Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-mlc7c Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T03:36:39.437Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Flight handling qualities

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 February 2016

G. D. Padfield
G. D. Padfield*
Affiliation:
Department of Engineering, The University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper describes the methodology and key results from the first three years of delivery of ‘Flight Handling Qualities’ (FHQ), a problem-based-learning core module for fourth year Master of Engineering (MEng) undergraduates in Aerospace Engineering and optional module for the Systems Engineering MSc Programme, at the University of Liverpool. The module aim is to equip students with the skills and knowledge required to tackle aircraft handling qualities (HQs) and related ‘whole aircraft’ problems. Students are presented with the theory of handling qualities engineering in a series of interactive lectures. The students work in teams of four or five and undertake a number of team-building exercises throughout the first semester. Teams are presented with the idea that the aircraft with its handling qualities is the focus for knowledge acquisition and skills development. Each team is given the task of assessing and quantifying the HQs of a particular aircraft in a particular role, and then developing fixes to any handling deficiencies they identify; the current aircraft include the Wright Flyer, Grob 115, Black Hawk, Bo-105 and XV-15. Teams write an interim report at the end of the first term and a final report at the end of the second term, showing how they have assessed the aircraft, developed solutions to the problems and made recommendations concerning the aircraft’s suitability in the defined role. The reports also address the technical feasibility and economic viability of the proposed upgrades. The teams present their work to mock ‘customers’ (group of staff, another student team, visiting Industrialists) with the objective of demonstrating that the aircraft is now fit for the role. Each individual student maintains a ‘personal learning journal’, in which they document the development of their understanding of handling qualities and, more general, transferable skills. The module is designed to enable students to engage in all elements of the conceive-design-implement-operate (CDIO) cycle.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Aeronautical Journal , Volume 110 , Issue 1104 , February 2006 , pp. 73 - 84
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Aeronautical Society 2006 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Cooper, G. and Harper, R., The use of pilot rating in the evaluation of aircraft handling qualities, NASA TN D-5153, April 1969.Google Scholar
2. anon. Handling Qualities Requirements for Military Rotorcraft, Performance Specification, ADS-33-PRF, USAAMC, Aviation Engineering Directorate, March 2000.Google Scholar
3. anon. Joint aviation requirements JAR-29 – Large Rotorcraft, Amendment 3, Joint Aviation Authorities, The Netherlands, 2002.Google Scholar
4. anon. Military Specification – Flying qualities of piloted airplanes, MIL-F-8785C, US Dept. of Defence, 1980.Google Scholar
5. anon. Joint aviation requirements JAR-25 – Large aeroplanes, Joint Aviation Authorities, The Netherlands, 2000.Google Scholar
6. Padfield, G.D. and White, M.D., Flight simulation in academia; HELIFLIGHT in its first year of operation, Aeronaut J, September 2003, 107, (1075), pp 529–538.Google Scholar
7. White, M.D. and Padfield, G.D., Flight simulation in academia; progress with HELIFLIGHT at the University of Liverpool, Royal Aeronautical Society Flight Simulation Conference, London, May 2004.Google Scholar
8. Padfield, G.D., The making of helicopter flying qualities, a requirements perspective, Aeronaut J, December 1998, 102, (1018), pp 409–437.Google Scholar
9. Padfield, G.D., Helicopter Flight Dynamics, Blackwell Science, Oxford, 1996.Google Scholar
10. Cook, M.V., Flight Dynamics Principles, Arnold (John Wiley), London, 1997.Google Scholar
11. Hodgkinson, J., Aircraft Handling Qualities, Blackwell Science, Oxford, 1999.Google Scholar
12. Mitchell, D.G., Hoh, R.H., Aponso, B.L. and Klyde, D.H., Proposed incorporation of mission-oriented flying qualities into MIL-STD-1797A, WL-TR-94-3162, flight dynamics directorate, Wright Laboratory, October 1994.Google Scholar
13. Hoh, R.H., Lessons learned concerning the interpretation of subjective Handling Qualities Pilot Rating Data, AIAA Paper 902824, AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Portland, August 1990.Google Scholar
14. Lumsden, R.B. and Padfield, G.D., Challenges at the helicopter-ship dynamic interface, proceedings of the 24th European Rotorcraft Forum, Marseilles, France, September 1998 (also Military Aerospace Technologies, IMechE. FITEC 1998).Google Scholar
15. Meyer, M. and Padfield, G.D., First steps in the development of handling qualities criteria for a civil tilt rotor, J. American Helicopter Society, January 2005, 50, (1).Google Scholar
16. Padfield, G.D., Brookes, V., Meyer, M., Progress in civil tilt rotor handling qualities, J American Helicopter Society, January 2006, 50th anniversary issue.Google Scholar
17. Padfield, G.D. and Lawrence, B., The birth of flight control; an engineering analysis of the Wright Brothers 1902 Glider, Aeronaut J, December 2003, 107, (1078), pp 697–718.Google Scholar
18. Lawrence, B. and Padfield, G.D., Flight testing simulations of the Wright 1902 Glider and 1903 Flyer, 34th Annual International Symposium of the SFTE, Portsmouth, Va, USA, September 2003.Google Scholar
19. Lawrence, B. and Padfield, G.D., Flight handling qualities of the Wright Flyer III, AIAA Conference, Reno, Jan 2005.Google Scholar
20. anon. Design data on the Grob 115, Grob Aircraft Company, 2000.Google Scholar
21. Padfield, G.D., Manimala, B. and Turner, G.P., A severity analysis for rotorcraft encounters with vortex wakes, J American Helicopter Society, October 2004.Google Scholar