DOCSLIB.ORG

Flight Safety Digest November-December 1999

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Flight Safety Digest November-December 1999 FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 1999 FLIGHT SAFETY DIGEST SPECIAL DOUBLE ISSUE Propulsion System Malfunction Plus Inappropriate Crew Response (PSM+ICR) Human Factors Report FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION For Everyone Concerned With the Safety of Flight Flight Safety Digest Officers and Staff Vol. 18 No. 11–12 November–December 1999 Stuart Matthews Chairman, President and CEO Board of Governors In This Issue Robert H. Vandel Propulsion System Malfunction Plus Executive Vice President 1 James S. Waugh Jr. Inappropriate Crew Response (PSM+ICR) Treasurer Carl Vogt General Counsel and Secretary Controlled-flight-into-terrain Accidents Board of Governors Decline in First 11 Months of 1999 194 ADMINISTRATIVE Boeing data show one CFIT hull-loss accident involving a Ellen Plaugher large, Western-built commercial jet airplane. Executive Assistant Linda Crowley Horger Manager, Support Services FAA Publishes Guidelines for 196 FINANCIAL Aircraft Data Communications Systems Elizabeth Kirby Advisory circular outlines standards developed Controller in cooperation with international civil aviation authorities. TECHNICAL James Burin Boeing 727 Strikes Runway During Director of Technical Programs 198 Joanne Anderson Missed Approach Technical Assistant Ann Hill Manager of Seminars and Workshops Robert H. Gould Managing Director of Aviation Safety Audits and Internal Evaluation Programs Robert Feeler Manager of Aviation Safety Audits Robert Dodd, Ph.D. Manager, Data Systems and Analysis Darol V. Holsman Safety Audits MEMBERSHIP Carole L. Pammer Director of Marketing and Business Development Ahlam Wahdan Assistant to the Director of Marketing and Business Development PUBLICATIONS Roger Rozelle Director of Publications Mark Lacagnina Senior Editor Wayne Rosenkrans Senior Editor Linda Werfelman Cover image: Copyright © 1999 PhotoDisc Inc. Senior Editor Karen K. Ehrlich Production Coordinator Ann L. Mullikin Flight Safety Foundation is an international membership organization Production Designer dedicated to the continuous improvement of flight safety. Nonprofit and Susan D. Reed independent, the Foundation was launched in 1947 in response to the aviation Production Specialist industry’s need for a neutral clearinghouse to disseminate objective safety information, and for a credible and knowledgeable body that would identify David A. Grzelecki threats to safety, analyze the problems and recommend practical solutions to Librarian, Jerry Lederer Aviation Safety Library them. Since its beginning, the Foundation has acted in the public interest to produce positive influence on aviation safety. Today, the Foundation provides Jerome Lederer leadership to more than 850 member organizations in more than 140 countries. President Emeritus Foreword This special issue of Flight Safety Digest presents a report on factors that have been involved in accidents and incidents when flight crews responded inappropriately to malfunctions of turbine-airplane powerplants and related systems. The report is the result of two years of study by a multidisciplinary task group chaired by the U.S.-based Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) and The European Association of Aerospace Industries (AECMA). The study was prompted as the result of an accident involving a twin-turboprop commuter airplane that struck the ground Dec. 13, 1994, during a missed approach at Raleigh-Durham (North Carolina, U.S.) International Airport.1 The two pilots and 13 passengers were killed, and five passengers were seriously injured. In its report on the accident, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) said that a transient negative- torque condition caused an engine ignition light to illuminate while the crew was conducting an instrument approach. NTSB said that the captain assumed incorrectly that the engine had failed and that the captain subsequently failed to follow approved procedures for an engine failure, for a single-engine approach and go-around, and for stall recovery. The task group assembled by AIA and AECMA studied this accident and several similar accidents and incidents that have occurred since 1959. They found that, despite improvements in propulsion systems over the years, the frequency of such accidents and incidents has not changed. Inappropriate crew response to transport-airplane propulsion system malfunctions causes an average of three accidents in revenue service and two accidents in training each year. The propulsion system malfunctions cited in the report should not have caused accidents or incidents; the accidents and incidents were caused by flight crews who did not respond correctly to the malfunctions. The activities of Flight Safety Foundation are focused primarily on human factors (especially flight crew error), controlled flight into terrain (CFIT),2 approach-and-landing accidents and loss of control. The Foundation is publishing this report in an effort to give wider distribution to useful information on factors involved in inappropriate response by flight crews to propulsion system malfunctions, and how these errors can be reduced. — FSF Editorial Staff 1. U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. Aircraft Accident Report: Uncontrolled Collision with Terrain, Flagship Airlines, Inc., dba American Eagle, Flight 3379, BAe Jetstream 3201, N918AE, Morrisville, North Carolina, December 13, 1994. NTSB/AAR-95/07. October 1995. See also: Flight Safety Foundation. “Commuter Captain Fails to Follow Emergency Procedures after Suspected Engine Failure, Loses Control of the Aircraft During Instrument Approach.” Accident Prevention Volume 53 (April 1996): 1–12. 2. Controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) occurs when an airworthy aircraft under the control of the flight crew is flown unintentionally into terrain, obstacles or water, usually with no prior awareness by the crew. This type of accident can occur during most phases of flight, but CFIT is more common during the approach-and-landing phases, which typically comprise about 16 percent of the average flight duration of a large commercial jet. FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION • FLIGHT SAFETY DIGEST • NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 1999 i Propulsion System Malfunction Plus Inappropriate Crew Response (PSM+ICR) G.P. Sallee (co-chair) Aerospace Industries Association D.M. Gibbons (co-chair) The European Association of Aerospace Industries FLIGHT SAFETY FOUNDATION • FLIGHT SAFETY DIGEST • NOVEMBER–DECEMBER 1999 1 Contents 1.0 Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................................3 2.0 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................4 3.0 Definitions ..........................................................................................................................................................6 4.0 Data Collection, Analysis Process and Results .................................................................................................8 5.0 Propulsion System Instrumentation and Failure Warning Systems ............................................................... 24 6.0 Simulator Capabilities and Realism with Respect to Propulsion System Malfunctions ............................... 26 7.0 Flight Crew Training ....................................................................................................................................... 28 8.0 Human Factors ................................................................................................................................................ 31 9.0 Regulatory Requirements................................................................................................................................ 38 10.0 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................................................... 39 11.0 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................................... 41 Appendix A: Contributing Organizations and Individuals .................................................................................... 44 Appendix B: U.S. National Transportation Safety Board Final Recommendations from Investigation of Jetstream 31 Accident, 13 Dec. 1994 ............................................................ 47 Appendix C: Letter from U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to Aerospace Industries Association (AIA) ...................................................................................... 49 Appendix D: Letter from AIA to FAA ................................................................................................................... 51 Appendix E: Summary of Turbofan PSM+ICR Events ......................................................................................... 52 Appendix F: Turbofan Training Accident Summaries .......................................................................................... 72 Appendix G: Summary of General Electric/CFM International Commercial Fleet Rejected Takeoff Study....... 75 Appendix H: Summary of Turboprop Data ............................................................................................................ 77 Appendix I: Summary of Turboprop Training Events ........................................................................................ 145 Appendix J: Fleet Survey of Engine Failure Indications —
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]
  • Propeller Operation and Malfunctions Basic Familiarization for Flight Crews
    PROPELLER OPERATION AND MALFUNCTIONS BASIC FAMILIARIZATION FOR FLIGHT CREWS INTRODUCTION The following is basic material to help pilots understand how the propellers on turbine engines work, and how they sometimes fail. Some of these failures and malfunctions cannot be duplicated well in the simulator, which can cause recognition difficulties when they happen in actual operation. This text is not meant to replace other instructional texts. However, completion of the material can provide pilots with additional understanding of turbopropeller operation and the handling of malfunctions. GENERAL PROPELLER PRINCIPLES Propeller and engine system designs vary widely. They range from wood propellers on reciprocating engines to fully reversing and feathering constant- speed propellers on turbine engines. Each of these propulsion systems has the similar basic function of producing thrust to propel the airplane, but with different control and operational requirements. Since the full range of combinations is too broad to cover fully in this summary, it will focus on a typical system for transport category airplanes - the constant speed, feathering and reversing propellers on turbine engines. Major propeller components The propeller consists of several blades held in place by a central hub. The propeller hub holds the blades in place and is connected to the engine through a propeller drive shaft and a gearbox. There is also a control system for the propeller, which will be discussed later. Modern propellers on large turboprop airplanes typically have 4 to 6 blades. Other components typically include: The spinner, which creates aerodynamic streamlining over the propeller hub. The bulkhead, which allows the spinner to be attached to the rest of the propeller.
    [Show full text]
  • Epic Performance for Tнe Entire King Air 200 Family
    BEECHCRAFT KING AIR B200GT EPIC PERFORMANCE FOR THE B200 ENTIRE KING AIR 200 FAMILY... 200 ...utilizing Swept Blade Technology Simply more of what you bought your King Air for! THE ELEMENTS OF RAISBECK’S 200-SERIES EPIC PERFORMANCE PACKAGE (Elements available separately) SWEPT BLADE TURBOFAN PROPELLERS RAM AIR RECOVERY SYSTEM ENHANCED PERFORMANCE LEADING EDGES DUAL AFT BODY STRAKES HIGH FLOTATION GEAR DOORS OPTIONAL CROWN WING LOCKERS Diaphragm Seal Particle Separator with flap Ice Shedder Turning Vane Flap Bypass Door Seal Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits Benefits • Stunning ramp presence • Significantly increases climb and cruise • Cruise speeds and range are increased • Passenger ride quality is improved • Climb and cruise performance of standard- • FAA-certified to carry 600 pounds total cargo in • Quiet and virtually vibrationless operation performance in both normal and anti-ice • Stall speeds and characteristics are improved • Pilot control and handling qualities are gear King Airs is restored 17 cubic feet of luggage space from takeoff to touchdown operating modes • Air conditioning and cooling are more efficient enhanced • Cruise speed is increased 8 to 12 knots • Returns your cabin to your passengers • Certified around the world to meet the most • Protects against FOD—deployable for all • Outboard wing fatigue life is inherently • Air Minimum Control Speed is inherently depending on altitude • Handles skis, snowboards, camping and stringent regulations and noise requirements ground, takeoff and landing operations
    [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]
  • P180E User Guide IMPORTANT INFORMATION
    P180E User Guide IMPORTANT INFORMATION This manual is for flight simulation use only. Do not attempt to use any part for real flight operations. This software is an artistic representation of the subject matter. Military Visualizations Inc. does not endorse, nor in turn, is endorsed by the manufacturer(s) of the depicted subject matter. End User License Agreement By purchasing the Milviz P180E, you are consenting to be bound by and agree to the following: COPYRIGHT: Copyright © 2021 Military Visualizations (Milviz). Milviz retains FULL copyright on the entire P180E package. DISTRIBUTION: You may NOT redistribute the P180E package in whole or in part. Any such distribution is strictly prohibited. GRANT OF LICENSE: A limited license is granted to use the Milviz P180E for personal entertainment purposes only. Commercial, training or any other use without the express permission of Military Visualizations Inc. is expressly prohibited. Any such usage will be litigated to the full extent of the law. This does NOT give you the license to modify in anyway part or whole based on the designers original work except for your own personal use. You MAY of course use the paint kit provided to create new liveries for public distribution, provided no charge is made for them! Any inquiries regarding use of this product in a commercial or training capacity should be directed via e-mail to [email protected]. DISCLAIMER: Milviz and all associates shall NOT be held responsible for any damages arising from the use of the P180E product. Copyright © 2021 Military
    [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]
  • 2009 Pocket Reference
    Raisbeck Performance Systems 2009 for the Beechcraft King Air Family 2009 POCKET REFERENCE Performance Engineering Directory EPIC Performance Packages............................................................................. .2 Systems Overview............................................................................................... .3 The Seven Points of Airplane Productivity................................................ .6 EPIC Performance The.EPIC Performance Advantage......................................................................... .7 200/B200.EPIC PLATINUM.Elements..................................................................... .8 200/B200.EPIC GOLD.Elements............................................................................ .9 200/B200.EPIC PLATINUM.Benefits..................................................................... .10 200/B200.EPIC GOLD.Benefits............................................................................ .11 200/B200.EPIC PLATINUM.Performance.Comparisons....................................... .12 200/B200.EPIC GOLD.Performance.Comparisons............................................... .13 200/B200.EPIC PLATINUM.Noise.Characteristics................................................ .14 200/B200.EPIC PLATINUM.MATOW.Benefits....................................................... .15 EPIC.for.King.Airs.with.PT6A-41.Engines............................................................. .16 EPIC.for.King.Airs.with.PT6A-61.Engines............................................................
    [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]
  • 2012 Edition Raisbeck Systems
    Raisbeck Systems for your King Air 2012 Edition Raisbeck Performance Systems for the entire Beechcraft King Air Family 2012 POCKET REFERENCE A Message from the CEO Performance Systems for the entire UR PERFORMANCE SYSTEMS ARE ON King Air Family OFACTORY-NEW KING AIRS. Hawker Beechcraft and their predecessors have 350ER/350i/350/300 Series added Raisbeck Engineering Systems to • Dual Aft Body Strakes their King Air factory production line. Typical • High Flotation Gear Doors of these has been our Dual Aft Body Strakes • Crown Wing Lockers (2001), Nacelle Wing Lockers (2004) on the King Air 350. In 2011, our Ram Air Recovery System was added to the new King Air 250. And...King Air new aircraft salesmen offer our systems as optional 250/B200GT/B200/200 Series additions prior to delivery. • Power Props • Ram Air Recovery System WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT TO OUR CUSTOM- • Enhanced Performance Leading Edges ERS, OUR DEALERS, AND OUR BUSINEss? • Dual Aft Body Strakes In a word: market acceptance. There is James D. Raisbeck, C.E.O. • High Flotation Gear Doors no question that factory acceptance and [email protected] • Crown Wing Lockers endorsement has been a major milestone in our market penetration. Many millions of flight hours on thousands C90GTx/C90GTi/C90GT/C90/90/E90 Series of King Airs, and not one FAA Airworthi- • Power Props WHY HAVE OUR SYSTEMS BEEN SO UNIVER- ness Directive or FAA-Mandatory Service • Dual Aft Body Strakes SALLY ACCEPTED? Raisbeck Engineering Bulletin! • Crown Wing Lockers has dedicated itself for the past 30 years • Increased Gross Weight to developing systems which measurably FOR ME, A PLEASANT AND REWARDING improve all King Air models.
    [Show full text]
  • Crash Following In-Flight Fire Fresh Air, Inc. Convair CV-440-38, N153JR, San Juan, Puerto Rico, March 15, 2012
    Crash Following In-Flight Fire Fresh Air, Inc. Convair CV-440-38, N153JR San Juan, Puerto Rico March 15, 2012 Accident Report NTSB/AAR-14/04 National PB2015-101257 Transportation Safety Board NTSB/AAR-14/04 PB2015-101257 Notation 8601 Adopted November 17, 2014 Aircraft Accident Report Crash Following In-Flight Fire Fresh Air, Inc. Convair CV-440-38, N153JR San Juan, Puerto Rico March 15, 2012 National Transportation Safety Board 490 L’Enfant Plaza, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20594 National Transportation Safety Board. 2014. Crash Following In-Flight Fire, Fresh Air, Inc., Convair CV-440-38, N153JR, San Juan, Puerto Rico, March 15, 2012. Aircraft Accident Report NTSB/AAR-14/04. Washington, DC. Abstract: This report discusses the March 15, 2012, accident involving a Convair CV-440-38, N153JR, operated by Fresh Air, Inc., which crashed into a lagoon about 1 mile east of the departure end of runway 10 at Luis Muñoz Marín International Airport, San Juan, Puerto Rico. The two pilots died, and the airplane was destroyed by impact forces. Safety issues include inadequate Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) oversight of 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 125 operations, inadequate evaluation of Fresh Air’s compliance with FAA-approved procedures, and evaluation of 14 CFR Part 125 pilots using another operator’s operations specifications. Safety recommendations are addressed to the FAA. The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) is an independent federal agency dedicated to promoting aviation, railroad, highway, marine, and pipeline safety. Established in 1967, the agency is mandated by Congress through the Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 to investigate transportation accidents, determine the probable causes of the accidents, issue safety recommendations, study transportation safety issues, and evaluate the safety effectiveness of government agencies involved in transportation.
    [Show full text]
  • (JAR)/Federal Aviation Regulations (FAR) 23 Harmonization
    Federal Aviation Administration Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee General Aviation Certification and Operations Issue Area JAR/FAR 23 Harmonization Working Group Task 4 – Flight test Task Assignment IIIII~IMIIirt•·•·llllllllll .. ll .. lllllllllt•r•::rlrllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll~ to aDd 6:01Bpatible witla tlaat as8ipecl ao D. Draft a separate Notice of Proposed Federal Aviation Admlnlatnitlon the Avi.ation RulemakiJJs Advisory Rulemakina for Tasks 2-5 proposing CoiMriHee. The General Avielion and new or revised requirements, a Aviation Rulemaklng Advlaory Business AU-plaae Subcommittee, supportina economic analysis. and other Commmee; Gener11l Av.. tlon 8IKI consequently, estalliiebed t8e JAR/FAR required analysis, with any other Buslne.. Airplane SubcommlttH: Z3 HannenizatiOit Workiat Greup. conateral documeRts (sucb as. Advisory JAR/FAR 23 HarmonlzaUon Working Specifical1J, dae Work.ina Grevp's Circulars) the Workina Group Group tasb are tbe foliowing: The JAR/FAR 23 determines to be needed. Harmonization Working Group ii E. Give a status reporl oa each task at AGENCY: Federal Aviation ct:arged wUh making recommendations each meetina of the Subcommittee. Administration (FAA), DOT. to the General A viatton and Bulinest The JAR/FAR 23 Harmonization ACTION: Notice of establishment of JAR/ Airplane Subcommittee concerning the Working Croup win be comprised of FAR 23 Harmonization Working Group. FAA disposition of the CoDowing experts from those orpnlzations having rulemalcing subj.ecta recently an interest in the task assigned to it. A SUMMARY: Notice is given of the coordinated between ttse JAA 1111d the working group member need not establishment of the JAR/FAR Z3 FAA~ necessarily be a representative or one of Harmonization Working Group by the Task 1-Review/AR Issue$: Review the organizations of the parent General General Aviation and Business Airplane JAR 23 Issue No.
    [Show full text]
  • SR-71 Blackbird Operations Manual
    SR-71 Blackbird Operations Manual “I was extremely impressed by the level of detail in your display of 955 . Everything looks true to form. You obviously take great pride in getting things right and you've succeeded on the SR-71.” Richard H Graham, Col. USAF (Retired, SRSR----7171 Pilot, Squadron Commander and 9 ththth SRW Commander) Revision: 1.3-FS9 5th January, 2012. Glowingheat.co.uk - Lockheed SR-71 Operations Manual - 2012 Contents 2) Introduction & Brief History 7) SR-71 Walkaround 9) Glowingheat SR-71 Features 10) Glowingheat SR-71A/B Flight Procedures 12) Aircraft limitations & Main Panel, Right and left Panels 18) Annunciator Panel 19) Autopilot controls 20) Power Schedule 21) Engine Control Unit 23) RPM Indicators & Fuel Management Weight and Balance 25) Flight Characteristics 28) Engine Start & Take-off 29) Climb procedures 32) Cruising & Descent Procedures 33) Before Landing checks 35) Shutdown Procedure 36) Virtual Cockpit Gauges & Switches 42) The Tail numbers included & their individual history 44) Credits 45) Bibliography & Web links Page 1 Glowingheat.co.uk - Lockheed SR-71 Operations Manual - 2012 Introduction & Brief History The Birth of an aviation legend began in September 1959 when the DOD, CIA and USAF decided that Lockheed would build a U-2 follow on aircraft under the codename 'Oxcart'. The design team lead by Kelly Johnson designed and built the A-12 - a single seat Mach 3+ capable aircraft that was way ahead of its time. The aircraft coupled with the awesome power of twin Pratt & Whitney J-58 Continuous Bleed Afterburning Turbojets was like nothing seen before. Designed to operate in full afterburner for an hour at a time before descending to refuel, it's engines were extraordinary.
    [Show full text]