APPENDIX A
APPENDIX A condition is very poor.
I would rate it a degree lower than the 180-knot approach with 15" aileron limits. I call this one about an 8 rating.
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B TYPICAL PILOT COMMENTS ON ROLL EVALUATIONS DURING OFFSET APPROACHES - PILOT A Actual Approaches t o Landings at 180 Knots 6 , = 45". - There was very satisfactory lateral control during the 200 -foot offset approach and landing. I did not have the feeling I was even close to the control-wheel stop. I was able t o c o r r e c t over and line up with the runway with quite satisfactory roll performance. I would rate that as a 2. It might be even a bit better than 2 from the control standpoint, s o between a 1 . 5 and a 2. F r o m the standpoint of the speed, it was entirely too much speed as far as float down the runway. You touch too far down the runway, because at that speed you are so far above reference speed. F r o m the lateral control standpoint it was very good.
6 , = 30". - I found when flying down the final approach that I had no tendency at all t o hit the lateral control stops.
However, when I started the offset correction, I immediately put in enough aileron to hit the stops and I got barely satisfactory rolling capability to return to the centerline. I would rate this as a 4.
I hit the stops both correcting to the centerline and then correcting on the centerline once I reached it. I did on one occasion feel myself using a little rudder, but it could be done with the s o I would rate it as a 4. Again, the speed is too fast; it uses too much run ailerons, way f o r the touchdown because of the speed. is a 4.
But the lateral control 6 , = 15". - On this approach I hit the stops only a couple of times during the ap proach, versus the 135-knot approach where I found myself hitting the stops quite often.
When I started the correction from the offset, I immediately hit the stops on the initial correction. I was fairly conservative on bank angle. I did not let the bank angle get more than about 15" in the correction to the centerline when still about 40 o r 50 feet in the air. I would rate this as a 7.5. It is certainly not very good but a bit better than at 135 knots. You can s e e the difference in the roll authority in the speed.
The touchdown point is fairly far down the runway.
Actual Approaches to Landings at 135 Knots 6 , = 45". -Approaches were made with an approximate descent rate for an instru ment landing system of about 700 feet a minute and with a 135-knot approach speed.
A t 200 feet altitude and at 200 feet offset to the right, we made a correction toward the runway. I had plenty of lateral control to make the correction to the runway 1000 feet down the runway.
centerline. Actual touchdown was about I would rate the lateral control for this correction as 2. I had plenty of control, and there was no problem at all in lining up with the runway. In fact, I felt I could have cut the time down and still had a fairly good rating.
S, = 30". - A s we crossed the 200-foot point, I started the correction back to the
APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B left and hit the control-wheel stop immediately. I was able to get satisfactory bank and initiated the roll to the left as I would like to have it; however, I felt there was a slight i ' deficiency in roil rate when I started to correct back t o the centerline.
I again hit the stop with the right aileron in attempting t o roll out on the centerline. This would be rated as a 4. It is not quite good enough, although on smoother conditions the offset is not too much to correct for. I think you'd probably get by all right. I did find myself using a little more runway t o get lined up with the centerline. In other words, I was afraid to bank it over too much and therefore I ended by traveling farther down the runway t o reach the centerline on touchdown.
6 = 15". - With the 15" aileron stops , roll control was completely unsatisfactory.
W I found myself hitting the stops even on the final approach occasionally. J u s t to make a normal correction t o keep the wings level, I hit the stops. When we made the c o r rection back to the centerline, I immediately hit the stop, but I did not let the bank angle go as steep as I had on the first two approaches, and, actually, when I started ' t o roll out on the centerline, I used a little rudder to assist in bringing the wing up.
The lateral control was inadequate; even when I got the airplane on centerline and was in the flare, I hit the stops several times with the ailerons. In fact, at touchdown I had the aileron against the stop with the airplane in a slight wing-down condition. We touched slightly on one wheel, so I would rate this as somewhere around an 8. 5. It certainly is not satisfactory.
REFERENCES 1. Kier, David A. : Flight Comparison of Several Techniques for Determining the Minimum Flying Speed for a Large, Subsonic Jet Transport. NASA TN D-5806, 1970.
2. Condit, Philip M. ; Kimbrel, Laddie G. ; and Root, Robert G. : Inflight and Ground- Based Simulation of Handling Qualities of Very Large Airplanes in Landing Approach. Boeing Co. (NASA CR-635) , 1966.
Bisgood, P. L. : A Review of Recent Handling Qualities Research, and Its 3 Application t o the Handling Problems of Large Aircraft. Royal Aircraft Establishment Rep. No. TN Aero 2688, British R. A. E . , June 1964.
4. Ashkenas, I. L. : A Study of Conventional Airplane Handling Qualities Require ments. Part I. Roll Handling Qualities. Tech. Rep. AFFBL-TR-65-138, A i r Force Flight Dynamics Lab. , Wright-Patterson A i r Force Base, Nov.
1965.
5. Anon. : Flying Qualities of Piloted Airplanes. Military Specification MIL -F 8785B(ASG), Aug. 7, 1969.
6. Anon. : Design Objectives for Flying Qualities of Civil Transport Aircraft. Aero space Recommended Practice (ARP) 842, SAE, Aug. 1, 1964.
E . A. : The International System of U n i t s - Physical Constants and 7. Mechtly, Conversion Factors. NASA SP-7012, 1969.
Harper, Robert P. , Jr. ; and Cooper, George E. : A Revised Pilot Rating Scale 8.
for the Evaluation of Handling Qualities. AGARD C. P. No. 17, Stability and Control. P a r t 1, Sept. 1966, pp. 227-245.
H. ; Port, W. G. A . ; and Morrall, J. C. : A Flight Study of the Side 9. P e r r y , D.
step Manoeuvre During Landing. R. & M. No. 3347, British A. R. C. , 1964.
NASA-Langley, 1971 - 2 H-642 NATIONAL AND AERONAUTICS SPACE ADMINISTRA~LON WASHINGTON, D. C. 20546 FIRST CLASS MAIL OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY F O R PRIVATE U S E 5300 POSTAGE AND FEES PAID NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 0 5 U 001 2 7 5 1 3 0 5 71118 0 0 9 0 3 4 1 R F O R C E WEAPCNS LABORATORY /WLOL/ N E h M E X I C O 87117 K I R T L A N D AFB, ATT E o LOU ROkMANg G H I E F V T E C H . L I B R A R Y POSTMASTER: If Undeliverable (Section 158 Postal Manual) Do Not Return
-_
“The aeronautical and space activities of t h e United States shall be
conducted so as t o contribzLte . . . t o t h e expansion of h a m a n knowl
edge of phenomena in t h e atmosphere and space. T h e Adnzinistration shall provide for the widest practicable and appropriate dissenzination of iizforniation concerning its activities and the r e s d t s thereof.” -NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ACT OF 1958
NASA SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL PUBLICATIONS
TECHNICAL REPORTS: Scientific and TECHNICAL TRANSLATIONS: Information technical information considered important, piiblished in a foreign language considered complete, and a lasting contribution to existing to merit NASA distribution in English.
knowledge.
SPECIAL PUBLICATIONS: Information TECHNICAL NOTES: Information less broad derived from or of value to NASA activities.
in scope but nevertheless of importance as a Publications include conference proceedings, contribution to existing knowledge. monographs, data compilations, handbooks, sourcebooks, and special bibliographies.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUMS: Informat ion receiving limited distribution TECHNOLOGY UTILIZATION because of pr3minary data, security classifica PUBLICATIONS: Information on technology tion, or other reasons. used by NASA that may be of particular interest in commercial and other non-aerospace CONTRACTOR REPORTS: Scientific and applications. Publications include Tech Briefs, technical information generated under a NASA Technology Utilization Reports and contract or grant and considered an important Technology Surveys.
contribution to existing knowledge.
Details on the availability of these publications may be obtained from: SCIENTIFIC AND TECliNICAL INFORltlATlON OFFICE
NATI 0 NA L AER 0 N AUT1 C S A N D SPACE AD M I N I STRATI 0 N
Washington, D.C. PO546