3 Nov. 1930, Bill was raised in Bakersfield, California.

Bill’s long and illustrious career at NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center spanned more than 48 years, during which he logged more than 8,000 hours in over 60 different aircraft from helicopters and sailplanes to the hypersonic X-15. Several of the airplanes he flew are displayed at the National Air and Space Museum in Washington, D.C.

Following four years in the Air Force, Bill was hired as an aeronautical research engineer at the NASA High-Speed Flight Station -- now NASA’s Armstrong Flight Research Center -- on 1 Oct. 1958, the very same day that NASA was established. His first assignments included development of a rudimentary performance simulator for the X-15 rocket plane and stability and control research involving the F-107A fighter prototype.

In September 1959 he transferred to the center’s Flight Operations Branch as a research pilot. Over the next three decades he conducted flight experiments in a wide variety of aircraft including the rocket powered X-15 and the wingless lifting bodies. Bill flew to the edge of space in the X-15, attaining a maximum speed of Mach 5.53 (3,897 mph) and a maximum altitude of 306,900 feet (nearly 59 miles). He was then assigned to fly the HL- 10, M2-F3, and X-24B lifting bodies to validate engineers’ assertions that such vehicles could be precisely controlled during approach and landing, and providing NASA with the confidence needed to proceed with designs for the space shuttle orbiter.

In addition he flew hundreds of research flights in advanced jet fighters including the F-14, F-15, F-16, and YF-17. He performed a guest pilot evaluation of the X-29 forward- swept-wing technology demonstrator and flew the pioneering F-18 High Alpha Research Vehicle, the first aircraft to use multi-axis thrust vectoring for vehicle control. Because of his demonstrated leadership and extraordinary service in flight research, Bill was appointed 74 January - June 2014 chief pilot in 1986 with responsibility for recruiting, developing and training the center’s cadre of research pilots. He also served as assistant chief of the Flight Operations Division.

In 1993, he retired from flying to become the center’s chief engineer. In this position, he oversaw all of the center’s research projects and was responsible for flight safety. Bill held this position until his retirement from civil service in May 1998. He returned to the center seven months later as a contractor employee with Analytical Services and Materials, Inc., to write analytical histories of various programs and to evaluate lessons learned. During a period of budget reductions, he gave up his salary and continued to work as a volunteer with the center’s history office.

His numerous awards and honors include the AIAA Haley Space Flight Award (1976), the NASA Exceptional Service Medal (1976), the Lancaster Aerospace Walk of Honor (1993), the NASA Distinguished Service Medal (1997) and the Milton O. Thompson Lifetime Achievement Award (2000). He was honored in the “Salute to Test Pilots” at the Experimental Aircraft Association’s annual convention in 1996.

Bill was awarded civilian astronaut wings on Aug. 23, 2005 for two of his X-15 flights that exceeded 50 miles altitude. That honor came nearly 40 years after the flights occurred because at the time of the X-15 program, NASA did not confer astronaut wings on its pilots.

Bill was a distinguished member of The Society of Experimental Test Pilots. He joined the SETP in 1961 and was elected a Fellow in 1998.

Bill is survived by his wife Judi, daughters Sidney Sparks, Jan Sieving and husband Mark, Leslie Dana-Kirby and husband Shawn, son Matt Dana and wife Krista, sister Toni Dunrud and husband Rich, and seven grandchildren.

(Written by Peter Merlin and Alan Brown, NASA)

Col Frederick Rodgers Dent III (USAF Ret) (M), passed away on 1 Jan. 2014.

Fred was born at Kelly Field, San Antonio, Texas, 3 April 1934, the son of Maj. Gen. Frederick Rodgers Dent Jr. and Corra Lynn Dent, both deceased. As an Air Force brat, Fred spent his early years at Wright Patterson Air Force Base before enrolling at Phillips Academy in Andover Massachusetts. He was accepted at the United States Military Academy in West Point, N.Y., in 1952 and was commissioned as a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force in 1956. His first assignment was flying F-100s at Kadina Air Force Base in the 16th TFS, 18th TFW.

He then returned to the University of Texas for his Master of Science in Aerospace January - June 2014 75 Engineering. The new engineer was assigned in 1963 to Eglin Air Force Base developing and testing weapon systems.

In 1965, Fred was chosen to attend the Aerospace Research Pilot School at Edwards Air Force Base and remained at the school as an academic and flight instructor. While there he was the project pilot on the rocket powered NF-104 aircraft and variable stability trainer NF-106. In 1969, Fred returned to the F-100 as a flight commander and assistant Ops officer in the 308th TFS, Republic of Vietnam. While there, he completed over 350 combat hours.

After returning from Vietnam, Fred attended the Air War College at Maxwell Air Force Base, earning an MBA from Auburn University. His next assignment was to the Pentagon to develop flight programs for the F-15, and YF-16 and YF-17 prototype test programs. In 1974, Fred became a charter member of AFTEC where he managed the F-16 IOT&E program in Albuquerque, N.M. His final assignment was the director of Avionics at Eglin Air Force Base until 1980.

Col. Dent would eventually log more than 3,587 flight hours in 36 different aircraft. He was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross, Meritorious Service Medal with one oak leaf cluster, Air Medal with 12 oak leaf clusters and the Air Force Commendation medal.

Following his Air Force career, Fred established a waterfront oyster bar (The Oar House), continued work in the defense industry with DOP in Shalimar and General Dynamics as an IOT&E program manager in Taiwan. Fred returned to his beloved Poquito Bayou to continue as an instructor for Embry Riddle Aeronautical University.

An avid hunter, fisherman and ‘scratch’ golfer, Fred always led with his sense of humor and a smile. He was a best friend to everyone he ever met, a true officer and a gentleman and his family’s hero.

A memorial in Fred’s honor was held at the Fort Walton Beach Yacht Club. In the summer, Fred will be returned to West Point to be buried next to his father.

He was preceded in death by his sister, Lynn Dent Boykin. He is survived by his beloved wife of 56 years, Marion; son, Rod (Diane) Dent; daughter, Daphne (Lee) Sowell; grandchildren, Madeline and Erick; and brother, David (Lisa) Dent.

76 January - June 2014 Emil B. “Fritz” Feutz (M), was born 1 July 1923, the son of Wallace and Lelah Feutz of Mexico, Missouri. He passed away on Sunday, 1 Sept. 2013 at his home. He was 90.

He was a graduate of the Missouri Military Academy in 1941 and the University of Missouri in 1952 with a B.S.M.E. He had a tour of duty in the U.S. Army from 1943-1946.

Fritz achieved his lifelong ambition to be a test pilot. From 1950-1953 he was an aerodynamicist and Flight Test Engineer for Beech Aircraft. In 1953 he moved to Cessna Aircraft Company as an experimental test pilot, and in 1957 he moved over to McDonnell Aircraft Company. In 1961 he established his own firm, Testair Inc., in St. Louis. Fritz has been a member of SETP since 1973.

In addition to his wife of 66 years, Dorothy Estep Feutz, he is survived by four children, Sheryl Feutz-Harter of Plattsburg, Wally Feutz of Mexico, Connie Feutz of Bellingham, Washington, and Eric Feutz of Fayette; eight grandchildren; and eight great-grandchildren. Emil left his mark on MMA with the creation of the Feutz Aviation Scholarship, awarded to the deserving MMA cadet who participates in the aviation program. The family is requesting memorial contributions to the E.B. Feutz Scholarship, care of Missouri Military Academy, 204 N. Grand Street, Mexico, MO 65265 or the local hospice of their choice.

Hans Häfliger (M), was born born in Unterkulm near Aarau on 30 January 1924 and passed away on 7 March 2014 at his home in Emmenbrücke, Switzerland, 36 days after his 90th birthday. After primary and secondary school, he made an apprenticeship as a mechanic. He started his military training in 1944 and got his wings in November 1945 as a Sergeant.

Serving as a militia pilot on the P-51 Mustang, he studied at the Institute of Technology in Burgdorf and got his degree as a B.S.M.E. in April 1948. In 1950 he became an officer and 1951 he started his career as a test pilot at Emmen. He was immediately involved in production and reception of the De-Havilland DH-100, produced at Emmen under licence. Hans got also involved in the development of the N-20, a double-delta wing fighter/attack plane with four jet engines integrated in the wing. He flew the 2/3 model called Arbalète for investigation of stability and control. He was at the same time involved in the development of the P-16 at Altenrhein, where he made the first flight with the first prototype in April 1955. After 4 months and 22 flights, enlarging the envelope into the supersonic range, he had to eject due to a failure in the January - June 2014 77 fuel system. It was the first ejection in Switzerland.

In the low performance range, Hans was active in the development of the Pilatus P-3, a piston engine trainer for the Swiss Air Force. Since Pilatus had no test pilot at this time, Hans flew the full program after the first few flights up to full certification. The P-3 was a competitor to the Beech Mentor and won the competition.

Hans made evaluation flights on Mystère-IV, Hawker Hunter, SAAB Draken, Mirage III, LTV A-7, Kaman Huskie, Alouette III and Agusta Bell 204.

In 1959 he became Chief Test Pilot of GRD, participated in the Mirage IIIS Holloman Campaign in 1964 where the Hughes Taran System was integrated on a modified cell of Mirage III E to become the Mirage III S. During this campaign he became a member of The Society in September 1964. Hans was Project Pilot for the integration of AIM 9 on the Swiss Hawker Hunter. He made the aerodynamic integration, first separation and first life firing. Production test flights of the Mirage III S and RS, modernization of the Hunter fleet, integration of new air to ground weapons on DH-112, reception flights on Pilatus Porter both with piston and turboprop engines, and the conversion of the Swiss WW II fighter C-36 to Turboprop for target towing for AAA kept him current in a wide range of flight test and brought him an extraordinary experience which he was always ready to share with his collaborators, especially also as Deputy Head of the flight test section of GRD at Emmen. He retired 1984 after 33 years as a test pilot, totalling over 8200 hours in over 50 types of airplanes and helicopters.

In the Swiss Air Force, after his time as a Squadron Pilot, Hans became Flight Safety Officer on a Hunter base and later, as a Lieutenant Colonel, Chief Safety Officer for all bases of the Swiss Air Force.

In the fall of 2013 he gave an interview in the context of “100 years of military aviation in Switzerland” about his life as a pilot. Concluding this interview he said “of all the airplanes and helicopters I flew, I liked the Hawker Hunter best.” True love does not corrode.

Hans is survived by his wife Annemarie, his daughters Helen and Barbara, his son Christian and their children and great children.

Those who knew him, his modesty, his significant smile and his open mind will miss him.

78 January - June 2014 Col. Ralph Hoewing (M) was born in Canton, MO on 3 July 1916 and passed away on 7 December 2009 in Riverside, Calif. at the age of 93.

Raised on the family farm in northeastern Missouri, Ralph grew up fascinated by the exploits of pilots such as Charles Lindbergh, Richard Byrd and Jimmy Doolittle. He took the occasional opportunity to ride as a passenger when barnstormers came through, but being a realistic sort of person, he knew that he was expected to take over the family farm someday and put aside dreams of ever becoming a pilot. Nevertheless, after graduating from high school, he was offered the chance to go to the local college (Culver-Stockton). He took it and completed two years before returning to the farm.

In 1940, those two years of college paid off when the threat of war led to the call for thousands of new Army pilots. Ralph volunteered, was accepted, and reported to Hicks Field for primary training. In January1942, he got his wings and 2nd Lieutenant’s bars at Kelly Field (42-A) and was immediately assigned to Wright Field as a test pilot. He remained at Wright Field throughout the war and in September 1944 was assigned as Chief of the new Flight Test Performance School. In January 1945, he attended the RAF Empire Test Pilots’ School at Boscombe Down and Farnborough, England, returning to Wright in January 1946 as Commandant of the Test Pilot School, a position he held until mid-1947.

In 1947 he attended the University of Missouri to complete his degree, graduating in 1949 (B.S. Eng.). Ralph was assigned to the Civil Engineering Officer at FEAMCOM, Tachikawa AFB, Japan in early 1950 and on June 28 began five months of flying cargo runs between Japan and Korea (a total of 40 runs). He returned to the U.S. in 1953, attended Air Command and Staff School and was an instructor at the AF Institute of Technology until 1956, then spent the next five years involved with Air Force efforts to develop a nuclear airplane program. In 1961 he was assigned to AF Space Systems Division in El Segundo, California, becoming Deputy Director, Gemini Launch Vehicle Directorate and in 1964 continued his work with the space program as Vice Commander, 6555th Aerospace Test Wing, Patrick AFB, Florida.

Following his retirement in 1967 he returned to the Los Angeles area and began a new career as a public school math teacher until he retired for good in 1974.

Ralph and Janet, his wife of 63 years, moved to the Air Force Village West in Riverside in 1990 and spent many happy years with friends there. Janet also died in 2009. He is survived by his daughters Susan and Karen, son Bob, four grandchildren and two great- grandchildren.

January - June 2014 79 The Honorable John E. “Jack” Krings (F) took his last flight on 7 March 2014. Mr. Krings was born in Pittsburgh, PA on 2 April 1930. Just as he lived his life, Jack fought complications from Myelodysplastic Syndrome with dignity, courage and tenacity. His life was one of accomplishment, service to his country and love of his family.

Jack graduated from Louisiana State University in 1952 with a B.S. in Chemistry and Physics and a minor in Math. His flying career began with U.S. Air Force flight training in 1953. Jack served for thirteen years as an Air Force and Air National Guard combat ready fighter pilot, test pilot, nuclear weapons expert and operational leader. He was an Air Force fighter pilot from 1952 to 1956 and saw combat in Korea. He was a fighter pilot with the Air National Guard until 1966.

Jack amassed 30 years’ experience in aerospace design, engineering, testing, marketing and management with McDonnell Douglas Corporation. Jack joined McDonnell in 1956 as an engineer then progressed from production test pilot to experimental pilot to Chief Test Pilot and Director of Flight Operations. He personally invented aircraft systems that are the standard for all contemporary military and emerging civil aircraft. As a pilot at Douglas Aircraft, he flew F-3H Demons and F-101 Voodoo’s. He attended the Navy Test Pilot School while at McDonnell and when he returned participated in the F-4 Phantom development program. Along with the F-4 tests, he helped develop the F-15 Eagle and did the spin tests on the aircraft earning the SETP Iven C. Kincheloe Award in 1975. He acquired unique expertise and experience with unqueried analysis doing these F-15 spin tests and went on to participate in the design and spinning of many contemporary fighter planes. For example, Jack planned and executed significant testing programs for the F-18 and AV-8B Harrier fighters. Jack undertook the maiden flight of the first F-18 Hornet at Lambert Field, St. Louis on November 18, 1978. He was promoted to Chief Test Pilot in 1962. Jack retired from McDonnell Douglas in 1985 having flown fighters continuously for over 30 years.

Mr. Krings was appointed by President Reagan as the First Director of Operational Test & Evaluation, at the level of Assistant Secretary of Defense. In this role, he worked directly for the Secretary of Defense and the Congress, and was a member of the Defense Resources Board and the Defense Acquisition Board. He evaluated and reported independently to the Secretary of Defense and the Congress (to include Caspar Weinberger, Frank Carlucci and Dick Cheney) on all major weapons systems operational test results regarding effectiveness and suitability. It was with regret that then President Bush accepted Mr. Krings’ resignation with the following words: “As the first Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, you had the difficult task of setting the course. You have often said your allegiance was to the soldier, sailor, Marine and airman. You served them well, insuring that systems procured are adequately tested and proven effective for combat. You set a tone of objectivity and discipline that will be a standard for those to follow. Through your independence and the challenges you overcame, you established a legacy which will benefit the country well 80 January - June 2014 into the future.”

In 1989, Jack formed Krings Corporation, a consulting firm in Austin, Texas which had clients that included key executives in the Department of Defense, most prime defense contractors, the FAA and NASA. Since 1989, he has provided expertise ranging from acquisition reform strategy, corporate re-engineering and technical systems develop to test and evaluation integration. With the transformation of our National Defense, Jack became a much sought after consultant with Missile Defense, Information Security, Homeland Defense, and Joint Program Policies and Management. His focus also expanded to include Information Assurance, a critical element in the escalating challenge of cyber-terrorism.

Jack joined SETP in 1975, upgraded to Associate Fellow in 1978 and became a Fellow in 1981. He has received the Iven C. Kincheloe Award, the J. H. Doolittle Award, the Tenhoff Award, and was presented twice with the Department of Defense Medal for Distinguished Public Service.

Jack is survived by his wife of 27 years, Barbara, his sons Kent, Kirk and Joseph Kerry. He was predeceased by his daughter Karen in 2006.

Memorial contributions may be made in memory of Jack to the Leukemia Society, South Central Texas Austin Chapter, 8001 Centre Park Drive, Ste 150, Austin, Texas 78754, (512) 491-6610 or by visiting www.lls.org.

David Lockspeiser (F), who took his last flight on 23 March, was one of Britain’s most distinguished test pilots as well as being an innovative aircraft designer and engineer who designed and built the Boxer utility aircraft, an “Aerial Land Rover.” He was 86.

Originally named the LDA-01 or Land Development Aircraft, the Boxer was intended as a multi-purpose aircraft for developing and agricultural countries. The single seat canard tandem-wing design placed the large wing at the back of the plane on top of the fuselage with the small wing at the front underneath. The large rear wing was exactly two of the smaller at the front, making them interchangeable for easy assembly from a kit in local agricultural conditions. Safe, hard wearing and inexpensive it had the ability to fly at low speeds making it suited to a variety of rural uses including crop spraying and transporting people, animals and goods. With help from others, notably his mechanic friend George Smith, David built a 70% size prototype in a Nissan hut at Dunsfold aerodrome where he was working for Hawker’s as a test pilot. On completion the hut had to be taken down to free the plane. David flew it for the first time in August 1971 at BAC Wisley.

By 1975 numerous developments and a Lycoming 160 bhp engine made it ready to fly at the Paris Airshow in the hope of attracting commercial backing. On the day before the January - June 2014 81 public were admitted, and just as David was walking to the aircraft to prepare for takeoff, a swarm of bees landed on the cockpit canopy completely covering it. That day’s flying was abandoned. When the bees were finally removed David taxied the plane around the airfield only for a part of the undercarriage to collapse. The bees had saved him from a serious accident had he flown. Developments were continued until 1987 when the aircraft was destroyed during a suspicious fire in the hangar at Old Sarum where it was being stored. David was dismayed to discover that contrary to his belief it had not been insured.

David was born in Farnborough, Hampshire, on April 12, 1927, the only son of Ben (later Sir Ben) and Elsie Lockspeiser, and younger brother of Judith and Frida. He studied at the Miles Aeronautical Technical School from 1945 and contrary to his father’s wishes had developed a passion to fly from an early age. In 1949, with his father unwilling, legendary test pilot Eric “Winkle” Brown signed David’s papers to join the RAF. Brown later commented: “It was obvious that this young man had the ‘right stuff ’ - and so it proved” . David was posted to Fassberg in Germany with 118 Squadron, returning to the UK and 245 Squadron in 1953. He qualified as a Pilot Attack Instructor and Instrument Ratings Examiner before leaving the RAF in 1955 with the rank of Flight Lieutenant to join Hawker Aircraft Ltd as a production and development test pilot on Hunters.

David’s work testing Hunters, delivering new aircraft to customers, training their pilots and problem solving took him all over the world. During a trip to India and the Middle East in 1959 he noted ruefully that the sign above the door of the Taj Mahal Hotel in Bombay where he was staying said “Dogs and South Africans not admitted”. Alcohol was banned there at the time and he was told the only way he could have a drink was to get a certificate from the police station stating that he was an alcoholic, a challenge he accepted and overcame.

While In India he got news that the Burmese Air Force Sea Furies had been grounded after a series of unexplained fatal accidents. He was asked to go and investigate, discovering that the pilots had made no radio contact before they crashed. David found they were probably unconscious due to carbon dioxide poisoning from badly serviced parts and their failure to wear oxygen masks. Once the planes were fully serviced and the correct procedures explained the planes were fit to fly. However a local soothsayer had said the accidents were caused by ghosts of the dead and the pilots were not keen to fly again.

In 1968 he joined the Civil Aviation Division of the British Aircraft Corporation (BAC) as a communications pilot. He returned to development and testing in 1977 when he moved Singapore as a test pilot for Lockheed Air Services developing extensive upgrades to the Singapore Air Force Hunters strike capability. He took to the Singapore life style and profited from its location to further his Scuba diving hobby off the coast of Malaysia, and donning his back pack to trek far and wide in the region.

He returned to the UK from 1984, moving back to the family home in Farnborough on the death of his father in 1990. He had been forced to give up motor racing hobby earlier in life when Hawker’s frowned on the risk to one of their best pilots but was now free to drive his Lotus Elite on Rally’s across Europe and the UK. He was an enthusiastic 82 January - June 2014 member of many motor and aircraft organisations. David joined SETP in 1987 and was upgraded to Fellow in 2010.

Altogether he flew around 100 different aircraft (160 including variants) over 7,000 hours. He never stopped designing aeroplanes and had been working on the latest project until a few weeks before his death.

David is survived by his son Jerry Lockspeiser and daughter “Beccy” Lockspeiser. Memorial donations may be made to the RAF Benevolent Fund , 67 Portland Place, London W1B 1AR.

John I. Miller (F), was born on 12 February 1932 and died on 9 February 2014.

John’s five-decade-long flying career began in Great Britain, migrated across the Atlantic Ocean to Edwards Air Force Base, and culminated in his retirement in 2002 as an Engineering Test Pilot for The Boeing Company. Along the way, he logged more than 13,500 hours as a pilot in over 120 aircraft types.

John attended the Empire Test Pilots’ School at Farnborough, England, and then was assigned to the Royal Air Force Flight Test Center at Boscombe Down. Among many aircraft he flew were the Canberra (USAF B-57)---the first model to fly across the Atlantic in both directions in one day and to exceed 60,000 ft and 70,000 ft altitude---and the Vulcan delta-winged jet bomber which was operated by the Royal Air Force from 1953 until 1984. He served as the TSR-2 project test pilot and as a captain in all “V” bombers.

Between 1966 and 1970 John was the RAF Exchange Test Pilot at Edwards Air Force Base, California, where he flew many interesting aircraft. He was the Launch Commander/ check pilot on the B-52 mother ship to the famed X-15, HL-10, and X-24. He also was the B-58 chase pilot for XB-70 bomber testing. During his busy years at Edwards John also served as the USAF Project Pilot and IP on programs from the EC 47Q&R and HC- 130H to the C-5A Galaxy airlifter.

From 1970 to 1997 John was an engineering test pilot at McDonnell Douglas (MDC), where he completed notable first flights on the MD-87 twin-jet, DC-10 Series 30 tri-jet and the KC-10 Wing Aerial Refueling Pods (WARPS) tanker. While at MDC he served as an experimental and production test pilot, check airman and training pilot. As a consultant to the FAA he served as a DER (designated engineering representative) test pilot. After its launch in 1986 John became the MD-11 tri-jet Chief Engineering Test Pilot. In this role he managed the MD-11 flight deck design and flight-testing. He completed the MD-11 first flight and other critical tests, leading to certification of the aircraft in 1990 for use in airline service.

January - June 2014 83 In 1997 McDonnell Douglas merged into The Boeing Company from where John retired five years later.

John joined SETP in 1967 and was made a Fellow in 1992.

John is survived by his wife Madge, two sons, Nicholas (Angela) and Timothy (Esmeralda), grandaughters Katrina, Jennifer and Nova, grandson Aaron, and two brand new great grandchildren.

Peter T. Reynolds (F) was born on 25 May 1944 in Panama City, Panama and took his last flight on 10 April 2014.

Pete received his BS degree in Engineering from Purdue in 1966 and a MS degree in Mechanical Engineering from the University of Colorado in 1968. He was “Outstanding Graduate” USAF pilot training in 1969. He flew combat tours in Southeast Asia in 1970-71. He was “Top Graduate” pilot instructor training in 1971. Pete was a USAF instructor pilot from 1971-72 and in 1973 joined Gates Learjet as a Production and Avionics Test Pilot. Pete became an Experimental Test Pilot in 1975 and Chief Experimental Test Pilot in 1989.

In addition to 7 first flights in prototype jets, Pete’s major flight test accomplishments include serving as the project engineering test pilot on the Learjet Model 24E/F in 1975. He flew the 51,000 metric feet certification program, obtaining the first FAA approval to operate civil aircraft above 45,100 feet.

In 1977 he performed the first flight of the Learjet Model 28 – the first jet to fly with winglets. Along with NASA Astronaut Neil Armstrong, he took the Model 28 to 50,000 feet in a little over 12 minutes, setting 5 world class records in one day.

In 1989 he was named Manager of Learjet Engineering Flight Test. In 1994, following the acquisition of Learjet by Bombardier, he was promoted to Director of Flight Test with responsibility for consolidating the separate flight test organizations of Canadair, de Havilland and Learjet into a single operating unit called the Bombardier Flight Test Center. He was appointed Vice President of Flight Test for Bombardier Aerospace in 1996.

Pete joined SETP in 1976 and was upgraded to Fellow in 1993. In 1999 he won the J. H. Doolittle Award. He has served as Central Section Chairman, Vice Chairman and Treasurer and presented many presentations at annual symposia. He was also the recipient of the AIAA Flight Test Engineering Excellence Award and the Kansas Governor’s Aviation Honors Award. Pete was enshrined posthumously into the Kansas Aviation Hall of Fame at the Kansas Aviation Museum on 15 April 2014.

84 January - June 2014 Memorial donations may be made to: Homes for Our Troops, 6 Main Street, Tauton, MA 02780-2733.

Pete was a caring husband to his wife Becky, and sweet father to his daughter Kelly and son Todd. He is sorely missed by his many friends and colleagues.

Major General Gregorii Alexanderovich Sedov (HF), took his last flight on 10 March 2014. He was 97.

General Sedov learned to fly in the mid-1930’s and studied aerospace engineering prior to World War II. At the outbreak of the war, he entered the Soviet Air Force and became an Air Force test pilot. He performed flight tests in all Soviet fighter aircraft and evaluated almost all Allied fighter airplanes, including the P-38, P-39, P-47 and P-51, Spitfire, Hurricane and others. He also evaluated captured German aircraft, which included various models of the Me-109, FW-190, Me-110 and Me-262.

Following the war, he remained an Air Force test pilot and participated in test and evaluation of the first generation of Soviet jet-powered airplanes. In 1950 he joined the Mikoyan Design Bureau, becoming Chief Test Pilot flying the M.G 15/17/19/21 and others, before ending his test pilot career in 1959.

In 1951, Gregorii flew the SI-02, then became the lead pilot for all phases of flight test for the MiG-17 prototypes and series fighters. He flew the Mikoyan experimental aircraft series designated M and SM-1 through SM-9, which led to the definition of the MiG-19 configuration, and then flew the first flight of the MiG-19 prototype (SM-9) and participated in all of the subsequent test and development phases of that airplane. Beginning in 1954, he participated in flight tests of the Je- series of experimental airplanes which culminated in the Mig-21. These tests included first flights of the Je-2A, the Je-4 and the Je-6, the prototype of the first generation MiG-21F.

He was Deputy Chief Designer of the A.I. Mikoyan Design Bureau for flight testing from 1958 – 1972, and became Chief Designer of the M.G 23 and 27 in 1972.

General Sedov was a Distinguished Test Pilot of the Soviet Union, and was named a Hero of the Soviet Union.

January - June 2014 85 H.E. “Tat” Tatman (M), test pilot extraordinaire and loving husband passed away on 31 January at the age of 92.

He retired from United Airlines in 1981, and continued his long standing production flight test career into experimental flight test, expert witness testimony, and post crash investigation in to his 70’s. He continued flight instruction in general aviation aircraft in to his eighties.

Tat was committed to following in his father’s footsteps and becoming a Navy Pilot. However, after the attack on Pearl Harbor, the Navy had thousands more pilot recruits than it needed. The Army, however, did not, and Tat joined the Army Air Corps in 1942.

After completing Basic and Advanced training, he was assigned to Instructor status (a huge disappointment as everyone wanted combat assignments) and taught Instrument and Multi- Engine courses. He joined the First Combat Cargo Squadron supplying forward fighter bases under General Stillwell and served in India and China flying the C-46 and C-47.

He returned home in 1945 looking to join the airlines, as his wife frowned on continuing service in the military. He was hired by United Airlines in November 1946. In the first 10 years he was furloughed 3 times. Eventually he was recommended to join United’s Flight Test Engineering Department in San Francisco. There he flew every seat in every airplane United operated until he retired. His specialty airplane was the B-747. He attended the Boeing Pilot School, Boeing Mechanic School, and United Pilot training for the 747. He accepted more B-747-100 and 200 models than any other airline test pilot.

Tat joined SETP in 1985 after participating in a lengthy DC-8 Quiet Nacelle project with Bob Laidlaw at Mojave. He documented the experience in a paper presented at a Seattle SETP meeting in June, 1999 entitled, “50 Hours of Uncoordinated Flight, DC-8 Sideslip Testing in Extremis (A Love Story).

Tat was married four times. He is survived by Robin, his fourth wife who according to Tat, “was not the first, but would be the last.” And just so you don’t think he was careless with the ladies, he was married to each wife an average of 15 years, and the last wife 25 years. He also has 3 wonderful sons, with several grand children and great-grandchildren all stemming from his first wife, Rosella.

He ordered his martini’s dry, shaken, very cold, and naked; and he drank anything that poured. He never let a lady sit without pulling a chair out, and always kissed their hands on the first introduction.

He was a consummate gentleman, loving partner and father, superior line pilot, outstanding test pilot, and excellent instructor. He positively influenced a current generation of airline and military pilots with his ferocious pursuit of excellence and integrity both in and out of the cockpit. His sharp wit and humor never left him.

He will be in our hearts always. 86 January - June 2014 William Reginald “Bill” Yoakley (M) was born on 10 October 1921 in Tampa, Florida in the middle of a hurricane and took his last flight on 1 May 2014. He was 92.

He joined the Army Air Corps when WWII broke out. He soon began instructing pilots for battle. After the war he joined the Florida Air National Guard and participated in the formation of the first jet fighter flight demonstration team, The Florida Rockets, of which he proudly flew formation and solo acts across the country from Florida to California.

When the Korean War began, his squadron was called up and he went on to fly 100 missions, bailed out into Wonsan Harbor and was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. He was honorably discharged from the USAF with the rank of Major.

In peacetime, Bill enjoyed an adventurous career as a Test Pilot for North American Aviation, testing F-86 and F-100s. He was the first person to dead-stick a production F-100A successfully into a 5200 foot strip at Los Angeles International Airport. He worked with Bob Hoover in customer relations, Sabreliner production and then retired at a very young age of 58, to once again begin new careers of managing Best Western Hotels and the Fighter Aces Museum in Mesa, Arizona until the age of 85.

His favorite hobbies were boating, sailing, scuba diving and wood working, among numerous others. He joined SETP in 1967.

Bill was predeceased by his brother David, sister Hilda, wife Dorothy, two children from his first marriage, William and Anne O Hara. He is survived now by three children from his marriage to Dottie; sons Don Yoakley, his wife Kathy, residing in Jacksonville, FL; David Yoakley and his wife Debbie, residing in Torrance CA; and daughter Trisa Mills, residing in San Diego, CA. He has eight wonderful grand children, Billy, Charlie, Kristin, Natalie, Haylie, Taylor, Chad and Vickie and three great grandchildren, Brad, Claire, and Dylan.

He was an amazing, kind man, and a great father who will be missed by many. He had a great ride on this planet. His favorite saying “use a little bottom rudder in the turn to final... along with so on and so forth.” His wishes were for no service. Please, no groaning, moaning or tears necessary, just remember the good times and cheer me on, I have never flown this high before. His ashes will be scattered over the beautiful big Pacific Ocean as requested.

Donations in Bill’s name may be made to the Wounded Warriors Project at www. woundedwarriorproject.org/Donate.

January - June 2014 87 The Society of Experimental Test Pilots PRSRT STD P.O. Box 986 U.S. POSTAGE Lancaster, CA 93584-0986 PAID SUNDANCE PRESS 85719

SETP CORPORATE MEMBERS Advanced Training Systems JT3, LLC International Krings Corporation Aerospace Services International Lockheed Martin Corporation AeroTEC Marinvent Corporation Air Force Test Pilot School (India) Martin-Baker Aircraft Company Ltd. Airborne Systems Group MIT Lincoln Laboratory Airbus SAS Modern Technology Solutions, Inc. ALCAT, Inc. Mojave Air and Space Port Alenia Aeronautica S.p.A. National Aerospace Laboratory NLR Aviation Partners, Inc. National Test Pilot School Bell Helicopter - A Textron Company Northrop Grumman Corporation Butler Parachute Systems, Inc. Raisbeck Engineering, Inc. Calspan Corporation Saab Aeronautics Clay Lacy Aviation Safe Flight Instrument Corporation David Clark Company Incorporated Sage Cheshire, Inc. DCS Corporation Scaled Composites, LLC EADS Deutschland GmbH Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation ETPS Software Engineering Institute eXAQT Consultant Group Sunshine Aero Industries, Inc. ForeFeathers Enterprises Symbolic Displays, Incorporated GE Aviation Test Flying Academy of South Africa General Atomics Aeronautical (TFASA) Systems, Inc. Thales VISIONIX, Inc. Gentex Corporation The Boeing Company Gladstone Aerospace Corporation The Johns Hopkins Univ./APL Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation The Spaceship Company, LLC Honda Aircraft Company Thornton Corporation Honeywell Aerospace Flight Test Tiger Century Aircraft, Inc. Operations Universal Avionics Systems Corp. International Test Pilot School Virgin Galactic, LLC Canada Ltd. Wyle IPEV - Flight Test and Research XCOR Aerospace Institute