DOCSLIB.ORG

High-Lift Systems on Commercial Subsonic Airliners

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
High-Lift Systems on Commercial Subsonic Airliners , j / ,_ / t - ¸ /I i NASA Contractor Report 4746 High-Lift Systems on Commercial Subsonic Airliners Peter K. C. Rudolph CONTRACT A46374D(LAS) September 1996 National Aeronautics and Space Administration NASAContractorReport4746 High-Lift Systems on Commercial Subsonic Airliners Peter K. C. Rudolph PKCR, Inc. 13683 18th Ave. SW Seattle, WA 98166 Prepared for Ames Research Center CONTRACT A46374D(LAS) September 1996 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Ames Research Center Moffett Field, California 94035-1000 Table of Contents Page Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 3 Chapter 1 Types of High-Lift Systems: Their Geometry, Functions, and Design Criteria ...... 3 1.1 Types of High-Lift Systems ............................................................................. 3 1.1.1 Leading-Edge Devices ........................................................................ 1.1.2 Trailing-Edge Devices ........................................................................ 10 19 1.2 Support and Actuation Concepts ..................................................................... 1.2.1 Leading-Edge Devices ........................................................................ 22 1.2.2 Trailing-Edge Devices ........................................................................ 26 1.3 Geometric Parameters of High-Lift Devices ................................................... 36 1.4 Design Requirements and Criteria for High-Lift Systems ............................... 37 1.4.1 Failure Modes and Fail-Safe Design .................................................... 37 1.4.2 Protrusions and Flow Blockage ........................................................... 39 39 1.4.3 Spanwise High-Lift Continuity ............................................................ 1.5 Characteristics and Constraints of High-Lift Devices ..................................... 40 1.6 Interactions between Leading- and Trailing-Edge Devices ............................. 43 45 Chapter 2 Review of High-Lift Systems on Current Commercial Airliners ............................. 45 2.1 Boeing Airplanes .............................................................................................. 2.1.1 Boeing 707-320 .................................................................................... 45 2.1.2 Boeing 727 ........................................................................................... 45 5O 2.1.3 Boeing 737 ........................................................................................... 2.1.4 Boeing 747 ........................................................................................... 51 2.1.5 Boeing 757 ........................................................................................... 54 56 2.1.6 Boeing 767 ........................................................................................... 59 2.1.7 Boeing 777 ........................................................................................... 2.2 McDonnell Douglas Airplanes ......................................................................... 61 2.2.1 MD-80/87 ............................................................................................. 61 2.2.2 DC-10/MD-11 ...................................................................................... 63 2.2.3 YC-15 and C-17 Trailing-Edge Flaps .................................................. 65 2.3 Lockheed L1011 .............................................................................................. 65 67 2.4 Airbus Airplanes .............................................................................................. 2.4.1 Airbus A300 ......................................................................................... 67 2.4.2 Airbus A310-300 .................................................................................. 68 2.4.3 Airbus A320 ......................................................................................... 68 2.4.4 Airbus A321 ......................................................................................... 72 2.4.5 Airbus A330/340 .................................................................................. 74 75 2.5 British Aerospace BAe146 and RJ70/80/100 .................................................. 77 2.6 Ilyushin 96 ........................................................................................................ 77 2.7 Performance Comparison ................................................................................. 80 2.8 High-Lift System Impact on Noise .................................................................. °,° 111 2.9 Lessons Learned from Review ......................................................................... 81 2.9.1 Leading-Edge Devices ......................................................................... 81 2.9.2 Trailing-Edge Devices ......................................................................... 82 2.9.3 Boeing Summary .................................................................................. 84 2.9.4 McDonnell Douglas Summary ............................................................. 85 2.9.5 Lockheed Summary ............................................................................. 85 2.9.6 Airbus Summary .................................................................................. 86 2.9.7 British Aerospace Summary ................................................................ 86 Chapter 3 Conceptual Studies for Improved High-Lift Systems ............................................... 87 3.1 Summary of Studies ......................................................................................... 87 3.2 Leading-Edge Devices ..................................................................................... 89 3.2.1 Krueger Flaps ....................................................................................... 89 3.2.2 Tapered Slats and Conical Slat Motion ................................................ 91 3.2.3 Shallow Slat ......................................................................................... 93 3.3 Trailing-Edge Devices ..................................................................................... 95 3.3.1 Flap Shapes .......................................................................................... 95 3.3.2 Spanwise Continuity ............................................................................ 98 3.3.3 Flap Airloads and Their Reaction into the Flap Mechanisms .............. 99 3.4 Trailing-Edge Flap Mechanisms ...................................................................... 100 3.4.1 Summary of Flap Mechanisms ............................................................ 100 3.4.2 Design for Aerodynamic Efficiency .................................................... 101 3.4.3 Design for Reliability and Good Wear Characteristics ........................ 102 3.4.4 Design for Low Cost ............................................................................ 103 3.4.5 Mechanism Selection ........................................................................... 104 3.4.6 Simple, Four-Bar Linkages .................................................................. 104 3.4.7 The Link/Track Mechanism--Trailing-Edge Flap Mechanism of the Future? ....................................................................................... 106 3.4.8 Link/Track Mechanism versus Simple, Four-Bar Linkage .................. 113 Chapter 4 Economics of High-Lift Systems .............................................................................. 117 4.1 Tendencies in High-Lift-System Development ............................................... 117 4.2 Weight Estimating for High-Lift Devices ........................................................ 118 4.2.1 Weights of Trailing-Edge Flaps ........................................................... 118 4.2.2 Weights of Leading-Edge Devices ...................................................... 120 4.2.3 Weight Scaling for Airplane Size ........................................................ 122 4.2.4 Impact of Weight Reduction on the Airplane ...................................... 122 4.3 Importance of Takeoff L/D and Maximum Lift Coefficient ............................ 122 4.4 Cost Model for Manufacturing Cost ................................................................ 123 4.5 Relating Cost Model to Real Airplane ............................................................. 124 4.6 Part Count ........................................................................................................ 125 4.6.1 Trailing-Edge Flaps .............................................................................. 125 4.6.2 Leading-Edge Devices ......................................................................... 130 4.6.3 Part-Count Scaling for Airplane Size ................................................... 131 iv 4.7 Calculating High-Lift-System Cost for an Airplane of 250,000 lb Gross Weight .................................................................................................... 131 4.7.1 Determination of the Constants ............................................................ 131 4.7.2 Weight, Part Count, and Manufacturing Cost of High-Lift Systems ................................................................................................ 132 4.8 Impact of Weight and Cost Reductions on the Airplane
Load more

Recommended publications
  • STOL CH 701 / 750 Rudder Assembly Manual
    STOL CH 701 / 750 Rudder Parts are labeled for easy identification with a part number and description: Part number example: 7R2-1 Rudder Spar 7 - STOL CH 701 model. R - Rudder section of the aircraft drawings. 2 - Page 2 of the Rudder drawings. 1 - Part 1 on page 2. Kit parts that make up the rudder skeleton. Drawing 7-R-0 is for reference only: for building sequence use this step by step photo assembly guide. This manual has been prepared for assembly of the Rudder Starter Kit supplied with the predrilled Rudder Spar, (starting May 2007), and match drilled Bottom Rib, (starting Jan. 2008). Previous versions did not include the predrilled Rudder Spar or match drilled Bottom Rib. In addition to the photo assembly guide, also refer to drawings 7-R-1, 7-R-2 and 7-R-3 (701) or 75-R-1, 75-R-2, and 75RA-1 (750) (drawing number in right bottom corner of the title block). Always refer to the drawings for technical information: material thickness, part dimension, part orientation, layout distances, and rivet sizes, location and spacing. STOL Zenith Aircraft Company Revision 1.7 (02/2010) RUDDER SKELETON, 7-R-2 CH 701 / 750 www.zenithair.com © 2005 Zenith Aircraft Co SECTION 1 - Page 1 of 12 7R2-1 Spar or 75R2-3 Spar Spar Web - term used to refer to the flat area between the flanges. Tool: half round 6” fine (smooth) double cut hand file. Use a file to remove any burs on the edges of the parts and lightly round off corners.
    [Show full text]
  • 08/31/88 Delta
    NextPage LivePublish Page 1 of 1 08/31/88 Delta http://hfskyway.faa.gov/NTSB/lpext.dll/NTSB/1328?fn=document-frame.htm&f=templ... 2/7/2005 NextPage LivePublish Page 1 of 1 Official Accident Report Index Page Report Number NTSB/AAR-89/04 Access Number PB89-910406 Report Title Delta Air Lines, Inc. Boeing 727-232, N473DA, Dallas- Fort Worth International Airport, Texas August 31, 1988 Report Date September 26, 1989 Organization Name National Transportation Safety Board Bureau of Accident Investigation Washington, D.C. 20594 WUN 4965A Sponsor Name NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, D.C. 20594 Report Type Highway Accident Report August 17, 1988 Distribution Status This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161 Report Class UNCLASSIFIED Pg Class UNCLASSIFIED Pages 135 Abstract This report examines the crash of Delta flight 1141 while taking off at the Dallas-Forth Worth, Texas on August 31, 1988. The safety issues discussed in the report include flightcrew procedures; wake vortices; engine performance; airplane flaps and slats; takeoff warning system; cockpit discipline; aircraft rescue and firefighting; emergency evacuation; and survival factors. Recommendations addressing these issues were made to the Federal Aviation Administration, the American Association of Airport Executives, the Airport Operations Council International, and the National Fire Protection Association. http://hfskyway.faa.gov/NTSB/lpext.dll/NTSB/1328/1329?f=templates&fn=document-fr..
    [Show full text]
  • Application to the Flight
    Journal name 000(00):1–13 A Methodology for Vehicle and Mission ©The Author(s) 2010 Reprints and permission: Level Comparison of More Electric sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav DOI:doi number Aircraft Subsystem Solutions - Application http://mms.sagepub.com to the Flight Control Actuation System Imon Chakraborty∗ and Dimitri N. Mavris† Aerospace Systems Design Laboratory, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332, USA Mathias Emeneth‡ and Alexander Schneegans§ PACE America Inc., Seattle, WA 98115, USA Abstract As part of the More Electric Initiative, there is a significant interest in designing energy-optimized More Electric Aircraft, where electric power meets all non-propulsive power requirements. To achieve this goal, the aircraft subsystems must be analyzed much earlier than in the traditional design process. This means that the designer must be able to compare competing subsystem solutions with only limited knowledge regarding aircraft geometry and other design characteristics. The methodology presented in this work allows such tradeoffs to be performed, and is driven by subsystem requirements definition, component modeling and simulation, identification of critical or constraining flight conditions, and evaluation of competing architectures at the vehicle and mission level. The methodology is applied to the flight control actuation system, where electric control surface actuators are likely to replace conventional centralized hydraulics in future More Electric Aircraft. While the potential benefits of electric actuation are generally accepted, there is considerable debate regarding the most suitable electric actuator - electrohydrostatic or electromechanical. These two actuator types form the basis of the competing solutions analyzed in this work, which focuses on a small narrowbody aircraft such as the Boeing 737-800.
    [Show full text]
  • Home at Airbus
    Journal of Aircraft and Spacecraft Technology Original Research Paper Home at Airbus 1Relly Victoria Virgil Petrescu, 2Raffaella Aversa, 3Bilal Akash, 4Juan M. Corchado, 2Antonio Apicella and 1Florian Ion Tiberiu Petrescu 1ARoTMM-IFToMM, Bucharest Polytechnic University, Bucharest, (CE), Romania 2Advanced Material Lab, Department of Architecture and Industrial Design, Second University of Naples, 81031 Aversa (CE), Italy 3Dean of School of Graduate Studies and Research, American University of Ras Al Khaimah, UAE 4University of Salamanca, Spain Article history Abstract: Airbus Commerci al aircraft, known as Airbus, is a European Received: 16-04-2017 aeronautics manufacturer with headquarters in Blagnac, in the suburbs of Revised: 18-04-2017 Toulouse, France. The company, which is 100% -owned by the industrial Accepted: 04-07-2017 group of the same name, manufactures more than half of the airliners produced in the world and is Boeing's main competitor. Airbus was Corresponding Author: founded as a consortium by European manufacturers in the late 1960s. Florian Ion Tiberiu Petrescu Airbus Industry became a SAS (simplified joint-stock company) in 2001, a ARoTMM-IFToMM, Bucharest subsidiary of EADS renamed Airbus Group in 2014 and Airbus in 2017. Polytechnic University, Bucharest, (CE) Romania BAE Systems 20% of Airbus between 2001 and 2006. In 2010, 62,751 Email: [email protected] people are employed at 18 Airbus sites in France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Belgium (SABCA) and Spain. Even if parts of Airbus aircraft are essentially made in Europe some come from all over the world. But the final assembly lines are in Toulouse (France), Hamburg (Germany), Seville (Spain), Tianjin (China) and Mobile (United States).
    [Show full text]
  • The Difference Between Higher and Lower Flap Setting Configurations May Seem Small, but at Today's Fuel Prices the Savings Can Be Substantial
    THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN HIGHER AND LOWER FLAP SETTING CONFIGURATIONS MAY SEEM SMALL, BUT AT TODAY'S FUEL PRICES THE SAVINGS CAN BE SUBSTANTIAL. 24 AERO QUARTERLY QTR_04 | 08 Fuel Conservation Strategies: Takeoff and Climb By William Roberson, Senior Safety Pilot, Flight Operations; and James A. Johns, Flight Operations Engineer, Flight Operations Engineering This article is the third in a series exploring fuel conservation strategies. Every takeoff is an opportunity to save fuel. If each takeoff and climb is performed efficiently, an airline can realize significant savings over time. But what constitutes an efficient takeoff? How should a climb be executed for maximum fuel savings? The most efficient flights actually begin long before the airplane is cleared for takeoff. This article discusses strategies for fuel savings But times have clearly changed. Jet fuel prices fuel burn from brake release to a pressure altitude during the takeoff and climb phases of flight. have increased over five times from 1990 to 2008. of 10,000 feet (3,048 meters), assuming an accel­ Subse quent articles in this series will deal with At this time, fuel is about 40 percent of a typical eration altitude of 3,000 feet (914 meters) above the descent, approach, and landing phases of airline’s total operating cost. As a result, airlines ground level (AGL). In all cases, however, the flap flight, as well as auxiliary­power­unit usage are reviewing all phases of flight to determine how setting must be appropriate for the situation to strategies. The first article in this series, “Cost fuel burn savings can be gained in each phase ensure airplane safety.
    [Show full text]
  • Republic of Yemen Air Transport Sector Review Note
    Republic of Yemen Air Transport Sector Review Note May, 2009 Middle East and North Africa Region Energy and Transport Unit CURRENCY EQUIVALENTS (Exchange rate effective on January, 2009) Currency Unit = Yemeni Rial (YER) 1 YER = 0.005 USD 1 USD = 200 YER Fiscal Year: January 1 – December 31 ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ACAC Arab Civil Aviation Commission ADE Aden International Airport AOC Air Operator Certificate ATC Air Traffic Control ATIS Automated Terminal Information System BASA Bilateral Air Service Agreements CAMA Civil Aviation and Meteorological Authority of Yemen FIR Fligths Information Region GNSS Global Navigation Satellite Systems GoY Government of Yemen GPS Global Positioning System IATA International Air Transport Association ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization ILS Instrument Landing Approach MoT Ministry of Transport RIY Al-Mukalla Airport SAH Sana’a International Airport SARP Standards and Recommended Practices UAE United Arab Emirates USOAP Universal Safety Oversight Audit Programme VOR - DME VHF Omni-Directional Radio Range - Distance Measuring Equipment 2/65 January 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................... 4 I. THE AIR TRANSPORT SECTOR AT A GLANCE ....................................................................... 9 II. AIR TRANSPORT SERVICES AND COMPETITION POLICY..........................................10 A. DOMESTIC AIR TRANSPORT ...............................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Facts & Figures & Figures
    OCTOBER 2019 FACTS & FIGURES & FIGURES THE STAR ALLIANCE NETWORK RADAR The Star Alliance network was created in 1997 to better meet the needs of the frequent international traveller. MANAGEMENT INFORMATION Combined Total of the current Star Alliance member airlines: FOR ALLIANCE EXECUTIVES Total revenue: 179.04 BUSD Revenue Passenger 1,739,41 bn Km: Daily departures: More than Annual Passengers: 762,27 m 19,000 Countries served: 195 Number of employees: 431,500 Airports served: Over 1,300 Fleet: 5,013 Lounges: More than 1,000 MEMBER AIRLINES Aegean Airlines is Greece’s largest airline providing at its inception in 1999 until today, full service, premium quality short and medium haul services. In 2013, AEGEAN acquired Olympic Air and through the synergies obtained, network, fleet and passenger numbers expanded fast. The Group welcomed 14m passengers onboard its flights in 2018. The Company has been honored with the Skytrax World Airline award, as the best European regional airline in 2018. This was the 9th time AEGEAN received the relevant award. Among other distinctions, AEGEAN captured the 5th place, in the world's 20 best airlines list (outside the U.S.) in 2018 Readers' Choice Awards survey of Condé Nast Traveler. In June 2018 AEGEAN signed a Purchase Agreement with Airbus, for the order of up to 42 new generation aircraft of the 1 MAY 2019 FACTS & FIGURES A320neo family and plans to place additional orders with lessors for up to 20 new A/C of the A320neo family. For more information please visit www.aegeanair.com. Total revenue: USD 1.10 bn Revenue Passenger Km: 11.92 m Daily departures: 139 Annual Passengers: 7.19 m Countries served: 44 Number of employees: 2,498 Airports served: 134 Joined Star Alliance: June 2010 Fleet size: 49 Aircraft Types: A321 – 200, A320 – 200, A319 – 200 Hub Airport: Athens Airport bases: Thessaloniki, Heraklion, Rhodes, Kalamata, Chania, Larnaka Current as of: 14 MAY 19 Air Canada is Canada's largest domestic and international airline serving nearly 220 airports on six continents.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement Yemenia Crash
    IN THE NAME OF GOD THE MOST COMPASSIONATE, THE MOST MERCIFUL STATEMENT Subject: Initial report on the crashed Yemenia airplane 70-ADJ, flight IY626 to Moroni First: Factual information on the crashed plane: Transport company: Yemen Airways (Yemenia Airlines) Aircraft: A310-300 Registration #: ADJ-70 Manufacturing date: 1990, operated by Yemenia Airline since September 1999 Accumulated flying hours: 53,587 hrs Total running time for Engine 1: 211 hours, Engine 2: 3400 hrs, powered by P & W 400 engines. The engines suppositional minimum life cycle is10,000 hours according to the manufacturing standards. Second: Flight information Flight route: Sana’a to Moroni Fight number: IY626 Number of passengers: 142 passengers, and 11 crew members Approximate flight duration: 4.45 hours - The plane took off from Sana’a Airport at 9:56 p.m. (Sana’a local time). There were absolutely no faults or notifications. It has been inspected by the Civil Aviation Authority in accordance with the customary measures and standards. - After its departure from Sana’a airport heading towards Moroni it went through the airspace of Addis Ababa, Nairobi, Dar-asylum and Madagascar. - Expected arrival time of the flight was 2:00 a.m. according to the flights arrival schedule. - According to the available information, the wind speed was approximately between 20 to 30 knots (50 km per hour approx.) - Furthermore, the air traffic control tower in Sana’a Governorate didn’t receive any report from aviation control units of other governorates, where the plane passed through, or receive any message from the pilot reporting any kind of a problem during the flight.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Classifications, History and Airport Technology Problem 2
    CEE 4674: Airport Planning and Design Spring 2007 Assignment 1: Aircraft Classifications, History and Airport Technology Date Due: Jan/23/2008 Instructor: Trani Problem 2 Read pages 1 and 2 in Chapter 1 in the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 (Airport Design) before answering this question. Also, read the aircraft classification handout provided in class. Examine the FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-13 (Airport Design). Specifically examine Appendix 13 of the FAA Advisory Circular which contains information about various aircraft. a) For the aircraft shown in Table 2.1, state the Airplane Design Group (ADG) class, the Terminal Areas Procedures Aircraft Speed Category, and the wake vortex class for each vehicle. b) For each aircraft, calculate the stalling speed (minimum speed for flight) from the known aircraft approach speeds published in the FAA AC. Stalling speed is just 30% below the approach speed. Table 2.1 Aircraft to be Studied. Aircraft ADG and Speed Classification British Aerospace BAe 146-300 C-III Beech Raytheon Bonanza B36TC A-I Airbus A-320-100 C-III Gulfstream G-IV D-II Boeing 777-300 D-V Boeing 747-400 D-V Boeing 737-500 C-III Beech Airliner 1900-C B-II British Aerospace BAe Jetstream 31 B-II Dassault Falcon FAL-900 B-II Cessna Citation I B-II Bombardier DHC-8 Dash 8-300 B-III Hawker HS 125 Series 700 C-I Bombardier CRJ/200 or Canadair CL-600 B-II Cessna 150 A-I McDonnell Douglas MDC-DC-9-82 C-III CEE 4674 A1 Trani Page 1 of 3 c) Match the names with the 2-D drawings (use the number of the aircraft and match by writing on the space to the right of each aircraft).
    [Show full text]
  • Using an Autothrottle to Compare Techniques for Saving Fuel on A
    Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Graduate Theses and Dissertations Dissertations 2010 Using an autothrottle ot compare techniques for saving fuel on a regional jet aircraft Rebecca Marie Johnson Iowa State University Follow this and additional works at: https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd Part of the Electrical and Computer Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Johnson, Rebecca Marie, "Using an autothrottle ot compare techniques for saving fuel on a regional jet aircraft" (2010). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. 11358. https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/etd/11358 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Iowa State University Capstones, Theses and Dissertations at Iowa State University Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Graduate Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Iowa State University Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Using an autothrottle to compare techniques for saving fuel on A regional jet aircraft by Rebecca Marie Johnson A thesis submitted to the graduate faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Major: Electrical Engineering Program of Study Committee: Umesh Vaidya, Major Professor Qingze Zou Baskar Ganapathayasubramanian Iowa State University Ames, Iowa 2010 Copyright c Rebecca Marie Johnson, 2010. All rights reserved. ii DEDICATION I gratefully acknowledge everyone who contributed to the successful completion of this research. Bill Piche, my supervisor at Rockwell Collins, was supportive from day one, as were many of my colleagues. I also appreciate the efforts of my thesis committee, Drs. Umesh Vaidya, Qingze Zou, and Baskar Ganapathayasubramanian. I would also like to thank Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • NTSB-AAR-72-18 TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD Title PAGE
    SA-424 FILE NO. 1-0002 AIRCRAFT ACCIDENT REPORT WESTERN AIR LINES, INC. BOEING 720-047B,N3166 ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT ONTARIO, CALIFORNIA MARCH 31, 1971 ADOPTED: JUNE 7, 1972 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, 0. C. 20591 REPORT NUMBER: NTSB-AAR-72-18 TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TiTLE PAGE . Report No. 2.Government Accession No. 3.Recipient's Catalog No. NTSB-AAR-72-18 I. Title and Subtitle 5.Report Date Aircraft Accident Report - Western Air Lines, InC., Sune 7, 1972 Roeing 720-047B, N3166, Ontario International Airport, 6.Performing Organization Ontario. California, March 31, 1971 Code '. Author(s) 8.Performing Organization Report No. I. Performing Organization Name and Address IO.Work Unit No. Bureau of Aviation Safety 11 .Contract or Grant No. National Transportation Safety Board Washington, D. C. 20591 13.Type of Report and Period Covered 12.Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Aircraft Accident Report March 31, 1971 NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD Washington, 0. C. 20591 14.Sponsoring Agency Code 15.Supplementary Notes I6.Abstract Flight 366, a Boeing 720B, on a proficiency check flight, yawed and rolled out of control, and crashed while in the process of executing a 3-engine missed- approach from a simulated engine-out ILS instrument approach. The five crew- members and only occupants died in the crash. The weather conditions at Ontario were 600 feet overcast, with 3/4-mile visibility in fog, haze, and smoke. The National Transportation Safety Board determines that the probable cause of this accident was the failure of the aircraft rudder hydraulic actuator support fitting. The failure of the fitting resulted in the inapparent loss Of left rudder control which, under the conditions of this flight, precluded the pilotk ability to maintain directional control during a simlated engine-out missed- approach.
    [Show full text]
  • Jason Dunham Cmd Inv
    DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY UNITED STATES FLEET FORCES COMMAND 1562 MITSCHER AVENUE SUITE 250 NORFOLK VA 23551-2487 5830 SerN 00/15 1 7 May 19 FINAL ENDORSEMENT on bf(& ltr of27 Jul 18 From : Commander , U.S. Fleet Forces Command To: File Subj : COMNIAND INVESTIGATION INTO THE DEATH OF ENS SARAH JOY MITCHELL, USN , AT SEA ON 8 JULY 2018 Encl: (64) Voluntary Statement of 16R6 dtd 1 Apr 19 (65) Voluntary Statement of -----b){&) dtd 1 Apr 19 1. I thoroughly reviewed the subject investigation and its endorsements . I approve the findings of fact opinions , and recommendations as previously endorsed and as modified below. 2. Findings of Facts: a. FF 312 added: On the morning of 8 July=~-=--==-=-=,-,,-,:--e-=--==-=-=--=--~ was on the bridge prior to launchino RIB KELLY MILLER and RIB BILLY HAMPTON . After confening with the OOD bJl&J , ll>H& made the decision to execute planned RIB operations . [Encl (21)] b. FF 313 added: The OOD is cha1·ged with "the direct supervi sion of the ship's boats" and is responsible for "ensming that all boat safety regulations are observed" in accordance with reference (c). c. FF 314 added: lliR6 wa s the scheduled OOD for the 0700 - 0930 watch and assumed the watch at 0700. [Encl (17), (22), (64)] d. FF 3 15 added: The boat deck was given pennission from "6f( , thrnugh 6)l6J b)(&) , to load lower , and launch RIB KELLY MILLER and RIB BILLY HAMPTON. Both Rill s were in the water at approxima tely 0910. [Encl (17), (21) , (64)] gave u·ip and shove off orders to the two RIBs before breakaway and then gave them,------- pennission to load , lower and launch when they were rnady.
    [Show full text]