Search Results

A 10-foot-long fuselage section from a Boeing 737-100 airplane was dropped from a height of 14 feet generating a final impact velocity of 30 feet per second. The fuselage section was configured to simulate the load density at the maximum takeoff weight condition. The final weight of 8870 pounds included cabin seats, dummy occupants, overhead stowage bins with contents, and cargo compartment luggage. The fuselage section was instrumented with strain gages, accelerometers, and high-speed cameras. The fuselage sustained severe deformation of the cargo compartment. The luggage influenced the manner in which the fuselage crushed, affecting the gravitational (g) forces experienced by the test section. The seat tracks experienced 15 g's vertical deceleration. Although numerous fuselage structural members fractured during the test, a habitable environment was maintained for the occupants, and the impact was considered survivable.

The crash impact characteristics of commuter category airplanes has recently been established using empirical procedures based on full scale aircraft impact test data for a range of aircraft sizes[1]. To compliment that empirical approach the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) initiated a full scale commuter category airplane vertical impact test program. Those airplane vertical impact tests were structured to evaluate the airframe's capability to maintain its structural integrity and provide a protective shell for its occupants, to quantify the acceleration impact response characteristics of the airframe, and to evaluate the means necessary to provide occupant pelvic/lumbar column load injury protection up to the limits of survivable impact conditions.

A transport airplane fuselage section with a full complement of cabin seats and anthropomorphic test dummies was longitudinally impact tested at a condition that approached the ultimate strength of the airframe protective shell structure. Airframe structural responses, seat/floor reaction loads, and the interactive effects of secondary impacts between multiple cabin seat rows were investigated. The scope and conduct of the test are presented together with some preliminary analyses of the test results.

Since the first airplane was certified in 1927, the standard configuration has been with the main lifting surface or surfaces forward of the stabilizing surface. Although some of the advantages of the canard configuration were recognized quite early - by the Wright Brothers, for example - canard surfaces have been used to date only as additional control surfaces on some military airplanes, and on some amateur built airplanes. As a result, the Airworthiness Regulations of Reference 1 address only tail aft configurations. When FAA was first approached regarding certification of a canard configured small airplane, an FAA/Industry Empennage Loads Working Group was formed to develop technical proposals for the necessary rule changes and policy. The concerns addressed by this working group are discussed in the following sections.

One Engine Inoperative takeoff climb performance of the XV-15 tilt rotor aircraft was analytically determined from level flight data and compared to the proposed powered-lift aircraft criteria. The results of this analysis can be useful in establishing the takeoff profile and highlighting potential certification issues.