Photo: NASA

Captain Charles « Chuck » YEAGER broke the sound barrier with the help of his friend Jack RIDLEY on a 14th of October 1947 – He did it 71 years ago!

(U. S. Air Force illustration/Mike Carabajal)

Photo: NASA

Photo: U.S.Air Force Link

XLR-11 ROCKET POWERED AIRCRAFT

Birth of Manned Rocket Research Airplanes: 1946 to 1975

The first reliable, effective rocket engine that would provide boost for experimental research aircraft was produced by four members of the American Rocket Society (ARS) who combined forces to form Reaction Motors Incorporated (RMI) (Rockaway, New Jersey) for developing the Experimental Liquid Rocket (XLR-11) rocket motor. The XLR-11 engine had four separate rocket chambers. Each chamber provided 1500 lb of rated thrust and could be operated independently as a means of throttling thrust in quarters, up to 6000 pounds. The XLR-11 possessed remarkable longevity, powering an impressive fleet of rocket aircraft for more than a quarter of a century (1946 to 1975). This fleet of vehicles were the first rocket aircraft devoted solely to high performance experimental flight research. They were not constrained by military or commercial demands and ranged from being the first to break the sound barrier (XS-1), to the first to reach Mach 2.0 (D-558-II [fig. 5]), to the first to exceed the X-2 Mach 3.2 record (X-15 with two XLR-11 engines).

Figure 5. The D-558-II airplane on Rogers lakebed.

The X-1E – Early Development of Energy Management

Design efforts to extend aircraft performance produced increased wing loadings, W/S, and decreased lift-to-drag ratios, L/D. These design changes were beneficial in reducing drag to achieve supersonic and hypersonic speeds, but were also detrimental in that they reduced the area of the maneuvering footprint and presented difficulties in the approach and landing.

As L/D values decreased, the glide slope angle and the rate of descent increased, making it more difficult for pilots to estimate distances and times required for acceptable landings. The X-1E (fig. 6) was modified with a low-aspect-ratio wing having a thickness-to-chord ratio of four percent – the only aircraft of the X-1/D-558 series to have sufficiently low L/D values to require unique energy management techniques. This X-1E was the first to experiment with approach patterns designed to give
the pilot more time in the traffic pattern to manage energy.

The landing pattern was approached in a conventional manner except that altitudes and speeds were somewhat higher than for
powered aircraft. The initial reference point was established at 12,000 ft (mean sea level) on a downwind heading (180 deg remaining to turn). The downwind leg was offset some four miles from the centerline of the landing runway. On downwind, abeam the touchdown point, landing gear and partial flaps were deployed at a speed of 240 knots. Full flaps were usually deployed on the final approach. At the initial reference point the pilot had almost three minutes until touchdown – additional time for handling increased speeds and sink rates.7,8

Figure 6. The X-1E airplane on Rogers lakebed.

Report from www.archives.gov

(Text from the NASA at: http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/home/index.html)

The post Charles « Chuck » YEAGER – 71 years ago ! appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

In order to save jet fuel, they look at new concepts, processes, and designs that could be lighter. They try to reduce drag, and they try to increase the propulsive efficiency. For this purpose, they try to get rid of metallic airframes, and parts as often as possible.

For instance NASA has a newer composite 10 percent lighter than carbon fiber composite. This advanced material is called « Pultruded rod stitched efficient unitized structure » or PRSEUS.

The new sleeker designs look like large wings without any traditional tube-shaped fuselage in the central part since it is blended with the wings. These futuristic designs are more fuel efficient as the more lift the plane has, the less it consumes fuel.

The researchers also look at new energy sources as it is showed in this video, and in the end there is further information about the NextGen project which could save fuel too, thanks to this new form of air traffic management:

The post SOLUTIONS TO SAVE JET FUEL appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

Foreign Object Damage (FOD) can be caused by Foreign Object Debris (called FOD too). FOD can also mean « Foreign Object Detection« . Watch the video, and read its transcript below:

Transcript :

Our Air Force has the most technically advanced aircraft in the world – deadly fighters, and bombers, mighty cargo and tanker workhorses, our many helicopters, and a variety of specialty aircraft.

But they can all be easily grounded by FOD.

Foreign objects cause damage to our aircraft in many ways. For example, cut tires, and jammed flight or engine controls. FOD has caused at least six fighter aircraft to crash over the last twelve years! Some of the items that caused these mishaps were:

• Rags;
• Safety wire pliers;
• A piece of aluminum foil;
• A one-inch piece of safety wire;
• Even a small washer!

These incidents show that poor housekeeping, and work practices are still the two major contributors to preventable FOD. We can eliminate FOD. To do so, we must make these six commonsense steps, part of our every job, every step, every day.

1. The first step – be aware that you can make a difference, and that FOD is a constant problem. Every time you sign out a tool box, work a job, or just step out to help someone, keep your eyes open for tools, rocks, and other debris. And when you see something, stop, and pick it up. Occasionally, you may need a sweeper to clean up an area. MAC usually coordinate with base OPS. MAC (Military Airlift Command) usually coordinates this support with base OPS.
2. The second step – keep your work area clean. Check your shoes for foreign objects, and empty your pockets of keys, change, pencils, and trash. Place these items into a FOD bag before entering the cockpit, intake, other confined areas, or before working on top of the aircraft. Are you covering all of those lines, houses, cannon plugs, and ducts during extended maintenance? The ACES II ejection seat is the most reliable, and safest seat in the world, as long as nothing gets in the way. Somebody did not report losing this pencil tip. It then migrated in flight to the sequence start switch which activates the seat computer as it departs the aircraft. It was discovered during a visual inspection of the seat when it was removed for other maintenance. Because of the protective shield over the switch, and the tight clearance in the cockpit, it normally would never have been found. How do you think the pilots felt when they heard about it? Do you check the area one more time before you leave? It is possible the person before you left something behind.
3. Step three – we have to keep our vehicles clean. We know foreign objects get around, and many times are, vehicles carry them out to the flight line. Tire checks – are you constantly doing them every time you went to the flight line? How about after you drove out of the taxiway to let the jet pass? How clean is your vehicle? Is there safety wire, trash, or fasteners on the floor? Is the FOD can overflowing before you empty it? If you have a vehicle magnet installed, are you checking it daily?
4. Step four – Thorough FOD walks. Are you looking, or are you out there just stretching your legs? Pay special attention to the grounding points, and cement grooves, and cracks. These areas are always filling up with trash, rocks, and hardware. A good daily FOD walk helps us keep up with all the debris that still manages to get onto the ramp. A FOD walk should have found this bolt. Instead, it was sucked up, off of the ramp by a B-1. Three first-stage compressor blades, and one inlet guide vane were damaged. It cost us 56 man-hours, and over $ 35,000 to remove and fix this engine.
5. Step five – good tool and hardware control is a must. Remember the last time you lost a tool, or a nut? How long did you look for it? Did you find it? When was the last tool report started? Remember – tool control starts when you receive a toolbox. Before you sign for it, make sure all missing tools are written up, and check the box for pieces of safety wire, and other trash. Woe! Slow down, and look. Is that a tool, or the tool cutout? If you find a tool missing, don’t accept the box, and make sure a last tool report, and investigation is started. Also, never leave tools in hardware in or on the aircraft. Do a good inventory of your toolbox, and TOs* after every job. This alone will narrow the search area, and greatly increase your chances of finding a last tool. Think about it, what would you rather check? One aircraft, or three? When you do find a tool missing, start looking for it immediately. If you can find it after a short search, report it immediately to the expediter, or dock chief, and get some extra help to look for the missing tool or hardware. For tight or inaccessible areas, you can also use a borescope** or X-ray equipment to locate lost items. How would you tell the pilot if the jet has just taxied? What if it is flying? A file about this size was left behind after blunting two engine blades on a C-5, possibly fallen behind a nacelle blocker door*** during the job. Four people then signed for the box over the next several days before someone finally noticed, and reported the last tool. The file was not located, and then came loose in flight the next day. This incident caused over 550 men-hours of work, and $ 66,000 in damage to the engine. Hardware control is simply taking only what you need, and counting how many nuts, bolts, or other hardware you take from bench stock. After the job, make sure you account for all the hardware. If you don’t complete the job, annotate the screw bag with the quantity, the type of hardware, and your name. This will help the person who finishes the job track down any missing hardware. Here is what a misplaced ¼ inch nut did to a C-130 engine. Over 30 blades were damaged beyond repair, not counting depot costs – the damages have already taken 64 man-hours, and exceeded $ 38,000 in damages. Sometimes, we accidentally leave items inside the intake danger area, or in the intake before an engine start. These have included VTR tapes, flashlights, cleaning bottles, and aircraft forms. Are you paying attention? Or have you just been lucky?
6. Step six – follow the T.O..

   For tight or inaccessible access areas, you can also use a borescope, or X-ray equipment to locate lost items. How would you tell the pilot if the jet has just taxied? What if it is flying? A file about this size was left behind after blending two engine blades on a C-5, possibly fallen behind a nacelle blocker door*** during the job. Four people then signed for the box over the next several days before someone finally noticed, and reported the last tool. The file was not located, and then came loose in flight the next day. This incident caused over 550 men-hours of work, and $ 66,000 in damage to the engine. Hardware control is simply taking only what you need, and counting how many nuts, bolts, or other hardware you take from bench stock. After the job, make sure you account for all the hardware. If you don’t complete the job, annotate the screw bag with the quantity, the type of hardware, and your name. This will help the person who finishes the job track down any missing hardware. Here is what a misplaced ¼ inch nut did to a C-130 engine. Over 30 blades were damaged beyond repair, not counting depot costs – the damages have already taken 64 man-hours, and exceeded $ 38,000 in damages. Sometimes, we accidentally leave items inside the intake danger area, or in the intake before an engine start. These have included VTR tapes, flashlights, cleaning bottles, and aircraft forms. Are you paying attention? Or have you just been lucky?

6. Step six (again and further) – Follow the T.O.. Several times we have had equipment, and panels come off during an engine run, or in flight, causing serious damage. On the last job before a three-day weekend, an experienced crew chief and his assistant were preparing an F-16 for an engine run. He skipped the warning, and the step to check the run screen safety pin for security. During the engine run, one pin came out, and after whipping around in the intake for a few seconds, the lanyard broke. The pin destroyed over 426 blades. Total cost – $ 69,000 and 366 man-hours. What was the cost of the crew chief? How do you think he felt? Think of what he went through. The de-certification, the investigation, the waiting. Was the two or three seconds saved worth it? Sometimes, confusing or incomplete TOs are part of the problem. Improper installation caused by poor tech aide, and inexperience created a stress crack in the upper anti collision light lens in a KC-10.

* T.O.: Technical Order

** (or boroscope)

*** Thrust reverser (pelle d’inverseur de poussée)

The post Foreign Object Damage and FOD Prevention appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The British Harriers were to be replaced by the F-35Cs. Do you remember? You may have learnt from the recent news that the carrier variant of the Lockheed Martin Aeronautics Joint Strike Fighter – CV JSF (Carrier Vessel variant’s Joint Strike Fighter) – F-35C was unable to catch the wire onboard the aircraft carrier during the latest landing tests.

Strange as it may seem, the F-35C’s designers may have not forecast what would unfold during a test flight while landing on an aircraft carrier:

The arresting hook (tailhook) never engaged the arresting wire as the clearance between the tail hook and the main landing gear’s tyre tread is too short for such a speed. An F-35C Lightning II missing her carrier landing has been reported even though some U.S. officials would have dismissed such information which might result from simulated tests.

Added to that is a software bug which had grounded the CV JSF for 6 days a few month earlier for the fifth-generation fighter aircraft might have encountered wing-folding input while flying!

As a result, the British Ministry of Defence might find a Plan-B solution as these design flaws, and some others which date back to November 2011 are deemed unacceptable for such an expensive fighter aircraft – $139.5 million for the F-35C (CATOBAR – Catapult Assisted Take Off But Arrested Recovery), and $150 million for the F-35B (STOVL – Short Take-Off and Vertical Landing). The latter can land on carriers but she is more expensive, and the JSF program costs have already increased several times.

Moreover, the JSF would not be able to fire AMRAAM air-to-air missiles as reported in this video:

And there’s even more: according to a Pentagon study team report, 13 areas of concern that remained to be addressed in the F-35 would have been identified. For instance, the Helmet Mounted Display System (HMDS) would not work properly…

The British MoD is therefore considering the purchase of either F/A-18E Super Hornets or RAFALEs for the RAF. The French Dassault which has already lost the Swiss NAC tender due to replace the Swiss Air Force’s F-5s, would be proposing a new offer with 18 RAFALEs at a cost deemed lower than the 22 SAAB Gripens’ one according to the Swiss press.

The RAFALE is still in competition with the Eurofighter in the Indian MMRCA tender. the Indian officials are expected to make a decision this week. To be continued… ==> We have just learnt (on January 31, 2012) that the RAFALE has won the MMRCA tender…

The post Could RAFALE benefit from F-35 glitches? appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Deborah Hersman – NTSB chairman – about what happened on Southwest Airlines B-737 appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

However, the NTSB (National Transportation Safety Board) said that the last heavy « C » check – the last major MRO operation on the aircraft – was performed at the Dallas Southwest maintenance facilities in March 2010.

The TWU (Transport Workers Union) has condemned the use of aircraft repair stations outside the USA, calling on Congress and the Federal Aviation Administration to toughen the FAA’s oversight – Watch the video:

.

The post 7 major airlines outsourcing 40% of their maintenance appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post PW1000G geared turbofan engine appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post FLIGHT SAFETY – Aircraft integrated de-icing services appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Airbus A380 engine failure – Qantas fleet grounded appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post LC-130 takes off for Operation Deep Freeze appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The main rotor or rotary wing on the H-3 has five identical wing blades. Other helicopters may have two, three, or four blades. A typical wing blade is shown in figure 1-17. The rotary-wing blade is made of aluminum alloy, except the steel cuff by which the blade attaches to the rotor hub. The main supporting member of the blade is a hollow, aluminum alloy extruded spar, which forms the leading edge. The steel cuff is bolted to the root end of the spar. Twenty-three individual pockets constructed of aluminum ribs, aluminum channels, and aluminum skin covering are bonded to the aft edge of the spar.

Text and cutaway view: www.tpub.com courtesy

The post Sea King helicopter blade appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post X3 concept – experimental compound helicopter appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Pre-flight Walk Around Inspection appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Commentary on plane that lost wing in Argentina appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

« Until next time, throttle on… »

The post Cockpit overview appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

Figure 1-5. – FLAPERON CONTROL SYSTEMS

1. Wing fold flaperon interlock switch
2. Flaperon control linkage
3. Right wing flaperons
4. Flaperon actuator (right wing)
5. Flaperon pop-up valve
6. Wing-fold‚ interlock mechanism
7. Filter
8. Crossover cables Flaperon pop-up mechanism and cylinder
9. Left wing flaperons
10. 1Flaperon control linkage
11. Flaperon actuator (left wing)
12. Crossover cables
13. Pushrods Left wing flaperons
14. Throttle quadrant

Longitudinal control systems control pitch about the lateral axis of the aircraft. Many aircraft use a conventional elevator system for this purpose. However, aircraft that operate in the higher speed ranges usually have a movable horizontal stabilizer. Both types of systems are discussed in the following text.

ELEVATOR CONTROL SYSTEM – A typical conventional elevator control system is operated by the control stick in the cockpit, and is hydraulically powered by the elevator power mechanism. The operation of the elevator control system is initiated when the control stick is moved fore or aft. When the stick is moved, it actuates the control cables that move the elevator control bell crank. The bell crank transmits the movement to the power mechanism through the control linkage. In turn, the power mechanism actuates a push-pull tube, which deflects the elevators up or down. If the hydraulic system fails, the cylinder can be disconnected. In this condition the controls work manually through the linkage of the mechanism to actuate the elevators.

HORIZONTAL STABILIZER CONTROL SYSTEM – Horizontal stabilizer control systems are given a variety of names by the various aircraft manufacturers. Some aircraft systems are defined as a unit horizontal tail (UHT) control systems, while others are labeled the stabilator control system. Regardless of the name, these systems function to control the aircraft pitch about its lateral axis.

Source: http://www.tpub.com

The post FLAPERON CONTROL SYSTEM appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Airliner severe problems in volcanic dust appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Rotax engine explained appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

17/03/2010
Certification tests of Russia’s new Sukhoi Superjet 100 medium-haul airliner are nearing completion. Its engine was subjected to tough reliability tests involving simulated ice and hail storms and frozen-carcass bird strikes.

www.rian.ru courtesy

The post SNECMA / NPO Saturn’s PowerJet SaM146 certification – Sukhoi Superjet 100 engine appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.

The post Manufactured objects and their designers appeared first on AVIATION ENGLISH.