DOCSLIB.ORG

CRD - NPA 13/2005 Comment Response

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CRD - NPA 13/2005 Comment Response Explanatory Note Paragraph - Add. info: Cmt. Aero Dordogne Service Item 1: “large aircraft” inchanged Not accepted. Item 2: “complex aircraft below 5700 Kg” (type rating) inchanged The group ratings were created just for this purpose. The table reflects Part- Item 3: Introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg turbine engine aircraft” (group rating) 66.A.45(g)3. group ratings that were already in place in many Member States. (actuals groups 3 & 4) Having three representative aircraft in one group entitles for a group rating for all Item 4: cancelled aircraft in that group. Item 5: introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg piston(s) engine(s) aircraft”(group Task 66.009 on the Agency's rulemaking inventory will address the issue of group rating)(actuals groups 5 to 10) ratings for light aircraft and experience requirements. The task is planned to start in Item 6 to 10: cancelled 2006. Your comment should be taken into acount when drafting the NPA. Item 11 & following: inchanged Justification Being too precise the sorting out is somehow not coherent ans will result in a rarefactionof mechanics having a valid licence to sign the CRS on general aviation aircraft. Paragraph - Add. info: ANNEX 1 APPENDIX 1“aircraft type ratings” Cmt. UEA Malibos Aviation Too much different types for all “small “aeroplanes piston engine below 5 700 kg. Not accepted. PROPOSED TEXT for aeroplanes piston engine below 5700 kg : The group ratings were created just for this purpose. The table reflects Part- - 1 TYPE for single/multiple piston engine – wooden structure 66.A.45(g)3. group ratings that were already in place in many Member States. - 1 TYPE for single/ multiple piston engine – metal structure Having three representative aircraft in one group entitles for a group rating for all - 1 TYPE for single/mutiple piston engine – composite structure aircraft in that group. Task 66.009 on the Agency's rulemaking inventory will address the issue of group ratings for light aircraft and experience requirements. The task is planned to start in 2006. Your comment should be taken into acount when drafting the NPA. Justification Those types of small aircraft very often fly less than 100 hours by year and it will be very difficult for mechanics to justify the '6 months experience' by type, if types are too precise. The work is not very diferent between a cessna 150 and a cessna 152 or SOCATA TB9 and TB10 or TB20 .... mechanics working on small non commercial aircrafts who are eligible to PART 66 license can justify experience and they are obliged to work following service maintenance manual of each aeroplane, to justify an experience by type of aircraft is unuseful. Being too precise on the types of small non commercial aeroplane will result on a rarefaction of mechanics having a valid license to sign the CRS. Certainly small aircraft wouldn’t be able to fly anymore if they can’t find mechanics or workshop in their vicinity. If you maintain too precise type ratings it will conduct workshop to be specialized by type of aircraft and it’s not reasonable for a small aircraft (for example a PIPER J3 !!!) to fly several hours to joign a worshop each 25 or 50 hours ! 20 December 2005 Page 1 of 53 Comment Response Paragraph - Add. info: Aircraft Type List 20 December 2005 Page 2 of 53 Comment Response Cmt. ACG Partially accepted. Please refer to the amended list. Please see below the comment to the aircraft type list: "Part 1" - the rating Cessna 550/560 (PW 530) should be corrected to: Cessna 560 (PW 535) - this is the correct engine acc. to TCDS and the Cessna 550 (PW 530) as already listed - Cessna 551 (JT15D) has a MTOM below 5700 kg, so should be transfered to "Part 2" and added to the type ratings Cessna 500/501 - so the new type rating there (in "Part- 2") is Cessna 500/501/551 (PWC JT15D) - Let 410/420 (MW M601) should read Let 410/420 (WM M601) "WM for Walter Minor" "Part 2" - we would suggest to transfer the types Piper PA 46 (Continental TSIO-520), Piper PA 46 (Lycoming TIO-540) to "Part 6" and Piper PA 60 Series (Lycoming TIO-540) to "Part 5" "Part 4" - we would suggest to transfer Pilatus PC-12 (PWC PT6) to "Part 2" "Part 6" the following aircraft types should be added: - Bölkow BO 208 (Continental O-200) - LBA Flugzeugkennblatt Nr: 644 - Piaggo P 149 D (Lycoming GO-480) - Robin HR 100.... different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to french TCDS N 131 - Siai Marchetti S.205..., S.208...,different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc.to italian TCDS A 131 - Avion NIPPER T-66 (Stamo 1400) french TCDS N 1 (it could be that this is an "Annex II" aircraft pls check) - Moravan Z 143 L (Lycoming O-540) CAA-CZ TCDS 94-08 - Moravan Z 326 (WM 6-III) CAA-CZ TCDS "Part 8" the following aircraft types should be added: - Aviamilano P.19 (Continental O-200) - Boeing 75 "Stearman" different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to FAA TCDS A-743 (it could be that this is an "Annex II" aircraft pls check) - CP 301 (Continental) - LBA TCDS L-642 und L-564a - Jodel D11, D111, D112 different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to french TCDS N 3 - Piper J3 , Piper PA-11 different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to FAA TCDS A-691 - Pitts S-1/S-2 different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to FAA TCDS A8SO - Robin DR 300/400 Series.... different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to french TCDS N 121 - Saab 91D Safir different models and engines, detailed type ratings to be specified acc. to swedish TCDS 9B 20 December 2005 Page 3 of 53 Comment Response Justification Paragraph - Add. info: ANNEX 1 APPENDIX 1, “AIRCRAFT TYPE RATINGS” Cmt. Troyes Aviation Item 1: “large aircraft” inchanged Not accepted. Item 2: “complex aircraft below 5700 Kg” (type rating) inchanged The group ratings were created just for this purpose. The table reflects Part- Item 3: Introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg turbine engine aircraft” (group rating) 66.A.45(g)3. group ratings that were already in place in many Member States. (actuals groups 3 & 4) Having three representative aircraft in one group entitles for a group rating for all Item 4: cancelled aircraft in that group. Item 5: introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg piston(s) engine(s) aircraft”(group Task 66.009 on the Agency's rulemaking inventory will address the issue of group rating)(actuals groups 5 to 10) ratings for light aircraft and experience requirements. The task is planned to start in Item 6 to 10: cancelled 2006. Your comment should be taken into acount when drafting the NPA. Item 11 & following: inchanged Justification Being too precise the sorting out is somehow not coherent ans will result in a rarefactionof mechanics having a valid licence to sign the CRS on general aviation aircraft. Cmt. AMO repair station Item 1: “large aircraft” inchanged Not accepted. Item 2: “complex aircraft below 5700 Kg” (type rating) inchanged The group ratings were created just for this purpose. The table reflects Part- Item 3: Introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg turbine engine aircraft” (group rating) 66.A.45(g)3. group ratings that were already in place in many Member States. (actuals groups 3 & 4) Having three representative aircraft in one group entitles for a group rating for all Item 4: cancelled aircraft in that group. Item 5: introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg piston(s) engine(s) aircraft”(group Task 66.009 on the Agency's rulemaking inventory will address the issue of group rating)(actuals groups 5 to 10) ratings for light aircraft and experience requirements. The task is planned to start in Item 6 to 10: cancelled 2006. Your comment should be taken into acount when drafting the NPA. Item 11 & following: inchanged Justification Being too precise the sorting out is somehow not coherent ans will result in a rarefactionof mechanics having a valid licence to sign the CRS on general aviation aircraft. 20 December 2005 Page 4 of 53 Comment Response Paragraph - Add. info: ANNEX 1 APPENDIX 1, “AIRCRAFT TYPE RATINGS” Cmt. MTA Aviation Item 1: “large aircraft” inchanged Not accepted. Item 2: “complex aircraft below 5700 Kg” (type rating) inchanged The group ratings were created just for this purpose. The table reflects Part- Item 3: Introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg turbine engine aircraft” (group rating) (actuals 66.A.45(g)3. group ratings that were already in place in many Member States. groups 3 & 4) Having three representative aircraft in one group entitles for a group rating for all Item 4: cancelled aircraft in that group. Item 5: introduce “Aeroplane below 5700 Kg piston(s) engine(s) aircraft”(group Task 66.009 on the Agency's rulemaking inventory will address the issue of group rating)(actuals groups 5 to 10) ratings for light aircraft and experience requirements. The task is planned to start in Item 6 to 10: cancelled 2006. Your comment should be taken into acount when drafting the NPA. Item 11 & following: inchanged Justification Being too precise the sorting out is somehow not coherent ans will result in a rarefaction of mechanics having a valid licence to sign the CRS on general aviation aircraft. 20 December 2005 Page 5 of 53 Comment Response Paragraph - Add. info: Appendix I to Part-66 AMC (Aircraft Type Rating List) 20 December 2005 Page 6 of 53 Comment Response Cmt.
Recommended publications
  • Police Aviation News August 2015

    Police Aviation News August 2015

    Police Aviation News August 2015 ©Police Aviation Research Number 232 August 2015 PAR Police Aviation News August 2015 2 PAN—Police Aviation News is published monthly by POLICE AVIATION RESEARCH, 7 Wind- mill Close, Honey Lane, Waltham Abbey, Essex EN9 3BQ UK. Contacts: Main: +44 1992 714162 Cell: +44 7778 296650 Skype: BrynElliott E-mail: [email protected] Police Aviation Research Airborne Law Enforcement Member since 1994—Corporate Member since 2014 SPONSORS Airborne Technologies www.airbornetechnologies.at AeroComputers www.aerocomputers.com Avalex Displays www.avalex.com Broadcast Microwave www.bms-inc.com FLIR Systems www.flir.com L3 Wescam www.wescam.com Powervamp www.powervamp.com Trakka Searchlights www.trakkacorp.com Airborne Law Enforcement Association www.alea.org EDITORIAL I have just returned from Houston and the ALEA annual convention. It may be many miles from my home shores and the words may have been spoken by an American but they rang somewhat true to the situation at home where the new and developing National Police Air Service is still finding its feet. I was sitting in on the Unit Managers Course when the instructor, a greatly respected man who earned his respect by running a large and successful air operation, reminded his stu- dents of their purpose in life. “If the cops on the street are not screaming for you to come in the expectation of getting [air support] help, the operation is flawed and should be considered a failure” Bryn Elliott LAW ENFORCEMENT BRAZIL PARA: Emergency services aviation in Brazil has reportedly fallen on hard times. A few years ago the sector had in place a major forward plan that encompassed most of Brazil’s States and most of the airborne service provision and was expected to see growth in re- sources and manpower controlled within a number of complex governing groups [DFNSP, CAVSEG, CONAV, AEAP, SENASP] but when President Rousseff took power in 2011 she swept them away leaving a vacuum.
  • Decision 2005/07/R

    Decision 2005/07/R

    DECISION No 2005/07/R OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE AGENCY of 19-12-2005 amending Decision No 2003/19/RM of 28 November 2003 on acceptable means of compliance and guidance material to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2042/2003 on the continuing airworthiness of aircraft and aeronautical products, parts and appliances, and on the approval of organisations and personnel involved in these tasks THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE EUROPEAN AVIATION SAFETY AGENCY, Having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1592/2002 of 15 July 2002 on common rules in the field of civil aviation (hereinafter referred to as the Basic Regulation) and establishing a European Aviation Safety Agency1 (hereinafter referred to as the “Agency”), and in particular Articles 13 and 14 thereof. Having regard to the Commission Regulation (EC) No 2042/2003 of 28 November 2003 on the continuing airworthiness of aircraft and aeronautical products, parts and appliances, and on the approval of organisations and personnel involved in these tasks.2 Whereas: (1) Annex IV Acceptable Means of Compliance to Part- 66 Appendix 1 Aircraft type ratings for Part-66 aircraft maintenance licence (hereinafter referred to as Part-66 AMC Appendix I) is required to be up to date to serve as reference for the national aviation authorities. (2) To achieve this requirement the text of Part-66 AMC Appendix I should be amended regularly to add new aircraft type rating. (3) The regular amendment of Part-66 AMC Appendix I is considered as a permanent rulemaking task for the Agency. This decision represents the first update according to an accelerated procedure accepted by AGNA and SSCC.
  • Comparison of Helicopter Turboshaft Engines

    Comparison of Helicopter Turboshaft Engines

    Comparison of Helicopter Turboshaft Engines John Schenderlein1, and Tyler Clayton2 University of Colorado, Boulder, CO, 80304 Although they garnish less attention than their flashy jet cousins, turboshaft engines hold a specialized niche in the aviation industry. Built to be compact, efficient, and powerful, turboshafts have made modern helicopters and the feats they accomplish possible. First implemented in the 1950s, turboshaft geometry has gone largely unchanged, but advances in materials and axial flow technology have continued to drive higher power and efficiency from today's turboshafts. Similarly to the turbojet and fan industry, there are only a handful of big players in the market. The usual suspects - Pratt & Whitney, General Electric, and Rolls-Royce - have taken over most of the industry, but lesser known companies like Lycoming and Turbomeca still hold a footing in the Turboshaft world. Nomenclature shp = Shaft Horsepower SFC = Specific Fuel Consumption FPT = Free Power Turbine HPT = High Power Turbine Introduction & Background Turboshaft engines are very similar to a turboprop engine; in fact many turboshaft engines were created by modifying existing turboprop engines to fit the needs of the rotorcraft they propel. The most common use of turboshaft engines is in scenarios where high power and reliability are required within a small envelope of requirements for size and weight. Most helicopter, marine, and auxiliary power units applications take advantage of turboshaft configurations. In fact, the turboshaft plays a workhorse role in the aviation industry as much as it is does for industrial power generation. While conventional turbine jet propulsion is achieved through thrust generated by a hot and fast exhaust stream, turboshaft engines creates shaft power that drives one or more rotors on the vehicle.
  • Gallery of USAF Weapons Note: Inventory Numbers Are Total Active Inventory figures As of Sept

    Gallery of USAF Weapons Note: Inventory Numbers Are Total Active Inventory figures As of Sept

    Gallery of USAF Weapons Note: Inventory numbers are total active inventory figures as of Sept. 30, 2014. By Aaron M. U. Church, Associate Editor I 2015 USAF Almanac BOMBER AIRCRAFT flight controls actuate trailing edge surfaces that combine aileron, elevator, and rudder functions. New EHF satcom and high-speed computer upgrade B-1 Lancer recently entered full production. Both are part of the Defensive Management Brief: A long-range bomber capable of penetrating enemy defenses and System-Modernization (DMS-M). Efforts are underway to develop a new VLF delivering the largest weapon load of any aircraft in the inventory. receiver for alternative comms. Weapons integration includes the improved COMMENTARY GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator and JASSM-ER and future weapons The B-1A was initially proposed as replacement for the B-52, and four pro- such as GBU-53 SDB II, GBU-56 Laser JDAM, JDAM-5000, and LRSO. Flex- totypes were developed and tested in 1970s before program cancellation in ible Strike Package mods will feed GPS data to the weapons bays to allow 1977. The program was revived in 1981 as B-1B. The vastly upgraded aircraft weapons to be guided before release, to thwart jamming. It also will move added 74,000 lb of usable payload, improved radar, and reduced radar cross stores management to a new integrated processor. Phase 2 will allow nuclear section, but cut maximum speed to Mach 1.2. The B-1B first saw combat in and conventional weapons to be carried simultaneously to increase flexibility. Iraq during Desert Fox in December 1998.
  • AD 2012-0170R2 [Task 2014.211] TGB Oil Level and Magnetic Chip Detector Insp and Pitch Control Rod Bearing Insp

    AD 2012-0170R2 [Task 2014.211] TGB Oil Level and Magnetic Chip Detector Insp and Pitch Control Rod Bearing Insp

    EASA AD No.: 2012-0170R2 EASA AIRWORTHINESS DIRECTIVE AD No.: 2012-0170R2 Date: 20 June 2014 Note: This Airworthiness Directive (AD) is issued by EASA, acting in accordance with Regulation (EC) No 216/2008 on behalf of the European Community, its Member States and of the European third countries that participate in the activities of EASA under Article 66 of that Regulation. This AD is issued in accordance with EU 748/2012, Part 21.A.3B. In accordance with EC 2042/2003 Annex I, Part M.A.301, the continuing airworthiness of an aircraft shall be ensured by accomplishing any applicable ADs. Consequently, no person may operate an aircraft to which an AD applies, except in accordance with the requirements of that AD, unless otherwise specified by the Agency [EC 2042/2003 Annex I, Part M.A.303] or agreed with the Authority of the State of Registry [EC 216/2008, Article 14(4) exemption]. Design Approval Holder’s Name: Type/Model designation(s): AIRBUS HELICOPTERS SA 365, AS 365, SA 366 and EC 155 helicopters TCDS Number: EASA.R.105 Foreign AD: Not applicable Revision: This AD revises EASA AD 2012-0170R1, dated 18 October 2013. ATA 05 Time Limits and Maintenance Checks – Tail Rotor Gearbox (TGB) Oil Level and Magnetic Chip Detector – Inspection ATA 65 Tail Rotor – Pitch Control Rod Bearing – Inspection / Replacement Manufacturer(s): Airbus Helicopters (formerly Eurocopter, Eurocopter France, Aerospatiale). Applicability: SA 365 N1, AS 365 N2, AS 365 N3, SA 366 G1, EC 155 B and EC 155 B1 helicopters, all serial numbers, except those modified in accordance with Eurocopter (EC) modification (mod) 07 65B63.
  • Helideck Manual

    Helideck Manual

    English version HELIDECK MANUAL Helicopter operations on offshore installations In cooperation with Revision date 01.09.2016 revisjonsdato 01.12.2015 Changes in this edition: • “OLF” is systematically changed to “Norwegian Oil and Gas Association” • References to Authority regulations updated • Relevant EN-standards updated • Minor changes in health requirements • Minor addition in refueling procedures • Enclosure F1 updated • Enclosure F2 updated • Enclosure F3 cancelled • Enclosure G updated • Enclosure I updated • Enclosure L updated DOKUMENTNR: REVISONSNR: REVISJONSDATO: Final 01.09.2016 Side 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 General .......................................................................................................................... 5 1.1 Purpose and scope ......................................................................................................... 5 1.2 Responsibilities ............................................................................................................... 5 1.3 Approval ......................................................................................................................... 5 1.4 Distribution and Amendments ......................................................................................... 5 1.5 References ..................................................................................................................... 6 1.6 Definitions ....................................................................................................................... 6 2
  • Military Vehicle Options Arising from the Barrel Type Piston Engine

    Military Vehicle Options Arising from the Barrel Type Piston Engine

    Journal of Power Technologies 101 (1) (2021) 22–33 Military vehicle options arising from the barrel type piston engine Pawe l Mazuro1 and Cezary Chmielewski1,B 1Warsaw University of Technology B [email protected] Abstract in terms of efficiency, meaning that piston engines can deliver enhanced range and endurance. This is benefi- The article reviews knowledge about requirements for engines in cial in missions requiring a stopover for refueling and state-of-the-art unmanned aerial vehicles and tanks. Analysis of particularly useful for unmanned supply, observation design and operational parameters was carried out on selected and maritime missions. turboshaft and piston engines generating power in the range of 500 - 1500 kW (0.5 - 1.5 MW). The data was compared In contrast, land combat vehicles have significantly with the performance of innovative, barrel type piston engines, different drive unit requirements. High mobility en- which are likely to become an alternative drive solution in the ables the vehicle to rapidly change location after de- target vehicle groups. tection. To this end, the torque curve as a function of the rotational speed of the shaft is of decisive im- portance. Keywords: military UAV, tanks, turboshaft engines, piston engines, barrel type piston engines The complexity of tank engines adds an additional layer of requirements, impacting the reliability and durability of the power unit, and they come with re- 1 Introduction lated manufacturing and operating costs. In military land vehicles, the engine should be as small This article consolidates knowledge on options and as possible; the space saved can be used for other capabilities arising from use of the barrel type piston purposes.
  • 201311 General Aviation Report November 2013

    201311 General Aviation Report November 2013

    OCCURRENCE LISTING Aircraft Below 5700kg OCCURRENCES RECORDED BETWEEN 01 November 2013 and 30 November 2013 FIXED WING AIRCRAFT AERO AT3 BOMBARDIER ROTAX Standing EGBK (ORM): 08/11/2013 201314409 912 Northampton/Sywell Numerous flights carried out and not entered in aircraft Tech Logs. Over a period from March 2009 to July 2013, there have been 152 flights (approx 120 flight hours) carried out using four aircraft. No Tech Log entries have been made for any of these flights. There are significant airworthiness implications for the aircraft involved. All four aircraft are currently grounded. Appropriate CAA action is being taken as a result of this incident. AUSTER AUSTER J (J5K) OTHER (Blackburn Rejected take-off Watchford Farm Strip 06/10/2013 201315059 Cirrus Minor IIA) UK Reportable Accident: Aircraft overran runway during rejected take-off and struck a fence. Damage to rear fuselage and tail plate. Two POB, no injuries. Subject to AAIB AARF investigation. AVIONS ROBIN DR400 LYCOMING En-route Casablanca FIR 06/10/2013 201314382 360 FAMILY DR400 infringed an active area closed by NOTAM within the Casablanca FIR. Content: This list contains occurrences and accidents to aircraft of 5700kg and below recorded on the MOR database during the period shown above. The list includes information reported to the CAA, information from CAA investigations and deductions by CAA staff. The authenticity of the contents or absence of errors and omissions cannot be guaranteed. The list contains preliminary information. Purpose: The information is supplied for flight safety purposes only. Queries & Contact Safety Data Department, Civil Aviation Authority, Aviation House, Gatwick Reporting: Airport, W Sussex, RH6 0YR.
  • L'industrie Aéronautique Et Spatiale Française

    L'industrie Aéronautique Et Spatiale Française

    Le Groupement des Industries Françaises, L’industrie Aéronautique et Spatiale Française Chiffre d’affaires ’acte de naissance de l’industrie Aéronautiques et Spatiales ette industrie de souveraineté, de haute technologie, aéronautique, spatial, défense et sécurité en million d’euro (Me). L aéronautique française porte la performante, structurée, économiquement essentielle, Total 2011 estimé 38 500 Me (CA non consolidé). date du 11 janvier 1908. Ce jour là, C participe à la richesse de la France et contribue largement à quelques pionniers dont Louis Blériot, Le Gifas a trois missions principales : son rayonnement dans le monde. Avec 77 % de son chiffre d’affaires 28 % 28 % Louis Breguet, Gabriel Voisin et Robert consolidé réalisé à l’exportation, l’industrie française aéronautique, Militaire Répartition Militaire Représenter et coordonner Étudier et défendre Promouvoir les capacités 10 800 M 10 800 M spatiale, avec sa composante défense et sécurité, est72 le% premier secteur 28 % 72 % civil / militaire Esnault-Pelterie fondent la Chambre Civil Civil 28 % 1/ les activités de la profession 2/ les intérêts de ses adhérents 3/ technologiques industrielles Militaire Militaire 27 700 M Syndicale des Industries Aéronautiques, et humaines de la France dans exportateur français et dégage le premier excédent27 700 Mcommercial. 10 800 M HAUTE-NORMANDIE Le Conseil d’Administration du GIFAS, composé des L’étude et la défense des intérêts de la profession 72 % 72 % 10 800 M DASSAULT AVIATION 3 % Civil avec le but clairement exposé dirigeants des sociétés adhérentes, détermine les lignes entrent dans les missions naturelles de tout groupement le domaine aéronautique et spatial Son carnet de commandes représente l’équivalent de quatre années Civil 27 700 M 27 700 M d’action du GIFAS, en fonction des problèmes communs professionnel.
  • Organisations Approved in Accordance with Part M, Subpart G Published 04 September 2018 That Have ARC Privileges

    Organisations Approved in Accordance with Part M, Subpart G Published 04 September 2018 That Have ARC Privileges

    Organisations approved in accordance with Part M, Subpart G Published 04 September 2018 that have ARC privileges Approval Address Aircraft Type Reference UK.MG.0231 2 Excel Aviation Limited Extra EA200/300 Series The Tiger House Sywell Aerodrome Piper PA31 AOC No GB2299 Sywell Beech 200 Series Northamptonshire NN6 0BN Boeing 727 Tel: 01778 590448 Eurocopter EC135 Series Email: [email protected] Boeing 737 300/400/500 Regional Office: Shared Service Centre UK.MG.0661 A2B Aero Limited EUROCOPTER AS355 SERIES Hangar 4S Oxford Airport SIKORSKY S76 SERIES AOC No Kidlington BELL 429 SERIES Oxfordshire OX5 1RA EUROCOPTER AS365 SERIES Tel: 01844 352239 / 07777 236 0123 EUROCOPTER EC135 SERIES Email: [email protected] SINGLE TURBINE ENGINE HELICOPTERS NOT E AGUSTA WESTLAND AW139 Regional Office: Shared Service Centre EUROCOPTER BO105 EUROCOPTER DEUTSCHLAND MBB-BK 117 SERI EUROCOPTER EC155 SERIES MD HELICOPTERS 902 ROBINSON R22/R44 AGUSTA AW109 SERIES BELL 212/AGUSTA AB212 BELL 412/AGUSTA AB412 AIRBUS HELICOPTERS EC225 AIRBUS HELICOPTERS AS332 UK.MG.0494 Acropolis Aviation Limited AIRBUS A319-100 SERIES Business Aviation Centre Farnborough AOC No 2363 Airport Farnborough Hampshire GU14 6XA Tel: 01458 241112 Email: aidan.murphy@acropolis- aviation.com Regional Office: Shared Service Centre UK.MG.0385 ACS Aviation Limited SINGLE TURBOPROP AEROPLANES NOT EXCEED Hangar 4 Perth Airport PISTON ENGINE AEROPLANES - METAL STRUCT AOC No Scone PISTON ENGINE AEROPLANES - COMPOSITE ST Perthshire PH2 6PL PISTON ENGINE AEROPLANES - WOODEN STRU
  • Varga Béla Helikopter Gázturbinás Hajtóművek Technikai Elemzése

    Varga Béla Helikopter Gázturbinás Hajtóművek Technikai Elemzése

    Varga Béla HELIKOPTER GÁZTURBINÁS HAJTÓMŰVEK TECHNIKAI ELEMZÉSE A helikopterek erőforrásainak jelentős fejlődése, ami főképpen a hajtómű teljesítménytömegviszony, a hatásfok és fajlagos-tüzelőanyag fogyasztás, valamint megbízhatóság, és üzemeltethetőségben jelenik meg, természetesen kiha- tással volt a helikopterek harcászati technikai jellemzőire. Ezek a tények kutatásra érdemessé teszi ezt a területet. A cikkben végig követem a helikopter hajtóművek időbeni fejlődési folyamatát. Ismertetem működésük jellegzetességeit, a legfontosabb gyártókat és gyártmányokat. Statisztikai kimutatásokon keresztül szemléltetem, hogy milyen teljesít- mény paraméterekkel rendelkeztek a múltban és rendelkeznek a jelenleg alkalmazott helikopter hajtóművek. Kulcsszavak: Helikopter gázturbinás hajtóművek, turboshaft, tengelyteljesítmény, fajlagos tüzelőanyag fogyasz- tás, termikus hatásfok, fajlagos hasznos munka. A GÁZTURBINÁS KORSZAK KEZDETE A II. világháború végére a dugattyús légcsavaros repülőgépek elérték fejlődésük csúcspontját. Ez azt jelentette, hogy a sebességük valamivel meghaladta a 700 km/h-t. A repülési magasságuk elérte egy átlagos vadászrepülőgép esetében a 12 km-t, speciális felderítő változatok esetében pedig a 1415 km-t. Jól példázza ezt a folyamatot a II. világháború egyik legismertebb és talán legtöbb fejlesztési fázison átesett vadászrepülőgépe, a Messerschmitt Bf 109. Az 1. táblázat- ban táblázatban a teljesség igénye nélkül felsoroltam néhány fő változatát ennek a repülőgép- nek, szemléltetve, hogy az egyre nagyobb teljesítményű motorok nem hoztak átütő eredményt a repülőgépek sebesség növekedése szempontjából. Típus változat Év Motor Teljesítmény (Le) Sebesség (km/h) Bf 109B 1937 Jumo 210 720 466 Bf 109D 1938 DB 600 960 514 Bf 109E 1939 DB 601A 1175 569 Bf 109F 1941 DB 601N 1200 614 Bf 109G 1942 DB 605 1475 643 Bf 109K 1944 DB 605D 2000 (metanol befecsk.) 724 1. táblázat Bf 109 teljesítmény adatai [1] Ezek a korlátok ismertek voltak már a II.
  • Military Simulator Census 2014 Flightglobal Insight | 3

    Military Simulator Census 2014 Flightglobal Insight | 3

    IN ASSOCIATION WITH SPECIAL REPORT MILITARY SIMULATOR CENSUS 2014 Flightglobal Insight | 3 Flightglobal_Partner of Choice_Oct2014_AM310.indd 1 2014-10-28 8:37 AM MILITARY SIMULATOR CENSUS 2014 CONTENTS ABBREViaTIONS 4Mil 16 Indonesia 22 ANALYSIS 5Mitsubishi 17 Iran 22 NH Industries 17 Iraq 22 CENSUS BY aiRCRAFT MANUfacTURER Northrop Grumman 17 Israel 22 Aero Vodochody 7 Panavia 17 Italy 23 AgustaWestland 7 Pilatus 17 Japan 23 AIDC 7PZL 17 Jordan 23 Airbus Military 7 Raytheon 18 Kuwait 23 Alenia Aermacchi 8 Saab 18 Malaysia 23 AMX International 8 SEPECAT 18 Mexico 23 Antonov 8 Shenyang 18 Morocco 24 BAE Systems 8 Sikorsky 18 Myanmar 24 Beechcraft 8 Sukhoi 19 Netherlands 24 Bell 9 Transall 19 New Zealand 24 Bell Boeing 10 Tupolev 19 Nigeria 24 Boeing 10 Westland 19 Norway 24 Boeing Vertol 12 Oman 24 Boeing/BAS Systems 12 CENSUS BY OPERATOR COUNTRY Pakistan 24 Chengdu Aviation/Pakistan Aeronautical Complex 12 Algeria 20 Peru 24 CASA 12 Argentina 20 Poland 24 Dassault 12 Australia 20 Portugal 24 Dassault/Dornier 13 Austria 20 Qatar 24 Dassault-Breguet 13 Bahrain 20 Romania 24 Douglas 13 Belgium 20 Russia 24 Embraer 13 Brazil 20 Saudi Arabia 25 Enstrom 13 Brunei 20 Singapore 25 Eurocopter 13 Canada 20 Slovakia 25 Eurofighter 14 Chile 21 South Africa 25 Fairchild Republic 14 Colombia 21 South Korea 25 Hawker Beechcraft 14 Croatia 21 Spain 25 Hindustan Aeronautics 14 Czech Republic 21 Sudan 26 Hongdu 14 Denmark 21 Switzerland 26 IAR 14 Ecuador 21 Taiwan 26 Israel Aerospace Industries 14 Egypt 21 Thailand 26 Korea Aerospace Industries 14 Finland