APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A PRIMARY RESPONSE CHARACTERISTICS The figures in appendix A illustrate the primary response characteristics at 15 These surge.
KEAS to stimulus from the stick, rudder pedals, heave rate contro1,and GAC 6DOF computer program and were used to verify responses were generated on the the NASA Ames model.
ALFA angle of attack, deg AXPIL acceleration at the pilot station, x direction, g AYPIL acceleration at pilot station, y direction, g AZPIL acceleration at the pilot station, z direction, g BETA sideslip angle, deg DEL ALT incremental altitude change, ft DELFWD incremental forward position of the aircraft, ft GTH LT gross thrust, left engine, lb/100 of change of altitude, ft/s HDOT rate LT VANEH left horizontal vane deflection, deg NACEL LT left nacelle deflection, deg P body angular velocity, deg/s PHI Euler bank angle of the aircraft, deg PSI Euler heading angle, deg QDOT Pitch rate acceleration in body axis, deg/s RR Yaw rate at body axis, ft/s RRDOT Yaw axis acceleration, ft/s2 THET pitch attitude, deg TLEVX/PL power level angle, deg VEQUI equivalent airspeed, knots .
- # P .
z
t .
I ui a w W z a w Figure A1.- Lateral stick input.
s
d d Y v) LL
P
P w z a w 5 0 . . . . . . . . I . . j . , . . . 1 I IC
-
I Figure A 1 .- Continued.
6- W I e k - 0 .o 0 a I I j : !
I . , . . . .. . .~ . * . , I i . . : ' . C .o Figure A1.- Continued.
6 ' 0 N P
-
d J 9 I 0 )-.
a L
z
J I d 0 n ?
Figure A 1 . - Continued.
d
.
1.- a 0 t
zr"
';s Figure A 1 . - Continued.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Figure A 1 . - Continued t-.
w I t - .
.o 'f t-.
c3 a I W z a w Figure A 1 . - Continued.
x: n Q I (Y > w z a > ';J Figure A 1 . - Continued.
Is
d t-.?
a a .: P
-
W z U W t c .
-
Figure A1.- Continued.
N d I J U L d \ - - ~ 0 : , . . . t--:-:-::~i.:..:..l : . . . / . . I . . . . ; . . . . ( . . . I . : ::. ' I v
z 0 d 0
x: L
P
Figure A 1 . - Continued.
a t A a n t . . . ! . : ! I
x
I
i I
0 0 I
t
- I I I
I I 1 I I I t- I t I I o x ?
I I t I i I L 1 1
Figure A 1 . - Continued.
n
*
I
2 n
w W
*
n I Figure A 1 . - Concluded.
Y cn a F i g u r e A2.- Rudder pedal i n p u t .
Figure A2.- Continued.
t-.
w I t - .
!e
___-- d d
R
sj
i I -
I I I
!
.o
: -
I Figure A2.- Continued.
N Q x a N r) N h 0
*
a n ' 0 0 c ( X N a J 0 0 G2 L Figure A2.- Continued.
c N . .
1 i .
. .,... . . . . . . . . ._^ , . ...
0 1. . :: . . , . , . , . T'
I
1 I 1
6 '
Figure A2.- Continued.
c .
e J 2 c.
I N d l- -l
x
a 1 0 w P
-
I Figure A2.- Concluded.
p.
*
a i d
Q
d p.
N a '1c e
+
?
I n I 1 I 1 t I I 1 . 1 ).. . ..&. . . . . . . . ,. . . .. . . . . .... )-.- ..... _- 1 ?
Figure A3.- Flightpath lever input.
s
w m Figure A 3 . - Continued.
X I CI c3 Figure A 3 . - Continued.
*
w I e O '. 0 ...
I - - I
z
.o Figure A 3 . - Continued.
CI I a L.
d (L
-
d a Y P > W z a > CI -I Figure A 3 . - Continued.
Y t n Q W I z a w t cf L.
I Figure A 3 . - Concluded.
a t A a I F i g u r e A 4 . - Surge i n p u t .
I X a d Q.
>..
a m.
P Figure A 4 . - Continued.
4 1 e w I ..
0 0 Figure A 4 . - Continued.
Y I
-
L CI c1 I Figure A 4 . - Continued.
4 3 Figure A 4 . - Continued.
4 4 Y I Q d d Q m N.
P -.
> w z a >
-
I Figure A 4 . - Concluded.
4 5
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B
FUNDAMENTAL TIME HISTORIES
The figures in Appendix B demonstrate fundamental time histories of the air-
cr ft in Phase I11 for various hover control configurations for 1.0 in. of input
deflection. These figures were generated by the Grumman 6DOF digital program and have been compared with the NASA Ames VMS responses.
ANACT nacelle deflection, deg
DIF TRST differential thrust between the left and right engines, lb/100
DIF VANE differential thrust between the left and right horizontal vanes, deg GVANEL left guide vane deflection, deg
vx I velocity of the aircraft in the inertial axis, x direction, ft/s
VY I velocity of the aircraft in the inertial axis, y direction, ft/s YAI position change of the aircraft in the inertial axis 4 6
-
0.01 0.0 voi-
0'05 . 0'0 0.05-
U W L I X A o m 0 0' 0' 0.0 vmi- t-0 lDow 4 7 o b rri- O'b b ' 0 : , 0'0 I XA U H 1 1ldXY ?
9 ?
0' I 0-0 OI- O i l 0-0 voi- 0 .b o-mi- 1ooW CDNCJA 11 1 3 w 4 8 9 9 .I4 a, 0.01 0.0 0-oi- E .i 0.b E ' i - 13H1 I Xh 9 0 a , I L a , ho O L 0.b 0.C 0-'I 0.b 0.I- 0.b 0- i- MWA 11 l'W730 looH 4 9 CONTROL MODE 1 AND2 0.0 i.0 i o 3.0 i.0 6.0 0.0 TI IlE-SEC Figure B4. - 698 Lateral dynamic response.
Final response characteristics-- Phase 111: 1 in.-step lateral-stick input from trim hover in no-wind conditions with flightpath augmentation on.
5 0 W aJ W u I M c u E'il o.'o o.'o o * o L d I Hd 5 1 0 Q O ' W I 0.0 o w i - Illh .
0:o o o i - 0 . i 0-b ' d I W d CONTROL MODE a 1P Figure B5.- Concluded.
5 3 n CONTROL MODE 1P Final response characteristics-- Figure B6.- 698 Lateral dynamic response.
Phase 111: Full lateral tophat input from trim hover in no-wind with flightpath augmentation on.
5 4 , a a, a = !
0.c 0 .b 0’0)-
0 - i 0 . i - C I tll 17tn30 0 u I 0.b 0.61 0 : o o*oi- d I Hd 5 5 r;
P? W O
.O c J F CONTROL MODE a 2P
Figure B7. - 698 Lateral dynamic response. Final response characteristics--
Phase 111: 1 in.-step lateral-stick input from trim hover in no wind with flightpath augmentation on.
D a a a , 'c1 c 0-b E ' u 71dAY I M I e- m Q, t MI C L I oh Vd- Vi1 0.0 d 1 W d a CONTROL MODE 2P
Figure B8.- 698 Lateral dynamic response. Final response characteristics--
Phase 111: Full lateral tophat input from trim hover in no-wind with flightpath augmentation on.
5 8 a / o? 0 : o 1 l K U O ?
oh ooi- ooi-
low
d I Hd 5 9 CONTROL MODE 3P
Figure B9.- 698 Lateral dynamic response. Final response characteristics--
Phase 111: 1 in.-step lateral stick input from trim hover in no-wind with flightpath augmentation on.
6 0 0-or 0.0 0-oi- IM ' 0-k 0.0 0 . i 0 .b 0.61 0-0 1wd d I Hd 6 1 Final response characteristics-- Figure B10.- 698 Lateral dynamic response.
Phase 111: 1 in.-step lateral-stick input from trim hover in no-wind with flightpath augmentation on.
6 2 a a, -0 = !
F-l 0' C I tll u I 0 0 c m a, S - i l 0 0 S-ti- I W d 6 3 REFERENCES
1. Kress, R. W . : An Affordable Means of Increasing Sea-Based Air Power. SAE
Paper 801241, Oct. 1980.
2. Wilson, S. B.; Bowles, J. V.; and Foster, J. D.: Analysis of Selected VTOL
Concepts for a Civil Transportation Mission. AIAA Paper 81-2655, Dec. 1981.
3. Ciminera, M. V . : The Development of a Twin-Turbofan V/STOL Aircraft.
Presented at the 36 Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, May
1980.
4. Grumman Aerospace Corporation: Full-scale Tests of Grumman Design 698-411 Tilt
Nacelle V/STOL Model at the NASA-Ames Research Center. NAVAIR Report
N00019-80-C-0115, Dec. 1981.
5. Jones, A. D.: Operations Manual: Vertical Motion Simulator (VMS) S.08. NASA
TM-81180, May 1980.
6. Stapleford, R. L.; Clement, W. F.; Heffley, R. K; Booth, G. C.; and
Fortenbaugh, R. L.: Flight Control/Flying Qualities Investigation for
Lift/Cruise Fan V/STOL. Naval Air Development Center Report 777143-30, vol. I, 11, 111, Aug. 1979.
7. Merrick, V. K.: Simulation Study of Two VTOL Control/Display Systems in IMC
Approach and Landing. NASA TM-81295, Aug . 1 9 8 1 .
8. Merrick, V. K.: A Translational Velocity Command System for VTOL Low-Speed
Flight. NASA TM-34215, March 1982.
9. Merrick, V. K.: Study of the Application of an Implicit Model Following Flight
Controller to Lift-Fan VTOL Aircraft. NASA TP-1040, Nov. 1977.
10. Greif, R. K.,; Fry, E. B.; Gerdes, R. M.: and Gossett, T. D.: Stabilization on
VTOL Aircraft in Hovering Flight. NASA TN D-6900, Aug. 1972.
11. Valckenaere, W. : Tilt Nacelle V/STOL Aircraft Grumman Design 698-41 1 Flight
Simulation Study Results (Phase I) Feb. 1984.
12. Co,oper, G. E.; and Harper, R. P.: The Use of Pilot Rating in the Evaluation of
Aircraft Handling Qualities. NASA TN D-5153, Apr. 1969.
13. Johns, J. B.; Clark, J. W., Jr.; and Donley, S. T.: Results of the Grumman
Design 698-411, Phase 11, Piloted Simulation. Naval Air Development Center 6053/6012 memorandum to memorandum 605 1 , Dec. 1983.
6 4 14. Donley, S. T.: Evaluation of Several Control/Dispiay Control for V/STOL Shipboard Landing. Transactions of SAE, 1980.
15. Johns, J. B.; Clark, J. W., Jr.; and Donley, S. T.: Results of the Grumman
Design 698: Phase I11 Piloted Simulation. Naval Air Development Center
605360 1 2 memorandum to memorandum 605 1 , Sept . 1984.
16. Falarski, M. D.; Dudley, M. R.; Buckman, W.; and Pisano, A . : Aerodynamic
AIAA Characteristics of a Large-Scale Twin Tilt-Nacelle V/STOL Model.
Paper 81-0150, Jan. 1981.
17. Johns, J. B.; Donley, S. T.; and Clark, J. W., Jr.: Results of JVX Test #1
Naval Air Development Center 6053/6012 memorandum to
Piloted Simulation.
memorandum 6095, June 1984.
6 5
TABLE 1.- CLASSICAL CONTROL SYSTEM--PHASE I
CRUISE BASIC UNAGUMENTED, STABLE AIRCRAFT SASa SELECTION PROVIDES RATE DAMPING IN PITCH RATE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD IN ROLL TURN COORDINATION IN YAW PILOT RELIEF MODES ALTITUDE HOLD HEADING HOLD CONVERSION ATTITUDE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD - PITCH RATE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD - ROLL TURN COORDINATION IN YAW TRANSITION
ATTITUDE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD - PITCH
RATE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD BECOMES ATT-ITUDE
COMMAND/ATTlTUDE HOLD AT 40 knot - ROLL
TURN COORDINATION BECOMES RATE COMMAND/ATTITUDE HOLD AT 60 knot - YAW MANUAL OPERATION OF THROTTLE/NACELLE ON THRUST LEVER FLIGHTPATH CONTROL (h, x ) AVAILABLE ON SEPARATE VELOCITY LEVER ALTITUDE HOLD AVAILABLE WHILE ON APPROACH TO LANDING SITE HOVER AND LANDING MAY BE ATTEMPTED WITH ABOVE SYSTEM aSAS: STABILITY-AUGMENTATION SYSTEM.
6 6
TABLE 4. - CLASSICAL CONTROL SYSTEM--PHASE
I I
0 ABOVE 160 knots (PRIOR TO NACELLE UNLOCK) LONGITUDINAL: PITCH RC LATERAL/DIRECTIONAL: ROLL RC/AH TURN COORDINATION HEADING HOLD AVAILABLE VERTICAL: MANUAL THROTTLE ALTITUDE HOLD AVAILABLE 0 BETWEEN 160 knots AND 50 knots (CONVERSlON/TRANSlTION) LONGITUDINAL/VERTICAL: PITCH RC/AH OPTIONS: (1) MANUAL THROTTLE AND NACELLE TILT (2) FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTATION:
h, COMMAND/h, ;( HOLD
LATERAL/DI RECTIONAL: ROLL RC/AH TURN COORDINATION 0 AT 50 knots AND BELOW: LONGITUDINAL/VERTICAL: OPTIONS: (1) STANDARD MODE: PITCH AC/AH VIA STICK (2) PRECISION MODE: ;( COMMAND/;( HOLD VIA STICK ;( COMMAND/;( HOLD/AH VIA TRC BUTTON OPTIONS: (1) MANUAL THROTTLE AND NACELLE TILT (2) FLIGHT PATH AUGMENTATION:
h, COMMAND/h, HOLD
LATERAL/DI R ECTIONAL: OPTIONS: (1) STANDARD MODE: ROLL AC/AH VIA STICK (2) PRECISION MODE:
$ COMMAND/^ HOLD VIA STICK
i COMMAND/i HOLD/AH VIA TRC BUTTON
YAW RC/HEADlNG HOLD RC - RATE COMMAND I; - ALTITUDE RATE
AH - ATTITUBE HOLD 2 ~ LONG!TUD!NAL ACCELERATION
AC -ATTITUDE COMMAND iC - LONGITUDINAL VELOCITY
- LATERAL VELOCITY 6 9 w
- I N
d
2 ' d
d
LA LA
= I LA
a I m 10
Y n W z n a n w I- n L > z 2 0 a n z U w w >
B
n - N pr) 7 0
TABLE 6.- CLASSICAL CONTROL SYSTEM--PHASE I11
LONGITUDINAL/VERTICAL : RESPONSE TYPE CONTROL EFFECTORS ATTITUDE, x COMMAND HORIZONTAL VANE, /ATTITUDE, x HOLD NACELLE TILT VIA STICK x COMMAND /x, NACELLE TILT, ATTITUDE HOLD HORIZONTAL VANE VIA TOP HAT x COMMAND/x, NACELLE TILT, ATTITUDE HOLD HORIZONTAL VANE LATERAL: RESPONSE TYPE CONTROL EFFECTORS ??!ODE 1 AND 2 VERTICAL VANE AC/AH VIA STICK MODE 1P (X-SHAFTED) VERTICAL VANE AC/AH VIA STICK DIFFERENTIAL GUIDE VANE (DIFFERENTIAL THRUST) y COMMAND/y, HOLD DIFFERENTIAL GUIDE VIA TOP HAT VANE (DIFFERENTIAL THRUST), VERTICAL VANE MODE 2P (NON-X-SHAFTED) VERTICAL VANE, AC/AH VIA STlCK DIFFERENTIAL RPM (DIFFERENTIAL THRUST) y COMMAND/y HOLD DIFFERENTIAL RPM VIA TOP HAT (DIFFERENTIAL THRUST), VERTICAL VANE MODE 3 (X-SHAFTED) DIFFERENTIAL GUIDE AC/AH VIA STICK VANE (DIFFERENTIAL THRUST) MODE 4 (X-SHAFTEG) DIFFERENTIAL GUIDE RC/AH VIP STICK VAN E (D I F F E R ENTIA L THRUST) 7 1 iA e3 a
W E
I
t 9
t
a 5
P
I z
9 9
4 X X
v)
n I
n r N r r I " , I- I
>
W
-
a
z
n
--------
7 2 7 3 I I I I n N Y I N Z E 0 v)
+ -
A a b e N u Jv) m - I w
pI 2 5 Y 0
E Y ..
I- v) W
>
o E 19
7 4 I Figure 1.- Model 698 research aircraft.
RESULTANT THRUST HAS LESS THAN 1% THRUST LOSS
- 5%
< 30% OF TOTAL
THRUST FOR AIRCRAFT
v T CENTER
\ CONTROL OR
THRUST DECREASE AT MAXIMUM VANE DEFLECTION figure 2.- Thrust vector diagram.
7 6 , ,' C S Y
.. . '*
Figure 3.- Vertical motion simulator.
- A --
( b ) Phases I1 and 111.
F i g u r e 4.- Simulator c o c k p i t . (a) Phase I .
7 8 VERTICAL /VANE HOR I ZONTAL 100%
li /VANE
.... 85@- ENGINE rprn
I 1 1 0 " NACELLE .
ANGLE G/S AND 500 ft/rnin
12 - 120 knots
LOCALIZER - ' 5
= 10 -1000 ft
-
-
v 10 -
-
I 1 5 "
ANGLEOF -
PITCH -
>- 0
ATTITUDE
-
1 REF
-
HORIZON 4 -
-
2 -
A
- -5
\
-
-
RADAR ALTITUDE
/ o - -
AIRSPEED, -
-
-2 -
- -10
A
/ 2.5
DME, n. mi.'
34 35 N 1 2 3 HEADING I 1 1 1 1 I I I I I J Ih
/ / 0 \ \ \ \ROLLANGLE
/ /
(a) Phase I.
Figure 5.- Design 698 V/STOL HUD format.
7 9 0, W Lea
& N
- .
z C U !
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1 I l l I I v) Lea c, C 1 1 1 1 lu: =r I Z
-
L G H u n n I 0 Ln H n I I J h n v d c e a
=\
\ m a l W K
s
VERTICAL VANE NACELLE DEFLECTION RPM, % ANGLE, d y b HORIZONTAL /VANE
-
.... -80 e... DEFLECTION
I 1 1 0
- 5 = 10- RADAR
ALTITUDE,
I 1 -
100 ft
PITCH -
ATTITUDE -
>-
AIRSPEED
ATTl TU DE -
AND VECTOR 1 REF
-
\ O l HORIZON
X 10 knots r&
-5
VERTICAL -
VELOCITY, ft/sc - -1 0
CLOSURE RATE, knots V ‘ C 30 ,0.5
/ / I I o \ \ \ \ ROLL ANGLE
( c ) Phases I1 and 111--above 40 knots.
Figure 5.- Concluded.
w -1 n (d U I W a w I- U U H d C I- U u
z
U
a
a Q
a
n I- a v E w
s
z
a
E a 8 3 Figure 7.- 1980 Visual scene capability.
w
k
K c I I
i
I a G
I
I
n A e H W
Y
W U v) I
oIw#NAL PAGE I S
0 ?OOR QUALtTY
a l > .- v) C n m 4 - (v .- cu a, L, U a, (d rn rn M c d L, (d t rn a, -4 I, *I (d CT M c -4 P
s
c t a, a t (d X I t Q, a u I Q\ a, M -4 r a 8 6 6 r 1 I 1 I L - _ N
z
n
WT. = 14,275 Ib W \
I e = 2.00
b
V w o ~ 15 KEAS
2 66
Q = 4.05 ft I I- 2 3 4 5 h Id Figure 10.- Ground-effect trim requirements.
LAND I N G D I ST R I BUT I 0 N
T 8o
XDA, ft
0 A
+ o
Q
A
I I I .
I t 1 I
a
-40 -30 -20 -10 YDA, ft 1 - 2 0 OPEN -MANUAL THROTTLE CLOSED - FLT. PATH AUG.
0 1 -40
A 3A
' 3B
0 3c -60 Figure 11.- Landing distribution on an LPH--phase I.
8 8 100 r SLOPE SET BY u l 0 ) 'O 70 w' .J
p 60
a
CLOSED GEAR DOWN
>
w J 40 7, deg ~ N A C , deg a 0 3 5
5 30
0 0 5
g
0 0 5 I I I 1 I I I 1 I I -50 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 COCKPIT THROTTLE LEVER, deg Figure 12.- Engine thrust-response characteristics--inbound transition profile.
0 CLEAN ~ N A C = 5" 0 CONVERTED ~ N A C Z 5" OPEN 7 = 0" CLOSE x 5
n
c i
2 4 w \ I - v) K I
+
'2 I I I I BO 80 120 160 200 V,, KEAS Figure 13.- Throttle lever vs. power lever--aircraft trim points.
8 9 - ENVIRONMENT: 10 knots WOD AT O",
- LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE
-
I 6~ 4 0 INTERCEPT + TRACK GS - DECELERATION TO HOVER/LOW SPEED
l:[ I
6 - 6 - a a u - 0 u - 0 I I 4 - 0 0 4 - 0 0 , ,
I
0 ' I STATION KEEPING 6 b I
8 -
= 4 - 00 00
Qo
2 1
MANUAL THROTTLE FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTOR DATA REPRESENTS INDIVIDUAL PILOT RATINGS manual vs Figure 14.- Individual pilot ratings for inbound transition to an LPH: flightpath augmentor--phase 11.
9 0 LATERAL TRANSLATION TO PORT
I
ENVIRONMENT: 10 knots WOD AT Oo, L I G HT/MOD ER ATE TU R BU L ENC E I
6 k I
K
- 0
0 0
= 4 -
I
0 0
I
-
-
8 -
-
6 - K L 6 - 0 0 K
-
= 4 -
2 1
c I MANUAL THROTTLE FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTOR DATA REPRESENTS INDIVIDUAL PILOT RATINGS manual vs Figure 15.- Individual pilot ratings for outbound transition from an LPH: flightpath augmentor--phase 11.
9 1 LATERAL TRANSLATION TO HOVER ENVIRONMENT: o 15 knots WOD AT Oo, LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE A 15 knots WOD AT Oo, MODERATE TURBULENCE 0 25 knots WOD AT Oo, MODERATE TURBULENCE a U I HOVER OVER TD SPOT I
-
A A A D 2 - 0 . 0
-
DESCEND AND LAND A B A B A B
1 0 I 0
LT U I 4 - - 0 2 -
-
0 I I
NONPRECISION PR EClSlON PRECISION + X SHAFT FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTOR ALWAYS ENGAGED DATA REPRESENTS INDIVIDUAL PILOT RATINGS Figure 16.- Individual pilot ratings for inbound transition to an LPH: non-precision vs precision vs precision and cross-shafting--phase 11.
9 2 LATERAL TRANSLATION TO HOVER
-
A 15 knots WOD AT O", MODERATE TURBULENCE 8 -
- 0 25 knots WOD A T Oo, MODERATE TURBULENCE
CT 6 - I I
a -
A n I
4 - 0 - A n A Fl
v
- 0
2o 0
HOVER OVER TD SPOT DESCEND AND LAND
I I
PR EClSlON PRECISION + NONPRECISION X SHAFT FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTOR ALWAYS ENGAGED DATA REPRESENTS AVERAGED PILOT RATINGS
Figure 17.- Averaged pilot ratings for inbound transition to an LPH: non-precision
vs precision vs precision and cross-shafting--phase 11.
9 3 AIRWAKE TURBULENCE ON
-
- A SEA STATE 5 , 3 5 knots WOD AT -60°, WITH
- AIRWAKE TURBULENCE ON
.
6 -
-
E
O A O A A O A
= 4 -
O O o b B B O O O A A A - O O O M O A O A
I I
10 -
-
8 - O A
- O A O A
6 - O A A O M
K -
' A U ' A o o & A O A O A
= 4 - 0 A
- 0 0 0
2 -
-
O J
10 - 00 A A O O M O M
-
8 - A
-
A 6 - O M 0:
- O P
00 A A 0 0 n
= 4 -
-
-
2 -
-
Figure 18.- Individual pilot ratings for inbound transition to a DD-963: non-precision vs precision vs precision and cross-shafting--phase 11.
9 4 TRANSLATION TO HOVER OVER TD SPOT ENVlRONMENT: 0 SEA STATE 3,25 knots WOD AT -60°, WITH AIRWAKE TURBULENCE ON A SEA STATE 5,35 knots WOD AT -60°, WITH AIRWAKE TURBULENCE ON LT ' 4 HOVER OVER TD SPOT a DESCEND AND LAND
lo F
I 1 0 ' PRECISION PRECISION + NONPRECISION X SHAFT FLIGHTPATH AUGMENTOR ALWAYS ENGAGED FLAGGED SYMBOLS INDICATE REDUCED LOW FREQUENCY TURBULENCE AND GROUND EFFECTS DATA REPRESENTS AVERAGED PILOT RATINGS
Figure 19.- Average pilot ratings for inbound transition to a DD-963: non-precision
vs precision vs precision and cross-shafting--phase 11.
0 15 knots WOD A T 0' LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE
c CL
70 r SEA STATE 3
0 15 knots WOD AT 0"
60 -
MODERATE TURBULENCE SEA STATE 3
50 -
25 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE
40 - SEA STATE 3
LEVATOR
30 -
-
\
c , w-
2- 10 -
SPOT 6 DECK
-
REFERENCE r-, r n o -MARK
% -10 -
-
-20
CL - CENTERLINE
-
-30 DE -DECK EDGE -40
SPOT^
-
-50
-
-60 I I U
-70 '
-40 -31 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 y-POSITION, ft (a) Standard mode.
Figure 20.- Landing distribution on an LPH--phase 11.
9 6 0 15 knots WOD AT 0" LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE SEA STATE 3 0 15 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE SEA STATE 3 25 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE SEA STATE 3 SPOT 6 DECK REFERENCE
-
MARK
CL - CENTERLINE
DE - DECK EDGE
-50
-70 -601
I I -80 -40 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 y-POSITION, ft (b) (b) Precision mode with noncross-shafted engines.
Figure 20.- Continued.
0 15 knots WOD AT 0"
CL
c LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE
-
SEA STATE 3 0 15 knots WOD AT 0"
-
MODERATE TURBULENCE SEA STATE 3
-
25 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE
-
SEA STATE 3
-
-
-
SPOT 6 DECK E REFERENCE 2-
-
MARK 0 0 k V Y
-
; -10
-
-20 CL - CENTERLINE
-
DE - DECK EDGE -30
-
-40 SPOT '
-
-50
-
-60 I U -70 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 40 y-POSITION, ft ( c ) Precision mode with cross-shafted engines.
Figure 20.- Concluded.
C -ca-
9 8 H H bo E : I
l S
c N P, L w o N n bo rzl H
z
n a
a
n v) I ?l !
w ‘ n : ‘C L n U $4 ‘NO11 ISOd-X 9 9 ENVIRONMENT: 0 15 knots WIND, LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE A 25 knots WIND, LIGHT/MODERATE TURBULENCE
''1 8 0 A I I
*o 0 NONPRECISION NONPRECISION PRECISION +
t MANUAL + FLIGHTPATH F L IGHTPATH
AUGMENTOR AUGMENTOR MANEUVERING OCCURS OUT-OF-GROUND EFFECT DATA REPRESENTS INDIVIDUAL PILOT RATINGS individual pilot ratings--phase 11.
Figure 22.- Spot turns above a VTOL pad: NO. OF
PILOTS\ T
RANGE OF DATA AVERAGE H Q R ~
10 - 10
7€
T
7 T T 6 7 ( 5 6 6 a 6 U z 5 -L
-
3 A 3 1 1 lP/STK 1P/TH IP/BW 2 2P/STK 2P/TH 2P/BW 3 4 1 CONTROL MODE LPH DAY SS3 20 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE Figure 23.- General control mode comparison: pilot ratings--phase 111.
1 0 0 1-B ADDITION OF HUMAN BW BESTWAY FIGURE ON DECK ST STICK 1-D NO FIGURE ON DECK TH TOPHAT CI
u
- 20
i
n 0 0 I -
z -20
%
9 . 6
-60 0 SYSTEM
0 1P*-BW
L -
O 1-B
A 1P*-ST
O 1-D
O 1P*-TH . I . I loo/(b! ..A 1 ! 1' ! , I ! . ! , L 4 I 14U I -40 -20 0 20 40 60 -60 -20 0 20 60 100 140 y-POSITION, f t y-POSITION, ft
s
c
2- 10 2- 10 k k v) v) 0 -10 0 -10
%
t
-30 -30 -50 -50 (C) I
I l a 1 7n 1 L - kd! I 1 I I I I
-70 - I u 1 0 1 NO. OF RANGE OF DATA AVERAGEHQR DAY NIGHT 10 10 6 ,
E 6
1 5 5 ?
3 3 1 1
RATE I ATTITUDE I RATE I ATTITUDE
COMMAND COMMAND COMMAND COMMAND (4) (3) (4) (3) CONTROL MODE LPH D/N SS3 20 knots WOD AT 0" MODERATE TURBULENCE Rate command vs attitude command: Figure 25.- Day vs night.
pilot ratings--phase 111.
1 0 2 N FLOWN IN NIGHT CONDITIONS B DAYTIME LANDING WITH HUMAN FIGURE
-
-
1 I
115 50
I I
' U
-
-
c , 10 c . 55 w- w-
i
2- 0
E 2 5 -
l= -10 v)
g
0-
-
-30 -5 0
-
SYSTEM
-
-35 0 3-N -50
O 3*-N
- (a1 l / b / l l l , , , L I l , l , l , ~ -65 -70 -30 -10 0 10 30 50 70 y-POSITION, ft
-
-
-
-
c 5 5 -
c 20
7 l
i -
E 2 5 -
g
0 : x
-
-20 -5
-
SYSTEM
-
-35 0 4-N -40
4 - (c)
tl(d) I
-65 -45 -15 0 15 45 75 105 -30 -10 0 10 30 50 70 y-POSITION, ft y-POSITION, ft F i g u r e 26.- LPH T D Dispersions.
( a ) Control system 3 SS 3.
(b) Control system 3*, SS 3. ( c ) Control system 4 , SS 3 .
( d ) C o n t r o l system 4*, SS 3 .
NO. OF
PILoTS \?[ 1 RANGE OF DATA
AVERAGEHQR ss5 SS3 I T 6 K
E 6
"f
1 5 5:: TRC
AC I TRC I AC
(3) (1P) (3) (1P) CONTROL MODE MODERATE TURBULENCE SS 3 26 knots WOD AT -30° vs.
SS 5 35 knots WOD AT -30" Rate command vs attitude command: Figure 27.- SS 3 vs SS 5.
pilot ratings--phase 111.
1 0 4 SYSTEM c, +
2- 15 -
-
k 5 - 0 -
-5 -
-15 -
-25 -
(a) o d ' 1 ' 1 ' 1 " ' 1 ' ' ' -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 y-POSITION, ft y-POSITION, ft SYSTEM
4 5 1 1 I 0 3+
x -15 -25 \ / (d) -35 I l l l l l I l l l l -35 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30 y-POSITION, ft y-POSITION, f t -- .
Figure 28.- DD-963 TD Dispersions. (a) Control system l P , SS 3.
(b) Control system 1P*, SS 5. ( c ) Control system 3*, SS 3.
( d ) Control system 3*, SS 5.
1 0 5 NO. OF T 1
‘ILoTS ‘ I I + I RANGE OF DATA
/
AVERAGEHQR 1 J
15 knc 25 knots WOD i WOD 9 9 8 8 7 2 1 7 a 6 6 a a 5 I 5 :
+
4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 SURGE SURGE SURGE SURGE ON ON OFF OFF CONTROL MODE 1P 15/25 knots WOD MODERATE TURBULENCE Figure 29.- Spot turns: surge control--phase 111.
I X-SHAFTED
RECOVERABLE NONRECOVERABLE
c m 0 0 0
I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 AIRSPEED AT FAILURE, knots Figure 30.- Minimum recovery speed: cross-shafted engines--phase 1 1 1 .
1 0 6
I NON-X-SHAFTED
RECOVERABLE
L
a0 a o m m o o 00
NONRECOVERABLE I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I I I I 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 AIRSPEED AT FAILURE, knots Figure 31.- Minimum recovery speed: noncross-shafted engines--phase 111.
CI r
-
3- 200
-I
- % \ 0
3 ' k
GRUMMAN-PREDICTED
k
-
MINIMUM FOR MINIMUM FOR
2 400
CONVERTED FLIGHT CONVERTED FLIGHT
:/
500 t
STALL -
! ! ! I I 1 I
680 1 1 I !v
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 AIRSPEED AT FAILURE, knots Figure 32.- Altitude loss following an engine failure: cross-shafted engines--phase 111.
1 0 7
-
NON-X-SHAFTED
-
0 0
-
0 0
- 0
-
c 1000
vi v)
-
3 1200
w n
-
3 1400 k 0 0
-
2 1600
-
-
2000 0 0
-
I NONRECOVERABLE Figure 33.- Altitude loss following an engine failure: noncross-shafted engines--phase 111.
1 0 8 SINK RATE AT EJECTION I N I T I AT ION, ft/sec $J, h DATA AT EJECT
-
- 024-SINK RATE A T EJECT
1 00
- X-SHAFTED
-
2 80
-
-
-
-
-
100 120 180 200 20 40 60 80 140 160 ALTITUDE AT EJECTION INITIATION, ft *LIMITS BASED ON THE MOST CRITICAL AIRSPEED AT EJECTION, 0 knots Figure 34.- Simulated ejections vs MK 1 0 ejection seat envelope: cross-shafted engines--phase 111.
1 0 9 SINK RATE AT EJECTION INITIATION, ft/sec , h DATA AT EJECT O ’ @ 42-SlNK RATE A T EJECT .
SOLID SYMBOLS INDICATE UNSAFE EJECT / L w F
3ge
0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320 360 400 ALTITUDE AT EJECTION INITIATION, ft *LIMITS BASED ON THE MOST CRITICAL AIRSPEED AT EJECTION, 0 knots Figure 35.- Simulated ejections vs MK 1 0 ejection seat envelope: noncross-shafted engines--phase I11 c 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.
1. R e m 1 No.
NASA TM-86785 5. Report Date hk!1efh%8fi~G QUALITIES AND FLIGHT CHARACTERISTICS June 1986 OF THE GRUMMAN DESIGN 698 SIMULATED TWIN-ENGINE TILT 6. Performing Orplnization ode NACELLE V/STOL AIRCRAFT 8. PerformingOrganization Report No.
7. Authorlsl
Megan A. Eskey and Samuel B. Wilson, I11
A-8536 1
10. Work Unit No.
9. Performing Organization Name and Address Ames Research Center 11. Contract or Grant No.
Moffett Field, CA 94035
I
13. T y p of Report and P ~ i b d Covered 12. Spmsoring Agency Name and Address Technical Memorandum National Aeronautics and Space Administration 14. Sponsoring Agency Code Washington, DC 20546
I 505-43-01
11s Supplementary Notes
Point of Contact: Samuel B. Wilson, 111, Ames Research Center, M/S 237-3
Moffett Field, CA 94035 (415) 694-5903 or FTS 464-5903
16 Abstract This paper describes three government-conducted? piloted flight simu- lations of the Grumman Design 698 vertical and short takeoff and landing (V/STOL) aircraft. Emphasis is placed on the aircraft's handling qualities
as rated by various NASA, Navy, and Grummand Aerospace Corporation pilots
with flight experience ranging from conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) to V/STOL aircraft. Each successive simulation incorporated modifications to the aircraft in order to resolve the flight problems which were of most concern to the pilots in the previous simulation.
The objective of the first simulation was to assess the basic handling qualities of the aircraft with the noncross-shafted propulsion system. The objective of the second simulation was to examine the effects of incorporating the cross-shafted propulsion system. The objective of the third simulation was to examine inoperative-single-engine characteristics with and without cross-shafted engines.
, 1 1 Key Words ISugge~tCdby Authorlst t 18 Distribution Statement Medium speed tilt-nacelle Unlimited V/STOL aircraft iiatidiing qualities ratings
Flight simulations investigation Subject Category - 05
19 Sccwity Classif (of this reportt 10 Security Classif (of this pge) 21 NO of 22 Rice' Unclassified
Unclassified 1 1 0 A 0 6
'For sale by the National Technical Information Service. Springfield. Virginia 22161