USAAEFA PROJECT NO. 82-14

'0PRELIMINARY AIRWORTHINESS EVALUATION

OF THE UH-60A CONFIGURED WITH THEEXTERNAL STORES SUPPORT SYSTEM (ESSS)

ARTHUR R. MARSHALL ROBERT M. BUCKANIN

MAJ, TC PROJECT ENGINEER

PROJECT OFFICER/PILOT

RANDALL G. OLIVER RICHARD S. ADLER

MAJ, FA PROJECT ENGINEER

PROJECT PILOT

"S MARCH 1983

"A Fl"T '.L REPORT

p ,A

" EF~F

S..j . ELECTE

SSEP 2 7 19

Approved for public release, distribution unlimited

UNITED STATES ARMY AVIATION ENGINEERING FLIGHT ACTIVITYEDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA 93523

BTIC FILE COPY 8309 26 07o2P•.- ._i l~ i .. • •. ..• .. .. .. -. 8 3-

DISCLAIMER NOTICE

"The findings of this report are not to be construed as an official Department ofthe Army position unless so designated by other authorized documents. I

DISPOSITION INSTRUCTIONS

Destroy this report when it is no longer needed. Do not return it to the originator.

TRADE NAMES

The mse of trade names in this report does not constitute an official endorsementor approval of the mise of the commercial hardware and software.

UNCLASSIFIEDSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGIE (Who.t Data Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORMI. REPORT NUMBER J.GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. R5CIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

1TSAAEFA PROJECT NO. 82-14 '4) . -/1113~ -D ___________

4.~~~~S TITPE OPdSbtte REPORT A PERIOD COVERED

PRELIMINARY AIRWORTHINESS EVALUATION OF THE FINAL REPORTUH-60A CONFIGURED WITH THE EXTERNAL STORES 4 DEC 82 - 26 JAN 83SUPPORT SYSTEM (ESSS) 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHoR(s) a. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(&)

ARTHUR R. MARSHALL ROBERT M. BUCKANIN* .RANDALL G. OLIVER RICHARD S. ADLER

0. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASKAREA A WORK UNIT NUMMERS

US ARMY AVN ENGINEERING FLIGHT ACTIVITYEDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CA 93523 68-3-BHOO8--04-68-EC

It. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

US ARMY AVN RESEARCH & DEVELOPMENT COMMAND MARCH 19834300 GOODFELLOW BOULEVARD 13. NUMBER OF PAGES

ST. LOUIS, MO 63120 9014. MONITORiNG AGENCY NAME 0 AOORESS(ff differengt f1mm Conltrolling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS, (of this report)

UNCLASSIFIED

15a. OECLASSIFicATioN/DOWNGRAOINGSCHEDULE

* IS6. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17 ITIU INSA E E T(fteasrc ntrdI tc 0 1dfeetfo eot

IS. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

* ~~It. KEY WORDS (Coanfrue on reverse side Iflnec..aary and Identify by block num bot)

Flight TestingHelicoptersLevel FlightPerformance Tests

inru1ACr "an i s.e n revre &EAD It rm vtr wd fdenify by block mombet)

~'he Preliminary Airworthiness Evaluation of the Ull-60A helicopter, (US/A %'iN

77-22714) ..Aconf igured with the External Stores Support System was 'conducted sait the Sikorsky Flight Test Facility, West Palm Beach, Florida (elevationJ

ii ~28 feet).sA total of 26 test flights were conducted, between 4 December'1982 and 26 January 1983 and 20.2 productive hours were flown.'-..Limitedlevel flight perforrnatce tests were conducted to determine the chanige In

DD '" 1473 EDITiONs orI NOV 5S IS OBSLETE rCASFE

SECURITY CLASSIPICATtOpt OF THIS PAGE (Whoe. Dot& EM,ted)

1 INC1ARS T F T R r)j SECuRITY CLA•SIPICATYo. OF THIS PAGNft( Ve Date fre..

-- drag of the UH-60A helicopter caused by three External Stores SupportSystem configurations with various stores installed. An unexplainedincrease in power required was found between the Preliminary AirworthinessEvaluation test aircraft and the aircraft used during a previous Airworth-iness and Flight Characteristics evaluation.-The maximum range for theself deployment ferry mission was determined %bNUS Army Aviation Researchand Develepment Command using the power required 'bbtained from this reportto be 1176 nautical miles in the original External Stores Support Systemwith four tanks configuration. This exceeded the 1150 nautical milerequirement for the self deployment ferry mission described in the MaterialNeed Document.

Accession ForU•TC URGA& -

D J.st.rilb ti.-n -

.-.AvUt*,bz.b' (7. 0 ?'s

ii

oft

UNCLASSIFIEDSECuRITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAQE(1P"en Date Entered)

-7 J

DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMYHO, US ARMY AVIATION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT COMMAND

4300 GOODFELLOW BOULEVARD, ST. LOUIS, MO 63120

DRDAV-D

SUBJECT: Directorate for Development and Qualification Position on the FinalReport of USAAEFA Project No. 82-14, Preliminary Airworthiness .-Evaluation of the UH-60A Configured with the External Stores SupportSystem (ESSS)

SEE DISTRIBUTION

1. The purpose of this letter is to establish the Directorate for Developmentand Qualification position on the subject report. In addition to documentingthe test results of the subject evaluation, this report also identifies asignificantly higher and unexplained increase in power required for the testaircraft as compared to the results of the Airworthiness and Flight Character-istics (A&FC) evaluation, USAAEFA Project No. 77-17.

2. The self deployment range for the UI1-60A equipped with the ESSS, 4 fueltank configuration has been calculated by this Directorate. The calculationsare based on the test data of this report (used to increment the A&FC baseline)and show that the LTH-60A range is 1176 nautical miles with the standard ESSS4 tank configuration and 1207 nautical miles with the ESSS 4 tank coufigurationwith the modified vertical pylon fairings. The unexplained power requiredincrease found for the subject test aircraft over the power required measuredfor the aircraft used during the A&FC test has not been used to increment thebaseline during the range calculations. The ground rules for the range calcula-tions are 10 knots headwind and 10% mission fuel reserve as quoted in the BLACKHAWK Material Need Document (Reference 1 in report). Based on the fact thatthe calculations indicate the South Atlantic route can be flown with the standardESSS, this Directorate has recommended to the Project Manager that the modifiedfairings for the vertical pylons not be procured.

3. This Directorate agrees with the conclusions stated in this report. Therewere no reported shortcomings or deficiencies associated with this evaluaeion.An evaluation has been tentatively planned for performance testing of a UH-60A,with production ESSS fixed provisions, to be done at USAAEFA.

FOR THE COMMANDER:

2 Encl CHARLES C. CRAWFORD, JR.as Director of Development

and Qualification

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION

Background ........................ .................... .

Description ............................................ 1Test Scope~s o o o ......... o.... se s..... o...I

Test Methodology .................. . .......... 3

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

General ................................ .. ......... too. 5Level Flight Performance ................. ........ 5

General .............. .. ......... of ....... 5

Fixed Provisions Configuration ............................... 6Original ESSS with Four Tanks Configuration ...... 7Modified ESSS with Four Tanks Configuration ....... 7Original ESSS with no Stores and with

Two Tanks Configurations ........................ 8Self Deployment Ferry Mission Range Estimate...... 8Inherent Sideslip ..... o... o... ... ... .... ........ ... 9

Handling Qualities. ..... .................................. 9Control Positions in Level Flight .... 9

CONCLUSIONS .............................................. 10

RECOMMENDATIONS ..... .............. ....... ..................... to I 1

APPENDIXES

As References .... sees*@*.......*ae*...................... 12

B. Description ............ 0 .. ................................ . . .. 13C. Instrumentation ..... .. *............. .o. o s . ~ . * 26

D. Test Techniques and Data Analysis Methods.#......so*.. 33

E. Test Data .a..... ............ ease................ 40F. Glossary ..... ....... *.# .... .........* .. so** . ..... . 80

DISTRIBUTION

I•'°,•. r~ '-.'• t'•-t"r•-t"•4".l .1.-. 4°• -*1*''" . ... ..". .I" *"I •' • " ... - "" .":T""" -.. . . . . . '

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

I. The United States Army has stated a requirement for a selfdeployment capability for the UH-60A helicopter. SikorskyAircraft (SA) Division of United Technologies has designed theExternal Stores Support System (ESSS) to satisfy this requirement.Specific self deployment mission requirements are contained inthe Material Need Document (ref 1, app A).

2. In November 1982 the United States Army Aviation EngineeringFlight Activity was tasked by the United States Aviation Researchand Development Command (AVRADCOM) (ref 2, app A) to plan, con-duct, and report on the Preliminary Airworthiness Evaluation(PAE) of the UH-60A configured with the ESSS.

TEST OBJECTIVE

3. The objective of the PAE was to obtain limited level flightperformance data for use by the AVRADCOM Directorate for Develop-ment and Qualification to determine if the UH-60A with the ESSSinstalled meets the self deployment capability requirement.

DESCRIPTION

4. The test helicopter, UH-60A Black Hawk US Army S/N 77-22714,was configured with the ESSS (photo 1). The ESSS for the BlackHawk consists of the airframe fixed provisions and the externalstores subsystem. The external stores subsystem is comprised ofa horizontal stores support, two support struts, and two verticalstores pylons for each side of the aircraft. The pylons aredesigned to accommodate 450 gallon fuel tanks at the inboardstations and 230 gallon fuel tanks at the outboard stations. Allstores stations are designed to permit jettison of loads. Afuel transfer system was not installed in the test aircraft. Adescription of the standard UH-60A Black Hawk can be found inthe operator's manual (ref 3, app A) and a more detailed descrip-tion of the ESSS is included in appendix B.

d • TEST SCOPE

5. The PAE was conducted at the Sikorsky Flight Test Facility

at West Palm Beach, Florida (elevation 28 feet) and consisted oflevel flight performance testing. A total of 26 flights wereconducted between 4 December 1982 and 26 January 1983 for a totalof 20.2 productive flight hours. SA calibrated and maintained

I~i 1

I-..• • : .. • .', • . • .. • ,.• . .. :': . . •' . . : . •• .•. . • -• ." -• .. _ - _= ' . '

'9

1�09-I

4-I0

1w

0C-,

C(V

I-

S.'

0CL

'a

ta

Ca(a

'Va)

"4Id-I-4'V0

a)44

C9.4

'C0'0

-4

P 0'C

2S

- - - -t -� -� 5�. 5�. - S -

all test instrumentation and performed all required maintenanceon the test helicopter. Flight restrictions and operatinglimitations observed during the PAE are contained in the opera-tor's manual (ref 3, app A) and the airworthiness release (ref 4,app A). Testing was conducted in accordance with the test plan(ref 5, app A) at the conditions shown in table 1. Theseconditions were based on the requirements of the Material NeedDocument (ref 1, app A).

TEST METHODOLOGY

6. Flight test data were obtained from test instrumentationdisplayed on the instrument panel and recorded on magnetic tapeinstalled in the aircraft. A detailed list of test instrumenta-tion is contained in appendix C. Established flight testtechniques and data analysis procedures used are described inappendix D.

II

3 -1

0'4

c C a C ' *44C0 C0 C-4 0

C)

m4 f. r.42 4 0en

>1 72 0 0- 10' ~ '

4 to 4' cc~

i7. u. 00 6' 0 t. -

- -- o

"ca' *'

I- "

Ld 0r vc T. -V' c -U

tic c C4 L.

0 ýcc z~ .. -

Goo Q 0 r c c 0 2 a .c '

ý a 4 CC Ci C

r- E

1.3 003 L A V4i - l

c 0 0 C Q. 'V,CV* C CC

~~l .4 ,>j L. N . a

-4~ 0C~ -1LPC C

cc C Yc

NL

l

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

GENERAL

7. Limited level flight performance and flight control position

data were obtained for the UH-60A Black Hawk helicopter in threeconfigurations (fixed provisions, original ESSS and modified ESSS)with various external stores installed. The flight tests were 5conducted at the Sikorsky Aircraft Division of United Technologies"Flight Test Center in West Palm Beach Florida. Test site elevationwas 28 feet. The aircraft was flown in ball-centered flight at

.. a referred rotor speed of 258 RPM. The maximum range in the selfdeployment ferry mission configuration (original ESSS with fourtanks) was calculated by AVRADCOM using the power required datacontained in this evaluation. This range was determined to be1176 nautical miles using a cruise climb flight profile and thecriteria in the Material Need Document (ref 1, app A).

LEVEL FLIGHT PERFORMANCEp

General

8. Initally, level flight performance tests were conducted in thefixed provisions configuration to provide a baseline to comparewith the Airworthiness and Flight Characteristics (A&FC) Evalua-tion test results. Additional tests were conducted to determinethe change in drag of the UH-60 helicopter configured with theoriginal ESSS and with various stores installed. A modifiedESSS with four tanks was also tested. These tests were conductedat the conditions of table 1. The data obtained were concentratedat thrust coefficients (CT'S) of approximately 0.007, 0.008,and 0.009. Test techniques and data analysis methods are describedin appendix D. Installed engine power and fuel flow for the

Black Hawk were derived by AVRADCOM from General Electric (GE)engine deck number 80024, dated 26 February 1981 using installedlosses determined by AVRADCOM. All power required data werecorrected by an estimate for drag of external test instrumenta-tion and nonstandard aircraft equipment and for instrumentationelectrical power consumption. All estimates for drag of theseexternal items were provided by SA. The test results from theA&FC Evaluation of the UH-60A in the normal utility configura-tion (ref 6, app A) were normalized to the PAE test aircraft.These results were used as the basis for evaluating the effectsof drag for the various configurations tested since the A&FCFinal Report constitutes the broadest range of available perfor-mance data verified by flight test. An unexplained increase inpower required was found between the PAE test aircraft and theaircraft used for the A&FC. A maximum range of 1176 nautical.miles was determined by AVRADCOM, using the data from

5I

this report, the latest self deployment ferry mission configur-"ation, the criteria of the Material Need Document (ref 1, app A),and power required for a cruise climb and level flight cruise atthe maximum range cruise airspeeds. This exceeds the 1150 naut--cal mile range required for the self deployment ferry mission.

Fixed Provisions Configuration

9. The fixed provisions configuration consisted of the BlackHawk in the normal utility configuration with the addition ofthe fixed ESSS mounting provisions enclosed by the fixed pro-visions fairings (fig. 1, and photos 2 and 3, app B). Levelflight performance data was obtained on four flights, two ofwhich (CT f 0.007286 and 0.008014) were conducted with theBlack Hawk standard stabilator schedule but with the ship systempilot's airspeed input to the stabilator amplifier replaced bythe boom (test) system airspeed. These flights were repeated andall subsequent tests conducted with a modified stabilator schedule(fig. 2, app B) and an increased electrical time delay in the

stabilator amplifier incorporated. In addition, the airspeedinputs to the stabilator amplifiers were returned to the standardBlack Hawk configuration and the ship system airspeed probesrotated inboard 15 degrees about an axis normal to their mounting

pad. The power required for level flight was the same forboth stabilator schedules.

10. The power required for the fixed provisions configurationwas expected to be equal to the A&FC test results with the addi-tion of the fixed provisions drag estimate of 0.78 ft 2 changein equivalent flat plate area (AFe). Initially, a significant

* amount of additional drag was found, approximately 7.5 ft 2

6Fe at high speeds. This amount was considered too large forthis small configuration change and led to additional flighttests to verify the boom airspeed system position error providedby SA. The calibration was found to be incorrect and the error"accounted for about 3 ft 2 of the drag increase. Other corrections

described in paragraph 6, appendix D were applied to the A&FCdata used as the baseline for this comparison and resulted infurther reducing the difference to approximately 3 ft 2 at anadvance ratio of 0.28 (approximately 120 knots true airspeed(KTAS)). The AFe determined for the fixed provisionsconfiguration varied with airspeed. A summary of AFe at thisadvance ratio of all the configurations tested is presented infigure 1, appendix E. The fairing presented in figure 2,appendix E was derived from all the fixed provisions data,figures 3 through 6, and includes the still unexplained increasein power required between the PAE test aircraft and that ofthe A&FC aircraft in the same configuration. A performance

6

iz

evaluation should be conducted on a late production UH-60A

helicopter to determine if this power required increase is uniqueto the PAE test aircraft.

Original ESSS with Four Tanks Configuration

11. The original ESSS with four tanks configuration consists ofthe horizontal and vertical stores support systems (wing andpylons) and ejector rack assemblies with two 450 gallon fueltanks mounted on the inboard store positions and two 230 gallonfuel tanks mounted on the outboard store positions (fig. 1, andphotos 6 and 7, app B). Five flights were conducted in thisconfiguration. Three were flown to determine Or effects at alongitudinal center of gravity (CG) of fuselage station (FS)350. The other two were flown at the forward CG limit, FS 343.This was to provide data over the range of CTs expected for theferry mission as well as longitudinal CG effects. The flightsat the limit forward CG were conducted near the same CT but atdifferent test conditions that were representative of the actualferry mission.

"12. Figure 7, appendix E presents a summary of the change in dragfrom the normal utility to the original ESSS with four tanks"configuration. The AFe varied with airspeed and CT. Figures 8,9, and 10 present the nondimensional data derived from the dimen-sional test data presented in figures 11 through 15. The dragincrease for the ESSS with four tanks configuration was found tobe higher than the amount predicted by SA, especially at thehigh CT (approximately 0.0090), where much of the ferry missionflight profile is flown.

13. Test data was obtained to determine the effect on powerrequired of changing the aircraft CG from FS 350.0 to the forwardlimit CG FS 343.0. The data used to evaluate these effects wereobtained on two flights: one at a heavy gross weight (24,580 Ib)and a low density altitude (1380 ft); and the other at a lightergross weight (17,960 lb) and a higher altitude (10,740 ft). Theresults of these limited tests were inconclusive (figs. 14 and 15,"app E). Sufficient testing should be accomplished in the ESSSconfiguration to define the change in power required by changesin aicraft CG.

Modified ESSS with Four Tanks Configuration

14. Si a the aircraft in the original ESSS with four tanksconfig -tion was not expected to meet the required ferry missionrange, modification to reduce the drag of the ESSS was inr~or-porate. -y SA. The modified ESSS with four tanks configuration

7

was the same as the original ESSS configuration described inparagraph 11 except for fairings added to the vertical storessupport system (pylons) to cover the ejector racks and extendfrom the original fairing to the top of the fuel tanks (photos 8and 9, app B). Four flights at CTs near those obtained for theoriginal ESSS data were conducted to determine if the drag wasreduced and to evaluate the overall drag change form the normalutility configuration. Figure 16, appendix E presents a summaryof the change in drag from the normal utility to the modified ESSSconfiguration. Figures 17 through 19 present the nondimensionaldata derived from the dimensional test data presented infigures 20 through 23. The AFe was again found to vary withairspeed and CT, similar to the data for the original ESSSconfiguration. The drag was substantially reduced at the lowCTs but only slightly reduced (approximately 0.7 ft 2 AF ) atCT - 0.009 and 120 KTAS. A comparison at this air speed o? theoriginal and modified ESSS AFe data over the range of CTstested is presented in figure 1, appendix E.

Original ESSS with no Stores and with Two Tank Configurations

15. Data were also obtained for the original ESSS with no stores(horizontal and vertical stores support systems with no stores)(photo 4, app B) and the original ESSS with two 230 gallon fueltanks installed at the outboard store positions (photo 5, app B).Figure 24, appendix E presents a summary of AFe from the normalutility configuration for these two configurations. The non-dimensional data for the two tank configurations are presentedin figures 25, 26 and 27 and the dimensional data for both con-figurations are presented in figures 28 through 32. The&Fe determined for both of these configurations were found tovary with airspeed and not with CT as with the four tank data(fig. 1, app E). The AFe for the original ESSS with no storesand with two tanks at approximately 120 KTAS was 11.8 ft 2 and14.2 ft 2 , respectively.

Self-Deployment Ferry Mission Range Estimate

16. The self deployment ferry mission ranges were calculated byAVRADCOM for the original and modified ESSS with four tanksconfigurations. These ranges were based oft the requirements ofthe Material Need Document (ref I, app A) and the data from theA&FC final report plus the AFe determined for each configuration.Estimates for the drag of a "hover infrared suppressor" and mainrotor deice equipment were also included. These items were notinstalled on the PAE test aircraft. Five nautical miles wereadded to the range estimate for the descent from 10,000 ft atthe end of the mission. The unexplained increase in the power

8

required between the PAE and A&FC test aircraft was ignored forthis calculation. The maximum range for the original ESSS withfour tanks using these criteria was 1176 nautical miles. Thisexceeds the 1150 nautical mile range required for the selfdeployment ferry mission. The maximum range for the modifiedESSS with four tanks was determined to be 1207 nautical milesfor these same criteria.

INHERENT SIDESLIP

17. The inherent sideslip angles were measured during all testflights. No consistent difference was found between configurationsbut the inherent sideslip did vary with CT. The data from allthe test flights were grouped according to CT and plots forinherent sideslip, (figures 33 and 34) were developed. Theinherent sideslip characteristics for the PAE test aircraft wereI to 3 degrees closer to zero sideslip than the A&FC test aircraftat high speeds. This unexplained difference was t,"cn intoaccount when normalizing the A&FC data for use in .s report(para 7, app D).

HANDLING QUALITIES

Control Positions in Level Flight

18. Control positions in ball centered level flight were obtainedin conjunction with the level flight performance data. The datafrom selected flights at each aircraft configuration tested arepresented in figures 35 through 39. The trends of controlpositions with airspeed were similar to those of the standardUH-60A.

-a 49

CONCLUSIONS

19. Based on the PAE of the UH-60A helicopter in the configura-tions tested, the following conclusions were reached:

a. Based on an AVRADCOM analysis using the power requireddata obtained from this report, the UH-60A in the original ESSSwith four tanks configuration exceeds the 1150 nautical milerange required for the self deployment ferry mission (para 15).

b. There is an unexplained increase in the power requiredfor level flight between the PAE test aircraft and the testresults from the A&FC Evaluation of the UH-60A heliocpter(para 10).

c. The modification to the ESSS reduced the drag of theUH-60A in the ESSS configuration, especially at thrust coeffi-cients less than 0.009 (para 14).

d. The inherent sideslip of the PAE test aircraft was I to3 degrees less left sideslip than the test aircraft used duringthe A&FC (para 17).

10

RECOMMENDATIONS

20. Sufficient testing should be accomplished in the ESSS withfour tank configuration to determine the change in power requiredby changes in aircraft CG (pars 13).

21. A performance evaluation should be conducted on a lateproduction UH-60A helicopter (para 10).

.4.!

I

Iq

II

i ". . .i. . r i i T ... . T. .. . .T . .. . i . . . . I I I i i . . .

APPENDIX A. REFERENCES

1. Document, TRADOC, ATCD-B, UH-60A Blackhawk Material Need,Production, updated (HN)(P) (U), Action Control Number 10705,-.August 1979, with change dated 13 December 1980.

2. Letter, AVRADCOM, DRDAV-D, 5 November 82, subject: Preliminary.jAirworthiness Evaluation of the UH-60A Configured with theExternal Stores Support System (ESSS), with revision I dated .'

23 November 82. (Test Request) .4

-A

3. Technical Manual, TM55-1520-237-10, Operator's Manual, .4UH-60A Helicopter, Headquartaers Department of the Army, 21 May1979, with change 19, dated 3 February 1983.

4. Letter, AVRADCOM, DRADAV-D, 12 January 1983, subject: Air-worthiness Release for the Conduct of a Preliminary AirworthinessEvaluation of a UH-60A Configured with the External StoresSupport System (ESSS), Project No. 82-14, with revision 2 dated12 January 1983.

5. Test Plan, USAAEFA Project No. 82-14, Preliminary Airorthi-nees Evaluation of the UH-60A Configured with the External StoreeSupport System, 26 November 82.

6. Final Report, USAAEFA Project No. 77-17, Airworthinese andFlight Characteristics Evaluation; UH-60A (Black Hawk) He i-copter, September 1981, unpublished.

.4

12

WI

•: r~-# 7_, o -. . = . • .. .= .- .= . • .: ~ o o. .- , • - -J = .* O -o ~ ° .- ~ . -. -

APPENDIX B. DESCRIPTION

1. The UH-60A is a twin engine, single main rotor configuredhelicopter with nonretractable wheel-type landing gear. A movablehorizontal stabilator is located on the lower portion of thetail rotor pylon. The main and tail rotor are both four-bladedwith a capability of manual main rotor blade and tail pylonfolding. The cross-beam tail rotor with composite blades isattached to the right side of the pylon. The tail rotor shaft iscanted 20 degrees upward from the horizontal. Primary missiongross weight is 16,260 pounds and maximum alternate gross weightis 20,250 pounds. The UH-60A is powered by two General ElectricT700-GE-700 turboshaft engines having an installed thermodynamicrating (30 minute) of 1553 SHP (power turbine speed of 20,900 RPM)each at sea level, standard-day static conditions. Installeddual-engine power is transmission limited to 2828 SHP. The air-craft also has an automatic flight control and a command instru-ment system. The test helicopter, UH-60A US Army SIN 77-22714was manufactured by SA, and is the first production Black Hawk.The main differences between t*- test aircraft and a standardUH-60A consist of special test instrumentation (app C), modifieddoor jettison system (photo 1), nonstandard gunners windows(photo 2), and airframe fixed provisions for the ESSS. A fueltransfer system was not installed in the test aircraft.

2, The ESSS consists of the airframe fixed provisions and theremovable external stores subsystem. The ESSS was designed toenable the UH-60A to carry external stores such as auxiliaryfuel tanks or various weapons systems.

3. The airframe fixed provisions (fig. 1, and photos 2 ond 3)are the fuselage attachment structure required for the installa-tion of the removable external stores subsystem. The removableexternal stores subsystem (fig. 1 and photo 4) consists of the

horizontal store support which is a composite boxed I-beam struc-ture, the support struts (two on each wing) and the verticalstores pylons (two on each wing) all of which are enclosed withthin aluminum fairings. Ejector racks were mounted on thevertical stores pylons at a 4* nose up angle with reference tothe aircraft water line. Model MAU-40 ejector racks were in-stalled at the inboard and outboard stores stations.

4. The test aircraft was configured with various portions of the1 4 external range fuel system, which included two 230 gallon external

fuel tanks on the outboard pylons (photo 5) and a combination ofI the two 230 gallon tanks with two 450 gallon fuel tanks on theinboard pylons (photos 6 and 7). Aluminum fairings were addedbetween the vertical stores pylon fairings and the auxiliarytanks (photos 8 and 9) for certain flights.

.3

* . B_ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.4

*1

I �ib C

'I

NU

Co

0Co

'a

IU-'

0

N -IJ 0

'a0

'U

14

'I

-a,

-m

�1 S . . � - S

Photo 2. UH-60A ESSS Fixed Provisions Configuration(Fairings Installed)

15

. ..

LU

0 LU

40 4A

4A'

> .

0of0

LU

IL.

16

-4

Photo 3. tJH-60A ESSS Fixed Provisions Configuration

(Fairings Removed)17

040

'41

41.

I

6

'V a0

-4

0hi

i4.4

0I U

M

0I-

6'I

C,.'

'-I0 1

-4

-II.'

0

GJ

'a

I0

I0

er

j

19 *1

I

20

II

=~4.4

411

-4j

IdI

Ad.

I 21

i.II

V.4

I.V

4b4

Ci.,Il~

222

4);:I

'4.-'°

0"

oA

I-

22 ."

II

II

q

be I'4.'

0C..,

i *1

I-ibe

0

4.,

II

C,,C,,C,,

a, 4.p4

*1

4.9

.4.'

0%

o'I0

4'

4

23

5. The first two flights of the PAE were flown with the standardBlack Hawk stabilator schedule and ship system airspeed probeorientation but with the ship system pilot's input to thestabilator replaced by the boom system airspeed. Theses flightswere conducted in the fixed provisions configuration. Afterthese two flights were completed, the gain control module of the "stabilator amplifiers were modified to increase the electricaltime delay to 3 seconds and change the stabilator schedule(stabilator incidence angle bias with collective control position)in the test aircraft. The modified stabilator schedule ispresented in figure 2. The airspeed inputs to the stabilator .2were returned to the standard Black Hawk configuration; thecopilot's ship system airspeed providing the input to the No. Istabilator amplifier and the pilot's ship system airspeedproviding the input to the No. 2 stabilator amplifier. Alongwith the stabilator control modifications, the orientation ofboth ship system airspeed probes was changed by rotating bothprobes inboard 15 degrees about an axis normal to their mountingpad.

6. Several external modifications were made to the test aircraftfor instrumentation or safety. These modifications were not partof the ESSS modifications or a standard UH-60A. Drag estimatesfor these items totalled 3.68 ft 2 of equivalent flat plate area.Each item is listed below:

ITEM

Tail rotor slip ring assemblyMain rotor slip ring assemblyAirspeed boomInstrumented main rotor blade (1)Ambient air temperature sensorTelemetry antennaTail rotor junction plateExternal instrumentation wiringEmergency crew door handlesNon-standard gunner's window

24

7. 4 1

.- ~ F6 -

tn IF

L L.r %:.

L t 'K L .*--~-. - L -- Id U -. ....

257

APPENDIX C. INSTRUMENTATION

GENERAL

1. The test instrumentation was installed, calibrated and main-tained by the SA personnel. A specially constructed boom, witha swiveling pitot-static tube and angle of attack and sideslipvanes, was installed at the nose of the aircraft. The boomdesign (photo 1) allowed takeoffs and ground handling ease atheavy gross weights without damaging the pitot-static tube.Figure 1 presents the position error correction for the boom

airspeed system. Major external instrumentation items such asthe airspeed boom and main and tail rotor slipring assemblies pare shown in photo 1. Data was obtained from calibrated instru-mentation and displayed or recorded as indicated below.

Pilot Panel

Airspeed (boom) jAltitude (ship's)"Altitude (radar)Rate of climb*"Rotor speed (sensitive)Engine torque * **Turbine gas temperature * **Power turbine speed (N )* **

Gas producer speed (Ng)* **Control positions

LongitudinalLateralDirectionalCollective

Horizontal stabilator positionTurn and slip indicator*

Copilot Panel

Event switchAirspeed*

' Altitude*Rotor speed*Engine torque* **

Engineer Panel

Fuel remainingInstrumentatlon controls

*Ship's system/not calibrated

* *Both engines

26

Free air temperatureTiwe code displayRtn numberEvent switch

2. Data parameters recorded on board the aircraft include thefollowing:

Digital (PCM) Data Parameters

Airspeed (boom)Altitude (boom)Total air temperatureRotor speedGas generator speed **

Power turbine speed**Engine mass fuel flow**Engine fuel used**Engine output shaft torque**Turbine gas temperature**Ma 4 n rotor shaft torqueMain rotor shaft temperatureTail rotor shaft torqueLateral acceleration at CG (sensitive)Stabilator positionControl positions

Longitudinal cyclicLateral cyclicDirectional pedalCollective

AftiLudePitch

RollHeading

Linear accelerationCenter of gravity normalCenter of gravity lateralCenter of gravity longitudinal

Angle of sideslipAngle of attackTime of dayRun numberPilot event

Engineer event

**Both engines

27

"~o.

3. Calibrations of the engine torque sensor systems in an enginetest cell were not accomplished. The typical engine run sheetsprovided by the manufacturer for the engine were substituted forthese calibrations. Figures 2 and 3 present the "calibrations" :.

used to determine engine torque.

.1 11,I

28

, a

1..r

28!

, *

---- --.. .* .*.*. -..-..--..--.* .. * *. ** _ ___

a 0

CA

41i

41J

adE

29I

* . FIGURE I

* .;~.- BO.OMr SYSTEM APHSPEED CALIBRATON IN LEVEL . . .f

UH-60A UOSA S/NT 77-2271C.

MROSS LOCATION DENSITY ROT~OR.. IN_ WEI6H _LONG. LAT ALTITUDE S Y S ES

_ LB) (FS) (BL) .(FT) (0 C) (RPM)6506 18a .X3500' .. 5 FIL~SQ SONLY11

_16,000 349.6 0.0 9680. 3.5 252 MODIFIED ESSS WITH.'FOUR-TANKS:

NOTE: 1. SH4ORT DASHED LINE ItlDiCATES EXTRAPOLAIETd

. . FAIRI1MJG USED A.S.-PQS-IT1.ON -ERROR -;CAL tBRAT ION4

Cc,7

--- ----- --

7- .- - _t7 -_ -

a - .7 .

loo- ... . . . . 7.Me _ _ _

---- ------ -- 7 -_ _-7-_ F

oI ../....

m.0 4 60 80 _100 10 4 - 1O

I NSTRUr1ifNT CORP.ECUEE AIRSPEED (K'N0_tS_) m 7I7

F~ w AtBiE:2._____

7~7T~' . ~ER:*K>BM7IoA_

:2i. -ENGEfINE OUTPUT SPEED 2 ,900'RPM '.:

I L L

0It

U~~~ ~ ---------------------

__ 7.- .2 0I0 . -S 0

_31-

NOP- 1:.,TA;WAND-R :ENGINEll-

I ' m

I'--7--4-

* I4

110.1

EWGM. W-tO FT.?U

~-~-4OO - I32

APPENDIX D. TEST TECHNIQUES AND DATAANALYSIS METHODS

GENERAL

1. Level flight performance and control positions in level flightwere obtained in coordinated (ball-centered) flight and comparedwith the test results of the A&FC Evaluation of the UH-60A (BlackHawk) helicopter (ref 6, app A). Referred rotor speed was main-tamned constant for all tests at 258 RPM. Longitudinal CG wasallowed to vary ±1.0 inch during each test flight but foreach data set, (consisting of several flights in the same aircraftconfiguration at different thrust coefficient values) the averagecg location was maintained constant near the proposed missionvalue. The data were analyzed to determine the power requireddifferences between the various aircraft configurations and theA&FC in terms of changes in equivalent flat plate area(AFe).

Aircraft Weight and Balance

2. The test aircraft was weighed at the start of the test programwith all instrumentation installed, full oil and fuel drained inthe fixed provisions configuration. The initial weight of theaircraft was 12,068 pounds with the longitudinal CG located atFS 358.9 and the lateral cg located at BL 0.2. The aircraft wasweighed in several other configurations periodically during thetest. It was not possible to weigh the aircraft at the 24,500pound gross weight since the only scales available required theaircraft to be supported at its Jack points. The aircraft weightat the tail Jack point exceeded the 5000 pound Jack point limit.The fuel cells and external sight gauges were calibrated using acalibrited flow meter. The fuel weight for each test flight wasdetermined prior to and after each flight using these externalsight gauges to determine the fuel volume and measuring thespecific gravity of the fuel.

Level Flight Performance

3. The engine output shaft torque was determined by use of theengine torque sensor. The output shaft horsepower was determinedfrom the engine output shaft torque and rotational speed by thefollowing equation:

2w (N ) QSHP - p (1)

33,000

33

Where:

Q - Engine output shaft torque (ft-lb)

Np - Engine output shaft rotational speed (Rfii)

33,000 - Conversion factor (ft-lb/min)/SHP

4. The level flight performance was generalized through the useof nondimensional coefficients as follows using the 1968 U.S.standard atmosphere:

SHP (478935.3)Cp

P

__ J oA(2)

CT - GW (91.19)

N 126 _ AR2 (3)

V (16.12)T

NR

I! R r (4)

Changes in engine power coefficient due to changes in flat platearea were determined using the following equation:

AFe t3:

AC ()P 2A (5)

.,.

Where:% Pa

6 - Pressure ratio =:' Pa

. '. 3 4

.d

P0o 0.0023769 slugs/ft 3

A HMain rotor disk area - 2262.02 ft 2

R -Main rotor radius - 26.833

PA - Ambient pressure in.-Hg

Pa - 29.92126 in. -Hg0

OAT + 273.156 - Temperature ratio = 288.15

OAT - Ambient air temperature (*C)

NR - Main rotor speed (rev/min)

478935.3 - Conversion factor (ft-lb-sec 2 -rev3 /min 3-SHP)

91.19 - Conversion factor (sec 2-rev2 /min 2

16.12 - Conversion factor (ft-rev/min-kt)

AFe - Change in equivalent flat plate area (ft 2 )

S- Advance ratio

5. Each speed power was flown in ball centered flight by referenceto the ship's turn and bank indicator at a predetermined thrustcoefficient (CT) and referred rotor speed (NR/V). Both thepilot's and copilot's turn and bank indicators were checked foralignment with the aircraft positioned in a level attitude. Tomaintain the ratio of gross weight to pressure ratio (W/8) con-stant, altitude was increased as fuel was consumed. To maintainNR//e constant, rotor speed was varied as appropriate for theambient air temperature. Corrections to power required weremade for the installation of test instrumentation. The powerconsumption fcr the electrical operation of the instrumentationequipment was measu.ed and determined to be 2.73 SHP and subtrac-ted from the power required data. The effects of the externalinstrumentation and nonstandard aircraft equipment were estimatedby SA to be the equivalent of 3.68 ft 2 of flat plate area.Paragraph 5, appendix B, lists the items included for thisestimate.

35

......................................

I -I-. . ... . - . . .

6. Test-day level flight data was corrected to standard dayconditions by the f.ollowing equations:

[ R

SHP SHPs

Suscit t N TeI a

i s S

"-N-

VTa -VT _8-

t (7) !

Whe re:

$ubscribt t - Test day :

Subscript s - Standard day "

Test data corrected for instrumentation drag and corrected tostandard altitude and ambient temperature are presented infigures 3 through 6, 11 through 15, 20 through 23 and 28 through32 appendix E.

7. The data obtained for three configurations (the original ESSSwith two and four fuel tanks installed and the modified ESSS withfour fuel tanks) were analyzed by use of a three dimensional plotfor each configuration. The power required data was plotted asa function of airspeed in terms of Cp versus u at a constantCT. These curves were then joined by lines of constant pto form the carpet plot. The reduction of this carpet plot to afamily of curves of CT versus Cp, for a constant u value, allowsdeLermination of the power required as a function of airspeedfor any value of CT. Except for one flight at a Or - 0.009033in the modified ESSS with four fuel tank configuration, lor'gi-tudinal cg was maintained constant within each data set. Foruse in the carpet plot the power required data for this one

flight was reduced by an amount, using equation 5, where

36

*-1

* .*. t * - . . . . . . . . ..-

AFe- 1.1 ft 2, This value was estimated from data availablein the A&FC final report (ref 6, app A). The data obtained forthe rest of the configurations tested (the original ESSS with nostores, original ESSS with four fuel tanks with the aircraftlongitudinal cg at FS 343.0 and the fixed provisions) wereanalyzed by calculating an equl.alent flat plat area changebetween the data points and a baEeline fairing using equation 5.

8. The baseline fairing used to determine the difference betweenthe fixed provisions configuration data and the normal utilityconfiguration data of the A&FC consisted of three elements. Thenondimensional data of the A&FC final report (ref 6, app A) atNR/4'• - 258 RPM was used as the starting point. Then thepower required data was corrected from a zero sideslip trim con-dition of this data plot to ball-centered trim conditions byusing the inherent sideslip of the PAE test aircraft (figs. 33and 34, app E). The power required due to sideslip relationshipwas assumed to be the same as that found for the A&FC test air-craft. Figure 46, appendix E, of the A&FC final report (ref 6,app A) was used to correct this dataý Finally, a power requiredincrease equivalent to A F - 0.5 ft" (estimated by the SA) waseadded because of an infrared jammer and chaff dispenser mountingbracket installed on the PAP test aircraft but not included inthe A&FC test aircraft normal utility configuration. Theseare part of the proposed self deployment ferry mission. Thefollowing equation illustrates the components that determinedthe baseline for the fixed provisions configuration:

C -C+PpFP. Baseline PA&FC Psideslip PAE FIR Jammer (8)

Where:

CP - Baseline power coefficient for fixed provi-F.P. Baseline sions only configuration

CPAF A&FC power coefficient at zero sideslip trim conditionA&FC

CP p - Power coefficient for conversion from zerosideslip PAE sideslip to ball-centered trim condition,

based on PAE sideslip data

Cp - Power coefficient for infrared jammer and chaffIR Jammer dispenser mounting bracket not included in A&FC

normal utility configuration

37

. .... . ..- . . . . ... . . . .

The difference between this baseline and the flight test data forthe fixed provisions configuration was expected to be 0.78 ft 2

of equivalent flat plate area (estimated by SA). The test resultsshowed a AFe in excess of the expected amount and to be depen-dent on airspeed (fig. 2, app E). A line was faired through allthe fixed provisions data to represent a partially unexplaineddifference between the two test aircraft. This fairing was usedas one of the factors in determining a baseline for the restof the data obtained in the remaining aircraft configurations.

9. Up to six elements were used to determine a baseline for thedata obtained in the ES£S only, original ESSS with two and fourfuel tank, and modified ESSS with four fuel tank configurations.The first three elements were the same as those described inparagraph 8 (i.e. Cp A&FC, ACPsideslip PAE and ACplR Jammer). Then

the fairing through the data in figure 2, appendix E was appliedto correct for the difference between the A&FC and the PAE levelflight power required. Kext, the drag estimate 0.78 ft 2 for thefixed provisions configuration was subtracted since the fixedproviaions fairings are not used wiith any of the ESSS configura-Lions and this estimate is included in the Cp A&FCPAterm

(para 8). ThLe sixth element was an estimate for the differencein longitudinal eg location of the test data with the A&FCcarpet plot (FS 347.0). This was applied as appropriate foreach data set. The following equation shows the six elementsthat are included in the baseline for these data sets.

Pbaseline " A&FC + Cpsideslip PAE CpIR Jammer (9)+ CpC +

PA&FC-PAE PO.78 1Fcg

Where:

CPb n Baseline power coefficient that includes allbaseline necessary corrections to compare similar data

between the A&FC and PAE test results

CP - Same as described in paragraph 8

CPd p Same as described in paragraph 8sideslip PAE

CP ae Same as described in paragraph 8IR Ja mr

38

CPA-. Power coefficient attributed to differenceA&FC-PAE between A&FC and PAE data.

CP = Power coefficient determined for fixed provisions drag.78 estimate of AFe - 0.78 ft 2

CP - Power coefficient determined for aircraft cgACG location difference

10. The specific range (SR) data for each level flight performancetest were derived from the test level flight power required andfuel flow (Wp). Selected level flight performance SHP and fuel

t"

flow data for each engine were referred as follows:

SHPtSHPREF - (10)

680.5

WFt

WF ___(1

REF - 690.55

A curve fit was subsequently applied to this referred data and

was used as the basis to correct WF to standard day fuel flowt

using the following equation.

WF - WF + AWF (12)8 t

Where:

AWF - Change in fuel flow between SHPt and SHPs

The following equation was used for determination of specificrange.

VTS

SR =

NFs (13)

39

APPENDIX E. TEST DATAINDEX

FigureFigures No.

Summary of Drag Change for VariousConfigurations

Summary of Drag Difference between PAEand A&FC Test Aircraft 2

Dimensional Level Flight Performancefor Fixed Provisions Configuration 3 through 6

Drag Change Summary for Original ESSSwith Four Tanks 7

Nondimensional Level Flight Performancefor Original ESSS with Four Tanks 8 through 10

Dimensional Level Flight Performancefor Original ESSS with Four Tanks 11 through 15

Drag Change Summary for Modified ESSSwith Four Tanks 16

Nondimensional Level Flight Performancefor Modified ESSS with Four Tanks 17 through 19

Dimensional Level Flight Performance forModified ESSS with Four Tanks 20 through 23

Drag Change Summary for Original ESSS Onlyand with Two Tanks 24

Nondimensional Level Flight Performancefor Original ESSS with Two Tanks 25 through 27

Dimensional Level Flight Performancefor Original ESSS with Two Tanks 28 through 30

Dimensional Level Flight Performance

for Original ESSS with no Stores 31 and 32

Inherent Sideslip Characteristics 33 and 34

Control Positions in Level Flight 35 through 39

40

, .. . .. .. ... ... . .. ... . l 1 : i It

1<1a -i mm~ c-. .

- U'4:7UA-S77721

0- ORI1I ...&SWITI -NO, STORES - . 34%.0-;-

~-------~-----&--- NA..--SSSW.IH,-TWO..TAN.KS-- - 3.. O_

* .OR191AL ESSS WITHIFOIJkTANKS __350.0,

NOTES: I.BALL-CENTERED TRIM CGW4DITIOK-* ___-____ - -- -2.DTA -O0TAINED-FRCM F! URES- -2 -THROUGH--32--

3- -AELMN (,F -0) IS THE..A&F-C.-DATA- FOR THE-- ~. - -. NORM-1L UTLILONE-IGURAT!OIIMALIlZEDJ.O_. -

THE PAE TEST AIRCRAFT (INHERENT SIDESLIP - -

*., ...~-, -. -~- -- AND CONFIGURATION DIFFERENCES): -

__.. .- 4. _.AlFT:lATA OBTAINED FROM USAAEFA TEST REPORT____ __ ROJECT 7 7- 17

MODIFIED ESSS WITH.

FOUR TANKS __

--mrn .. ORnNA SllTO21KFfW TAWS

* .. .- . . s----*~ORIGINAL ESSS WInTH K0 STORES.

eb FIXED PROVISIONS.

-~~~~~~~~.... ..~- 6 - - - - ~ - - - ----.-- - -......

3LuJ

7 -- - -

c0 .1 0 1 1

SO . 60. 70- .80 90 :.0 10

41

3ALENEETRMOOI'U -w AN

sj'lf 7ýW-141

..... 4% TU M L .... THUS ...

c I X10

0.08 12 01 0.20 O6,7 8.0 1 4. 2 O~

IZIIIi!iK 1[~.7" DER<A.-I.M3. -- BAS

-- NWLU0 YC14IRTINO42 ZDT

IPIGURE3 -

I k~EVEL FL IGHT' PERFORMANCE, - -.-

-AVGAYG CG AG AVG'- AVG AViý AIRCRAFT9RSS [&i OOT' REERD ,c- _ OJFIGURATIO

L7 EE1GHTF -L0?4 LAT -AL'T=TD ROT-OR 'PWEUM

16, 040' 347.2 :0.:2RA 6580 _11.0: 257.8 70.20 FIXED PROVISIONS

NOTE: BALL CENTERED' TRIM~ COMDITIO'N

00

05.-- . . . . . . .

L 3D _G_ _

4-)I ca- ..

. .- !--u

.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~!ARN OBT---AI-.N- .. ---.-..------ --

Fj . . . . .-4--- ...... A...4.

-TEST REPORT 77-17 ANDFIGURE_ 2 .7 BAEIEDERIVED

-.... - , REPORT'77.17

_40. 60 80 100. 4Žo .140.L--- Ito.

TRUE AIRSPEED (KNOTS)'. .

43

I P~i~ff PRF'O"M~CE .I ______

I:AVG ttIK AVG:~ AVGiA~ AiAVG:- I AW-RjAFTjfif,0CATJ 7O ] ENIT OATF7fEERD C.- COFGRTt>!-

-kO~ TII... -7 RPý

:jJI 347.) m: 7660 . 10.5 258. 72A.6' FIXED.PROVISEOSi- < - .~ -. - ~ . ~ h o ir 1 ~ BALI CE TERED TRI C W IT I00 -

-2-. __ - 2. T8QOMLSYS-TEKi-WASZ-~fA&4TE.!AlpRsPE4-. . .. SOURCE FOR THE NO6 k~ STABILATOR:AMPLtFtER:

- _0 0La

Q. 0 20 0

-- ~~FIGURES 33. AND_34 - - 7

________SIDE'SLIP~I ISTRUMENTATIO~N tW-0P9RA.TiOHA W7 ..

77I . .-

WLJI

I .

____IN -DRIE FRO A

* IL40 6D 8 00 10 10 10

---------- 7 7TREA SEE KOS

- -' .. .FAIRNG DERJED FOM AF44

T I G-ý

-~ . -~-.-LEVEL -FLIGHT PtRFORMANCE____* -, ~~UH-60A USA S/?4 77-227 14 7 ,.

AVG~~~~-~2 AV. •G -A.Li IkcAGROSS' LOCATION DENSITY OAT; REFERRED CT.OffGRTItWEIGT' -LONG LAT ALTITUDE . ROTOR -SPEE.D.

jtFTY-18,000: 346.8 0.2R 6880' 8.5 257.9 80.10 FIXED PROVISIONS

- 2 8.-.. . .*NMT:. - BA.L-CENTERED- ThR'l-cONDIT10NIJ

LL 0 fl).0

0, 10 - . .-- . . . . . .

FIGURAES 33 AND 344

---- 2400 -- ~- -

'46

FIUR -2 - -BAELNEDEIVD.

- .~ -.--- .FROM A&FrCTEST

REPO0RT 77-17

12MI

40 60 80 100 120 140 160

TRUE AIRSPEED (KNOTS)

'45

LVLFLIGHT: PRFORMANCE. V , <K

'AVG CG: AVG ___AVL0CAT-ION- DENSI-TY OAT' R~EFERRED.- C..CIFlGATI~

WEIhT tOG LAW -ALTITUDE "RO'týf -8PtebDJ ..

.17,840 36t . 7680 .13.0G 25 .7.9 8014 FX! _vSiN_7

-- NOTE: 1. BALLCNEE RM QIIK..__ I ______2. THE BOOM SYSTEM WAS USO-Aj T'f ýI4k$p

UJ__SME ORT W -fTA#4A0_R-." IF~ -71

- 0

*SIDESLIP: INSTRUMtEw$TATIO14NTOPAINL -I

L61

Ir F. 7-

1fAIRING DERIVED FROM A&W I .

-FIGUJRE 2*~~_ -I FFIAf

0~ j

4D 60 80 lo -Io

46

:7-

77-7~~- 7:2..

V.~; *Wi~ FOUK TANKS'

I2.

- I-q

7~77 _ -7nL L*ms w~o

.. .. ..... .

......................................

0.08l 0.2 01 .4 .... f Z

i I 7 - -1

a - ..........

. .., .7 1 .* . :

:T.-m~~tVE :-:7:-77 . ._

I -~ -- ~ P -~S~ ~iT~ffF~U~TANKS

~~~ -u:-I- - -- - --.

.... ... 4, RE.. . . . . . . . . . . . .ED.Z.. ..........

0 - KTX.-I- =IV. ____ b pE H1

LL

.77

m .

* ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 7U 7 .- 0 0 1 2

-- 548n 7r 7' = ,-77!=:77= :-7-

......... ~~~~ . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . .. . . . . . . . . .

...................... --l . -----. .....

....... .. ... $ h ~ ... .

U~~~~... - ..-....-- - -. . .- "

.... ... . . . . . . .. .

.'- - ...- ...

*7 .. .... ...-.

- . -- . . . ........

......... -f A M : 1- 7......... ... ... ... ........

--- ..... SO.L-i

I...

.74

m I i aq

-7m= .. .

7 -7- . :-m M- . --M m .L r___....._ _77

- -

L; -" i. ;-r-.

7 -- 7777 7 ... ...

. 1 . . - .

s :i:: ~O ~ ~7L... .7~a.urI~n~.~x-zz.....

577

L - - .1> LEVEL FLI PERFORMANCE' I..w:1-7WI

1~G~ AVG CG AVG AVG AVG' v ~ I -

LOATON ENTY OAT REFERRED C_ _OFGRAIý

-LNG .*LAT_ ALTITUDE_ . MOOR SPEtD__

__6.5 &3_9....92 ~~r ES.,

NOT: BLLCENTERED TRIM COND TAN~.

LU -

FUEL FLOW-AL-0..... IlNSTRUNMENTATION NOT O~PERATLONAL____

UI-

*C 4= -80

3-2-. FAIRING DERIVED D FROMFIGURES 3ShOGH1 :

1--- FAIIN DER VE F2ROM.- .-- D RIEVI), FIGURES8 THROUGHE'1

-REPORT 77-17-

7 600l20 .40 60 s0 100 120 140 160

TRUE AIRSPEED (KNJOTS) . w

51

* ~ ~ ~ ~ 7 -T -T- -TrJE 1

- LEVE--t L qlIGHT; PERFRMANCE. . .

-------'-~---------UH60A-S -7-SN79-2271-

_rAYG VAVG ---KV~~~ AVG ~ __

lossr L#G if tflUE OAT RTRPE- t CONFrGURATIION_- ~~ ~ ~~i --- P RTNLE~S.

~ IO4 '3O.~0.2 1.0 3~ 7. 84.Ž WITH FOURTAWK

.2() --.Tx~A~ ETE.R TRIM- CON~DITIONL

7 - --.-------

La-G* -is

* ~ L L .- -. Q

-. . .

N20 -7 1-~ -

~6O--. AIRING OBTAINED FROM.

~ a

--000-I 2() 40 .. 80 JO..........lAO

- - - -------

- . -~ hIrAIRSNGPEED V FRNOMSFIAR 8IHd H1

52 _

FIGURE 137 LEVEL FLIGHT PERFORMANCE . ..-

:A6---AVGLM iCGiiffAV.&.>AQ.GROSS. LOCAflION EST A R~iEE . CT AIRCRAFT

WtIGHT" LONGf -L-AT "ATITLJJE ROTOR -SpEE[ ýT COF Ft~T~d

11-i-960- --349-.- - -G-.2-- -18 740- - 5;--9 t8 W iT--FbtJ- T-A#9tS-

-~ ffl: .... ... - NOTE-:, -BALL- CE14IERED-T-aIWtO=T4-WW -

S- 0 p

020

1.10...;.. . :FAIRING biTAINED MROM..--4

FIGURES 33 AND 34a

~---~-~8 o - -.-- ---f- -. .- - -

- FAIRING DERIVED FROM. .

FIGURES 8 THROUGH 10La/

-.. .. ~! ~ T.C___BASEL-INE --DERIVEDFROM AIF TEST

S...... .. - -.........-- REPORT-77 17

20 4060 8 .-120 '140' L

I ~TRUE AIRSPEE.P (KNOTS) .

53

ILEM R. H TGH

-- ~~*- -WffiJh7-I9U

MW t. 7t_

JIWE- -'AL-N M -m.. . .. . .- -

UL L ---- --

..a .. .. . . .

.. .. .. .

I~j~777' 7 r .. .. .

.. .. .. ....

77-~- 7-77r.7.

.... ......

. ... . .. ... . . ..

INGL -- ~fV6'Pt K T---

9 ' .

!E - .._ ... ...

.

55E

S.. ... . ... .

r X :z:: Z . ... .

*_ * I---r-7777-'----_!.:

*---*:zJ'*'-j

* t-:-?r--~~~............. 4...' -

rJ Al. . 1p

. .. . ......... ... .7. 04 AS 03

AQANflRAI.... ...

t- _ :

'7 56

------ - 7-. . . - -

3 ,~7 t_ _ .~

I I~EVE~.:LIGHT PERFOOMW4E> , 1-_ -b W

V.

f-i- AtLC"t-ERTEMýTMM 7-:-Ttt w--i- -- 4

~I~iL~iii '.. .ID-LATE.RAL4G-74. EFEFW -V g~P~f _:__~ ____

--5_ POINTS -DERIVHD FROM4 FIGUqgE 20 I

-~- - --- CCU10.-

_W 7 . - ---

31 1 -

WO~ -- -

4~~ e .. . . . . . .I7 1 7 .* -----------

. L

*~~ .......... 1.

.T~s.C5.F~~f,'. x, 10 77.

~,57

t 7 1

T WI

K 2. LONGZ "ITUDINL ( 3 )---1 3-L: RCI.D A CG 77---- -<LI

4. "REFtRREd R0TdR sPtE 2 RPMi i.i .45.- POINTS IDRiviD FROT4F1RE-S WGTffROW:'2T

-I--- - -- -

___- ..

I .

S.,.j.:

o .v

.. . . . . .. .. . . .. . . . . .lu Ol

Li

Laa

ai. a . ..

I a

i-60.-- 70 8b 90. .100 1 -- J-

S- I.. .. ~THRUST COVFFICIEKiT,,.CZW. .

58

17F ISURIE:9_ _ _ _ _

7- .1. ............~

-7- -7 22 7Z2-! 1.

1: -4 -REFERRE1LROL4R NE Mf __

.7-::; ~ 2::: :v j.

______f~: I W.. . .- W--..--.T3* ~ ~ ~ .. ..... . . . . . . . .

177

.6~~7 K . - _ _ _ _ _ _

..- ..70 ....

-7~JS 7-FC~14~

..

m : i

~~~~~~ -~ - -7 7 ~ y 7 -------

4E)SITk_ OAT REFERREV' -C _ COJNFP COATION __

' ~OO 349 0J.4 , 'j T 5 ! 257.19 M.0

4i -

A .---- -~

FAI~ ~ RIG 6TIDM

-~- - - -----7

uLu

LALu

LaJ I.RNGFO

~ I '7FIGLJRES 17 THROUGH19 - .

I BASELINE! DERIVED--*vaee ~FROM A&FC TSST.

ERPO7 771i7.

Bo 10-10. L0

*TRUJEAIRSkf-D (KNO-TS).....

60

--II--- - !.7 7 i.--7lii -AUsk-54 V 7227114

"-.:AVG: A19 CG AVG! ANG AL~ __ _ __ _

.1C~IO OAT I ft Wb: i A1R AQI~7~~E~fCQ~NF1.RATO MR

fim'. I r.UI.;!

46z - n a m a m

Al Q .. . ....~~----~ _ _ _

(U. - I_

!LIj

---- -- F~AIRING OBTAINEDFROM4FIGURES 33 AND 34.

-~7 1-.g~

&LIJ.........................................z- . . . -

A7 -7

-~ ~ ~ ~ ~ RPR 7IURS77HR17 ..7

40 608 o ,0 4 6

TREARSED(KOS

-- . . . . . . -- .~6A1

I KEL fGJRE 22 ....'UV FLicGh PERFORMANCE_

; .IjR-60A USA S/N 77-22714

-- Avs--,- -~ -AVG'CG -AVG -AV` GVG - AVGC-ROSS LOCATION DENSITY OAT: REFERRED CT AIRCRA~ft

-WIH-- 1JL4M- -LAT - ALT ITUDE. - - ---- RGTOR- SPEED---- C0NF-IGtJAT4OW-7j:(18) . (ES) (BL) _(FT) (00) (RPI4) x 10~

MODIFIED! ESS"& 2<74 50- 33 4 O1 R 820. - 1.5 _267. 6 90.33 WITH.FO .URý TAMKS

- . NOTE:. BALL CEN4TERED. TRI'M COfADtTIACtL9S~~~ Lila- v-,-

___ ___FAIRING OBTAINED FROM

_3L

iI~CY l FS A3 4

I . 4%

40-: 801JN~EIE

-_ FI-AIJSES17IT.R(KNOT$)-

c~RREC~62

LEE FLGH PERFORKMACLITUH--60A -uSA S/N 77-22714- <;..:

GROSS. LOCATION DENSITY IOAT REFERIREDWE~t1 W.- -LAT: ALItJRQTOR $1PEED' .

--------tSr(D) - (FTý (R~y PM)

4 i..~ ~.-- -OTf BAll -FN~g ltiw tTiiw 1

7 20

:FAIRING OBTAINED FROM"__- .----... FIGLIRES33 AND 34 . .

F----2800--DEIE.FR-M ----__

- . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . - _

H..............................................CA__

FIURES 7THROUG 1 9 RO AM.

1-600-- --

1=200& - --. .

40 60 80 100 120 140 160

- .00TRUE AIRSPEED (KNOTS)

63

(~ ~~~~~ .. ' .- .~; .~ .1 .. - . . .1 .

7 1

-DOM.A _ANGEi StA'rIRY -FOR ORIGP*L ESSS ONLY AND WETH- TWO TANKS

.- -QNIGURATI!0t ýG~ LOCATIOt4 COE-FFCIENT- =

V .ORIGINAL-tsS 469 - -70. mO

347.0O 8-0.24-IfTWtA$S 347.2 _ 90.18

2. tFAIR! G3S DftVM+W -:f ~-THROUGH 27 AHO--31-AW132 -,

-. -* O~THE. ULT CIRATIir- 'AA - --- ORALIZED -TO THE: TEST.-AJRCAFT:

-.- 7 ::-*~1-

j I-

443

4-64

:1:. . . . ..~~.... ....~- _ _ __ _ __ _

-. ý~s ia 1 ..

. .. .....

a .~ -m--W

7- -I7

w a~

P11 Ito* I1

T4- -4hiL

I a...65

r..

*- - .R

NI4DIMESINAL LEVEL FL IGHT PERFORMA14CE a I .___ - UH-60A 'USA 'S/ft1 -?2-9714:7 ___

K- -ONfliG3RTION: -ORI61NAi. ESSS WI-KW + ' I-AL

OES!1 BALL-CENTERED TRI1#1 CONDMtON-.--~-U3. MI LATERAL. W ri

-4- -RE EERRECI.ROTQR-SPEED- =..Z5B RPX'.

. 5. POIkITS DERIVED FROM FIGURES -28ýTHRDUGH 30' V

p0.14 -

0. 1

LI.5

S-30 *.-J

-.. .. ... . I..

-20 -730

*60 :70 80 90 10'I'

I *THRUST COEFFICIENT, c1. X 1()4'

66

.. .--- ------

.1 I IFifU 7 -. 2 7

I.---. F mI

-' ~ ... : .. .... .. IOR ES S.~ EsV r1 0 . . 4

.I AAQ~~~AN Piz 0,1 A%

*k uw IIM i %

PIdtERtVýD FktMF El 20!WMH~Q

I___ AA-

* ~ ~~ ~ h -41%p± . .

-p7- -771

*~~ A - 1

-- ~~~~~ :j- - .. 4.~ ..

-~-0.

I -A -----

70 8go 160 110 ik0

THRUST C0EFFICiENT,: x 10N .. ..

67

I . '~I~RR 28K'

LEVEL Ft.~T RFORMAt4CE .-

ISW 772. 7_

K 7 A~7 <A~~6 i AVG AV.G__ .-. A iA A1RC.RAFL..CROSS _ LOCATtr64 ENSIW ! OAT REFERR.ED Cy CONFIGURATION

LONWFT ~lAT W.ITp~E7 -ROTOR SPEED!

346900 ;940 257.7 70.14 ~~t P OIT~.E9

. ~ !~ NOTE: BALLCENTERED TRIM CW~rrf0T

40 -. - 0. .

4U-- 0A 0

CL 4-.0 .

FAIRING ObfAINEDFROM _ a

FIGURES 33 -AND.34

Z" -. 7..

.17.1

'F I R LN.DRLE RM

~A R-. NG..

uj

'FGRS2ITRUH2

I a4. 0 21'? ..... 1.> 160.

TRU AISPE (KNOTS)

* 68

L f t - ~ ~ ; FhG U R ?9. .

LoCArWIq40ENS flY 1 OAT i RFERRED CC00PtGURATxoit~I AATITUDE .-.. OWSED

-_!~F347_.W__ 6"mI 43601 258. 80.24 "ORIlrtftM.-ES9SS_________ - - - T--t1Ir tw-TNK&rt---

- + .. t . -NOTE: -BALL MUMEE. TRO1IfDTON

%F 7 .C)_ b G > 7

fz A OO~ -

- FAIRIING OBTAINED FROM.'

_7 -47

%U

'FIGURES 25 T UH2

1600 BASELINE.-DERIVTEFRO A&Ft TEST__

40 lt0 00 12 1.406

- . I AIRPEEV (KNOTS).

.......................69

... .. . . ......

-/M -77 227 .4;

OAT .... .. .. .. a::

o~ ~ q .-. .

U ~- !V41:i~

FIIGURES3 25V 34ROGH2

a J m

-T ROU H....

t:t-

40 .. 60. 80) Lie- i -a

TRUE ARS~iPEED (KNOTS)

F4- . - 70

AVG AO:~OSS LOAI'ON 1- DII1 OA RFE

1~ r.

La 3k -- ýSL ~-7 1WT261ST

9c.9

_~ o J

-AND

4 16W7 W-K

...:. .. L __7

I2099

ti~7;;7I277 -- -

*_ A&fC' TE-ST. REPORT: 7 1'

STRUE. Al KSPEWI.A KNOTS)> _

71

- ---.------ ~~~-- -~--- - - --G-r--r--T----i-

IU--0 USA S/NI 77 .47K4

AýV6 -Ak J AVG'AV-.'Ad Utz JAI-Q=S!' LOCATION- ENMITY: OAT; qFERt1.•p WTQfTr gOK LAttq -OT EED t OFSU~rf

;'It• t- J: t;L (JX, -rUm•/I/. 7€'. ::= .-xH'- • ~ i• " : " : . . I . ' . : : . . .. . . - -.. . ... . . .. . . . . . : : . . - : 4 : • ' ' . - - : - : ' * :

17 ,960 34 -.0 0.2R 7300 :10. 0, 298. -.OR

.- _ _ __.. .T E.: -A L L R E D ..i.. .. . ....

I- a

'•:• • • .__ ._ _ __.__- ' 0 " '

F.,,- AIRING OBTAINED .. .

I FIGURES AND:'

-_ ,_... ___ __.: _ _._ _:_ . . . -• . . . _ :. . . i_ : . . - . ., . ' _

i I .- * - .I•- -. . . . . . . :---- . .

i--i-- I~ARIXG.- DERIVED FROM. A&F-C-FINAL. REPORT 77-17 AND

- -�"��".. ....FI U E. ... -.. ... . -....----. ---

. • _ . .... . " . . . . ... . ..- . ... B:-D RLV-ED - .-~ FROMi A&FC TEST

-- ~- - REPORT 77-17 -

F-- - 40 60 80. 100 120 140 160.

TRUE AIRSPEED (KNOTS)

72

: ~~~~~....................... '"-0....... -- :............... " ................. ---..... " ......... -,--' "z_:'

.1 F I~~~ U T ~ 7 '7 7 7 i T F

.7 - -1 7 -I -

rEUt±tAIRINM I UVEU Ff0MI F Er I TTH"J3. 32'ANV. RtETMA~TAIV

* -. -OMALL -Aitt~r I iC,?wF~luiluu, tL.. *--.* :-AOWITfUDNAL- CG W~CAUMON -jHj$ýJ -

_24-MU-1 ATERAI --- _

I.~~D 1- - -

I 00

10 ...... 0...

. .

d qS. ... ... ... . ... 2

so 9 6 It

60 70

THOT.8PIIN, CT-

- . ,73

____ ~FI.tJRE:34 IV L -ANNERVt4T S1D0SLIP ANGLE

IOE:1 :FAIRINCS DERIVED: PROMi FlGtqRES: -4- -r - - THROUGH 32 - N6 AkE REPRES NATIVE.

-,fAL -I KI1 K_ FTIwi

- - ~~LOKGI T4INAL -C4- VOCATIM~4 T-ESTED - -

An-~ W.A E .C -*-*------___

414

* -. -.. ----............... ...... -

.Xv1

- -30 ----- 0.--0

0.34-

- ... .... .

- -- -- - -CT1 X. . -.-- ---TH"T ~ COEFFCIENT

-. ~~.~- -. - --- --- 4 - --.--74

AR -I-

~iLrt t.

- ~..77:i

Gr .. .. .... ..j

It7:- ... ... ...

T .... ..-..

IL 12......

.. .. .. ..

- -7

.. .... ....

-- FBRIT AWPLO F0

it .[,wflrvr k4~"~

: wi VA M 11 9IFL4L~ r;~j~;1~ ~I rFF Fj

fitFjF li

4. j,.61 1.. j

KKi i I

z li F I it

F J

...7........ .

I;IM

I FW i7 1:

it Ti It : i; ;it I; !i i4O

it Ipi i.h~A~rD (FT

-0lL:FKSM0S IN 'LE~E~IH

I:~ AVG "TA/i~2I~AG

LIr OAT) O~ OTIR

L.~ ... - 2ORI INALAS55-; 7ý iWITH TWGQTAKS

.~.B, -ATE BL C --EN IT E.RE D RlCODf

--- -- - ...., . .

.... ... . ---.-

jOj;

----- -- -

1111

iI f- iR 1

AV$ AVG' .. AVG AVG'

Pt Wt 10I? tONG UAT ALT T-l ..'SJ~jUf4.4d

* ~~~0 7 -. 35.2-.RT103S 0.2 12 RT 7. ;~ *- 24* iW * ! S t-P

AMWl8 - 5 .1 RT .94 252 M~ :I~;ES.W.

ILZ _0d~ "1

-- 20

* , - 20

5--

'3--

P Q- - _

ta

* ~..

3i 2

I. ~ 4

70 -0 6 0 100 Ito 140:160.

CAL19RATED AiRsptrt (Kows)

* ~ .A M -G - Y

A ONGA _O1OT jCQT#TfJR.i i .. . ...... ... .

r 143f0 3.4.3 (FWD) 0. 2 -RT !W b6 s zia

A-301 'j~qe 4 FWe) -. ;RT -. 770 - 2t-

r V.

_w 0 a

0

. .. ....... ..

* ~ 7

g6 -

Q. * i

EI z U- J

20 4 1) 9 DO 10 14 6

CAIRAE 2ISIE (KNOTS

APPENDIX F. GLOSSARY

A&7C Airworthiness and Flight Characteristicsapp appendixAVRADCOM US Army Aviation Research and Development

CommandBL buttlineCc center of gravityCT thrust coefficientESSS External Stores Support Systemfig. figureFS fuselage stationft feetGE General ElectricKT knot iKTAS knots true airspeedlb poundPAE Preliminary Airworthiness EvaluationRPM revolutions per minuteSA Sikorsky :rcraft Division of United

TechnologiesSHP shaft horsepowerAFe change in equivalent flat plate area

80

- x- .7%__ --

DISTRIBUTION

Deputy Chief of Staff for Logistics (DALO-Sfl, DALO-AV) 2

Deputy Chief of Staff Operations (DAMO-RQ) I

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel (DAPE-HRS) I

N Deputy Chief of Staff for Research Development and

. Acquisition (DAMA-PPM-T, DAMA-RA, DAMA-WSA) 3

Couptroller of the Army (DACA-ZA) 1

US Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command

(DRCDE-SA, DRCQA-E, DRCDE-I, DRCDE-P) 4

US Army Training and Doctrine Command (ATTG-U, ATCD-T,

ATCD-ET, ATCD-B) 4

US Army Aviation Researeh and Development Command

(DRDAV-DI, DRDAV-EE, DRDAV-EG) 10

US Army Test and Evaluation Command (DRSTE-CT-A,

.j DRSTE-TO-O) 2

US Army Troop Support and Aviation Materiel. Readiness

Command (DRS°TS-Q) 1

US Army Logistics Evaluation Agency (DALO-LEI) I

US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Agency (DRXSY-R, DRXSY-MP) 2

US Army Operational Test and Evaluation Agency (CSTE-POD) 1

US Army Armor Center (ATZK,-CD-TE) 1

US Army Aviation Center (ATZQ-D-T, ATZQ-TSM-A,

ATZQ-TSM-S, ATZQ-TSM-U1) 4

US Army Combined Armn Center (ATZLCA-DM) I

US Army Safety Center (IGAR-TA, IGAR-Library) 2

,a~- .- . . . -- - . .- - - -

US Army Research and Technology Laboratories

(DAVDL-AS, DAVDL-POM (Library)) 2

US Army Research and Technology Laboratories/Applied

Technology Laboratory (DAVDL-ATL-D, DAVDL-Library) 2

US Army Research and Technology Laboratories/Aeromeihanics

Laboratory (DAVDL-AL-D) I

US Army Research and Technology Laboratories/Proplusion

Laboratory (DAVDL-PL-D) 1

Defense Technical Information Center (DDR) 12

US Military Academy (MADN-P) 1

MD(C-TEA (MTT-TRC) 1

ASD/AFXT I

Project Manager, BLACK HAWK (DRCPM-BH) 5

US Army Material Development and Readiness Command

(DRCDE-SA, DRCQA-ST) 4

US Army Aviation Development Test Activity (STEBG-CT) 2

US Army Troop Support and Aviation Materiel Readiness

Command (DRSTS-WC) 2

US Lrmy Infantry Center (ATSH-TSM-BH) 2

US Army Materiel Systems Analysis Agency (DRXSY-AAM) 2

US Army Operational Test and Evaluation Agency

(CSTE-TM-AV) 2

General Electric (Mr. Koon) 2

Sikorsky Aircraft Division, United Technologies

Corporation (Mr. Richard Connor) 5