DOCSLIB.ORG

Special Flight Authorizations for Supersonic Aircraft

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Special Flight Authorizations for Supersonic Aircraft 3782 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Rules and Regulations certified that this rule, when Issued in Fort Worth, Texas, on January 4, 106 describes the authority of the FAA promulgated, does not have a significant 2021. Administrator. Subtitle VII, Aviation economic impact on a substantial Martin A. Skinner, Programs, describes in more detail the number of small entities under the Acting Manager, Operations Support Group, scope of the agency’s authority. criteria of the Regulatory Flexibility Act. ATO Central Service Center. This rulemaking is promulgated [FR Doc. 2021–00022 Filed 1–14–21; 8:45 am] under the authority described in Environmental Review BILLING CODE 4910–13–P Subtitle VII, Part A, Subpart III, Section The FAA has determined that this 44715 Controlling aircraft noise and action qualifies for categorical exclusion sonic boom. Under that section, FAA is under the National Environmental DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION charged with prescribing regulations to Policy Act in accordance with FAA measure and abate aircraft noise. This Order 1050.1F, ‘‘Environmental Federal Aviation Administration regulation is within the scope of that Impacts: Policies and Procedures,’’ authority since it provides for certain paragraph 5–6.5.a. This airspace action 14 CFR Part 91 operations of new supersonic aircraft in is not expected to cause any potentially [Docket No.: FAA–2019–0451; Amdt. No. approved areas where the significant environmental impacts, and 91–362] environmental impact of the operations no extraordinary circumstances exist has been assessed. RIN 2120–AL30 that warrant preparation of an I. Overview of Final Rule environmental assessment. Special Flight Authorizations for This rulemaking amends the Lists of Subjects in 14 CFR Part 71 Supersonic Aircraft administrative requirements for a special flight authorization originally Airspace, Incorporation by reference, AGENCY: Federal Aviation published as appendix B to part 91, Navigation (air). Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation (DOT). Authorizations to exceed Mach 1 Adoption of the Amendment (§ 91.817), of title 14 of the Code of ACTION: Final rule. Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This In consideration of the foregoing, the SUMMARY: In consideration of the rulemaking is intended to streamline the Federal Aviation Administration application procedure for these special amends 14 CFR part 71 as follows: continuing development of a new generation of supersonic aircraft, FAA is flight authorizations by clarifying the PART 71—DESIGNATION OF CLASS A, modernizing the procedure for information that is needed for B, C, D, AND E AIRSPACE AREAS; AIR requesting a special flight authorization submission and specifying the program TRAFFIC SERVICE ROUTES; AND to operate in excess of Mach 1 over land office within FAA that processes the REPORTING POINTS in the United States. The renewed applications. This rule sets forth the interest in development of supersonic application criteria in a more user- ■ 1. The authority citation for part 71 airplanes caused FAA to review its friendly format. FAA is adopting the continues to read as follows: application procedures that allow for rule largely as it was proposed, with flight tests of these aircraft. This final some minor changes to the regulatory Authority: 49 U.S.C. 106(f), 106(g); 40103, rule modifies the criteria for applying text, as discussed in Section IV and the 40113, 40120; E.O. 10854, 24 FR 9565, 3 CFR, accompanying preamble discussion. 1959–1963 Comp., p. 389. for these authorizations and moves the material from an appendix to a II. Background § 71.1 [Amended] regulation to make it easier to find and understand. Outside the context of In a notice of proposed rulemaking ■ 2. The incorporation by reference in (NPRM) titled Special Flight 14 CFR 71.1 of FAA Order 7400.11E, special flight authorizations under this final rule, the FAA continues generally Authorizations for Supersonic Aircraft Airspace Designations and Reporting (84 FR 30961, June 28, 2019), FAA Points, dated July 21, 2020, and to prohibit civil supersonic flight over land in the United States. proposed to modernize the procedures effective September 15, 2020, is for requesting special flight DATES: amended as follows: Effective February 16, 2021. authorizations that are needed to ADDRESSES: For information on where to accomplish testing and development of Paragraph 6005 Class E Airspace Areas obtain copies of rulemaking documents new supersonic aircraft. The NPRM Extending Upward from 700 feet or More and other information related to this Above the Surface of the Earth. provided a brief history of FAA’s final rule, see ‘‘How To Obtain regulation of civil supersonic aircraft * * * * * Additional Information’’ in the beginning in the 1970s with the AGL WI E5 Prairie Du Chien, WI SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section of introduction of the Concorde, including [Amended] this document. the history of the application procedure Prairie Du Chien Municipal Airport, WI FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For for special flight authorizations that is (Lat. 43°01′09″ N, long. 91°07′25″ W) questions concerning this action, the subject of this rulemaking. That airspace extending upward from 700 contact: Sandy Liu, Office of FAA is clarifying the application feet above the surface within a 6.6-mile Environment and Energy, AEE–100, procedure for requesting a special flight radius of Prairie Du Chien Municipal Airport, Federal Aviation Administration, 800 authorization to fly faster than Mach 1 and within 1 mile each side of the 110° Independence Avenue SW, Washington, following increased interest by industry bearing from the airport extending from the DC 20591; telephone (240) 267–4748; to develop such aircraft. The revisions 6.6-mile radius to 6.8 miles east of the email [email protected]. adopted here do not change the general airport, and within 1 mile each side of the prohibition against overland supersonic 140° bearing from the airport extending from SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: flight in the United States that has been the 6.6-mile radius to 10.4 miles southeast of Authority for This Rulemaking the airport, and within 1 mile each side of in place since 1973 (14 CFR 91.817). the 320° bearing from the airport extending FAA’s authority to issue rules on This rule replaces the procedure from the 6.6-mile radius to 10.6 miles aviation safety is found in Title 49 of the described in part 91, appendix B, with northwest of the airport. United States Code. Subtitle I, Section regulatory text that clearly describes the VerDate Sep<11>2014 21:59 Jan 14, 2021 Jkt 253001 PO 00000 Frm 00048 Fmt 4700 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\15JAR1.SGM 15JAR1 Federal Register / Vol. 86, No. 10 / Friday, January 15, 2021 / Rules and Regulations 3783 application process and criteria. The authorization to perform supersonic in effect since 1973, and no change to new regulation provides clarity, aircraft development testing. that regulation was proposed. includes noise testing as another reason In the proposed rule, FAA identified Rather, the proposed rule focused on for which an authorization may be three areas intended to improve the administrative application process issued, and requires one additional provisions that comprised appendix B. for special flight authorizations to piece of information to be provided in The first designated the proposed office exceed Mach 1 for certain reasons, and an application, which is discussed in FAA to which applicants are to send for flight in limited areas that would be below. This rule does not introduce any applications and direct questions. The determined in advance. The rule does new FAA policy or change the intent of second proposed to gather the scattered not in and of itself authorize the the original application process. application requirements into a list, and operation of any specific airplane over Recognizing the renewed interest of present them according to modern any particular area; rather, any flights the aviation industry in developing regulatory formatting standards. As part authorized under the rule could only supersonic aircraft, Congress instructed of this effort, FAA proposed also to occur upon receiving FAA authorization FAA in Section 181 of the FAA correct the regulatory text for after completion of the application Reauthorization Act of 2018 (Pub. L. consistency throughout the new section. process and considerable regulatory 115–254, Oct. 5, 2018) to assume a Third, FAA proposed the addition of a prerequisites, including analyses of the leadership role in the development of new reason for flight testing to environmental impacts on the area over international policies, regulations, and accommodate future noise certification which an applicant proposes to operate, standards that facilitate the safe and actions. as required by law. Neither these efficient operation of such aircraft. The NPRM invited interested persons regulatory prerequisites nor the Section 181 further directed FAA to to participate in the rulemaking by assessments of environmental impacts undertake reforms of its regulations submitting written comments, data, or were the subject of FAA’s proposed regarding civil supersonic aircraft. views. It also invited comments relating changes. Comments that suggested FAA’s first step in response to Section to the economic, environmental, energy, changes to the required assessments 181 was to propose changes to the or federalism impacts that might result were beyond the scope of this special flight authorization application from adopting the proposal. rulemaking. process. The second step was FAA’s The special flight authorizations that III. Discussion of Public Comments publication of an NPRM that proposes are the subject of this rulemaking have landing and takeoff noise limits under FAA received a total of 206 comments been available since the FAA adopted 14 CFR part 36 for the first group of on the NPRM: 43 comments generally the supersonic prohibition in 1973. This supersonic aircraft expected to be supported the NPRM, 45 generally rulemaking only presents an update of presented for certification (85 FR 20431, opposed the NPRM, and 118 are the administrative application process, Apr.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Concorde Is a Museum Piece, but the Allure of Speed Could Spell Success
    CIVIL SUPERSONIC Concorde is a museum piece, but the allure Aerion continues to be the most enduring player, of speed could spell success for one or more and the company’s AS2 design now has three of these projects. engines (originally two), the involvement of Air- bus and an agreement (loose and non-exclusive, by Nigel Moll but signed) with GE Aviation to explore the supply Fourteen years have passed since British Airways of those engines. Spike Aerospace expects to fly a and Air France retired their 13 Concordes, and for subsonic scale model of the design for the S-512 the first time in the history of human flight, air trav- Mach 1.5 business jet this summer, to explore low- elers have had to settle for flying more slowly than speed handling, followed by a manned two-thirds- they used to. But now, more so than at any time scale supersonic demonstrator “one-and-a-half to since Concorde’s thunderous Olympus afterburn- two years from now.” Boom Technology is working ing turbojets fell silent, there are multiple indi- on a 55-seat Mach 2.2 airliner that it plans also to cations of a supersonic revival, and the activity offer as a private SSBJ. NASA and Lockheed Martin appears to be more advanced in the field of busi- are encouraged by their research into reducing the ness jets than in the airliner sector. severity of sonic booms on the surface of the planet. www.ainonline.com © 2017 AIN Publications. All Rights Reserved. For Reprints go to Shaping the boom create what is called an N-wave sonic boom: if The sonic boom produced by a supersonic air- you plot the pressure distribution that you mea- craft has long shaped regulations that prohibit sure on the ground, it looks like the letter N.
    [Show full text]
  • Ovrhyp, Scramjet Test Aircraft STATE UNIVERSITY Student Authors: J
    https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19910000728 2020-03-19T20:21:21+00:00Z /z7 H OVRhyp, Scramjet Test Aircraft STATE UNIVERSITY Student Authors: J. Asian, T. Bisard, S. Dallinga, K. Draper, G. Hufford, W. Peters, and J. Rogers Supervisor: Dr. G. M. Gregorek Assistant: R. L. Reuss Department of Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering Universities Space Research Association Houston, Texas 77058 Subcontract Dated November 17, 1989 Final Report May 1990 03/0_ OVRhyp, Scramjet Test Aircraft UNIVERSITY Student Authors: J. Asian, T. Bisard, S. Dallinga, K. Draper, G. Hufford, W. Peters, and J. Rogers Supervisor: Dr. G. M. Gregorek Assistant: R. L. Reuss Department of Aeronautical & Astronautical Engineering Universities Space Research Association Houston, Texas 77058 Subcontract Dated November 17, 1989 Final Report RF Project 767919/722941 May 1990 ABSTRACT (Gary Huff0rd} A preliminary design for an unmanned hypersonic research vehicle to test scramjet engines is presented. The aircraft will be launched from a carrier aircraft at an altitude of 4Q,0QQ feet at Mach 0.8. The vehicle will then accelerate to Mach 6 at an altitude of 100,000 feet. At this stage the prototype scramjet will be employed to accelerate the vehicle to Mach 10 and maintain Mach IQ flight for 2 minutes. The aircraft will then decelerate and safely land, presumably at NASA Dryden F[i_ht Test Center. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ............................ ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ....................... iii LIST OF FIGURES ......................... v INTRODUCTION .......................... vi CONFIGURATION .......................... WEIGHTS ANALYSIS ........................ 12 PURPOSE ............................. 12 METHOD ........................... 12 SYSTEMS .......................... 14 AERODYNAMIC SURFACES .................... 14 BODY STRUCTURE ....................... 15 THERMAL PROTECTION SYSTEM ................. 15 LAUNCH AND LANDING SYSTEM ................
    [Show full text]
  • Feeling Supersonic
    FlightGlobal.com May 2021 How Max cuts hurt Boeing backlog Making throwaway Feeling aircraft aff ordable p32 Hydrogen switch for Fresson’s Islander p34 supersonic Will Overture be in tune with demand? p52 9 770015 371327 £4.99 Big worries Warning sign We assess A380 Why NOTAM outlook as last burden can delivery looms baffl e pilots 05 p14 p22 Comment Prospects receding Future dreaming Once thought of as the future of air travel, the A380 is already heading into retirement, but aviation is keenly focused on the next big thing Airbus t has been a rapid rise and fall for on who you ask. As we report else- Hydrogen is not without its the Airbus A380, which not so where in this issue, there are those issues, of course, but nonethe- long ago was being hailed as the banking on supersonic speeds be- less it appears more feasible as a future of long-haul air travel. ing the answer. power source for large transport IThe superjumbo would be, The likes of Aerion and Boom Su- aircraft than batteries do at pres- forecasts said, the perfect tool for personic view the ability to shave ent, even allowing for improving airlines operating into mega-hubs significant time from journeys as a energy densities. such as Dubai that were beginning unique selling point. However, there are others who to spring up. While projects are likely to be see hydrogen through a differ- But the planners at Airbus failed technologically feasible, to be able ent filter. They argue that so- to take into consideration the to sell these new aircraft in signif- called sub-regional aircraft – the efficiency gains available from icant volumes their manufacturers Britten-Norman Islander, among a new generation of widebody will have to ensure that supersonic others – can be given fresh impetus twinjets that allowed operators to flight is not merely the domain of if a fuel source can be found that is open up previously uneconomical the ultra-rich.
    [Show full text]
  • Brazilian 14-Xs Hypersonic Unpowered Scramjet Aerospace Vehicle
    ISSN 2176-5480 22nd International Congress of Mechanical Engineering (COBEM 2013) November 3-7, 2013, Ribeirão Preto, SP, Brazil Copyright © 2013 by ABCM BRAZILIAN 14-X S HYPERSONIC UNPOWERED SCRAMJET AEROSPACE VEHICLE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS AT MACH NUMBER 7 Álvaro Francisco Santos Pivetta Universidade do Vale do Paraíba/UNIVAP, Campus Urbanova Av. Shishima Hifumi, no 2911 Urbanova CEP. 12244-000 São José dos Campos, SP - Brasil [email protected] David Romanelli Pinto ETEP Faculdades, Av. Barão do Rio Branco, no 882 Jardim Esplanada CEP. 12.242-800 São José dos Campos, SP, Brasil [email protected] Giannino Ponchio Camillo Instituto de Estudos Avançados/IEAv - Trevo Coronel Aviador José Alberto Albano do Amarante, nº1 Putim CEP. 12.228-001 São José dos Campos, SP - Brasil. [email protected] Felipe Jean da Costa Instituto Tecnológico de Aeronáutica/ITA - Praça Marechal Eduardo Gomes, nº 50 Vila das Acácias CEP. 12.228-900 São José dos Campos, SP - Brasil [email protected] Paulo Gilberto de Paula Toro Instituto de Estudos Avançados/IEAv - Trevo Coronel Aviador José Alberto Albano do Amarante, nº1 Putim CEP. 12.228-001 São José dos Campos, SP - Brasil. [email protected] Abstract. The Brazilian VHA 14-X S is a technological demonstrator of a hypersonic airbreathing propulsion system based on supersonic combustion (scramjet) to fly at Earth’s atmosphere at 30km altitude at Mach number 7, designed at the Prof. Henry T. Nagamatsu Laboratory of Aerothermodynamics and Hypersonics, at the Institute for Advanced Studies. Basically, scramjet is a fully integrated airbreathing aeronautical engine that uses the oblique/conical shock waves generated during the hypersonic flight, to promote compression and deceleration of freestream atmospheric air at the inlet of the scramjet.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 11 Subsonic and Supersonic Aircraft Emissions
    CHAPTER 11 Subsonic and Supersonic Aircraft Emissions Lead Authors: A. Wahner M.A. Geller Co-authors: F. Arnold W.H. Brune D.A. Cariolle A.R. Douglass C. Johnson D.H. Lister J.A. Pyle R. Ramaroson D. Rind F. Rohrer U. Schumann A.M. Thompson CHAPTER 11 SUBSONIC AND SUPERSONIC AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS Contents SCIENTIFIC SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................... 11.1 11.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 11.3 11.2 AIRCRAFT EMISSIONS ................................................................................................................................. 11.4 11.2.1 Subsonic Aircraft .................................................................................................................................. 11.5 11.2.2 Supersonic Aircraft ............................................................................................................................... 11.6 11.2.3 Military Aircraft .................................................................................................................................... 11.6 11.2.4 Emissions at Altitude ............................................................................................................................ 11.6 11.2.5 Scenarios and Emissions Data Bases ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Some Supersonic Aerodynamics
    Some Supersonic Aerodynamics W.H. Mason Configuration Aerodynamics Class Grumman Tribody Concept – from 1978 Company Calendar The Key Topics • Brief history of serious supersonic airplanes – There aren’t many! • The Challenge – L/D, CD0 trends, the sonic boom • Linear theory as a starting point: – Volumetric Drag – Drag Due to Lift • The ac shift and cg control • The Oblique Wing • Aero/Propulsion integration • Some nonlinear aero considerations • The SST development work • Brief review of computational methods • Possible future developments Are “Supersonic Fighters” Really Supersonic? • If your car’s speedometer goes to 120 mph, do you actually go that fast? • The official F-14A supersonic missions (max Mach 2.4) – CAP (Combat Air Patrol) • 150 miles subsonic cruise to station • Loiter • Accel, M = 0.7 to 1.35, then dash 25nm – 4 ½ minutes and 50nm total • Then, head home or to a tanker – DLI (Deck Launch Intercept) • Energy climb to 35K ft., M = 1.5 (4 minutes) • 6 minutes at 1.5 (out 125-130nm) • 2 minutes combat (slows down fast) After 12 minutes, must head home or to a tanker Very few real supersonic airplanes • 1956: the B-58 (L/Dmax = 4.5) – In 1962: Mach 2 for 30 minutes • 1962: the A-12 (SR-71 in ’64) (L/Dmax = 6.6) – 1st supersonic flight, May 4, 1962 – 1st flight to exceed Mach 3, July 20, 1963 • 1964: the XB-70 (L/Dmax = 7.2) – In 1966: flew Mach 3 for 33 minutes • 1968: the TU-144 – 1st flight: Dec. 31, 1968 • 1969: the Concorde (L/Dmax = 7.4) – 1st flight, March 2, 1969 • 1990: the YF-22 and YF-23 (supercruisers) – YF-22: 1st flt.
    [Show full text]
  • Make America Boom Again: How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport,” Eli Dourado and Samuel Hammond Show That It Is Time to Revisit the Ban
    MAKE AMERICA BOOM AGAIN How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport _____________________ In 1973, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) banned civil supersonic flight over the United States, stymieing the development of a supersonic aviation industry. In “Make America Boom Again: How to Bring Back Supersonic Transport,” Eli Dourado and Samuel Hammond show that it is time to revisit the ban. Better technology—including better materials, engines, and simulation capabilities—mean it is now possible to produce a supersonic jet that is more economical and less noisy than those of the 1970s. It is time to rescind the ban in favor of a more modest and sensible noise standard. BACKGROUND Past studies addressing the ban on supersonic flight have had little effect. However, this paper takes a comprehensive view of the topic, covering the history of supersonic flight, the case for supersonic travel, the problems raised by supersonic flight, and regulatory alternatives to the ban. Dourado and Hammond synthesize the best arguments for rescinding the ban on supersonic flights over land and establish that the ban has had a real impact on the development of supersonic transport. KEY FINDINGS The FAA Should Replace the Ban on Overland Supersonic Flight with a Noise Standard The sonic boom generated by the Concorde and other early supersonic aircraft was very loud, and as a result the FAA banned flights in the United States from going faster than the speed of sound (Mach 1). This ban should be rescinded and replaced with a noise standard. A noise limit of 85–90 A-weighted decibels would be similar to noise standards for lawnmowers, blenders, and motorcy- cles, and would therefore be a reasonable standard during daytime hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Subsonic Aircraft Wing Conceptual Design Synthesis and Analysis
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by GSSRR.ORG: International Journals: Publishing Research Papers in all Fields International Journal of Sciences: Basic and Applied Research (IJSBAR) ISSN 2307-4531 (Print & Online) http://gssrr.org/index.php?journal=JournalOfBasicAndApplied --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Subsonic Aircraft Wing Conceptual Design Synthesis and Analysis Abderrahmane BADIS Electrical and Electronic Communication Engineer from UMBB (Ex.INELEC) Independent Electronics, Aeronautics, Propulsion, Well Logging and Software Design Research Engineer Takerboust, Aghbalou, Bouira 10007, Algeria [email protected] Abstract This paper exposes a simplified preliminary conceptual integrated method to design an aircraft wing in subsonic speeds up to Mach 0.85. The proposed approach is integrated, as it allows an early estimation of main aircraft aerodynamic features, namely the maximum lift-to-drag ratio and the total parasitic drag. First, the influence of the Lift and Load scatterings on the overall performance characteristics of the wing are discussed. It is established that the optimization is achieved by designing a wing geometry that yields elliptical lift and load distributions. Second, the reference trapezoidal wing is considered the base line geometry used to outline the wing shape layout. As such, the main geometrical parameters and governing relations for a trapezoidal wing are
    [Show full text]
  • 10. Supersonic Aerodynamics
    Grumman Tribody Concept featured on the 1978 company calendar. The basis for this idea will be explained below. 10. Supersonic Aerodynamics 10.1 Introduction There have actually only been a few truly supersonic airplanes. This means airplanes that can cruise supersonically. Before the F-22, classic “supersonic” fighters used brute force (afterburners) and had extremely limited duration. As an example, consider the two defined supersonic missions for the F-14A: F-14A Supersonic Missions CAP (Combat Air Patrol) • 150 miles subsonic cruise to station • Loiter • Accel, M = 0.7 to 1.35, then dash 25 nm - 4 1/2 minutes and 50 nm total • Then, must head home, or to a tanker! DLI (Deck Launch Intercept) • Energy climb to 35K ft, M = 1.5 (4 minutes) • 6 minutes at M = 1.5 (out 125-130 nm) • 2 minutes Combat (slows down fast) After 12 minutes, must head home or to a tanker. In this chapter we will explain the key supersonic aerodynamics issues facing the configuration aerodynamicist. We will start by reviewing the most significant airplanes that had substantial sustained supersonic capability. We will then examine the key physical underpinnings of supersonic gas dynamics and their implications for configuration design. Examples are presented showing applications of modern CFD and the application of MDO. We will see that developing a practical supersonic airplane is extremely demanding and requires careful integration of the various contributing technologies. Finally we discuss contemporary efforts to develop new supersonic airplanes. 10.2 Supersonic “Cruise” Airplanes The supersonic capability described above is typical of most of the so-called supersonic fighters, and obviously the supersonic performance is limited.
    [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]
  • 7. Transonic Aerodynamics of Airfoils and Wings
    W.H. Mason 7. Transonic Aerodynamics of Airfoils and Wings 7.1 Introduction Transonic flow occurs when there is mixed sub- and supersonic local flow in the same flowfield (typically with freestream Mach numbers from M = 0.6 or 0.7 to 1.2). Usually the supersonic region of the flow is terminated by a shock wave, allowing the flow to slow down to subsonic speeds. This complicates both computations and wind tunnel testing. It also means that there is very little analytic theory available for guidance in designing for transonic flow conditions. Importantly, not only is the outer inviscid portion of the flow governed by nonlinear flow equations, but the nonlinear flow features typically require that viscous effects be included immediately in the flowfield analysis for accurate design and analysis work. Note also that hypersonic vehicles with bow shocks necessarily have a region of subsonic flow behind the shock, so there is an element of transonic flow on those vehicles too. In the days of propeller airplanes the transonic flow limitations on the propeller mostly kept airplanes from flying fast enough to encounter transonic flow over the rest of the airplane. Here the propeller was moving much faster than the airplane, and adverse transonic aerodynamic problems appeared on the prop first, limiting the speed and thus transonic flow problems over the rest of the aircraft. However, WWII fighters could reach transonic speeds in a dive, and major problems often arose. One notable example was the Lockheed P-38 Lightning. Transonic effects prevented the airplane from readily recovering from dives, and during one flight test, Lockheed test pilot Ralph Virden had a fatal accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Roger Hiorns: Plane Burial / the Retrospective View of the Pathway (Pathways), 2017 Ongoing
    Roger Hiorns: Plane Burial / The retrospective view of the pathway (pathways), 2017 ongoing Off-site project on the occassion of the 100th exhibtion of the gallery’s establishment in 1994 When: Sunday 1 October, talks from 11am, plane burial from 2pm Where: ELI Beamlines, Institute of Physics, Czech Academy of Sciences, Za Radnicí 835, Dolní Břežany, Praha-Západ The latest project of the British artist Roger Hiorns, who exhibited at Galerie Rudolfinum in 2015, “buries” a jet fighter MiG-21. In his project, Hiorns references the land art tradition as well as the recent phenomenon of updating traditional rituals in today’s globalized society. From the innate human dream to take flight, powerful machines were born – apparatuses for demonstrating and cementing power, underlining the triumph of enlightenment, technology and progress. The machines are confronted with the man’s last rites. An act of solemn parting. A silent triumph in a dystopian landscape. A terse sculptural happening with an undertone of social criticism. An idea of buried aircraft of different types, in different corners of our planets, and in different contexts. Roger Hiorns Studied art at Goldsmiths, University of London. Short-listed for the Turner Prize in 2009. Participated at the Venice Biennale 2013, exhibited at prominent art galleries including Tate Modern in London, MoMA Contemporary Art Center in Long Island City, NY, Armand Hammer Museum of Art at UCLA, Los Angeles, and Walker Art Center, Minneapolis. Roger Hiorns’ solo exhibitions include IKON Gallery, Birmingham (2016), Kunsthaus CentrePasquArt, Biel and Galerie Rudolfinum, Prague (2015), Kunsthalle Wien and The Hepworth, Wakefield, United Kingdom (2014), De Hallen, Haarlem, the Netherlands (2012-2013) and MIMA, Middlesbrough, United Kingdom (2012).
    [Show full text]