Flight test investigation of certification requirements for laminar-flow general aviation airplanes

1991 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 652-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. S. Manuel ◽  
W. A. Doty
Keyword(s):  
Laminar Flow ◽  
Flight Test ◽  
General Aviation ◽  
Test Investigation ◽  
Certification Requirements

The Flight Testing of Natural and Hybrid Laminar Flow Nacelles

1994 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Barry ◽  
Simon J. Parke ◽  
Nicholas W. Bown ◽  
Hansgeorg Riedel ◽  
Martin Sitzmann
Keyword(s):  
Boundary Layer ◽  
Laminar Flow ◽  
Aircraft Engine ◽  
Flight Test ◽  
Boundary Layer Transition ◽  
Future Application ◽  
Flight Testing ◽  
Layer Transition ◽  
Suction System ◽  
Natural Laminar Flow

The achievement of large areas of laminar flow over aircraft engine nacelles offers significant savings in aircraft fuel consumption. Based upon current engine configurations nett sfc benefits of up to 2% are possible. In addition the engine nacelle is ideally suited to the early inclusion of laminar flow technology, being relatively self contained with the possibility of application to existing airframes. In September 1992 a European Consortium managed by Rolls-Royce including MTU and DLR began flight testing of a natural laminar flow nacelle. This programme was later extended by R-R and DLR to flight test a hybrid laminar flow nacelle featuring boundary layer suction and insect contamination protection. The tests evaluated the effects of flight and engine environment, boundary layer transition phenomena, suction system operation and insect contamination avoidance strategies. This paper describes the global conclusions from these flight tests which are a significant milestone leading to the future application of laminar flow technology to engine nacelles.

Modified State Observer Based Adaptation for a General Aviation Aircraft - Simulation and Flight Test

2014 ◽  
Author(s):  
Venkatasubramani Subba Reddiar Pappu ◽  
James E. Steck ◽  
Karthikeyan Rajagopal ◽  
Sivasubramanya N. Balakrishnan
Keyword(s):  
Flight Test ◽  
State Observer ◽  
General Aviation ◽  
General Aviation Aircraft

The benefits and limitations of ground-based upset-recovery training for general aviation pilots

2012 ◽  
Vol 116 (1184) ◽  
pp. 1015-1039
Author(s):  
R. O. Rogers ◽  
A. Boquet
Keyword(s):  
Flight Test ◽  
General Aviation ◽  
Simulator Training ◽  
Flight Simulator ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Related Research ◽  
Training Requirements ◽  
Student Pilots ◽  
Based Instruction ◽  
Aviation Pilots

Abstract Research by Rogers et al (2009) and Leland et al established that flight simulator training can improve a pilot’s ability to recover a general aviation aeroplane from an in-flight upset. To reach this conclusion, they administered simulator-based and classroom-based upset-recovery training to two groups of student pilots, then compared their performance in recovering an aerobatic Decathlon aeroplane from a series of four upsets with the performance of a third group of untrained control group pilots subjected to the same upsets. We extend this result by addressing the unanswered question of how much classroom-based training as opposed to simulator-based training contributes to improving a pilot’s upset-recovery manoeuvring skills. After receiving classroom-based upset-recovery training but no simulator training, our participants were subjected to the same series of four upsets in the same Decathlon aeroplane. We then compared the performance of the classroom-trained pilots with the performances of control group pilots and the two groups of simulator-trained pilots. Statistical analysis suggests that classroom-based instruction alone improves a pilot’s ability to recover an aeroplane from an upset. We summarise related research, describe the training experiment and the training program, analyse and interpret flight-test data, and explain what our research implies with respect to establishing career-long commercial pilot upset-recovery training requirements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document