Flight Testing

Robert Stengel, Aircraft Flight Dynamics

MAE 331, 2010

Flight test instrumentation

Pilot opinion ratings
Flying qualities requirements
Flying qualities specifications
Pilot-induced oscillations

Flying (or Handling) Qualities

Stability and controllability
perceived by the pilot
1919 flight tests of Curtiss
JN-4H Jenny at NACA
Langley Laboratory by
Warner, Norton, and Allen
Elevator angle and stick
force for equilibrium flight
Correlation of elevator angle
and airspeed with stability
Correlation of elevator angle
and airspeed with wind
tunnel tests of pitch moment

Copyright 2010 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only.
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.html
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/FlightDynamics.html

Early Flight Testing Instrumentation

Flight recording instruments: drum/strip charts, inked needles, film,

galvanometers connected to air vanes, pressure sensors, clocks

Hundreds of Measurements To Be Made

Nose Boom and Calibration Quadrants

Air data measurement far from
disturbing effects of the aircraft

# pstagnation ,Tstagnation
%
pstatic ,Tstatic
%
z=%
!B
%
%
"B
$

& # Stagnation pressure and temperature

( %
Static pressure and temperature
( %
(=%
Angle of attack
( %
( %
Sideslip angle
' $

Trailing Tail Cones for Accurate

Static Pressure Measurement

Air data measurement far from disturbing

effects of the aircraft

&
(
(
(
(
('

Current Flight Testing

Instrumentation

Current Small UAV Avionics

...or you could use an iPhone 4

Typical components

3-axis accelerometer
3-axis angular rate
2-axis magnetometer
compass
GPS position
measurement
1 GHz processor
512 MB RAM
32 GB flash memory

#
u!
%
v!
%
w!
%
%
p
%
q
%
z=%
r
%
!
% horizontal
% !
% vertical
%
L
%
"
%
h
%$

&
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
('

First Flying Qualities

Specification

Autonomous Control of an Unmanned

Aerial Vehicle via an Apple iPhone
Jillian Alfred, Clayton Flanders, & Brendan Mahon
Princeton Senior Project, 2010
iPhone Installation

Hobbico NexSTAR

System Components

Pitot Tube Placement

Flying Qualities
Research at NACA

Hartley Soul and Floyd Thompson

(late 1930s)

Long- and short-period motions

Time to reach specified bank angle
Period and damping of oscillations
Correlation with pilot opinion

Robert Gilruth (1941-3)

Parametric regions and boundaries
Multi-aircraft criteria
Control deflection, stick force, and
normal load factor
Roll helix angle
Lateral control power

First flying qualities specification: 1935, Edward Warner for

Douglas DC-4 transport
Interviews with pilots and engineers

Gilruth Roll-Rate Criterion

[pb/2V]
Helix angle formed by
rotating wing tips,
pb/2V
Roll rate, p, rad/s
Wing semi-span, b/2, m
Velocity, V, m/s

Robert Gilruth criterion

pb/2V > 0.07 rad

NACA TR-715, 1941

Simplified Roll-Rate Response

Tradeoff between high pb/2V and

high lateral stick forces prior to
powered controls:

p! (t) = [Cl p p(t) + Cl! A ! A(t)]qSb / I xx

NACA TR-868

Aircraft That Simulate

Other Aircraft

Closed-loop control
Variable-stability research aircraft, e.g., TIFS, AFTI F-16,
NT-33A, and Princeton Variable-Response Research
Aircraft (Navion)

= a p(t) + c ! A(t)
q=

1 2
!V , dynamic pressure, N / m 2
2

p*, /s

Step response [p(0) = 0]

p(t) =

USAF AFTI F-16

Initial-condition response (!A = 0)

p(t) = p(0)eat

USAF/Calspan TIFS

USAF/Calspan NT-33A

c at
e !1 "A*
a

Princeton VRA

Steady state response

p* = !

Cl" A
Cl p

"A*

IAS, mph

Cooper-Harper Handling Qualities

Rating Scale

NASA TN-D-5153,1969

Effect of Equivalent Time Delay on

Cooper-Harper Rating

Short-Period Bullseye or Thumbprint

Aerial Refueling

Difficult flying task

High potential for PIO
Alternative designs
Rigid boom (USAF)
Probe and drogue (USN)

! nSP

! SP

Formation Flying
Coordination and precision
Potential aerodynamic interference
US Navy Blue Angels (F/A-18)

Carrier Approach on Back Side

of the Power/Thrust Curve

Precise path and airspeed control while

on the back side of the power curve
Slower speed requires higher thrust
Lightly damped phugoid mode requires
coordination of pitch and thrust control

Reference flight path generated by optical

device, which projects a meatball relative
to a datum line

NACA RM A57L11, 1957

Pilot-Induced Oscillations

Pilot-Induced Oscillations
MIL-F-8785C specifies no tendency for pilot-induced
oscillations (PIO)
Uncommanded aircraft is stable but piloting actions couple
with aircraft dynamics to produce instability

Category I: Linear pilot-vehicle system oscillations

Category II: Quasilinear events with nonlinear contributions
Category III: Nonlinear oscillations with transients
Hodgkinson, Neal, Smith, Geddes, Gibson et al

YF-16 Test Flight Zero

High-speed taxi test; no flight intended

Pilot-induced oscillations induced by overly sensitive roll control
Tail strike
Pilot elected to go around rather than eject

Military Flying Qualities

Specifications, MIL-F-8785C
Specifications established during WWII
US Air Force and Navy coordinated efforts
beginning in 1945
First version appeared in 1948, last in 1980
Distinctions by flight phase, mission, and aircraft
type
Replaced by Military Flying Qualities Standard, MILSTD-1797A, with procurement-specific criteria

MIL-F-8785C Flight Phase

MIL-F-8785C Aircraft Types

A. Non-terminal flight requiring rapid maneuvering precise

tracking, or precise flight path control

I.

Small, light airplanes, e.g., utility aircraft

and primary trainers
II. Medium-weight, low-to-medium
maneuverability airplanes, e.g., small
transports or tactical bombers
III. Large, heavy, low-to-medium
maneuverability airplanes, e.g., heavy
transports, tankers, or bombers
IV. Highly maneuverable aircraft, e.g., fighter
and attack airplanes

MIL-F-8785C Levels of
Performance
1. Flying qualities clearly adequate for the mission
flight phase
2. Flying qualities adequate to accomplish the
mission flight phase, with some increase in pilot
workload or degradation of mission effectiveness
3. Flying qualities such that the aircraft can be
controlled safely, but pilot workload is excessive
or mission effectiveness is inadequate

air-to-air combat
ground attack
in-flight refueling (receiver)
close reconnaissance
terrain following
close formation flying

B. Non-terminal flight requiring gradual maneuvering

climb, cruise
in-flight refueling (tanker)
descent

C. Terminal flight

takeoff (normal and catapult)

approach
wave-off/go-around
landing

Principal MIL-F-8785C Metrics

Longitudinal flying
qualities

static speed stability

phugoid stability
flight path stability
short period frequency
and its relationship to
command acceleration
sensitivity
short period damping
control-force gradients

Lateral-directional flying
qualities
natural frequency and damping
of the Dutch roll mode
time constants of the roll and
spiral modes
rolling response to commands
and Dutch roll oscillation
sideslip excursions
maximum stick and pedal forces
turn coordination

MIL-F-8785C Superseded by
MIL-STD-1797

Handbook for guidance rather than a requirement

Body of report is a form, with numbers to be filled in for
each new aircraft, e.g.,

UAV Handling Qualities

UAV missions are diverse and complex

All UAVs must have sophisticated closed-loop flight control
systems
Cockpit is on the ground; significant time delays
Launch and recovery different from takeoff and landing

UAV Handling Qualities.....You Must Be Joking, Warren

Williams, 2003

Suggestion: Follow the form of MIL-F-8785C, FAR Part 23,

etc., but adapt to differences between manned and
unmanned systems

Useful reference data contained in Appendix A (~700 pages)

Flight Testing for Certification

in Other Agencies

Even the Best Specs

Cannot Prevent Pilot Error
TAROM Flight 381 (A310 Muntenia)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VqmrRFeYzBI

Federal Aviation Administration

Airworthiness Standards
Part 23: GA
Part 25: Transports

UK Civil Aviation Authority

European Aviation Safety Agency
Transport Canada

On September 24, 1994, a TAROM Airbus A310, Flight 381, from Bucharest on approach to Paris Orly went into a sudden and
uncommanded nose-up position and stalled. The crew attempted to countermand the plane's flight control system but were unable to
get the nose down while remaining on course. Witnesses saw the plane climb to a tail stand, then bank sharply left, then right, then
fall into a steep dive. Only when the dive produced additional speed was the crew able to recover steady flight.
An investigation found that an overshoot of flap placard speed during approach, incorrectly commanded by the captain,
caused a mode transition to flight level change. The auto-throttles increased power and trim went full nose-up as a result. The
crew attempt at commanding the nose-down elevator could not counteract effect of stabilizer nose-up trim, and the resulting dive
brought the plane from a height of 4100 feet at the time of the stall to 800 feet when the crew was able to recover command.
The plane landed safely after a second approach. There were 186 people aboard. [Wikipedia]

TAROM Flight 371 (A310 Muntenia)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htzv2KebEkI&NR=1&feature=fvwp
TAROM Flight 371 was an Airbus A310 that crashed near Balote!ti in Romania on 31 March 1995. It was a flight from Bucharest's
main Otopeni airport to Brussels. The flight crashed shortly after it took off. Two main reasons are indicated: first the throttle of
the starboard engine jammed, remaining in takeoff thrust, while the other engine reduced slowly to idle, creating an
asymmetrical thrust condition that ultimately caused the aircraft to roll over and crash. Second, the crew failed to respond to the
thrust asymmetry.
None of the 10 crew and 50 passengers survived. [Wikipedia]

Next Time:
Advanced Problems of
Longitudinal Dynamics

Supplementary
Material

Helicopters and Flying Saucers

Princeton University!s
Flight Research Laboratory (1943-1983)
Robert Stengel, Aircraft Flight Dynamics, MAE 331, 2010

Forrestal Campus
3,000-ft dedicated runway

Copyright 2010 by Robert Stengel. All rights reserved. For educational use only.
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/MAE331.html
http://www.princeton.edu/~stengel/FlightDynamics.html

Piasecki HUP-1 helicopter

Hiller H-23 helicopter
Princeton Air Scooter
Hiller VZ-1 Flying Platform
Princeton 20-ft Ground Effect Machine

Short-Takeoff-and-Landing, Inflatable
Plane, and the Princeton Sailwing

Variable-Response Research Aircraft

(Modified North American Navion A)

Pilatus Porter
Goodyear InflatoPlane
Princeton Sailwing

Avionics Research Aircraft

(Modified Ryan Navion A)

Navion in the NASA Langley Research Center

30! x 60! Wind Tunnel

Lockheed LASA-60 Utility Aircraft

Schweizer 2-32 Sailplane (Cibola)

Steve Sliwa, !77, landing on Forrestal Campus runway.

currently CEO, In Situ, Inc.