DOCSLIB.ORG

Transport Airship Requirements

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Transport Airship Requirements Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 submitted by: Rijksluchtvaartdienst Luftfahrt-Bundesamt Saturnusstraat 50 Hermann-Blenk-Strasse 26 2132HB Hoofddorp D-38108 Braunschweig The Netherlands Germany www.minvenw.nl/rld www.lba.de TAR Intentionally left blank TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 2 of 117 TAR AIRWORTHINESS REQUIREMENTS FOR TRANSPORT CATEGORY AIRSHIPS Foreword 1 The Civil Aviation Authorities Luftfahrt-Bundesamt of Germany and Rijksluchtvaartdienst of The Netherlands have agreed common comprehensive airworthiness requirements for large airships to accomodate Type Certification applications for such aircraft in their countries. The new category Transport Airships is defined in Appendix C. 2 Existing airworthiness codes FAR P8110-2 of the Federal Aviation Administration of the United States of America and JAR-25 of the Joint Aviation Authorities of Europe have been selected to form the basis of these Transport Airship Requirements (TAR). 3 Certain of the requirements of this TAR, in particular those in Subpart F, call for the installation of equipment and in some cases prescribe requirements for the design and performance of that equipment. These requirements, in common with the remainder of the TAR, are intended to be acceptable to the Authorities as showing compliance, but it should be borne in mind that an importing country may require equipment additional to those in this TAR for operational purposes. 4 The performance requirements of Subparts B and G have been developed on the assumption that the resulting scheduled performance data will be used in conjunction with airship performance operating rules which are complementary to these performance requirements. 5 Terms used in this TAR are as contained in JAR-1, "Definitions and Abbreviations". Airship related Definitions and Abbreviations are presented in Appendix C. 6 Future development of the requirements for this TAR will be in accordance with an agreed amendment procedure. The two Aviation Authorities have agreed they should not unilaterally initiate amendment of the code. 7 Amendments to the text in this TAR will usually be issued initially as 'Orange Paper' Amendments. 8 Comment/Response Documents developed following Notice of Proposed Amendment (NPA) consultation produced by the two Aviation Authorities as a method of publicly responding to comments received are published with each Orange Paper amendment (OP) that contains the affected proposals. These texts will not be reproduced when those OPs are incorporated into a Change. Readers should therefore either retain Comment/Response Documents for future reference, or apply to the two Aviation Authorities for copies of specific Comment/Response Documents as required. 9 Units are transformed according the SI-system. However, in some cases the units where kept in order not to alter the known shape. TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 3 of 117 TAR Intentionally left blank TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 4 of 117 TAR Preambles 31.3.2000 The TAR consists of nine Subparts including subparts J for APUs, and 3 Appendices. Section 1 - Requirements 1 General I. This code is originally based on P8810-2 of the Federal Aviation Regulations, named Airship Design Criteria, applicable for conventional, near-equilibrium non-rigid airships with nine passenger seats or less, and it is termed "Transport Airship Requirements". JAR-25 requirements for large airplanes have been considered and incorporated where applicable to achieve a comparable level of safety. II. Several JAR-25 NPAs, which face incorporation in the JAR-25 text in the near future, have been considered and incorporated where applicable in the TAR. III. The definition of Transport Airships in Appendix C encompasses all types of construction, whether they be non- or semi-rigid, conventional rigid, metal rigid or metal pressure airships and whether they perform horizontal or vertical take-offs and landings. 2 Presentation I. The requirements of TAR are presented in two columns on loose pages, each page being identified by the date of issue or the Change number under which it is amended or reissued. A checklist of pages will be provided when the first changes are incorporated. II. In general, the TAR paragraphs carry the same number as the corresponding FAR- or JAR paragraph. In cases where new airship material is introduced, and there is no corresponding paragraph in FAR/JAR, a number is chosen for it which attempts to place the new material in the right context within the FAR/JAR numbering system. III. AC material is now shown in the related paragraphs but will be taken up in a new Section 2 in later issues. IV. Advisory material is now shown in the related paragraphs but will be taken up in a new Section 3 in later issues. V. Where appropriate, reference is made to existing JAR-25 ACJ and AMJ material. VI. New, amended and corrected text is enclosed within heavy brackets [ xx ]. Section 2 - Acceptable Means of Compliance and Interpretations (AC) (reserved) Section 3 - Advisory material (reserved) TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 5 of 117 TAR Intentionally left blank TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 6 of 117 TAR List of contents Subpart A - General 19 TAR 1 Applicability 19 Subpart B - Flight 19 GENERAL 19 TAR 21 Proof of compliance 19 TAR 23 Load distribution limits 19 TAR 25 Mass limits 19 TAR 27 Centre of gravity limits 20 TAR 29 Empty mass and corresponding centre of gravity 20 TAR 31 Removable ballast 20 TAR 33 Propeller speed and pitch limits 20 PROCEDURES 20 TAR 40 General 20 PERFORMANCE 20 TAR 45 General 20 TAR 51 Take-off 21 TAR 65 Climb: all engines operating 21 TAR 67 Climb: critical engine(s) inoperative 21 TAR 68 En-route flight path 22 TAR 75 Landing 22 TAR 76 Engine failure 22 TAR 77 Balked landing 22 TAR 80 Loading/Unloading 22 FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS 22 TAR 141 General 22 CONTROLLABILITY AND MANOEUVRABILITY 23 TAR 143 General 23 TAR 145 Longitudinal control 23 TAR 147 Directional control 23 TAR 149 Minimum control speed 23 TAR 150 Minimum aerodynamic control speed 23 TAR 153 Control during landings 23 TRIM 23 TAR 161 Trim 23 STABILITY 24 TAR 171 General 24 TAR 181 Dynamic stability 24 MISCELLANEOUS FLIGHT REQUIREMENTS 24 TAR 201 Stall demonstration 24 TAR 203 Stall characteristics 24 TAR 207 Stall warning 24 TAR 237 Wind velocities 24 TAR 251 Vibration and buffeting 24 TAR 253 Envelope pressure and distortion 24 TAR 255 Ground handling characteristics 24 TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 7 of 117 TAR TAR 261 Flight in rough air 24 Subpart C - Structure 25 GENERAL 25 TAR 301 Loads 25 TAR 303 Factors of safety 25 TAR 305 Strength and deformation 25 TAR 307 Proof of structure 25 TAR 309 Design mass 25 TAR 311 Design airspeeds 25 FLIGHT LOADS 26 TAR 321 General 26 TAR 333 Design manoeuvring loads 26 TAR 341 Gust and turbulence loads 26 TAR 361 Engine and APU torque 27 TAR 363 Side load on engine and APU mounts 27 TAR 367 Unsymmetrical loads due to engine failure 27 TAR 371 Gyroscopic loads 27 CONTROL SURFACE AND SYSTEM LOADS 27 TAR 391 Control surface loads: general 27 TAR 395 Control system 28 TAR 397 Control system loads 28 TAR 399 Dual control system 28 TAR 405 Secondary control system 28 TAR 407 Trim tabs effects 28 TAR 409 Tabs 28 TAR 411 Supplementary conditions for control surfaces 28 TAR 415 Tail-to-wind loads 28 GROUND LOADS 28 TAR 471 General 28 TAR 473 Ground load conditions and assumptions 28 TAR 477 Landing gear arrangement 29 TAR 479 Landing gear loading condition 29 TAR 481 Mooring and handling conditions 29 OTHER LOADS 29 TAR 505 Snow loads 29 TAR 507 Jacking loads 29 TAR 509 Servicing access loads 29 EMERGENCY LANDING CONDITIONS 30 TAR 561 General 30 FATIGUE EVALUATION 30 TAR 571 General 30 TAR 573 Damage tolerance and fatigue evaluation 30 LIGHTNING PROTECTION 32 TAR 581 Lightning protection 32 Subpart D - Design and Construction 32 GENERAL 32 TAR 601 General 32 TAR 603 Materials 32 TAR - Transport Airship Requirements March 2000 8 of 117 TAR TAR 605 Fabrication methods 32 TAR 607 Fasteners 32 TAR 609 Protection of structure 32 TAR 611 Accessibility provisions 32 TAR 613 Material strength properties and design values 32 TAR 619 Special factors 33 TAR 621 Casting factors 33 TAR 623 Bearing factors 34 TAR 625 Fitting factors 34 TAR 627 Welding factors 34 TAR 628 Rope, wire and cable factors 34 TAR 631 Birdstrike 34 CONTROL SURFACES 34 TAR 651 Proof of strength 34 TAR 655 Installation 34 TAR 657 Hinges 34 TAR 659 Mass balance 35 CONTROL SYSTEMS 35 TAR 671 General 35 TAR 672 Stability augmentation and automatic power-operated systems 35 TAR 675 Stops 35 TAR 677 Trim Systems 35 TAR 679 Control system gust locks 36 TAR 681 Limit load static tests 36 TAR 683 Operation tests 36 TAR 685 Control system details 36 TAR 687 Spring devices 36 TAR 689 Cable systems 36 TAR 693 Joints 36 LANDING GEAR 37 TAR 721 General 37 TAR 723 Shock absorption tests 37 TAR 725 Limit drop tests 37 TAR 729 Retraction mechanism 37 TAR 731 Wheels 38 TAR 733 Tyres 38 TAR 735 Brakes and braking systems 38 TAR 745 Wheel steering 39 PERSONNEL AND CARGO ACCOMMODATIONS 39 TAR 771 Pilot compartment 39 TAR 772 Flight crew compartment doors 40 TAR 773 Pilot compartment view 40 TAR 775 Windshields and windows 40 TAR 777 Cockpit controls 40 TAR 779 Motion and effect of cockpit controls 41 TAR 783 Doors 41 TAR 784 Passenger compartment windows 41 TAR 785 Seats, berths, safety belts and harnesses 41 TAR 786 Areas accessible during flight 42 TAR 787 Baggage and cargo compartment 42 TAR 789
Load more

Recommended publications
  • MS – 204 Charles Lewis Aviation Collection
    MS – 204 Charles Lewis Aviation Collection Wright State University Special Collections and Archives Container Listing Sub-collection A: Airplanes Series 1: Evolution of the Airplane Box File Description 1 1 Evolution of Aeroplane I 2 Evolution of Aeroplane II 3 Evolution of Aeroplane III 4 Evolution of Aeroplane IV 5 Evolution of Aeroplane V 6 Evolution of Aeroplane VI 7 Evolution of Aeroplane VII 8 Missing Series 2: Pre-1914 Airplanes Sub-series 1: Drawings 9 Aeroplanes 10 The Aerial Postman – Auckland, New Zealand 11 Aeroplane and Storm 12 Airliner of the Future Sub-series 2: Planes and Pilots 13 Wright Aeroplane at LeMans 14 Wright Aeroplane at Rheims 15 Wilbur Wright at the Controls 16 Wright Aeroplane in Flight 17 Missing 18 Farman Airplane 19 Farman Airplane 20 Antoinette Aeroplane 21 Bleriot and His Monoplane 22 Bleriot Crossing the Channel 23 Bleriot Airplane 24 Cody, Deperdussin, and Hanriot Planes 25 Valentine’s Aeroplane 26 Missing 27 Valentine and His Aeroplane 28 Valentine and His Aeroplane 29 Caudron Biplane 30 BE Biplane 31 Latham Monoplane at Sangette Series 3: World War I Sub-series 1: Aerial Combat (Drawings) Box File Description 1 31a Moraine-Saulnier 31b 94th Aero Squadron – Nieuport 28 – 2nd Lt. Alan F. Winslow 31c Fraser Pigeon 31d Nieuports – Various Models – Probably at Issoudoun, France – Training 31e 94th Aero Squadron – Nieuport – Lt. Douglas Campbell 31f Nieuport 27 - Servicing 31g Nieuport 17 After Hit by Anti-Aircraft 31h 95th Aero Squadron – Nieuport 28 – Raoul Lufbery 32 Duel in the Air 33 Allied Aircraft
    [Show full text]
  • Weather and Aviation: How Does Weather Affect the Safety and Operations of Airports and Aviation, and How Does FAA Work to Manage Weather-Related Effects?
    Kulesa 1 Weather and Aviation: How Does Weather Affect the Safety and Operations of Airports and Aviation, and How Does FAA Work to Manage Weather-related Effects? By Gloria Kulesa Weather Impacts On Aviation In addition, weather continues to play a significant role in a number of aviation Introduction accidents and incidents. While National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) reports ccording to FAA statistics, weather is most commonly find human error to be the the cause of approximately 70 percent direct accident cause, weather is a primary of the delays in the National Airspace contributing factor in 23 percent of all System (NAS). Figure 1 illustrates aviation accidents. The total weather impact that while weather delays declined with overall is an estimated national cost of $3 billion for NAS delays after September 11th, 2001, delays accident damage and injuries, delays, and have since returned to near-record levels. unexpected operating costs. 60000 50000 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 1 01 01 0 01 02 02 ul an 01 J ep an 02 J Mar May S Nov 01 J Mar May Weather Delays Other Delays Figure 1. Delay hours in the National Airspace System for January 2001 to July 2002. Delay hours peaked at 50,000 hours per month in August 2001, declined to less than 15,000 per month for the months following September 11, but exceeded 30,000 per month in the summer of 2002. Weather delays comprise the majority of delays in all seasons. The Potential Impacts of Climate Change on Transportation 2 Weather and Aviation: How Does Weather Affect the Safety and Operations of Airports and Aviation, and How Does FAA Work to Manage Weather-related Effects? Thunderstorms and Other Convective In-Flight Icing.
    [Show full text]
  • Lighter-Than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications
    Lighter-than-Air Vehicles for Civilian and Military Applications From the world leaders in the manufacture of aerostats, airships, air cell structures, gas balloons & tethered balloons Aerostats Parachute Training Balloons Airships Nose Docking and PARACHUTE TRAINING BALLOONS Mooring Mast System The airborne Parachute Training Balloon system (PTB) is used to give preliminary training in static line parachute jumping. For this purpose, an Instructor and a number of trainees are carried to the operational height in a balloon car, the winch is stopped, and when certain conditions are satisfied, the trainees are dispatched and make their parachute descent from the balloon car. GA-22 Airship Fully Autonomous AIRSHIPS An airship or dirigible is a type of aerostat or “lighter-than-air aircraft” that can be steered and propelled through the air using rudders and propellers or other thrust mechanisms. Unlike aerodynamic aircraft such as fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters, which produce lift by moving a wing through the air, aerostatic aircraft, and unlike hot air balloons, stay aloft by filling a large cavity with a AEROSTATS lifting gas. The main types of airship are non rigid (blimps), semi-rigid and rigid. Non rigid Aerostats are a cost effective and efficient way to raise a payload to a required altitude. airships use a pressure level in excess of the surrounding air pressure to retain Also known as a blimp or kite aerostat, aerostats have been in use since the early 19th century their shape during flight. Unlike the rigid design, the non-rigid airship’s gas for a variety of observation purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Aviation Annual Report
    2018 Aviation Annual Report Aviation Aircraft Use Summary U.S. Forest Service 2018 Table of Contents Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................................... 1 Table 1 – 2018 Forest Service Total Aircraft Available ..................................................................... 2 Introduction: The Forest Service Aviation Program...................................................................................... 3 Aviation Utilization and Cost Information .................................................................................................... 4 2018 At-A-Glance ...................................................................................................................................... 4 Aviation Use .......................................................................................................................................... 4 Table 2 and Figure 1 – Aircraft Total Use CY 2014-2018................................................................... 4 Figure 2 – CY 2018 Flight Hours by Month........................................................................................ 5 Table 3 and Figure 3 – Percent of CY 2018 Flight Time by Aircraft Type .......................................... 5 Table 4 – CY 2018 Aircraft Use by Region/Agency ............................................................................ 6 Aviation Cost ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Prusaprinters
    LZ-129 Hindenburg - scale 1/1000 vandragon_de VIEW IN BROWSER updated 14. 2. 2019 | published 14. 2. 2019 Summary famous Air Ship In my model series in 1:1000, the largest airship should not be missing. History: LZ 129 Hindenburg was a large German commercial passenger-carrying rigid airship, the lead ship of the Hindenburg class, the longest class of flying machine and the largest airship by envelope volume. It was designed and built by the Zeppelin Company (Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH) on the shores of Lake Constance in Friedrichshafen and was operated by the German Zeppelin Airline Company .The airship flew from March, 1936 until it was destroyed by fire 14 months later on May 6, 1937 while attempting to land at Lakehurst Naval Air Station in Manchester Township, New Jersey at the end of the first North American transatlantic journey of its second season of service with the loss of 36 lives. This was the last of the great airship disasters; it was preceded by the crashes of the British R38 in 1921 (44 dead), the US airship Roma in 1922 (34 dead), the French Dixmude in 1923 (52 dead), the British R101 in 1930 (48 dead), and the US Akron in 1933 (73 dead). (Source Wikipedia) f k h d 7 hrs 6 pcs 0.15 mm 0.40 mm PLA 70 g MK3/S Toys & Games > Vehicles airship famous friedrichshafen hindenburg lakehurst lz129 model scale zeppelin luftship large However, it should even reach 4-5% infill The assembly is quite simple. You should only pay attention to the exact course of the lines.
    [Show full text]
  • Efficient Light Aircraft Design – Options from Gliding
    Efficient Light Aircraft Design – Options from Gliding Howard Torode Member of General Aviation Group and Chairman BGA Technical Committee Presentation Aims • Recognise the convergence of interest between ultra-lights and sailplanes • Draw on experiences of sailplane designers in pursuit of higher aerodynamic performance. • Review several feature of current sailplanes that might be of wider use. • Review the future for the recreational aeroplane. Lift occurs in localised areas A glider needs efficiency and manoeuvrability Drag contributions for a glider Drag at low speed dominated by Induced drag (due to lift) Drag at high ASW-27 speeds Glider (total) drag polar dominated by profile drag & skin friction So what are the configuration parameters? - Low profile drag: Wing section design is key - Low skin friction: maximise laminar areas - Low induced drag – higher efficiencies demand greater spans, span efficiency and Aspect Ratio - Low parasitic drag – reduce excrescences such as: undercarriage, discontinuities of line and no leaks/gaps. - Low trim drag – small tails with efficient surface coupled with low stability for frequent speed changing. - Wide load carrying capacity in terms of pilot weight and water ballast Progress in aerodynamic efficiency 1933 - 2010 1957: Phoenix (16m) 1971: Nimbus 2 (20.3m) 2003: Eta (30.8m) 2010: Concordia (28m) 1937: Wiehe (18m) Wooden gliders Metal gliders Composite gliders In praise of Aspect Ratio • Basic drag equation in in non-dimensional, coefficient terms: • For an aircraft of a given scale, aspect ratio is the single overall configuration parameter that has direct leverage on performance. Induced drag - the primary contribution to drag at low speed, is inversely proportional to aspect ratio • An efficient wing is a key driver in optimising favourable design trades in other aspects of performance such as wing loading and cruise performance.
    [Show full text]
  • Preventive Maintenance
    Maintenance Aspects of Owning Your Own Aircraft Introduction According to 14 CFR Part 43, Maintenance, Preventive Maintenance, Rebuilding, and Alteration, the holder of a pilot certificate issued under 14 CFR Part 61 may perform specified preventive maintenance on any aircraft owned or operated by that pilot, as long as the aircraft is not used under 14 CFR Part 121, 127, 129, or 135. This pamphlet provides information on authorized preventive maintenance. How To Begin Here are several important points to understand before you attempt to perform your own preventive maintenance: First, you need to understand that authorized preventive maintenance cannot involve complex assembly operations. Second, you should carefully review 14 CFR Part 43, Appendix A, Subpart C (Preventive Maintenance), which provides a list of the authorized preventive maintenance work that an owner pilot may perform. Third, you should conduct a self-analysis as to whether you have the ability to perform the work satisfactorily and safely. Fourth, if you do any of the preventive maintenance authorized in 14 CFR Part 43, you will need to make an entry in the appropriate logbook or record system in order to document the work done. The entry must include the following information: • A description of the work performed, or references to data that are acceptable to the Administrator. • The date of completion. • The signature, certificate number, and kind of certificate held by the person performing the work. Note that the signature constitutes approval for return to service only for work performed. Examples of Preventive Maintenance Items The following is a partial list of what a certificated pilot who meets the conditions in 14 CFR Part 43 can do: • Remove, install, and repair landing gear tires.
    [Show full text]
  • Airborne Arctic Weather Ships Is Almost Certain to Be Controversial
    J. Gordon Vaeth airborne Arctic National Weather Satellite Center U. S. Weather Bureau weather ships Washington, D. C. Historical background In the mid-1920's Norway's Fridtjof Nansen organized an international association called Aeroarctic. As its name implies, its purpose was the scientific exploration of the north polar regions by aircraft, particularly by airship. When Nansen died in 1930 Dr. Hugo Eckener of Luftschiffbau-Zeppelin Company suc- ceeded him to the Aeroarctic presidency. He placed his airship, the Graf Zeppelin, at the disposal of the organization and the following year carried out a three-day flight over and along the shores of the Arctic Ocean. The roster of scientists who made this 1931 flight, which originated in Leningrad, in- cluded meteorologists and geographers from the United States, the Soviet Union, Sweden, and, of course, Germany. One of them was Professor Moltschanoff who would launch three of his early radiosondes from the dirigible before the expedition was over. During a trip which was completed without incident and which included a water land- ing off Franz Josef Land to rendezvous with the Soviet icebreaker Malygin, considerable new information on Arctic weather and geography was obtained. Means for Arctic More than thirty years have since elapsed. Overflight of Arctic waters is no longer his- weather observations toric or even newsworthy. Yet weather in the Polar Basin remains fragmentarily ob- served, known, and understood. To remedy this situation, the following are being actively proposed for widespread Arctic use: Automatic observing and reporting stations, similar to the isotopic-powered U. S. Weather Bureau station located in the Canadian Arctic.
    [Show full text]
  • LZ 129 Hindenburg from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia (Redirected from Airship Hindenburg)
    Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history LZ 129 Hindenburg From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Redirected from Airship Hindenburg) Navigation "The Hindenburg" redirects here. For other uses, see Hindenburg. Main page LZ 129 Hindenburg (Luftschiff Zeppelin #129; Registration: D-LZ 129) was a large LZ-129 Hindenburg Contents German commercial passenger-carrying rigid airship, the lead ship of the Hindenburg Featured content class, the longest class of flying machine and the largest airship by envelope volume.[1] Current events It was designed and built by the Zeppelin Company (Luftschiffbau Zeppelin GmbH) on Random article the shores of Lake Constance in Friedrichshafen and was operated by the German Donate to Wikipedia Zeppelin Airline Company (Deutsche Zeppelin-Reederei). The airship flew from March 1936 until destroyed by fire 14 months later on May 6, 1937, at the end of the first Interaction North American transatlantic journey of its second season of service. Thirty-six people died in the accident, which occurred while landing at Lakehurst Naval Air Station in Help Manchester Township, New Jersey, United States. About Wikipedia Hindenburg was named after the late Field Marshal Paul von Hindenburg (1847–1934), Community portal President of Germany (1925–1934). Recent changes Contact page Contents 1 Design and development Hindenburg at NAS Lakehurst Toolbox 1.1 Use of hydrogen instead of helium Type Hindenburg-class 2 Operational history What links here airship 2.1 Launching and trial flights Related changes Manufacturer
    [Show full text]
  • NASA Styrofoam Tray Glider.Pdf
    RIGHT FLIGHT Objectives The students will: Construct a flying model glider. Determine weight and balance of a glider. Standards and Skills Science Science as Inquiry Physical Science Science and Technology Unifying Concepts and Processes Science Process Skills Observing Measuring Collecting Data Inferring Predicting Making Models Controlling Variables Mathematics Problem Solving Reasoning Prediction Measurement Background On December 17, 1903, two brothers, Wilbur and Orville Wright, became the first humans to fly a controllable, powered airplane. To unravel the mysteries of flight, the Wright brothers built and experimented extensively with model gliders. Gliders are airplanes without motors or a power source. 52 Aeronautics: An Educator’s Guide EG-2002-06-105-HQ Building and flying model gliders helped the Wright brothers learn and understand the importance of weight and balance in air- planes. If the weight of the airplane is not positioned properly, the airplane will not fly. For example, too much weight in the front (nose) will cause the airplane to dive toward the ground. The precise balance of a model glider can be determined by varying the location of small weights. Wilbur and Orville also learned that the design of an airplane was very important. Experimenting with models of different designs showed that airplanes fly best when the wings, fuselage, and tail are designed and balanced to interact with each other. The Wright Flyer was the first airplane to complete a controlled takeoff and landing. To manage flight direction, airplanes use control surfaces. Elevators are control surfaces that make the nose of the airplane pitch up and down. A rudder is used to move the nose left and right.
    [Show full text]
  • Airships Over Lincolnshire
    Airships over Lincolnshire AIRSHIPS Over Lincolnshire explore • discover • experience explore Cranwell Aviation Heritage Museum 2 Airships over Lincolnshire INTRODUCTION This file contains material and images which are intended to complement the displays and presentations in Cranwell Aviation Heritage Museum’s exhibition areas. This file looks at the history of military and civilian balloons and airships, in Lincolnshire and elsewhere, and how those balloons developed from a smoke filled bag to the high-tech hybrid airship of today. This file could not have been created without the help and guidance of a number of organisations and subject matter experts. Three individuals undoubtedly deserve special mention: Mr Mike Credland and Mr Mike Hodgson who have both contributed information and images for you, the visitor to enjoy. Last, but certainly not least, is Mr Brian J. Turpin whose enduring support has added flesh to what were the bare bones of the story we are endeavouring to tell. These gentlemen and all those who have assisted with ‘Airships over Lincolnshire’ have the grateful thanks of the staff and volunteers of Cranwell Aviation Heritage Museum. Airships over Lincolnshire 3 CONTENTS Early History of Ballooning 4 Balloons – Early Military Usage 6 Airship Types 7 Cranwell’s Lighter than Air section 8 Cranwell’s Airships 11 Balloons and Airships at Cranwell 16 Airship Pioneer – CM Waterlow 27 Airship Crews 30 Attack from the Air 32 Zeppelin Raids on Lincolnshire 34 The Zeppelin Raid on Cleethorpes 35 Airships during the inter-war years
    [Show full text]
  • Manufacturing Techniques of a Hybrid Airship Prototype
    UNIVERSIDADE DA BEIRA INTERIOR Engenharia Manufacturing Techniques of a Hybrid Airship Prototype Sara Emília Cruz Claro Dissertação para obtenção do Grau de Mestre em Engenharia Aeronáutica (Ciclo de estudos integrado) Orientador: Prof. Doutor Jorge Miguel Reis Silva, PhD Co-orientador: Prof. Doutor Pedro Vieira Gamboa, PhD Covilhã, outubro de 2015 ii AVISO A presente dissertação foi realizada no âmbito de um projeto de investigação desenvolvido em colaboração entre o Instituto Superior Técnico e a Universidade da Beira Interior e designado genericamente por URBLOG - Dirigível para Logística Urbana. Este projeto produziu novos conceitos aplicáveis a dirigíveis, os quais foram submetidos a processo de proteção de invenção através de um pedido de registo de patente. A equipa de inventores é constituída pelos seguintes elementos: Rosário Macário, Instituto Superior Técnico; Vasco Reis, Instituto Superior Técnico; Jorge Silva, Universidade da Beira Interior; Pedro Gamboa, Universidade da Beira Interior; João Neves, Universidade da Beira Interior. As partes da presente dissertação relevantes para efeitos do processo de proteção de invenção estão devidamente assinaladas através de chamadas de pé de página. As demais partes são da autoria do candidato, as quais foram discutidas e trabalhadas com os orientadores e o grupo de investigadores e inventores supracitados. Assim, o candidato não poderá posteriormente reclamar individualmente a autoria de qualquer das partes. Covilhã e UBI, 1 de Outubro de 2015 _______________________________ (Sara Emília Cruz Claro) iii iv Dedicator I want to dedicate this work to my family who always supported me. To my parents, for all the love, patience and strength that gave me during these five years. To my brother who never stopped believing in me, and has always been my support and my mentor.
    [Show full text]