Test aircraft probe?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EDDL
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Test aircraft probe?
Hello,
most of test aircrafts have a probe fixed on the top of rudder... I guess it's for measuring the dyn pressure behind the aircraft, static pressure, angle of attack or sideslip angle.
anyone knows exactly what is it?
thank you.
most of test aircrafts have a probe fixed on the top of rudder... I guess it's for measuring the dyn pressure behind the aircraft, static pressure, angle of attack or sideslip angle.
anyone knows exactly what is it?
thank you.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cone is there to ensure that the pipe flies steady and straight. The static vents are usually a few feet ahead of the cone. What I would like to know though is how far Boeing reel the cone out. The one I had involvement with was 80 feet being the aircraft.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nirvana South
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget the Nose Boom
A lot of test aircraft also have a seperate Nose Boom which carries a Pitot head well ahead of the aircraft plus an OAT probe and two pairs of sideslip & angle of attack vanes. You can see them on both the CRJ-1000 prototype and our CRJ-100 test aircraft on here http://www.pprune.org/flight-testing...en-flight.html
Jimmy,
Beleive we've used both 80 & 100 foot for the trailing cone - best (most stable) length for a particular aircraft seems to vary a bit so we have an internal capstan with appropriate markings on the tubing & the FTE just runs it out as required before the testing starts.
Jimmy,
Beleive we've used both 80 & 100 foot for the trailing cone - best (most stable) length for a particular aircraft seems to vary a bit so we have an internal capstan with appropriate markings on the tubing & the FTE just runs it out as required before the testing starts.
Last edited by ICT_SLB; 10th Jun 2009 at 04:21.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jimmy,
Beleive we've used both 80 & 100 foot for the trailing cone - best (most stable) length for a particular aircraft seems to vary a bit so we have an internal capstan with appropriate markings on the tubing & the FTE just runs it out as required before the testing starts.
Beleive we've used both 80 & 100 foot for the trailing cone - best (most stable) length for a particular aircraft seems to vary a bit so we have an internal capstan with appropriate markings on the tubing & the FTE just runs it out as required before the testing starts.
Do you know if there different cone calibration corrections for different trail lengths?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Nirvana South
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jimmy,
Sorry you're talking to the Self Loading Ballast (well an Avionics engineer) but Mick (Flight Tester) is a real FTE & can probably help you as to corrections.
We also use the runway launch method for our smaller jets - the hose length looks to be closer to 50 feet (or less) on those.
Sorry you're talking to the Self Loading Ballast (well an Avionics engineer) but Mick (Flight Tester) is a real FTE & can probably help you as to corrections.
We also use the runway launch method for our smaller jets - the hose length looks to be closer to 50 feet (or less) on those.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should do tower flyby's with the cone in order to calibrate it at whatever trail length you're going to use. In my insignificant experience, the trail length variation is inconclusive so you're probably not going to use it as a calibration parameter.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Kittyhawk
Age: 20
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Data
All the info you need can be found here.
spaceagecontrol.com : Main > Data Sheet - 100101 Trailing Cone
Charlie
spaceagecontrol.com : Main > Data Sheet - 100101 Trailing Cone
Charlie
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Cheshire, UK
Age: 60
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You should do tower flyby's with the cone in order to calibrate it at whatever trail length you're going to use. In my insignificant experience, the trail length variation is inconclusive so you're probably not going to use it as a calibration parameter.
All the info you need can be found here.
spaceagecontrol.com : Main > Data Sheet - 100101 Trailing Cone
spaceagecontrol.com : Main > Data Sheet - 100101 Trailing Cone
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: ITALY
Age: 59
Posts: 221
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Machdiamond
the small static ports few meters upstream of the cone measure the absolute static pressure at flying altitude, so I cannot understand the need to calibrate through tower fly-by, probably it was the aircraft static ports which were calibrated and compared to cone static port pressure.
However, for stall tests, in order to appreciate the difference between the pitot tube pressure indication and the 'true' static pressure measured 50 meters behind the aircraft, with its lag in reading due to the length of the small pipe, we used to calibrate the two systems recording the two pressure peaks resulting from exploding a toy balloon in close proximity to the two pressure sources (pitot and cone static pressure ports)
Regards
D.
However, for stall tests, in order to appreciate the difference between the pitot tube pressure indication and the 'true' static pressure measured 50 meters behind the aircraft, with its lag in reading due to the length of the small pipe, we used to calibrate the two systems recording the two pressure peaks resulting from exploding a toy balloon in close proximity to the two pressure sources (pitot and cone static pressure ports)
Regards
D.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the small static ports few meters upstream of the cone measure the absolute static pressure at flying altitude, so I cannot understand the need to calibrate through tower fly-by, probably it was the aircraft static ports which were calibrated and compared to cone static port pressure.