Open up your mind and say, ahh...

Photo:

Update 3:55 p.m. ET – Darkness and bad weather has hampered the search for the missing plane but more than 100 people on the ground are continuing to search the mountains where the airplane disappeared. Two helicopters had to end their search, but are expected to try again at daybreak.

A Sukhoi Superjet 100 is missing in Indonesia after departing Jakarta with 50 people on board. The Russian jet was carrying Indonesian airline representatives as well as other airline industry passengers on a demo flight during a tour of Asia organized by the Russian plane maker.

The Sukhoi jet is Russia’s most modern airliner and first flew in 2008. The narrow-body airliner is aimed at the regional airline sector and is designed to compete with the more popular airplanes from Bombardier and Embraer. The Russian company partnered with Italy’s Alenia Aeronautica on the Superjet 100 project and the engines are a French/Russian partnership.

Sukhoi hopes to sell the 68- to 103-seat jet throughout parts of Asia, Western Europe and North America, where Russian aircraft have yet to find any customers. The Superjet 100 is a modern design with fly-by-wire control systems. Sukhoi is hoping the airplane will help shake the troubled reputation Russian-made aircraft have for questionable quality and accident rates much higher than their Western competitors. Last year Sukohi announced plans for a longer-range, business jet version of the airplane.

The Indonesian demo flight was scheduled to last less than an hour, but air traffic controllers lost contact with the jet while it was descending in a mountainous area, according to the BBC.

Sukhoi has delivered eight of the regional airliners and says it has orders for 240 more, mostly to customers outside of Russia. Indonesia-based airlines had already ordered more than 30 of the airplanes.

Photo: Solar Impulse/Jean Revillard

Andre Borschberg sounds remarkably bright and alert after spending more than 60 hours straight at the controls of the Solar Impulse flight simulator. Granted, he’s been able to get some sleep, sometimes napping for a whole 20 minutes at a time.

Borschberg is approaching the end of a 72-hour stint in the sim, running through a series of tests and challenges to prepare for what lies ahead when he attempts to fly around the world in a solar airplane in 2014. It’s been grueling, but not so bad.

“I feel quite well, better than what I expected,” Borschberg said from the cockpit mockup in Switzerland.

The point of the prolonged testing is to determine how best to manage the pilot’s needs while circumnavigating the globe in a solar plane. It also will allow the team to evaluate and refine the cockpit design. Some of the tests are simple reaction-time experiments; others are emergency drills designed to prepare Borschberg for things like losing power during a landing. Borschberg says his piloting skills haven’t degraded too badly with the loss of sleep.

“The quality stays very good,” he says, “but certainly it’s a bit lower than somebody who has slept eight hours.”

Andre Borschberg sleeping in the Solar Impulse simulator. Apparently there was no king-size option. Photo: Solar Impulse/Jean Revillard

A larger cockpit has been a big help. Compared to the first Solar Impulse that first flew in 2009, the second aircraft offers a bit more room.

“This cockpit is slightly larger than the first one,” Borschberg says. “We can do some exercise gymnastics, it helps to stimulate the muscles and the blood circulation. And I do some meditation to smooth how I use my energy.”

Borschberg has been allowed to take several “micro-naps” of about 20 minutes. It’s all part of the test. When the alarm goes off, there’s no hitting the snooze button. The former Swiss Air Force pilot must immediately take control of the airplane and establish straight and level flight.

“We measure the reaction time, as soon as I’m awake I go and take control of the airplane,” he says. “I have to grab it and provide an action. First control the airplane, then figure out anything else. Reaction time from alarm to when I grab the controls is 2 to 4 seconds. It is very quick.”

The biggest challenges of sleep deprivation have been critical decision making and of course landing the airplane. Borschberg says he finds he needs more decision making help from the crew as the simulation progresses. This was expected though, and he says it is not a problem.

The next-generation Solar Impulse, known as HB-SIB, will have a wingspan of more than 236 feet. It will not have a true autopilot. The airplane lacks sufficient power to maintain any type of predetermined flight altitude in the event of a strong downdraft, according to Borschberg, and it is so delicate that an autopilot could cause problems in unusual circumstances. Instead, Borschberg says, the airplane will have an electronic co-pilot of sorts capable of maintaining a directional heading and alerting the pilot to any problems with the performance of the airplane.

Borschberg and Solar Impulse co-founder Bertrand Piccard hope to attempt their around-the-world solar powered flight in 2014.

Photo: Icon Aircraft

Icon aircraft has made aviation history before even finishing the final design of its first airplane. The company achieved the significant milestone in the development of its A5 amphibious light sport aircraft with a new wing design aimed at significantly improving the safety of the airplane. The company recently completed a rigorous flight testing schedule focused on the stall and spin characteristics of the two seater. The result is that when the first one rolls off the assembly line, the A5 will become the first production aircraft sold ever to completely comply with the Federal Aviation Administration’s spin resistance standards. In simpler terms, Icon has designed an airplane that could practically erase one of the major causes of accidents in flying.

“Creating a full-envelope spin-resistant airplane was extraordinarily difficult and took longer than expected” said Icon’s CEO Kirk Hawkins in a press release announcing the FAA certification. “The design dramatically raises the bar for light aircraft safety by decreasing the likelihood of inadvertent stall/spin loss of control by the pilot.”

Many production airplane designs over the years have made significant progress towards minimizing the chance of a stall/spin accident. But until now, no airplane has been produced that fully complies with what is known as the FAA’s Part 23 spin-resistance standards. When the first A5 rolls off the factory floor, it will benefit from decades of research by NASA and the FAA focused on reducing, even eliminating accidents due to the inadvertent stall/spin. The spin resistant design doesn’t eliminate all of the potential hazards of flying, but like anti-lock brakes did for drivers, it does dramatically decrease one of the big hazards facing pilots.

The boom off of the back of the airplane contains a parachute and is commonly used in spin testing. The production A5 will have a parachute, but it will be integrated into the airframe. The small lines on the airplane are tufts of yarn that allow engineers to see how the air is flowing around the airframe.

An inadvertent stall/spin refers to a scenario where a pilot unintentionally flies the airplane in a way that causes the airflow over the wing to be disrupted and no longer be sufficient to produce enough lift. This usually happens at slower speeds, though it is related to the “angle of attack” of the wing, and not necessarily the airspeed.  When the airflow disruption occurs, the wing is said to be in a “stalled” condition and the airplane begins to lose altitude due to the loss of lift. Once an airplane wing is stalled, and if there is sufficient yaw motion – turning in the horizontal plane – the airplane can enter a spin.

If an airplane simply enters a stall and the pilot makes the necessary corrections all pilots learn in training, a minimal amount of altitude may be lost before the wing can generate lift again and the pilot and aircraft can begin flying again. But if the airplane enters a spin, significantly more altitude is lost. Even though a pilot can recover from a spin (usually with specific training), the disorientation often results in a recovery being less likely. Two common scenarios where this may occur is when the pilot is making the final turn before lining up with the runway to land, or turning back to the runway after taking off if an emergency landing must be made.

Inadvertent stall/spin accidents account for a significant percentage of pilot-related accidents in the non-commercial flying world of general aviation according to a report from the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association.

By designing the A5 to be highly resistant to entering a spin, Icon gives pilots an extra margin of safety should they find themselves in a situation where they have accidentally managed to stall the wings of the airplane. Hawkins says the A5 will provide “excellent control throughout the stall.”

Many of the small, general aviation aircraft flown today are approved for practicing spins and can safely recover from a spin assuming the pilot has the proper training. But even in a perfect scenario the recovery may use up well over 500 feet, a problem if you’re below that altitude to begin with such as during landing. Rich Stowell is one of the foremost experts in stall/spin safety and has performed spins in dozens of different aircraft. In his book Stall/Spin Awareness, Stowell points out that the “specter of an inadvertent stall/spin can affect a pilot’s passion for flying.” Stowell is a proponent of pilots learning about the stall/spin and has taught countless pilots how to recognize and recover from all different types of scenarios (he’s completed more than 32,000 spins during his career).

Image: Northrop Grumman

Northrop Grumman reached deep into its history, as well as its recent past, to draw inspiration for an airliner of the future — a flying wing much like the B-2 stealth bomber.

The firm designed the concept for NASA’s Environmentally Responsible Aviation program, an effort to develop an airplane that is quieter and more fuel efficient than today’s airliners. Although the program has drawn interest from several aviation firms, only Northrop Grumman is reaching back to the future. The company has been building flying wings since the 1940s, and anyone with even a passing knowledge of aviation can see the concept’s resemblance to Northrop Grumman’s B-2 bomber.

Studies like the Environmentally Responsible Aviation program always draw wild ideas, ranging from blended wing bodies to double-wide fuselage designs. Such things are nothing new for Northrop Grumman.

Jack Northrop first started flight testing flying wing designs in the 1940s. The company has developed several variations on the theme, including propeller- and jet-powered examples. The company also has considered flying wings as massive airliners. But stability problems prompted the company to shelve the idea for decades. Only when computer-controlled, fly-by-wire technology was available did the design become viable as a practical platform for large aircraft.

Northrop Grumman’s flying wing airliner concept has a wingspan of 230 feet, 58 feet wider than the B-2 bomber, according to Aviation Week & Space Technology. The cargo version (top photo) would have a wingspan of 260 feet, though the cabin area would be smaller than the passenger version, according to the article.

The shielded engines greatly reduce the noise signature, and they’re often seen on flying wing ideas. The sleek design also could improve fuel efficiency, though existing flying wing designs have yet to fully realize that potential because of drag penalties that occur through the control of the aircraft.

An artist

A flying wing can significantly reduce drag in part because the sleek design does not have protruding surfaces like a tail to disrupt the flow of air. Without a horizontal tail, the aircraft also does not have the added induced drag generated when the tail generates lift, which in the case of conventional aircraft is actually pushing down rather than lifting up.

The tail of most airplanes actually creates a lift force downward to balance the weight of the aircraft and the lift of the main wing. This force is counterproductive to the main wing, which is generating lift to keep the entire airplane aloft.

Aircraft equipped with canard wings, like many of the designs from Burt Rutan, also reduce the drag due to the lack of a conventional tail surface pushing downward during flight.

But because a flying wing does not have a vertical tail surface or winglets, the aircraft tend to have yaw instability. This means it is more likely to rotate in the horizontal plane with the wing tips effectively shuffling forward and back. To control this, and to control the airplane in a turn, drag-producing control surfaces along the wings are used during flight. These constant small corrections eliminate some of the inherent yaw instability of the flying wing. A conventional design flies through the air more like an arrow with feathers (or a conventional tail) guiding it straight (and no fly-by-wire computer having to keep it on path to the bullseye).

These stability issues led to Northrop abandoning the flying wing designs of the 1940s. But with modern fly-by-wire systems, many of the issues can be reduced or eliminated. And in the years to come there may even be ways to fully utilize the aerodynamic benefits of what is an efficient design.

Of course there is still the problem of passenger windows and where to put those slides and emergency exit rows to get everybody out of the airplane in a timely manner. But those problems should be relatively easy to solve.

After September 11, 2001 some airline pilots were granted the authority to carry guns while on duty in the cockpit. The pilots are trained on how to use the weapon in the unlikely event a person were to enter the cockpit and threaten the safety of the flight. Now a group representing the armed pilots wants to expand their authority so pilots who have the training can carry their hand guns while riding in the back of the airplane as well as in airport terminals.

The president of the Federal Flight Deck Officers Association told a Senate committee that there are five times as many airline pilots flying as passengers on airliners as there are Federal Air Marshals. The Air Marshals are the specially trained federal officers who travel undercover as security on a random selection of flights. But Marcus Flagg, president of the FFDO, told the Senate committee the Marshals cost about $3,300 per flight and the cost limits the number of Marshals on board aircraft. Flagg said expanding the authority of armed pilots would significantly increase the number of armed officers on board flights.

“A FFDO as a flying pilot at the controls would defend the aircraft from the cockpit only, and not exit the cockpit” Flagg told the committee (.pdf).  “If one or more FFDOs are riding as passengers in the back of that same aircraft, they may be the only trained law enforcement on board (including cockpit crew).”

Flagg said limiting the pilots to having an unlocked gun only available in the cockpit limits the usefulness of having the armed pilots. Currently pilots must have their weapons locked when carrying them to and from the cockpit and they cannot carry their weapons outside the cockpit such as during a visit to the lavatory.

The number of pilots who have been through the training and are authorized to carry a gun in the cockpit has not been released. But Flagg told the Orlando Sun Sentinel that the number is just under the FBI which has 13,800 armed officers according to the paper.

No armed pilot has had to use a gun to defend against a threat since the program started in 2002. There has been one accidental discharge of a gun in the cockpit of a US Airways flight while the airplane was on approach to land. There flight landed safely. In another incident a JetBlue pilot lost his hand gun when it was picked up by a passenger who mistakenly picked up the wrong backpack containing the locked weapon at John F. Kennedy airport in New York. The passenger realized she had the wrong bag after boarding her flight and returned it to a flight attendant.

Pilots undergo six days of training on how to use a gun for defending the cockpit. This compares to the many months of training for the Federal Air Marshals or typical police officers.

Photo: Flickr/Fly For Fun

Haiti bound pilot Dr. Richard McGlaughlin was flying with his daughter in his Cirrus SR22 on a trip to volunteer his services at a medical clinic. After departing Florida, McGlaughlin says he noticed the oil pressure dropped slightly while flying at 9,500 feet. A few minutes later the engine had stopped completely. He and his daughter were now flying a glider over the blue waters of the Bahamas.

An experienced pilot, McGlaughlin immediately established a slower air speed that would allow the airplane to glide the maximum distance given the altitude above the water. After declaring an emergency with Miami air traffic control, he determined that he and his daughter were not going to make it to the nearest island. Based on their altitude and the glide characteristics of the airplane, they were going to come up about two miles short.

All pilots learn the basics of how to make an emergency landing in the water during pilot training and about 90 percent of pilots who ditch their airplanes in water survive. But landing on the water at more than 60 miles per hour can result in an airplane flipping over and can cause injuries. McGlaughlin had another option. His Cirrus airplane is equipped with its own parachute designed to carry the aircraft and its passengers down to the surface when other options may not look as good.

So minutes after his engine stopped and McGlaughlin determined he couldn’t glide to land, he and his daughter tightened their seat belts and he pulled on the handle on the panel above his shoulder that deploys the parachute according to the Cirrus Owners and Pilots Association website.

After the initial jolt of the parachute inflating, the airplane was descending through 2,000 feet at a rate of about 1,700 feet per minute. That’s not exactly a speed for a soft landing, and McGlaughlin says they did hit the water harder than he expected, but both were okay with no injuries.

A Cirrus aircraft under parachute during flight testing.

McGlaughlin has made the trip to Haiti several times before to deliver supplies and volunteer his services and was prepared for the over water trip. Within minutes he and his daughter were out of the airplane with their life jackets on. They were able to get into the inflatable raft they had brought with them and less than an hour after declaring an emergency, the two were on a Coast Guard helicopter.

Cirrus was a pioneer in implementing the use of airframe parachutes on small general aviation aircraft. Since the SR22 and the similar SR20 were first delivered to customers in 1999, there have been 32 deployments of the parachute. Not all of the deployments have resulted in injury free touchdowns like the McGlaughlins. There have been six fatalities and several injuries.

Many of the problems have occurred when the parachute is deployed at an altitude too low for it to fully inflate, or too fast a speed. Aviation writer and pilot Paul Bertorelli believes better training for Cirrus pilots could improve the safety of the parachute equipped airplane, writing that pilots may be waiting too long or not long enough before pulling the handle. Both the Cirrus owners group and the airplane maker emphasize the need for training specifically aimed at when to deploy the parachute.

Several other companies also offer airframe parachutes on general aviation aircraft, mostly light sport manufacturers such as Flight Design CT and the Cessna 162 Skycatcher.

Photos: U.S. Coast Guard (top); Cirrus Aircraft (bottom)

Any pilot familiar with Van’s Aircraft probably could have guessed that when the company decided to build a light sport aircraft, it would deliver a lot of smiles for not much money. The kitplane company has for 40 years offered a long line of airplanes that offer impressive all-around performance on a relatively small budget. But there’s always been a catch.

You have to build the airplane yourself.

Van’s latest design is the RV-12, a two-seater with a 100-horsepower engine. It was designed to fit the Federal Aviation Administration’s light sport aircraft category, which limits aircraft to two seats, less than 1,320 pounds, a top speed of less than 120 knots (138 mph) indicated airspeed and fixed landing gear. Specifically the RV-12 is an E-LSA, where the “E” means experimental because it is an amateur or homebuilt aircraft.

The RV-12 has proven quite popular since its introduction a few years ago, with more than 150 flying already. It’s easy to see why. A complete kit costs less than $64,000 and includes everything you need to go flying except for gas, oil and about 800 hours of your time.

We recently paid a visit to the Van’s Aircraft factory in Aurora, Ore., and took an RV-12 demonstrator up for a flight. Ken Scott, Van’s technical-support guru and demo pilot, joined me. He’s built an RV-12 and hardly contains his excitement about the relatively simple airplane’s performance.

“My lawn tractor is way more complicated than my airplane,” he says, noting that his RV-12 lacks a suspension, steering mechanism or grass cutter. “And yesterday I was doing 126 knots straight and level on 100 horsepower!”

Yes, that’s a handle on the wingtip. The RV-12 features removable wings to make storing the plane much easier.

The RV-12 is a simple aircraft, essentially an aluminum frame with a few moving parts and an engine. And despite the experimental moniker, an E-LSA is not an experiment, but a safe and proven airplane approved by the FAA.

It should be noted that Scott was referring to the airplane’s true airspeed, while the 120 knot limit governing light sport aircraft refers to indicated airspeed. Indicated airspeed is what the airplane “feels” as the air hits the airframe. True airspeed corrects for altitude and temperature allowing the pilot to know how fast an airplane is moving over the ground, assuming no wind. At 10,000 feet and an air temperature of 65 degrees, the indicated airspeed may only be 100 knots, while the true airspeed would be 130.

Scott says he can climb at 1,400 feet per minute in his plane. This is impressive performance that makes reaching higher altitudes practical to chase higher true airspeeds.

We were flying somewhere over the Willamette Valley near the factory when it hit me. The RV-12 exceeds the kind of performance many pilots are familiar with flying stalwarts like the Cessna 172 or a Piper Cherokee. And while it’s true that, for most pilots, just about any airplane is fun to fly, the RV-12′s light and well-balanced controls elicit a smile far more easily than those classic aircraft.

Pages: 1 2 3 View All

Early Tuesday morning, pilots from All Nippon Airways pushed the power levers forward on the first Boeing 787 to enter service. Moments later, the eighth 787 off of the assembly line was rolling down the runway at Paine Field where the airplane was assembled. With a number of VIPs on board, including ANA’s CEO Shinichiro Ito, the Dreamliner departed from runway 16R and began a nine-plus hour flight to Japan.

The flight marks the end of the three days of events signaling the beginning of the Dreamliner’s entry into service. Early Sunday morning the official handover took place when Boeing received payment for Dreamliner ZA008 and ANA received the title of ownership for the first 787 to enter service. On Monday Boeing and ANA held a ceremonial event outside the factory where the 787 is assembled in a steady rain (picture above).

Despite the weather, company executives were upbeat to finally have the first 787 leaving the nest nearly two years after its first flight in December of 2009.

“It’s not often that we have the chance to make history” said Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Jim Albaugh, “to do something big and bold that will change the world in untold ways and endure long after we are gone.”

The long delay of the 787 program was alluded to by most of those who spoke at the event. All Nippon Airways’ Ito expressed his happiness at taking delivery of the company’s first 787, even if it is three years behind schedule.. He cited the company’s plan to expand beyond its native Japan where most of its routes are currently based.

“We are delighted to be taking delivery finally of our first 787″ Ito said. “The Dreamliner will enable us to offer unrivalled standards of service and comfort to our passengers and will play a key part in ANA’s plans for international expansion.”

Today’s flight marks the beginning of the Dreamliner’s entry into commercial service after many years and many billions of dollars in delays. A report by the Seattle Times estimates Boeing has spent more than $32 billion developing and building the 787 so far.

On October 26, ANA pilots will fly the airplane on an inaugural flight between Tokyo and Hong Kong. Regularly scheduled domestic service will begin on November 1. The airline will have four 787s in service by the end of the year and 12 of the Dreamliners based in Japan by early 2012.

Photo: Jason Paur/Wired.com