DOCSLIB.ORG

INDICATIONS of PROPULSION SYSTEM MALFUNCTIONS November 2004 6

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
INDICATIONS of PROPULSION SYSTEM MALFUNCTIONS November 2004 6 DOT/FAA/AR-03/72 Indications of Propulsion System Office of Aviation Research Malfunctions Washington, D.C. 20591 November 2004 Final Report This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturer's names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. This document does not constitute FAA certification policy. Consult your local FAA aircraft certification office as to its use. This report is available at the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center’s Full-Text Technical Reports page: actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF). Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. DOT/FAA/AR-03/72 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date INDICATIONS OF PROPULSION SYSTEM MALFUNCTIONS November 2004 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. S.T. Clark, R.E. Iverson, R.J. Mumaw, J.A. Sikora, J.L. Vian, and V.J. Winters CDRL Item 3c 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 Seattle, WA 98124 11. Contract or Grant No. DTFA03-01-C-00032 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered U.S. Department of Transportation Final Report Federal Aviation Administration 09/25/01 through 12/31/02 Office of Aviation Research 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20591 ANE-100, ANM-100 15. Supplementary Notes The FAA William J. Hughes Technical Monitor was William Emmerling. 16. Abstract This report summarizes the concepts, risks, issues, and conclusions of efforts to assess technical feasibility and operational appropriateness of providing indications of propulsion system malfunctions. 17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement Propulsion system malfunction, Inappropriate crew response This document is available to the public through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. 19. Security Classification (of this report) 20. Security Classification (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price Unclassified Unclassified 257 Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This study involved a large and diverse group of individuals and organizations. The following individuals, in particular, are acknowledged for their participation, work, and support: The Boeing Company: Sam Clark, John Doherty, Jenny Gertley, Gene Iverson, Allen John, Joe MacDonald, Jay Mesick, Randy Mumaw, Bob Myers, Joel Purificacion, James Johnson, Eric Schwartz, Joe Sikora, Doug Swanson, Dennis Tilzey, Nasser Vaziri, John Vian, and Van Winters General Electric: Sarah Knife, Stephen Bitter, and Pete Toot Federal Aviation Administration: Don Altobelli, Ann Azevedo, Bill Emmerling, Gary Horan, Mike McRae, and Hals Larsen Impact Technologies: Greg Kacprzynski, and Mike Roemer Pratt & Whitney: William Cousins, Scott Carr, and Art Becker United Air Lines: Marilyn Hardy iii/iv TABLE OF CONTENTS Page EXECUTIVE SUMMARY xix 1. INTRODUCTION AND APPROACH 1-1 1.1 Introduction 1-1 1.2 Approach 1-1 2. DISCUSSION, SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2-1 2.1 Discussion 2-1 2.2 Summary and Conclusions 2-2 2.3 Recommendations 2-3 3. OVERALL PSM DETECTION AND ANNUNCIATION RISK/BENEFIT ASSESSMENT (TASK 1.3) 3-1 3.1 Terms and Definitions 3-1 3.2 Benefit/Risk Assessment of PSM Annunciations 3-4 3.3 General Operational Benefit and Risks of PSM Annunciation 3-4 3.4 Potential Operational Benefit of PSM Annunciation 3-4 3.5 Operational Risks of PSM Annunciation 3-5 3.6 General Detection Feasibility Considerations 3-5 3.6.1 Identification of Malfunctioning Engine 3-5 3.6.2 Detection Time Lag Rule 3-6 3.6.3 Recoverability/Nonrecoverability 3-6 3.6.4 Detection Feasibility 3-6 3.6.5 False Detection Risk Discussion 3-7 3.6.6 Failure to Detect Risk Discussion 3-7 3.6.7 Recoverability Research Recommendations 3-7 3.7 Powerloss Annunciation Potential Operational Benefits/Risks 3-8 3.7.1 Powerloss Annunciation Potential Benefits 3-8 3.7.2 False Powerloss Detection Risks 3-8 3.7.3 Failure to Annunciate/Detect Powerloss Risks 3-9 3.7.4 Confidence of Correct Powerloss PSM Detection 3-9 3.7.5 Powerloss Detection Further Research 3-10 3.8 Surge Annunciation Potential Operational Benefits and Risks 3-10 v 3.8.1 Surge Annunciation Potential Benefits 3-11 3.8.2 Surge Detection/Annunciation Risks 3-11 3.8.3 Confidence of Correct Surge PSM Detection 3-12 3.8.4 Surge Detection Further Research 3-13 3.9 Failed Fixed Thrust Annunciation Potential Operational Benefits and Risk 3-13 3.9.1 Failed Fixed Thrust Annunciation Potential Benefits 3-13 3.9.2 Failed Fixed Detection/Annunciation Risks 3-14 3.9.3 Confidence of Correct Failed Fixed Thrust PSM Detection 3-14 3.9.4 Failed Fixed Thrust Further Research 3-15 3.10 High Vibration Annunciation Potential Operational Benefits and Risks 3-15 3.10.1 High Vibration Annunciation Potential Operational Benefits 3-15 3.10.2 High Vibration Detection/Annunciation Risks 3-15 3.10.3 Confidence of Correct High Vibration PSM Detection 3-16 3.10.4 High Vibration Further Research 3-16 3.11 Thrust Asymmetry 3-17 3.11.1 Thrust Asymmetry Annunciation Potential Benefits and Risks 3-17 3.11.2 Confidence of Correct Thrust Asymmetry PSM Detection 3-18 3.12 The PSM Benefit, Detection Potential, and Risk Summary 3-18 4. OPERATIONAL ASSESSMENT—TASKS 2.1, 1.2, 6.2, AND 6.1 4-1 4.1 In-Service Data Assessment (Task 2.1) 4-1 4.1.1 Research Objective and Goal 4-1 4.1.2 Task 2.1 Overview and Background 4-1 4.1.3 Discussion of Inappropriate Crew Response 4-3 4.1.4 Task 2.1 Review and Analysis Methodology 4-4 4.1.4.1 The AIA PSM+ICR Report Data Review and Analysis 4-4 4.1.4.2 The PSM and IFSD Data Review 4-5 4.1.5 The Review and Analysis of AIA PSM+ICR Report Events 4-6 4.1.5.1 The PSM+ICR Report Events Overview 4-6 4.1.5.2 The PSM+ICR Category Characterizations and Related Conclusions 4-6 vi 4.1.5.3 The AIA PSM+ICR Report Event Analyses and Related Conclusions 4-10 4.1.5.4 General and Specific PSM+ICR Safety Concerns From Event Analyses 4-22 4.1.6 Review and Analysis of Post-AIA Report PSM, IFSD, and PSM+ICR Data 4-25 4.1.6.1 Propulsion System Malfunction Data 4-25 4.1.6.2 Post-AIA Report PSM+ICR Events on Boeing Aircraft 4-33 4.1.6.3 The AIA Report PSM+ICR and 2000-2001 PSM Data Comparison/Analysis 4-35 4.1.6.4 Post-AIA Report Data Summary, Calculations, and Comments 4-38 4.1.7 Task 2.1 Report Conclusions and Recommendations 4-40 4.1.7.1 General 4-40 4.1.7.2 Traceability Task 2.1 Conclusions and Recommendations 4-43 4.2 Operational Assessment of PSM Annunciations (Task 1.2) 4-44 4.2.1 Engine Indication and Crew-Alerting Systems 4-44 4.2.2 Engine Indication System 4-46 4.2.2.1 Engine Indications 4-46 4.2.2.2 Engine Indication Annunciations/Alerts 4-49 4.2.3 Crew-Alerting Systems 4-51 4.2.3.1 General 4-52 4.2.3.2 Engine Indication and Crew-Alerting System Alert Levels 4-52 4.2.3.3 Engine Indication and Crew-Alerting Systems Inhibits 4-53 4.2.4 Flight Deck Design and Operational Philosophy, Requirements, and Guidelines 4-54 vii 4.2.4.1 Flight Deck Design and Operational Philosophy 4-54 4.2.4.2 Flight Deck Interface Design Guidelines and Requirements 4-55 4.2.4.3 Applicable Federal Aviation Regulations 4-56 4.2.5 Operational Assessment 4-57 4.2.5.1 Safety Concerns and Focus—Task 2.1 Data Analysis 4-58 4.2.5.2 Inappropriate Crew Response Prevention Potential 4-61 4.2.5.3 Existing Indications, Alerts, and Functions PSM+ICR Prevention Potential 4-66 4.2.6 Desired/Required Crew Awareness and Response—Potential Annunciations 4-72 4.2.6.1 Potential Safety and Operational Benefits and Risks 4-73 4.2.6.2 Summary, Conclusions, and Preliminary Recommendations 4-81 4.3 Human Factors Considerations (Task 6.2) 4-85 4.3.1 Introduction 4-85 4.3.2 Engine-Related Flight Crew Tasks 4-86 4.3.2.1 Engine Performance Monitoring 4-86 4.3.2.2 Crew Engine Health Monitoring (and Managing Nonnormals) 4-87 4.3.3 Enhancement Opportunities for Current Indications 4-87 4.3.3.1 Detection of Change 4-88 4.3.3.2 Interpretation of Change 4-89 4.3.3.3 Thrust Indication 4-91 4.3.3.4 Accident/Incident Literature 4-92 4.3.4 Role of the Flight Deck Interface in Propulsion System Management 4-93 4.3.4.1 Supporting Performance Monitoring 4-93 viii 4.3.4.2 Supporting Monitoring Engine Health and Managing Nonnormals 4-95 4.3.5 Designing for Engine-Related Tasks 4-96 4.3.5.1 Level of Representation 4-97 4.3.5.2 Level of Support From the Flight Deck Interface 4-99 4.3.5.3 Allocation Guidelines: Human Processor Strengths and Weaknesses 4-107 4.3.6 Indication Ideas 4-114 4.3.7 Summary and Recommendations 4-117 4.4 Noncommercial Aircraft Technology Survey (Task 6.1) 4-120 4.4.1 Task 6.1 Objective and Goal 4-120 4.4.2 Task 6.1 Overview/Background and Methodology 4-121 4.4.3 Aircraft and Engine Descriptions 4-123 4.4.3.1 F15E 4-123 4.4.3.2 F18E/F 4-123 4.4.3.3 F22 4-124 4.4.3.4 AV8B 4-124 4.4.3.5 C17 4-124 4.4.3.6 V22 4-125 4.4.3.7 AH64D 4-126 4.4.3.8 Gulfstream V 4-126 4.4.4 Summary of Survey Results 4-126 4.4.5 Potential Precedent and Technology Transfers 4-126 4.4.5.1 Engine Indication Concepts 4-129 4.4.5.2 Propulsion System Malfunction Indication Annunciations 4-129 4.4.5.3 Propulsion System Malfunction Alert Annunciations 4-129 4.4.5.4 Display Management Concepts 4-130 4.4.5.5 Airplane-Level Information Display 4-130 4.4.5.6 Health Monitoring and Control 4-130 ix 4.4.5.7 Airplane Flight Control or Control Function 4-130 4.4.6 Task 6.2 Conclusions 4-131 4.4.7 Task 6.2 Recommendations 4-131 5.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Project No.: R. 089145.001
    Project No.: R. 089145.001 Section 01 01 50 Mission Minimum Institution GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS 33737 Dewdney Trunk Road, Mission, BC Page 1 of 18 EXPANSION OF HEALTH CARE 1 SUMMARY OF WORK .1 Work covered by Contract Documents: .1 Work under this Contract comprises construction of a health care building expansion and renovation work as indicated, located at Mission Minimum Institution, Mission, B.C. .2 Contractor’s Use of Premises: .1 Contractor has controlled use of site within the construction area for Work, storage, and access as directed by the Departmental Representative. .2 Use of areas inside Mission Institution, for access to the construction site is controlled, by the Departmental Representative. .3 Obtain and pay for use of additional storage or work areas needed for operations under this Contract. .4 The new building will be constructed inside the security fence. The institution will be fully operational during work of this Contract. Provide temporary construction fence around site until new security fencing is installed. .3 Conform to National Building Code 2015 or British Columbia Building Code 2012 as applicable. .4 Contractor to apply for Building Permit before construction and Occupancy Permit upon Substantial completion. .1 Departmental Representative will supply the required drawings and Letters of Assurance for such applications. .2 Contractor to pay for all required fees for Building Permit and Occupancy Permit. .3 Before issuing the Substantial Completion certificate, Contractor must provide fire alarm verification report and Occupancy Permit from local authority having jurisdiction. 2 WORK RESTRICTIONS .1 Notify, Departmental Representative of intended interruption of disconnected services and provide schedule for review.
    [Show full text]
  • 19730021074.Pdf
    NASA TECHNICAL NOTE NASA TN D-7328 CO LE CORY STEADY-STATE AND DYNAMIC PRESSURE PHENOMENA IN THE PROPULSION SYSTEM OF AN F-111A AIRPLANE by Frank W. Burcbam, Jr., Donald L. Hughes, and Jon K. Holzman Flight Research Center Edwards, Calif. 93523 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION • WASHINGTON, D. C. • JULY 1973 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. NASA TN D-7328 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date STEADY-STATE AND DYNAMIC PRESSURE PHENOMENA IN THE July 1973 PROPULSION SYSTEM OF AN F-111A AIRPLANE 6. Performing Organization Code 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Frank W. Burcham, Jr., Donald L. Hughes, and Jon K. Holzman H-741 10. Work Unit No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 136-13-08-00-24 NASA Flight Research Center P. O. Box 273 11. Contract or Grant No. Edwards, California 93523 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Note National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, D. C. 20546 15. Supplementary Notes 16. Abstract Flight tests were conducted with two F-111A airplanes to study the effects of steady-state and dynamic pressure phenomena on the propulsion system. Analysis of over 100 engine compressor stalls revealed that the stalls were caused by high levels of instantaneous distortion. In 73 per- cent of these stalls, the instantaneous circumferential distortion parameter, Kg, exhibited a peak just prior to stall higher than any previous peak. The Kg parameter was a better indicator of stall than the distortion factor, K_, and the maximum-minus-minimum distortion parameter, D, was a poor indicator of stall.
    [Show full text]
  • Seventeenth European Rotorcraft Forum
    ERF91-25 SEVENTEENTH EUROPEAN ROTORCRAFT FORUM Paper No. 91-25 V-22 PROPULSION SYSTEM DESIGN W. G. Sonneborn, E. 0. Kaiser, C. E. Covington, and K. Wilson Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. Fort Worth, Texas U .S.A. SEPTEMBER 24-27, 1991 Berlin, Germany Deutsche ·oesellschaft fiir Luft- und Raumfahrt e. V. (DGLR) Godesberger Allee 70, 5300 Bonn 2, Germany OPGENOMENIN GEAUTOMATISEERDE ERF91-25 V-22 PROPULSION SYSTEM DESIGN W. G. Sonneborn E. 0. Kaiser C. E. Covington K. Wilson Bell Helicopter Textron, Inc. Fort Worth, Texas U.S.A. Abstract The next generation tiltrotor, the XV-15, truly dem­ onstrated the feasibility of the technology, especial­ The propulsion system of the V-22 Osprey, compris­ ly the tilting-engine concept. The free power tur­ ing the drive system, the power plant installation, bine allowed the rotor system to operate over a wide and the proprotor, is a unique design driven by the range of speeds without drive train shift mecha­ operational requirements of this tiltrotor aircraft. nisms. Pylon stability was satisfactory with a three­ bladed gimballed rotor attached to a stiff pylon. The drive system, which includes five gearboxes, shafting, and special nonlubricated flexible cou­ The V-22 propulsion design is the first design to plings, is described. The rationale for arrangement meet operational requirements as outlined in rigid and lessons learned is followed by a discussion of the NAVAIR specifications. Fly-by-wire control tech­ effect of special requirements such as shipboard nology simplifies the mechanical design, and use of compatibility and cooling. Lubrication system op­ composite materials achieves significant weight eration from horizontal to vertical modes, operation savings and other operational advantages.
    [Show full text]
  • Capabilities and Prospects for Improvement in Aircraft Icing Office of Aviation Research Washington, D.C
    DOT/FAA/AR-01/28 Capabilities and Prospects for Improvement in Aircraft Icing Office of Aviation Research Washington, D.C. 20591 Simulation Methods: Contributions to the 11C Working Group May 2001 Final Report This document is available to the U.S. public through the National Technical Information Service (NTIS), Springfield, Virginia 22161. U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for the contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturer's names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. This document does not constitute FAA certification policy. Consult your local FAA aircraft certification office as to its use. This report is available at the Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center's Full-Text Technical Reports page: actlibrary.tc.faa.gov in Adobe Acrobat portable document format (PDF). Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. DOT/FAA/AR-01/28 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date CAPABILITIES AND PROSPECTS FOR IMPROVEMENT IN AIRCRAFT ICING May 2001 SIMULATION METHODS: CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE 11C WORKING 6. Performing Organization Code GROUP 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS) Federal Aviation Administration William J. Hughes Technical Center Aircraft Safety Research and Development Branch 11. Contract or Grant No.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment
    University of Tennessee, Knoxville TRACE: Tennessee Research and Creative Exchange Masters Theses Graduate School 5-2006 Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment Scott Bennett Trail University of Tennessee - Knoxville Follow this and additional works at: https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes Part of the Aerospace Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Trail, Scott Bennett, "Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment. " Master's Thesis, University of Tennessee, 2006. https://trace.tennessee.edu/utk_gradthes/1816 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 Scott Bennett Trail entitled "Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment." 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 equirr ements for the degree of Master of Science, with a major in Aviation Systems. Robert B. Richards, Major Professor We have read this thesis and recommend its acceptance: Rodney Allison, Frank Collins 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 Scott Bennett Trail entitled “Evaluation of V-22 Tiltrotor Handling Qualities in the Instrument Meteorological Environment”.
    [Show full text]
  • Your Continued Donations Keep Wikipedia Running
    Jet engine performance Design Point TS Diagram Typical Temperature vs. Entropy (TS) Diagram for a single spool turbojet. Note that 1 CHU/(lbm K) = 1 Btu/(lb °R) = 1 Btu/(lb °F) = 1 kcal/(kg °C) = 4.184 kJ/(kg·K). Temperature vs. entropy (TS) diagrams (see example RHS) are usually used to illustrate the cycle of gas turbine engines. All the reader really needs to know about entropy is that it represents the degree of disorder of the molecules in the fluid and that it tends to increase! Apart from stations 0 and 8s, stagnation pressure and stagnation temperature are used. Station 0 is ambient. The processes depicted are: Freestream (stations 0 to 1) In the example, the aircraft is stationary, so stations 0 and 1 are coincident. Station 1 is not depicted on the diagram. Intake (stations 1 to 2) In the example, a 100% intake pressure recovery is assumed, so stations 1 and 2 are coincident. 1 Compression (stations 2 to 3) The ideal process would appear vertical on a TS diagram. In the real process there is friction, turbulence and, possibly, shock losses, making the exit temperature, for a given pressure ratio, higher than ideal. The shallower the positive slope on the TS diagram, the less efficient the compression process. Combustion (stations 3 to 4) Heat (usually by burning fuel) is added, raising the temperature of the fluid. There is an associated pressure loss, some of which is unavoidable Turbine (stations 4 to 5) The temperature rise in the compressor dictates that there will be an associated temperature drop across the turbine.
    [Show full text]
  • Aircraft of Today. Aerospace Education I
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 068 287 SE 014 551 AUTHOR Sayler, D. S. TITLE Aircraft of Today. Aerospace EducationI. INSTITUTION Air Univ.,, Maxwell AFB, Ala. JuniorReserve Office Training Corps. SPONS AGENCY Department of Defense, Washington, D.C. PUB DATE 71 NOTE 179p. EDRS PRICE MF-$0.65 HC-$6.58 DESCRIPTORS *Aerospace Education; *Aerospace Technology; Instruction; National Defense; *PhysicalSciences; *Resource Materials; Supplementary Textbooks; *Textbooks ABSTRACT This textbook gives a brief idea aboutthe modern aircraft used in defense and forcommercial purposes. Aerospace technology in its present form has developedalong certain basic principles of aerodynamic forces. Differentparts in an airplane have different functions to balance theaircraft in air, provide a thrust, and control the general mechanisms.Profusely illustrated descriptions provide a picture of whatkinds of aircraft are used for cargo, passenger travel, bombing, and supersonicflights. Propulsion principles and descriptions of differentkinds of engines are quite helpful. At the end of each chapter,new terminology is listed. The book is not available on the market andis to be used only in the Air Force ROTC program. (PS) SC AEROSPACE EDUCATION I U S DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. EDUCATION & WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRO OUCH) EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIG INATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPIN 'IONS STATED 00 NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICE OF EOU CATION POSITION OR POLICY AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC MR,UNIVERS17/14AXWELL MR FORCEBASE, ALABAMA Aerospace Education I Aircraft of Today D. S. Sayler Academic Publications Division 3825th Support Group (Academic) AIR FORCE JUNIOR ROTC AIR UNIVERSITY MAXWELL AIR FORCE BASE, ALABAMA 2 1971 Thispublication has been reviewed and approvedby competent personnel of the preparing command in accordance with current directiveson doctrine, policy, essentiality, propriety, and quality.
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Sky 2 JU Work Plan 2014/2015
    Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking Amendment nr. 2 to Work Plan 2014-2015 Version 7 – March 2015 – Important Notice on the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) Work Plan 2014-2015 This Work Plan covers the years 2014 and 2015. Due to the starting phase of the Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking under Regulation (EU) No 558/204 of 6 May 2014 the information contained in this Work Plan (topics list, description, budget, planning of calls) may be subject to updates. Any amended Work Plan will be announced and published on the JU’s website. © CSJU 2015 Please note that the copyright of this document and its content is the strict property of the JU. Any information related to this document disclosed by any other party shall not be construed as having been endorsed by to the JU. The JU expressly disclaims liability for any future changes of the content of this document. ~ Page intentionally left blank ~ Page 2 of 256 Clean Sky 2 Joint Undertaking Amendment nr. 2 to Work Plan 2014-2015 Document Version: V7 Date: 25/03/2015 Revision History Table Version n° Issue Date Reason for change V1 0First9/07/2014 Release V2 30/07/2014 The ANNEX I: 1st Call for Core-Partners: List and Full Description of Topics has been updated and regards the AIR-01-01 topic description: Part 2.1.2 - Open Rotor (CROR) and Ultra High by-pass ratio turbofan engine configurations (link to WP A-1.2), having a specific scope, was removed for consistency reasons. The intent is to publish this subject in the first Call for Partners.
    [Show full text]
  • A Reconfigurable VTOL Aircraft
    35th Annual AHS Student Design Competition A Reconfigurable VTOL Aircraft Sponsored by United States Army Research Laboratory Alfred Gessow Rotorcraft Center Department of Aerospace Engineering University of Maryland College Park, MD 20742 Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics Nanjing, China Executive Summary Metaltail: Reconfigured for the Future Swing Wing Mechanism Novel execution of sweeping wings reconfigures past problems into present-day solutions. Tailored Proprotor Design Common point design between rotors and propellers provides efficient performance for both hover and forward flight. Tailsitter Configuration An X-tail titanium frame ensures structural integrity for bearing landing loads. Modular Payload Bay State-of-the-Art Engines Innovative Hingeless Hub Large compartment and modular Two advanced turboshaft diesel Unique swashplate mounting rack offers flexibility for engines deliver unprecedented method results in compact hub assortment of payload packages. power for exceptional with shorter control rods. performance. Metaltail: Pushing the Envelope High in the montane forests of Ecuador, a steady hum of activity can be heard as Tyrian Metaltail hummingbirds skirt around the flora, pollinating the habitat. Using their high visual acuity, these small creatures can recognize a wide variety of colors and detect the slightest of motions. Coupled with their agile wing movements, they are able to precisely hover in place while in complex and dynamic environments. Inspired by these small but impressive flyers, Metaltail is a fully autonomous, high-speed, reconfigurable aircraft designed by the University of Maryland in response to the 35th Annual AHS Student Design Competition Request for Proposal (RFP) sponsored by the United States Army Research Laboratory (ARL). Developed as a Group 3 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV), Metaltail is an autonomous coaxial-proprotor swing-wing tailsitter that, like the high-altitude hummingbirds of Ecuador, leverages visual sensory information and adjustable wing geometry to maneuver in megacity environments.
    [Show full text]
  • RCAF Firebee Drone Set 1/72
    Belcher Bits BL6: RCAF Firebee Drone set 1/72 Belcher Bits, 33 Norway Spruce St, Stittsville, ON, K2S 1P3 Phone: (613) 836-6575, e-mail: [email protected] Background The vertical fin has a pitot tube extending from its leading edge; this can best be represented with a length of wire or fine tubing. The RCAF took on strength a number of Ryan KDA-4 Firebee Glue the wings to the fuselage, making sure they are level. Glue the drones in 1958 in support of Sparrow II trials, proposed for use with the elevators where indicated. Note also that there is a definite gap on the CF-100 and to be developed for use with the CF-105 Arrow. These trials back half of each joint, so only fill the front half. Same thin applies for were conducted by the Central Experimental Proving Establishment. the vertical fin. Two Lancaster 10MR (KB848 and KB851)were modified as Drone Glue the tailplane endplates on the end of the tailplanes ... where Controllers to carry the Firebee drones. The aircraft were the most else! Finally, slide the engine inlet cone into the intake and retain with colourful Lancasters in the RCAF with extensive patches of dayglo on a couple drops of glue nose, tail and wingtips (although Sparrows cant see colours, the pilots . launching them can!) It was common to see these Lancaster 10DCs with Firebee Colours a full load of two Firebees underwing. All KDA-4 Firebees in RCAF service were red 9-2 (FS 11310). There were variations: some had white wings, and other photos show this First Steps white extended in a band across the top of the fuselage.
    [Show full text]
  • NASA's First A
    NASA’s First A Aeronautics from 1958 to 2008 National Aeronautics and Space Administration Office of Communications Public Outreach Division History Program Office Washington, DC 2013 The NASA History Series NASA SP-2012-4412 NASA’s First A Aeronautics from 1958 to 2008 Robert G. Ferguson Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Ferguson, Robert G. NASA’s first A : aeronautics from 1958 to 2008 / Robert G. Ferguson. p. cm. -- (The NASA history series) (NASA SP ; 2012-4412) 1. United States. National Aeronautics and Space Administration--History. 2. United States. National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics--History. I. Title. TL521.312.F47 2012 629.130973--dc23 2011029949 This publication is available as a free download at http://www.nasa.gov/ebooks. TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments vii Chapter 1: The First A: The Other NASA ..................................1 Chapter 2: NACA Research, 1945–58 .................................... 25 Chapter 3: Creating NASA and the Space Race ........................57 Chapter 4: Renovation and Revolution ................................... 93 Chapter 5: Cold War Revival and Ideological Muddle ............141 Chapter 6: The Icarus Decade ............................................... 175 Chapter 7: Caught in Irons ................................................... 203 Chapter 8: Conclusion .......................................................... 229 Appendix: Aeronautics Budget 235 The NASA History Series 241 Index 259 v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Before naming individuals, I must express my gratitude to those who have labored, and continue to do so, to preserve and share NASA’s history. I came to this project after years of studying private industry, where sources are rare and often inaccessible. By contrast, NASA’s History Program Office and its peers at the laboratories have been toiling for five decades, archiving, cataloging, interviewing, supporting research, and underwriting authors.
    [Show full text]
  • A New VTOL Propelled Wing for Flying Cars
    A new VTOL propelled wing for flying cars: critical bibliographic analysis TRANCOSSI, Michele <http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7916-6278>, HUSSAIN, Mohammad, SHIVESH, Sharma and PASCOA, J Available from Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive (SHURA) at: http://shura.shu.ac.uk/16848/ This document is the author deposited version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from it. Published version TRANCOSSI, Michele, HUSSAIN, Mohammad, SHIVESH, Sharma and PASCOA, J (2017). A new VTOL propelled wing for flying cars: critical bibliographic analysis. SAE Technical Papers, 01 (2144), 1-14. Copyright and re-use policy See http://shura.shu.ac.uk/information.html Sheffield Hallam University Research Archive http://shura.shu.ac.uk 20XX-01-XXXX A new VTOL propelled wing for flying cars: critical bibliographic analysis Author, co-author (Do NOT enter this information. It will be pulled from participant tab in MyTechZone) Affiliation (Do NOT enter this information. It will be pulled from participant tab in MyTechZone) Abstract 2. acceleration of the fluid stream on the upper surface of the wing by mean of EDF propellers [13] that produces a much higher lift coefficient, with respect to any other aircrafts (up to 9-10); This paper is a preliminary step in the direction of the definition of a 3. very low stall speed (lower than 10m/s) and consequent increase radically new wing concept that has been conceived to maximize the of the flight envelope in the low speed domain up to 10÷12 m/s; lift even at low speeds. It is expected to equip new aerial vehicle 4.
    [Show full text]