Flying Qualities Evaluation of a Commuter Aircraft with an Ice Contaminated Tailplane
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
During the NASA/FAA Tailplane Icing Program, pilot evaluations of aircraft flying qualities were conducted with various ice shapes attached to the horizontal tailplane of the NASA Twin Otter Icing Research Aircraft. Initially, only NASA pilots conducted these evaluations, assessing the differences in longitudinal flight characteristics between the baseline or clean aircraft, and the aircraft configured with an Ice Contaminated Tailplane (ICT). Longitudinal tests included Constant Airspeed Flap Transitions, Constant Airspeed Thrust Transitions, zero-G Pushovers, Repeat Elevator Doublets, and, Simulated Approach and Go-Around tasks. Later in the program, guest pilots from government and industry were invited to fly the NASAT win Otter configured with a single full-span artificial ice shape attached to the leading edge of the horizontal tailplane. This shape represented ice formed due to a “Failed Boot” condition, and was generated from tests in the Glenn Icing Research Tunnel on a full-scale tailplane model. Guest pilots performed longitudinal handling tests, similar to those conducted by the NASA pilots, to evaluate the ICT condition. In general, all pilots agreed that longitudinal flying qualities were degraded as flaps were lowered, and further degraded at high thrust settings. Repeat elevator doublets demonstrated reduced pitch damping effects due to ICT, which is a characteristic that results in degraded flying qualities. Pilots identified elevator control force reversals (CFR) in zero-G pushovers at a 20° flap setting, a characteristic that fails the FAR 25 no CFR certification requirement. However, when the same pilots used the Cooper-Harper rating scale to perform a simulated approach and go-around task at the 20° flap setting, they rated the airplane as having Level I and Level II flying qualities respectively. By comparison, the same task conducted at the 30° flap setting, resulted in Level II flying qualities for the approach portion, and Level III for the go-around portion. The results of this program indicate that safe and acceptable flying qualities with an ICT condition, can be effectively assessed by task-oriented pilot maneuvers. In addition, other maneuvers such as repeat elevator doublets provide good qualitative and quantitative assessments of pitch damping and elevator effectiveness, which are characteristics that correlate well with pilot task ratings. The results of this testing indicate that the FAR 25 zero-G pushover maneuver, which requires no CFR during its execution, may be an overly conservative pass/fail criteria for aircraft certification.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».