Flight Testing for Weapons
 

Hi there,
I had been recently involved in testing of weapons from a rotary wing platform. Now that the weapons have been already selected they need to be integrated on this platform. Separation trials of these weapons have been planned in consultation with the supplier of these weapons though I'm not sure that I will be able to test these weapons in its entire envelope due to limitation of rounds made available for commercial reasons of supplier. Could somebody share experience on flight testing and proving of weapons integration especially if these are missiles which are not available in abundance for demonstration due to obvious commercial reasons. would it be right to let these weapons go to field pilots without having been flight tested for its flight envelope? What are the alternatives???

You may have to be a bit creative with the dropping of weapons,if you don`t have spare dummies to cover all the envelope conditions.Suggestions anyway; low speed/hover- use a couple of those large `collapsing airbags` covered in cardboard/nets that `Bollywood` stuntmen jump off buildings into,or a large pit full of polystyrene/netted.
forward flight- suggest you use a suitable parachute with static-line for recovery......make sure any flailing static line is not long enough to go into tail rotor,driveshafts,rotor or engine !!!
If possible,drops should be done over an area of soft sand as well.
I think your `worst` envelope conditions would probably be,high-speed in a turn,high-speed autorotation and low speed auto,max weight conditions.
I would explore any `asymmetric` drops( with sideslip/skid) very cautiously....Syc..
High-speed cameras,on aircraft and ground ..a must !

Don't forget emergency safe release for jettisoning everything.

You could always ask for wind tunnel testing to show the most critical points - he said tongue in cheek, knowing there are precious few wind tunnel tests done on helicopters...

In continuation - weapons flight testing
 

Thanks for the inputs -I have flight test plans for limited number of 'booster non guided missiles'. Emergency jettisoning at some corner points is a valuable suggestion. However, I was wondering if it would be ok to let this weapon be cleared for its entire operational envelope based on successful demonstration at few test points only - Any alternatives ??

Modern thinking is almost certainly towards computer modelling of weapons release, and then using your few available test assets to validate those computer models.

Not cheap or easy, but probably the best reasonably achievable under your constraints. Finding somebody whose modelling of such situations you'd trust may be a challenge. You could try Qinetiq in the UK, if you have sufficiently deep pockets. A good aeronautical university would probably be cheaper - possibly Glasgow or Liverpool Universities in the UK have this sort of capability. PM India-Mike if he doesn't chip into this already, he is in that area of research and might be able to advise.

G

It's all about what level of risk your organization is willing to accept. Flight test is a great risk reduction technique, but there are many more ways to manage risk...acceptance being one of them.

With guns, you primarily need to be concerned with arcs of fire and what happens to spent links and casings. Keeping those arcs clear of the rotor blades can be a challenge, especially if the tactics require manoeuvring.

With missiles or rockets, there are many more concerns. Stores clearance testing throughout the envelope is important, but can be expensive. Good ideas provided so far with the build up, but without good data gathering (especially high speed video), you won't have any knowledge of what may occur during the next step. Start with dropping inert missiles, if the release is good (defined by ???), then continue to training rounds. Live rounds may not be required, but the first one has to be fired at some point.

If you don't have sufficient resources to fully clear the weapons, then consider clearing a very limited envelope that allows only very specific delivery methods. You reduce the technical risk, but may increase operational risk.

Also, see if anyone else has cleared same/similiar weapons on similiar types. A good place to start is to join SETP and review the papers. Also a good place to make contacts.


Can you provide details here on the aircraft and weapons types you're working with?