A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 8-2003 A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane D. Andrew Moore University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Mechanical Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Moore, D. Andrew, "A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2003. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/2113 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in Masters Theses by an authorized administrator of TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange. For more information, please contact [email protected]. To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by D. Andrew Moore entitled "A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane." I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Gary Flandro, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. Louis Deken, Dr. Peter Solies Accepted for the Council: Carolyn R. Hodges Vice Provost and Dean of the Graduate School (Original signatures are on file with official studentecor r ds.) To the Graduate Council: I am submitting herewith a thesis written by D. Andrew Moore entitled “A Design Study of a Proposed Four-Seat, Amateur-Built Airplane.” I have examined the final electronic copy of this thesis for form and content and recommend that it be accepted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Mechanical Engineering. Dr. Gary Flandro Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Dr. Louis Deken Dr. Peter Solies Accepted for the Council: Dr. Anne Mayhew Vice Provost and Dean of Graduate Studies (Original signatures are on file with official student records.) A DESIGN STUDY OF A PROPOSED FOUR-SEAT, AMATEUR-BUILT AIRPLANE A Thesis Presented for the Master of Science Degree The University of Tennessee, Knoxville D. Andrew Moore August 2003 ii Dedicated to my Father who enabled me to fly and to Michael Reisman who showed me how. iii Acknowledgments The author wishes to express special appreciation to Dr. Gary Flandro, fellow sailplane enthusiast, advisor and head of my thesis committee, for allowing me the flexibility to pursue the design project herein. His patience with my many distractions balanced with his persistent encouragement were essential to the successful completion of this project. The author is additionally grateful to Dr. Lou Deken, thesis committee member and professor who taught many of the courses that provided the cornerstone for the work presented herein. Recognition and thanks go to Dr. Peter Solies for his valuable insights while participating on this thesis committee and especially for his unwavering dedication to the University soaring club all of these years. The author will be forever indebted to his wife Suzanne for providing inspiration by example and always believing in the successful completion of this project. iv Abstract An airplane configuration suitable for construction by an amateur builder without the need for complex factory fixtures and tooling has been developed. The proposed high-wing configuration is intended to carry a 600 LB payload of up to 4 passengers arranged in 2 rows of side-by-side accommodations at a design cruise speed of 145 kts. It has been shown that the cantilevered wing components of the low-wing, 2-seat Mustang II kit airplane are ideally suited for the proposed airplane when properly matched with strut braced inboard wing panels. The structural implications of optimally sized ailerons on the baseline Mustang II wing structure is presented. Wing, fuselage, and strut reaction loads have been determined for the proposed flight envelope. A steel tube cabin structure has been proposed and limited structural optimization accomplished using a finite- element model. Detail analysis of the wing/fuselage, wing/strut and strut/fuselage attachment fittings has been accomplished. v TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE 1. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................1 2. CONFIGURATION DEVELOPMENT...........................................................3 2.1 Mission.................................................................................................3 2.2 Configuration........................................................................................3 2.3 Construction.........................................................................................4 2.4 Engine/Propellor..................................................................................5 2.5 Initial Sizing..........................................................................................5 2.6 Center of Gravity Variation and Wing Placement................................9 2.7 Empennage Sizing and Placement....................................................12 2.8 Aileron Sizing.....................................................................................13 2.9 Landing Gear Arrangement...............................................................14 2.10 Composite Configuration Layout........................................................15 3. FLIGHT ENVELOPE..................................................................................18 3.1 Performance Estimate.......................................................................18 3.2 Structural Flight Envelope..................................................................22 4. WING LOADS............................................................................................28 4.1 Average Loads...................................................................................28 4.2 Span-wise Load Distribution..............................................................30 4.3 Outer Panel Loads.............................................................................30 4.4 Total Wing Attachment Reaction Loads............................................38 5. WING STRUCTURE...................................................................................43 5.1 General..............................................................................................43 5.2 Outboard Wing Panel Attachments...................................................43 5.3 Inboard Wing Panel Main Spar..........................................................45 5.4 Wing/Strut Attachment.......................................................................49 5.5 Forward Wing/Fuselage Attachment..................................................50 5.6 Aft Wing/Fuselage Attachment..........................................................51 6. FUSELAGE STRUCTURE.........................................................................54 6.1 Steel Cabin Frame.............................................................................54 6.2 Special Consideration to Lateral Reactions.......................................58 6.3 Fuselage Attachment Fittings............................................................60 vi CHAPTER PAGE 6.4 Wing Strut..........................................................................................63 7. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................67 7.1 Conclusions.......................................................................................67 7.2 Recommendations.............................................................................67 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY..............................................................68 VITA..................................................................................................................71 vii LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Wing Loading Comparison of Certified Aircraft.....................................8 2. Payload Effect on Center of Gravity......................................................12 3. Tail Volume Comparison.......................................................................13 4. Airfoil Characteristics.............................................................................22 5. Airplane Categories and Design Load factors.......................................22 6. Gust Load Factors.................................................................................26 7. Average Wing Aerodynamic Coefficients..............................................30 8. Outer Wing Panel Aileron-Deflected Torsion Estimate..........................36 9. Outer Wing Panel Reaction Load Components....................................38 10. Outer Wing Panel Combined Reaction Loads.......................................39 11. Wing Reaction Load Components.........................................................41 12. Wing Combined Reaction Loads...........................................................42 13. Material Mechanical Properties.............................................................43 14. Finite Element Model Applied Loads.....................................................56 15. Critical Fuselage Tube Properties.........................................................59 16. Summary of Fuselage Fitting Stresses..................................................64
Recommended publications
  • Electrically Heated Composite Leading Edges for Aircraft Anti-Icing Applications”
    UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES “FEDERICO II” PhD course in Aerospace, Naval and Quality Engineering PhD Thesis in Aerospace Engineering “ELECTRICALLY HEATED COMPOSITE LEADING EDGES FOR AIRCRAFT ANTI-ICING APPLICATIONS” by Francesco De Rosa 2010 To my girlfriend Tiziana for her patience and understanding precious and rare human virtues University of Naples Federico II Department of Aerospace Engineering DIAS PhD Thesis in Aerospace Engineering Author: F. De Rosa Tutor: Prof. G.P. Russo PhD course in Aerospace, Naval and Quality Engineering XXIII PhD course in Aerospace Engineering, 2008-2010 PhD course coordinator: Prof. A. Moccia ___________________________________________________________________________ Francesco De Rosa - Electrically Heated Composite Leading Edges for Aircraft Anti-Icing Applications 2 Abstract An investigation was conducted in the Aerospace Engineering Department (DIAS) at Federico II University of Naples aiming to evaluate the feasibility and the performance of an electrically heated composite leading edge for anti-icing and de-icing applications. A 283 [mm] chord NACA0012 airfoil prototype was designed, manufactured and equipped with an High Temperature composite leading edge with embedded Ni-Cr heating element. The heating element was fed by a DC power supply unit and the average power densities supplied to the leading edge were ranging 1.0 to 30.0 [kW m-2]. The present investigation focused on thermal tests experimentally performed under fixed icing conditions with zero AOA, Mach=0.2, total temperature of -20 [°C], liquid water content LWC=0.6 [g m-3] and average mean volume droplet diameter MVD=35 [µm]. These fixed conditions represented the top icing performance of the Icing Flow Facility (IFF) available at DIAS and therefore it has represented the “sizing design case” for the tested prototype.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Winglet Design
    DEGREE PROJECT IN VEHICLE ENGINEERING, SECOND CYCLE, 15 CREDITS STOCKHOLM, SWEDEN 2020 Aircraft Winglet Design Increasing the aerodynamic efficiency of a wing HANLIN GONGZHANG ERIC AXTELIUS KTH ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING SCIENCES 1 Abstract Aerodynamic drag can be decreased with respect to a wing’s geometry, and wingtip devices, so called winglets, play a vital role in wing design. The focus has been laid on studying the lift and drag forces generated by merging various winglet designs with a constrained aircraft wing. By using computational fluid dynamic (CFD) simulations alongside wind tunnel testing of scaled down 3D-printed models, one can evaluate such forces and determine each respective winglet’s contribution to the total lift and drag forces of the wing. At last, the efficiency of the wing was furtherly determined by evaluating its lift-to-drag ratios with the obtained lift and drag forces. The result from this study showed that the overall efficiency of the wing varied depending on the winglet design, with some designs noticeable more efficient than others according to the CFD-simulations. The shark fin-alike winglet was overall the most efficient design, followed shortly by the famous blended design found in many mid-sized airliners. The worst performing designs were surprisingly the fenced and spiroid designs, which had efficiencies on par with the wing without winglet. 2 Content Abstract 2 Introduction 4 Background 4 1.2 Purpose and structure of the thesis 4 1.3 Literature review 4 Method 9 2.1 Modelling
    [Show full text]
  • Hangar 9 Ultimate Manual
    TM® WE GET PEOPLE FLYING 46% TOC Ultimate 10-300 ASSEMBLY MANUAL Specifications Wingspan ..........................................................................................100 in (2540 mm) Length ................................................................................................110 in (2794 mm) Wing Area.........................................................................................3310 sq in (213.5 sq dm) Weight ...............................................................................................40–44 lb (18–20 kg) Engine.................................................................................................150–200cc gas engine Radio ..................................................................................................6-channel w/15 servos Introduction Thank you for purchasing the Hangar 9® 46% TOC Ultimate. Because size and weight of this model creates a higher degree for potential danger, an added measure of care and responsibility is needed for both building and flying this or any giant-scale model. It’s important that you carefully follow these instructions, especially those regarding hinging and the section on flying. Like all giant-scale aerobatic aircraft, the Hangar 9® TOC Ultimate requires powerful, heavy-duty servos. Servos greatly affect the flight performance, feel and response of the model. To get the most out of your Ultimate, it’s important to use accurate, powerful servos on all control surfaces. In the prototype models, we used JR 8411 digital servos with excellent
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Circular No. 103
    NATIONAL ADVISORY COifuciITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. AIRCRAFT CIRCULAR NO. 103. THE BRISTOL II BULLDOG" (BRITISH)* - A Single-seat All-Steel Fighter. The Bristol "Bulldog" was designed on the Bristol princi­ ples of metal construction by The Bristol Aeroplane Co., Ltd. The entire structural portion is of high tensile steel (Figs. 1, 2, and 3). The airplane is powered with the IIBristolll Jupiter radial air-cooled engine, either the "Bristolll Jupiter Series VII supercharged engine, when exceptional. speed and performance at high altitudes are espeGially required, or the IIBristol" Jupiter Series VI.A engine when the normal operating area of the airplane is not expected to exceed, say, 15,000 feet. The two types of engine are entirely interchangeable when desired. The speeds maintained at altitudes with the rate of climb. and the ceiling are given in tables at conolusion of this Circular. Fu s e I age The fuselage structure comprises three ·main parts, the front and rear portions and the stern frrune. Of these, the front ~or­ tion and the stern frame are constructed of high tensile tubes and the rear portion of members built up of high tensile steel str ip in special "Bristolll sections. Front end.- This portion extends from the front bulkhead *From circular issued by The Bristol Aeroplane Co., Ltd., England. N.A.C.A. Aircraft Circular No. 103 2 to the end of the tubular longerons, and acc~mmodates the pilot1s seat, controls lli~d most of the military equipment, etc. No bracing wires are fitted in the side frames and transverse brac­ ing is fitted only in the foremost panel.
    [Show full text]
  • February 2002 Alerts
    February 2002 FAA AC 43-16A CONTENTS AIRPLANES AERONCA ................................................................................................................................. 1 BEECH ........................................................................................................................................ 2 CESSNA ..................................................................................................................................... 6 EXTRA........................................................................................................................................ 9 MAULE..................................................................................................................................... 10 PIPER........................................................................................................................................ 10 SOCATA .................................................................................................................................. 13 HELICOPTERS BELL ......................................................................................................................................... 14 EUROCOPTER ......................................................................................................................... 14 MCDONNELL DOUGLAS ...................................................................................................... 15 AMATEUR, EXPERIMENTAL, AND SPORT AIRCRAFT AVID FLYER ...........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • For Improved Airplane Performance
    BLENDED WINGLETS FORFOR IMPROVEDIMPROVED AIRPLANEAIRPLANE PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE New blended winglets on the Boeing Business Jet and the 737-800 commercial airplane offer operational benefits to customers. Besides giving the airplanes a distinctive appear- ance, the winglets create more efficient flight characteristics in cruise and during takeoff and climbout, which translate into additional range with the same fuel and payload. ROBERT FAYE ROBERT LAPRETE MICHAEL WINTER TECHNICAL DIRECTOR ASSOCIATE TECHNICAL FELLOW PRINCIPAL ENGINEER BOEING BUSINESS JETS AERODYNAMICS TECHNOLOGY STATIC AEROELASTIC LOADS BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES BOEING COMMERCIAL AIRPLANES TECHNOLOGY/PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT AERO 16 vertical height of the lifting system (i.e., increasing the length of the TE that sheds the vortices). The winglets increase the spread of the vortices along the TE, creating more lift at the wingtips (figs. 2 and 3). The result is a reduction in induced drag (fig. 4). The maximum benefit of the induced drag reduction depends on the spanwise lift distribution on the wing. Theoretically, for a planar wing, induced drag is opti- mized with an elliptical lift distribution that minimizes the change in vorticity along the span. For the same amount of structural material, nonplanar wingtip 737-800 TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS devices can achieve a similar induced drag benefit as a planar span increase; however, new Boeing airplane designs Passengers focus on minimizing induced drag with 3-class configuration Not applicable The 737-800 commercial airplane wingspan influenced by additional 2-class configuration 162 is one of four 737s introduced BBJ TECHNICAL CHARACTERISTICS The Boeing Business Jet design benefits. 1-class configuration 189 in the late 1990s for short- to (BBJ) was launched in 1996 On derivative airplanes, performance Cargo 1,555 ft3 (44 m3) medium-range commercial air- Passengers Not applicable as a joint venture between can be improved by using wingtip Boeing and General Electric.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Circulaels National Advisory Committee For
    AIRCRAFT CIRCULAELS NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS No 119 THE AVRO TRAINER AIBPLAE (ERI T IS H) A Training Biplane Washington June, 1930 NATIONAL ADVISORY COlvilvITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS. AIRCRAFT CIRCULAR NO. 119. THE "AVRO TRAINER" AIRPLANE (BRITIsH)* A Training Biplane. Although the "Trainer" has scarcely a single dimension in common with the "504," the "family likeness" is quite striking. The two most marked changes are: the different shape of the rudder and the different landing gear. This airplane is primarily intended for training purposes and the requirements of -training have quite obviously been kept prominently in view throughout the design. Large, comfortable cockpits, good view, effective windshields, wide track are some of the features (Figs. 1, 3, 4) of the "Trainer." Constructional Features One of the innovations introduced in the "Avro Trainer" is that it is of all-metal construction (with exception of the fabric covering and the wooden fairings of the fuselage) in order to conform to thb requirements of the Air Ministry. In the tt Trainer" fuselage the modern form of Avro welded tube construction is employed (Figs. 5,6). Uniform stress is not easy of attainment in any aIrcraft structure, and the welded tube fuselage is no exception. In the "Trainer," however, an approach towards it has been made , by *From Flight, My 2, 1930. N.A.C.A. Aircraft Circular No. 119 2 having the longerons of thee different diameters, largest in front, medium from cockpits to about halfway towards the tail, and smallest in the tail end. The smaller tube is inserted a short distance into the larger, and the joint is then welded.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft Circulars National Advisory
    AIRCRAFT CIRCULARS NATIONAL ADVISORY coLaITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS 1o. 164 THE STIEGER ST. 4 LIGHT AIRPLANE (BRITISH) A Twin-Engine Four-Seat Low-Wing 0,-).bin Monoplane Washington May, 1932 NATIONAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE FOR AERONAUTICS AIRCRAFT CIRCULAR NO. 164 THE STIEGER ST. 4 LIGHT AIRPLANE (BRITISH)* A Twin-Engine Four-Seat Low-Wing Cabin Monoplane The ST. 4 is a twin-engine low-wing monoplane of the full cantilever type. Great care has been taken to keep the aerodynamic design "clean," and in order to avoid too great interference between fuselage and wing roots, the latter have been brought down to a thin section, while simultaneously. the trailing edge near the body has been raised. (Figs. 1, 2, 3.) Structurally, this arrangement has been achieved, by continuing the top boom of . the wing spar right across the fuselage, while the upper wing sur- face has been gradually reduced in camber as the fuselage is approached. As this surface drops away from the top spar boom, the latter becomes exposed, and is faired over the portion, which extends from the surface of the wing to the side of the fuselage. The wing consists structurally of three portions, or rather of two portions and a variation of one of them. These are: the wing root, the middle portion, and the wing tip . The middle portion and the tip are of dissimilar construction, although they are permanently attached to- gether, while the wing root, permanently attached to the fuselage and, indeed, forming an integral part of it, shows a type of construction quite different from both the middle and the end portions of the wing.
    [Show full text]
  • Development of an Advanced Composite Aileron for the L-101 1 Transport Aircraft
    NASA Contractor Report 3517 Development of an Advanced Composite Aileron for the L-101 1 Transport Aircraft C. F. Griffin and E. G. Dunning CONTRACT NASl-1506y FEBRUARY 1982 TECH LIBRARY KAFB, NM I1#111 Ill11lllllIll11lllll Ill1 lllll HI II 0062222 FEDD DOCUMENT Note that this document bears the label "FEDD," an acronym for "FOR EARLY DOMESTIC DISSEMINATION.’ The FEDD label is affixed to documents that may contain information having high commercial potential. The FEDD concept was developed as a result of the desire to maintain U.S. leadership in world trade markets and encourage a favorable balance of trade. Since the availability of tax- supported U.S. technology to foreign business interests could represent an unearned benefit, research results that may have high commercial potential are being distributed to U.S. industry in advance of general release. The recipient of this report must treat the information it contains according to the conditions of the FEDD label on the front cover. I -- -y NASA Contractor Report 3517 Development of an Advanced Composite Aileron for the L-101 1 Transport Aircraft C. F. Griffin Lockheed Corporation Burbank, California E. G. Dunning Avco Corporation Nasbde, Tennessee Prepared for Langley Research Center under Contract NAS l-15069 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Scientific and Technical Information Branch 1982 FOREWORD This report was prepared by the Lockheed-California Company, Lockheed Corporation, Burbank, California, under contract NASl-15069 and it is the summary report for the aileron program. The program is sponsored by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Langley Research Center. The Program Manager for Lockheed is F.
    [Show full text]
  • Federal Register/Vol. 64, No. 123/Monday, June 28, 1999/Rules
    34528 Federal Register / Vol. 64, No. 123 / Monday, June 28, 1999 / Rules and Regulations (2) Remove the temporary revision titled Federal Aviation Regulations (14 CFR 21.197 (k) This amendment becomes effective on ``Electrical Cables,'' dated March 7, 1996, and 21.199) to operate the airplane to a August 17, 1999. from the Pilot Operating Handbook (POH) location where the requirements of this AD Issued in Kansas City, Missouri, on June and insert a temporary revision titled can be accomplished. 18, 1999. ``Electrical Cables'' Rev. 1, dated July 12, (g) An alternative method of compliance or Michael Gallagher, 1996. Accomplish this action in accordance adjustment of the compliance times that with the Accomplishment Instructions provides an equivalent level of safety may be Manager, Small Airplane Directorate, Aircraft section in Pilatus PC XII SB No. 24±002, Rev. approved by the Manager, Small Airplane Certification Service. No. 1, dated September 20, 1996. Directorate, 1201 Walnut, suite 900, Kansas [FR Doc. 99±16277 Filed 6±25±99; 8:45 am] (b) For airplanes incorporating City, Missouri 64106. BILLING CODE 4910±13±U manufacturer serial numbers 101 through (1) The request shall be forwarded through 147, within the next 50 hours TIS after the an appropriate FAA Maintenance Inspector, effective date of this AD, replace the placard who may add comments and then send it to DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION installed near the standby magnetic compass the Manager, Small Airplane Directorate. that is required by AD 98±13±08, with a new (2) Alternative methods of compliance Federal Aviation Administration placard that incorporates the following words approved in accordance with AD 98±13±08 (using at least 1¤8inch letters): are not considered approved as alternative 14 CFR Part 39 STANDBY COMPASS FOR CORRECT methods of compliance for this AD.
    [Show full text]
  • Stinson Model 108 Series Airplanes
    The Stinson 108 Voyager http://www.westin553.net Larry Westin - 01/17/96 UPDATED - REV F - 09/03/14 - Page 1 of 11 As World War II entered its final stages, Stinson decided to use the pre-war model 10 Voyager as the starting point for its first post war airplane. Converting a company owned model 10A Voyager, the first prototype Stinson model Voyager 125 was built in late 1944. Initially this was still a three seater powered by a Lycoming 125 HP engine and known as the Voyager 125. First flight of the postwar Voyager was December 1, 1944. The first prototype (of two) was registered NX31519. First configuration of this airplane shows it with a tail, both vertical and horizontal, similar to the model 10A Voyager. Stinson's new post war aircraft was first named the Voyager 125. It was almost 2 feet longer, 250 pounds heavier and had 35 more horse power than the pre war Voyager. The pre war Voyager 10 was slightly under powered and the additional power was thought adequate to correct this deficiency. Flight tests showed a disappointing performance and the decision was made to use a higher powered engine. Substituting a 150 HP Franklin 6A4-150-B4 created the Voyager 150. The added powered allowed Stinson to make some additional changes by increasing the cabin width, lengthening the fuselage about a foot, and increasing gross weight another 285 pounds, to 2150 pounds. These changes not only improved performance, but it also made the Voyager into a 4 place airplane. The second prototype, registered NX51532, was also a converted model 10A Voyager owned by Stinson.
    [Show full text]
  • Explanatory Note to TCDS IM.A.120 – Boeing 737 Issue 11
    Explanatory Note to TCDS IM.A.120 – Boeing 737 Issue 11 This annex to the EASA TCDS IM.A.120 was created to publish selected special conditions / deviations / equivalent safety findings that are part of the applicable certification basis: Table of Contents: Certification Review Items: A-10: Additional requirements for import ...........................................................................................3 A. 11-02: Pressurised Cabin Loads ......................................................................................................5 A. 11-04: Emergency Landing Dynamic Loads ...................................................................................6 A. 11-05: Fatigue and Damage Tolerance ............................................................................................7 A. 11-06: Fasteners ...............................................................................................................................9 A. 11-08: Lift and Drag Device Indicator ..........................................................................................10 A. 11-11: Doors ..................................................................................................................................11 A. 11-12: Seat, Berths, Safety Belts and Harness ..............................................................................12 A. 11-13: Direct view and cabin attendant seat ..................................................................................13 A. 11-16: Equipment Systems and Installations ................................................................................14
    [Show full text]