HYPOTHETICAL COLLISION OF TU-154M WITH BIRCH TREE VERSUS FULL-SCALE CRASH DYNAMIC TESTS OF DC-7 AND LC-1649

Similar documents
INVESTIGATION OF ICING EFFECTS ON AERODYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS OF AIRCRAFT AT TSAGI

AIRCRAFT DESIGN MADE EASY. Basic Choices and Weights. By Chris Heintz

Reducing Landing Distance

The new Raisbeck/Hartzell C90 Swept Blade Turbofan Propeller

The new Raisbeck/Hartzell C90 Swept Blade Turbofan Propeller

AIR TRACTOR, INC. OLNEY, TEXAS

Investigation Report.

AIRCRAFT DESIGN SUBSONIC JET TRANSPORT

FIRST FLYING TECHNIQUES COCKPIT PREPARATION STARTUP TAXI

Crash Cart Barrier Project Teacher Guide

Test of. Cessna CT-182T Turbo Skylane HD-series Produced by Carenado

CRAHVI. CRashworthiness of Aircraft for High Velocity Impact. Tim Brown (Airbus UK) Aeronautics Days 19th - 21st June, 2006

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET NO. 1A13

Chapter 2 Lecture 5 Data collection and preliminary three-view drawing - 2 Topic

General Dynamics F-16 Fighting Falcon

Environmentally Focused Aircraft: Regional Aircraft Study

Development of Crash Injury Protection in Rotorcraft

Introduction. Fuselage/Cockpit

Chapter 10 Miscellaneous topics - 2 Lecture 39 Topics

Fire pumper brake work was put off

FINITE ELEMENT METHOD IN CAR COMPATIBILITY PHENOMENA

AVIATION INVESTIGATION REPORT A06O0141 LOSS OF CONTROL AND COLLISION WITH TERRAIN

AN ANALYSIS OF THE EFFICACY OF WAYSIDE HOT-BOX DETECTOR DATA

AE 451 Aeronautical Engineering Design I Estimation of Critical Performance Parameters. Prof. Dr. Serkan Özgen Dept. Aerospace Engineering Fall 2015

Lighter and Safer Cars by Design

Flight Test Evaluation of C-130H Aircraft Performance with NP2000 Propellers

Aging Systems Workshop Fuel Tank Safety- FINAL RULE

The Airplane That Could!

N123AX Piper SARATOGA II HP (PA-32R-301) HANDLING NOTES

Bob's Card Models and [Resources]

North American F-86F Sabre USER MANUAL. Virtavia F-86F Sabre DTG Steam Edition Manual Version 1

The Sonic Cruiser A Concept Analysis

Sierra. R/STOL High Lift Systems. Toll Free LANCAIR. Sierra R/STOL High Lift System Benefits DURING APPROACH AND LANDING DURING TAKEOFF

Monocoupe 90 AF BY LESLIE M. ADAMS

European Workshop on Aircraft Design Education 2002

Figure 1. What is the difference between distance and displacement?

A Game of Two: Airbus vs Boeing. The Big Guys. by Valerio Viti. Valerio Viti, AOE4984, Project #1, March 22nd, 2001

European Aviation Safety Agency

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF IMPACT BETWEEN SHUNTING LOCOMOTIVE AND SELECTED ROAD VEHICLE

Low Speed Rear End Crash Analysis

FRONTAL OFF SET COLLISION

FLASHCARDS AIRCRAFT. Courtesy of the Air Safety Institute, a Division of the AOPA Foundation, and made possible by AOPA Services Corporation.

Aeronautical Engineering Design II Sizing Matrix and Carpet Plots. Prof. Dr. Serkan Özgen Dept. Aerospace Engineering Spring 2014

Abstract. 1 Description of the Problem

AS 355 F1 S/N 5168 Factual Report Iao Valley Maui, Hawaii Date: July 21, 2000

Electric Flight Potential and Limitations

BELL 206L4 A reliable multi-mission capable helicopter with low operating costs.

AVIATION INVESTIGATION REPORT A00P0208 MAIN-ROTOR BLADE FAILURE

AE 451 Aeronautical Engineering Design Final Examination. Instructor: Prof. Dr. Serkan ÖZGEN Date:

Appenidix E: Freewing MAE UAV analysis

The Effects of Damage and Uncertainty on the Aeroelastic / Aeroservoelastic Behavior and Safety of Composite Aircraft. JAMS Meeting, May

DUCHESS BE-76 AND COMMERCIAL MULTI ADD-ON ORAL REVIEW FOR CHECKRIDE

General Atomics Urban Maglev: Moving Towards Demonstration

CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF ECOLOGICAL AIRCRAFT FOR COMMUTER AIR TRANSPORTATION

blended wing body aircraft for the

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION TYPE CERTIFICATE DATA SHEET NO. A16EA

AIAA Foundation Undergraduate Team Aircraft Design Competition. RFP: Cruise Missile Carrier

Initial / Recurrent Ground Take-Home Self-Test: The Beechcraft 58 Baron Systems, Components and Procedures

AGATE (ADVANCED GENERAL AVIATION TRANSPORTATION EXPERIMENT PROGRAM) FULL-SCALE TEST AND DEMONSTRATION REPORT NO: C-GEN (REV N/C)

AVIATION INVESTIGATION REPORT A07C0148 COLLISION WITH POWER LINE TOWER

FE151 Aluminum Association Inc. Impact of Vehicle Weight Reduction on a Class 8 Truck for Fuel Economy Benefits

Australian Pole Side Impact Research 2010

T-51 Mustang - 3/4 Scale Kit

Heating Comparison of Radial and Bias-Ply Tires on a B-727 Aircraft

Aircraft Design: A Systems Engineering Approach, M. Sadraey, Wiley, 2012 Chapter 11 Aircraft Weight Distribution Tables

SAE Aero Design. Operations Manual. Ali Alqalaf, Jasem Alshammari, Dong Yang Cao, Darren Frankenberger, Steven Goettl, and John Santoro.

Stagger Around #3: AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile, Abridged Edition

CERTIFICATION MEMORANDUM

WOLVERINE TO BHP JANSEN NEW TRANSMISSION LINE PROJECT FALL 2017

New Design Concept of Compound Helicopter

3 rd EASN Association International Workshop on AeroStructures

Building A Replica Aircraft. Part Three Construction Details Wings and Covering

National Transportation Safety Board Robert L. Swaim Aviation Engineering NRS. Fire Issues

European Aviation Safety Agency

INCORPORA:1EO. PO Box Shannon Lane Priest River, FAA APPROVED

time in seconds Amy leaves diving board

NORTHWEST HELICOPTERS. UH-1H & UH-1HPlus

PRESS RELEASE Q & A. The company decided from the onset to operate under a Boeing licensing umbrella to design and produce parts to Boeing standards.

Problem Statement. After losing hydraulic systems when engine #1 detached during takeoff.

Bob's Card Model and [Resources]

10th Australian International Aerospace Congress

Compiled by Matt Zagoren

Airframes Instructor Training Manual. Chapter 6 UNDERCARRIAGE

JODEL D.112 INFORMATION MANUAL C-FVOF

Part II. HISTORICAL AND ENGINEERING ANALYSIS OF AIRSHIP PLAN-AND- DESIGN AND SERVICE DECISIONS

CHAPTER 2 THE TUTOR. Introduction

Aircraft. Firefly Aircraft Venture

Accident Reconstruction & Vehicle Data Recovery Systems and Uses

Electric Drive - Magnetic Suspension Rotorcraft Technologies

EPIC PERFORMANCE for the ENTIRE KING AIR 200 FAMILY...

EAS 4700 Aerospace Design 1

Owners Manual. Table of Contents 4.1. INTRODUCTION SPEEDS FOR NORMAL OPERATION CHECKLIST & PROCEDURES 4

Airships: A New Horizon for Science April 30 May 3, Worldwide Aeros Corp. Montebello, California. Presented by:

Boeing /-200/-200A Limitations

VERTICAL IMPACT SIMULATIONS OF A FULL-SIZE AND SIMPLIFIED SCALED MODELS OF AN AIRCRAFT FUSELAGE SECTION

SELECTED ASPECTS RELATED TO PREPARATION OF FATIGUE TESTS OF A METALLIC AIRFRAME

Vso 61. Vs1 63. Vr 70. Vx 76. Vxse 78. Vy 89. Vyse. 89 (blue line) Vmc. 61 (radial redline) Vsse 76. Va 134) Vno 163

Development of a Subscale Flight Testing Platform for a Generic Future Fighter

Impact, Torsion, and Crush Tests for 477 kcmil and 795 kcmil 3M Brand Composite Conductor. 3M Company Purchase Order

SD3-60 AIRCRAFT MAINTENANCE MANUAL. This chapter includes information on dimensions, areas, zoning, etc. and is presented as follows:

Transcription:

SMOLENSK CONFERENCE, WARSAW, OCTOBER 22, 2012 HYPOTHETICAL COLLISION OF TU-154M WITH BIRCH TREE VERSUS FULL-SCALE CRASH DYNAMIC TESTS OF DC-7 AND LC-1649 Porownanie hipotetycznej kolizji Tu-154M z brzoza z testami dynamicznymi zderzen w pelnej skali przy uzyciu samolotow DC-7 oraz LC-1649 Professor Jacek F. Gieras, PhD, DSc, Fellow IEEE University of Technology and Life Sciences, Bydgoszcz, Poland E-mail: jacek.gieras@utp.edu.pl 1

Full-Scale Crash Dynamic Tests of DC-7 and LC-1649 What? Full-scale dynamic crash tests of DC-7 and Lockheed Constellation 1649 (LC-1649) passenger aircraft conducted by the Federal Aviation Agency in April 1964. Why? These test programs were designed to simulate typical crash conditions during survivable take-off and landing accidents and collected considerable data on crash loads, accelerations, and fuel containment. How? The test site has been designed in such a way as to obtain the desired impact conditions for accelerating the test aicraft to approximately the climbout velocity, controlled guidance of the aircraft to the initial impact point, and appropriate loacation of earthen barriers and pole barriers (telephone poles). The runway was built of two soil-cement strips 4.57-m wide and 5.49-m apart laid over the desert soil to support the main landing gear wheels. The length of strips from release point to the impact barriers was 1219 m. The aircraft was guided along a single track made of standard 41-kg railroad rails laid on a continuous reinforced concreate base. The rock, earthen and pole barriers were errected to break the nose landing gear, propellers of engines and wings, repectively. 2

LC-1649 full-scale dynamic crash test In 1964 full-scale dynamic crash tests on DC-7 and Lockheed 1649 Constellation (LC-1649) were performed by the Federal Aviation Agency, AZ, USA LC-1649 test site and wing impact sequence. Pole barriers (telephone poles) are marked with blue color Test site: Deer Valley Airport north of Phoenix, AZ, USA 3 R. T. Bocchieri, et.al, Crash Simulation of Transport Aircraft for Predicting Fuel Release, FAA Worldwide Techn. Transfer Conf. Atlantic City, NJ,, 2010

How have been full-scale crash tests performed? The objective of these experiments was exploration of the manner in which large aircraft are damaged in survivable accidents and accurate measurement of the crash loads In the case of the DC-7, after collision with telephone poles, the tip of right wing finally fell off. This fact is frequently cited by supporters of the crash official reports as a proof that the collision of the Tu-154M No 101 with the trunk of a birch tree on April 10, 2010 near Smolensk North Military Air Base severed the tip of the left wing and finally caused fatal collision of thetu-154m No 101 with the ground. It is necessary to point out the following differences in: weight and volume envelope of the Tu-154M, DC-7 and LC-1649 aircraft; construction of aircraft and their wings; kinetic energy and linear momentum of aircraft height at which the wing hit the pole or tree; properties of timber/wood; how the telephone poles and birch tree have been anchored to the ground. W.H. Reed, S.H. Robertson, L.W.T. Weinberg, L.H. Tyndall, "Full-scale dynamic crash test of a Douglas DC-7 aircraft", Technical report FAA- ADS-37, Aviation Safety Engineering and Research, Phoenix, AZ, 1965. W.H. Reed, S.H. Robertson, L.W.T. Weinberg, L.H. Tyndall, "Full-scale dynamic crash test of a Lockheed Constellation model 1649 aircraft, Technical report FAA-ADS-38", Aviation Safety Engineering and Research, Phoenix, AZ, 1965 4

Full-Scale Tests Conditions prior to crash or full-scale tests Parameter Tu-154M 101 DC-7 LC-1649 Gross weight of airliner at the time of crash/test. kg 78,600 (estimated) 49,010] 72,245 Velocity prior to contact with barrier, km/h approx. 270.0 (birch tree) 257.4 (gear barrier) 207.6 (gear barrier) Linear momentum, MNs 5.896 3.504 4.166 Kinetic energy, MJ 221.1 125.3 120.1 Leading edge sweep of wings, degree approx. 37 approx. 5 approx. 6 Material of wooden barriers birch tree processed pine processed pine Height of impact point measured from the ground level, m approx. 5.1 approx. 3.2 approx. 2.0 Diameter of pole/tree, m 0.3 to 0.4 0.305 0.305 Distance of impact point measured from the center axis of the fuselage, m 12.675 13.83 unknown Wing sweep angle, degree 37 5 6 Length of the tip wing being cut off, m 6.1 3.66 unknown 5

LC-1649 full-scale dynamic crash test Outboard pole impact Inboard pole impact The LC-1649 was made from higher-strength, low-elongation aluminum similar to modern aircraft. R. T. Bocchieri, et.al, Crash Simulation of Transport Aircraft for Predicting Fuel Release, FAA Worldwide Techn. Transfer Conf. Atlantic City, NJ,, 2010 6

Construction of Wings Tu-154M DC-7 LC-1649 The first version of the Tu-154M was designed in 1964, while the DC-7 was designed before 1953 and LC-1649 before 1943. The turbofan engines of the Tu-154M are mounted in the rear of the fuselage. The piston engines of the DC-7 and LC-1649 are buried in wings 7

Length of Aircraft Comparison of length of aircraft: (a) Tu-154M; (b) DC-7; (c) LC-1649 8

Wing Span of Aircraft Comparison of wing span: (a) Tu-154M; (b) DC-7; (c) LC-1649 9

Sweep Angle of Wings Leading edge sweep of wings of (a) Tu-154M, (b) DC-7 and (c) LC-1649 aircraft. Tu-154M The leading edge sweep is the angle between a constant percentage chord line along the semispan of the wing and the lateral axis perpendicular to the aircraft center line DC-7 LC-1649 10

Specifications of Aircraft Specifications of Tu-154M, Douglas DC-7 and LC-1649 aircraft Specifications Wing span, m Length, m Empty weight, kg Loaded weight, kg Max. speed, km/h Cruising speed, km/h Service ceiling, m Max range, km Range max payload, km Power plant (engines) Tu154M 37.55 47.90 55,300 max 100,000 950 11,100 5200 3900 3 x D-30KU turbofan rated at 108 kn (24,270 lb) each Aircraft DC-7 Dimensions: 34.98 29.53 Height, m 11.40 8.75 7.54 Wing area, m 2 201.5 188.3 171.87 Weights 37,785 57,200 Performance 650 560 6850 9000 7400 4 x R-3350 988TC-DA turbo radial rated at 2420 kw (3250 hp) Lockheed LC-1649 45.72 35.41 41,969 72,575 606 at 5669 m 466 7223 9945 + 3628 payload 7950 + 8845 payload 4 x R-3350-988TC-18EA- 2 turbo rated at 2535 kw 11 (3400 hp) each

LC-1649 Dynamic Crash Test Fuel tank and engine locations (a) DC-7 (b) LC-1649 12

Dynamic Crash Tests The aircraft were released for full-scale dynamic tests under the following arrangements: Normal take-off configuration; Flaps positioned full-up to reduce lift and drag; Upon release, the throttles advanced to pre-determined take-off position (for DC-7 3050 bhp (2.275 MW) per engine); Smooth and continuous acceleration of the aircraft during the 1292 m run until the impact with the propeller and landing gear barriers; Velocity of 257.4 km/h (139 knots) for DC-7 and 207.4 km/h (112 knots) for LC-1649. The tests were conducted by the FAA at Deer Valley Airport north of Phoenix, AZ, USA Photo on left shows the DC-7 wheels clipped off and one wing struck by a telephone pole. Photo on the right shows the DC-7 begins to explode into flames apparently unplanned. http://www.arizonawrecks.com/images/460_dc-7a.jpg LC-1649 destroyed in the test at Deer Valley. Photo taken by C. Baird. http://www.arizonawrecks.com/images/460_cons tellation_n7307c_faa_crash_web_pic.jpg 13

DC-7 Dynamic Crash Test Gear and propeller impact sequence 1. The first barrier was the landing gear barrier. 2. All four propellers were broken as a result of hitting the propeller barriers. All four engine mounts failed. 3. The gear barrier torn out the right main landing gear 4. The outer pole cut off the right wing approximately 3.66 m (12 feet) from the tip. 5. The aircraft hit the second inner pole approximately 0.15 s after the first pole impact. The inner pole struck the right wing between engines No 3 and No 4. The wing leading edge structure back to the forward spar was crushed. Then, 14 the inner pole broke.

Famous Armored Birch Tree Which photograph is authentic? 15

Famous Armored Birch Tree Recent photographs. The most important portion has been cut off. Source: http://imgsrc.ru/para-moto1/30127119.html 16

Famous Armored Birch Tree Recent photographs. Dr Bodin s lot with armored birch tree Source: www.google.com Source: http://imgsrc.ru/para-moto1/30127119.html 17

Tip of left wing of Tu-154M No 101 The wing has been cut off while the front edge slat is intact http://vfl.ru/fotos/aa582e8c473661.html How is it possible? 18

Conclusions (a) The Tu-154M is much longer (47.9 m versus 29.53 m and 35.41 m) and heavier (empty weight 55.3 t versus 37.785 t and 41.969 t) aircraft than the DC-7 and LC-1649. (b) The construction of the Tu-154M, DC-7 and LC-1649 aircraft and their wings is very different, e.g., leading edge sweep. The turbofan engines of the Tu-154M are mounted in the rear of the fuselage. The piston engines of the DC-7 and LC-1649 are buried in wings. (c) The kinetic energy prior to impact of the Tu-154M was 221.1 MJ versus 125.3 MJ for DC-7 and 120.1 for LC-1649. (d) It is easier to cut a pole/tree barrier by a wing with large sweep angle (Tu-154M) than by a wing perpendicular to the center line of the fuselage (DC-7, LC-1649). (e) The physical parameters of the "live" birch tree are different than those of telephone poles made of processed timber (yellow southern pine). (f) The height of impact point measured from the ground level is different for each case, i.e., approx 5.1 m for the Tu-154M, approx 3.2 m for the DC-7 and approx 2 m for the LC-1649. (g) The birch tree grew probably in swampy ground, while the telephone poles were buried approximetaly 1.22 m in the ground. It is unknown if a concreate has been used. (h) Research performed at the University of Akron and University of Maryland, photographs of the birch taken immediately after crash, lack of damage to the slat and lack of detailed investigation of the birch tree and wing immediately after crash testify that there was rather no collision of the Tu-154M Nr 101 with a birch tree. Therefore, the separation of the tip of wings in full-scale dynamic tests using the DC-7 and LC-1649 aircraft can not be a proof that the tip of the wing of the Tu- 154M was cut off as a result of collision with a birch tree trunk. 19

Questions & Answers 20