#Flight control system of aircraft manual
Nobody had any experience with manual controls anymore.I proposed to use the same force reduction mechanisms that were used on the F-86, but in the end a hydraulic boost was selected. I have worked together with Rockwell (formerly North American) on a two seat jet trainer a size and speed combination that would have had manual controls 60 years ago. In the end, introducing hydraulics solved so many problems that de facto above a certain speed and size combination no other option makes sense. Every engineer should think next: What about flutter? With more complex force reductions, the chance grew that something unexpected happens and failure modes multiplied. At top speed the control horn could still move through its full range but the achievable aileron deflections were only a few degrees - still enough for sufficient roll agility, however.Īilerons have mass. The English Electric Canberra used internal balances for the ailerons and a spring in the aileron controls to limit the stick forces.
This limited the motion range but improved the leverage of the pilot. The Dornier Do-335 or the Republic P-47 used a telescopic stick: At low speed the stick was short and could move through the full range of aileron deflections while at high speed it could be telescopically extended.On the first flight of the Messerschmitt Me-321 glider it was found that control forces especially in roll were way too high, so a second pilot with a second stick was installed.With increasing size and speed, the forces went up and increasingly clever force reduction systems were invented to keep stick forces within limits. Historically, aircraft used manual controls. Hydraulic flight controls are not mandatory for a specific class, but above some size and speed it will be hard to fulfil all certification requirements without at least adding some hydraulic boost.
0 kommentar(er)
