LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF TABLES
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
1 DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF RUNWAY ANALYSIS
2 FACTORS AFFECTING MTOM AND V-SPEEDS
2.2 THE AERODROME RUNWAY DISTANCES
2.3 CLIMB LIMITATIONS
2.4 OBSTACLE CLEARANCE
2.5 METEOROLOGICAL ELEMENTS
2.5.2 Pressure altitude
2.6 RUNWAY SLOPE
2.7 RUNWAY CONDITION AND CONTAMINATION
2.7.2Effect on aircraft performance33
2.8 TIRE SPEED LIMIT
2.9 BRAKE ENERGY CAPACITY
2.10 AIRCRAFT CONFIGURATION AND SYSTEMS SETTING
2.11 AIRCRAFT STATUS
2.12 BEARING STRENGTH
3 TAKE-OFF DATA OPTIMIZATION PRINCIPLE
3.1 AIRCRAFT CONFIGURATION AND SYSTEMS SETTING
3.2 V1/VR RATIO
3.2.1 v1/vr range
3.2.2 v1/vr ratio influence
3.3 V 2/VSR RATIO
3.3.1 v2/vSR range
3.3.2 v2/vSR ratio influence
3.4 TAKE-OFF DATA DETERMINATION
4 EXISTING RUNWAY ANALYSES PRODUCTS
4.1 AIRCRAFT MANUFACTURER SOFTWARE
4.7 CONCLUSION OF RUNWAY ANALYSES REVIEW
5 RUNWAY ANALYSIS CONCEPTUAL MODEL FOR TAKE-OFF
5.1 INPUT DATA
5.2 MASS TO V1/VR RATIO GRAPH
5.3 OPTIMIZATION PROCESS
5.4 V-SPEEDS EVALUATION
Urbánek, Boris: Runway analysis application for take-off [Master thesis]. Žilina University in Žilina. The Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications; Air Transport Department. Supervisor: Ing. Martin Ma aš, PhD. Level of professional qualification: Master. Žilina, ŽU, F PEDAS, 2012. Range: 72 pages.
The economic situation of recent years forces to operate at highest payloads possible and therefore maximum allowable take-off masses of an aircraft. An optimization of the take-off performance plays then important role much more than ever before. This thesis offers a summary of factors affecting the maximum take-off mass and appropriate take-off speeds, which together represent necessary performance data for a safe take-off. Moreover, particular sections describe a principle of the optimization process and offer a designed conceptual model in a form of flowcharts to obtain these take-off performance data. The data for several flight and ambient conditions are usually presented in so called runway analyses. This paper answers possible questions about their application and computing, which may interest a personnel of flight engineering departments or pilots. In addition to this, by following of the designed flowcharts they should be able to perform such calculation themselves for various aerodrome conditions and aircraft performance. The created conceptual model may also serve as a core for the software application, which reduces the time required to do the calculation manually.
Key words: Runway analyses. Aircraft performance. Maximum take-off mass. Take-off speeds. Takeoff optimization.
Ekonomická situácia posledných rokov vyžaduje prevádzku na najvyšších možných za aženiach, a teda na maximálnych vzletových hmotnostiach. Optimalizácia výpo tu výkonových údajov pre vzlet tak zohráva dôležitú úlohu ako nikdy pred tým. Táto práca ponúka preh ad faktorov, ktoré svojou povahou ovplyv ujú maximálnu vzletovú hmotnos a príslušné vzletové rýchlosti lietadla, ktoré tvoria potrebné údaje pre bezpe ný vzlet. Príslušné asti tejto práce navyše opisujú princíp optimalizácie výpo tu a navrhujú konceptuálny model vo forme vývojových diagramov, pomocou ktorých je možný výpo et vzletových údajov. Dáta pre rôzne letové a okolité podmienky sú zvy ajne uvedené v tzv. dráhových analýzach. Táto práca sa snaží zodpoveda otázky personálu oddelenia letového inžinierstva, prípadne pilotov, na ich tvorbu a použitie. Na základe vytvorených vývojových diagramov, letiskových a výkonových charakteristík lietadla by mali by navyše schopní urobi takýto výpo et. Konceptuálny model tohto výpo tu môže taktiež slúži ako jadro softwarovej aplikácie, ktorá bude schopná zníži potrebný as na manuálny výpo et údajov.
K ú ové slová: Dráhové analýzy. Výkonnos lietadla. Maximálna hmotnos pre vzlet. Vzletové rýchlosti. Optimalizácia vzletu.
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE 1: DECLARED DISTANCES
FIGURE 2: LINE-UP DISTANCE CORRECTION
FIGURE 3: TOD ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE
FIGURE 4: TOD ALL ENGINES OPERATING
FIGURE 5: TOD ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE WET CONDITIONS
FIGURE 6: TOR ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE
FIGURE 7: TOR ALL ENGINES OPERATING
FIGURE 8: TOR ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE WET CONDITIONS
FIGURE 9: ASD ONE ENGINE INOPERATIVE
FIGURE 10: ASD ALL ENGINES OPERATING
FIGURE 11: TAKE-OFF PATH SEGMENTS
FIGURE 12: TAKE-OFF FLIGHT PATH WITH OBSTACLES
FIGURE 13: DEPARTURE SECTOR (TRACK CHANGE 15°)
FIGURE 14: DEPARTURE SECTOR (TRACK CHANGE > 15°)
FIGURE 15: RUNWAY SLOPE
FIGURE 16: AQUAPLANING PHENOMENON
FIGURE 17: TAKE-OFF FLIGHT PATH ON A WET AND CONTAMINATED RUNWAY
FIGURE 18: OPTIMUM FLAP SETTING
FIGURE 19: V1/VR EFFECT ON RUNWAY LIMITED MTOM
FIGURE 20: V1/VR EFFECT ON CLIMB, OBSTACLE, BRAKE ENERGY AND TIRE SPEED LIMITED MTOM
FIGURE 21: V2/VSR EFFECT ON RUNWAY, BRAKE ENERGY AND TIRE SPEED LIMITED MTOM
FIGURE 22: V2/VSR EFFECT ON CLIMB, OBSTACLE LIMITED MTOM
FIGURE 23: OPTIMUM MTOM AND V1/VR RATIO
FIGURE 24: MTOM AS FUNCTION OF V1/VR AND V2/VSR
FIGURE 25: TAKE-OFF SPEED CALCULATION
FIGURE 26: AIRBUS LPC TAKE-OFF INTERFACE
FIGURE 27: TAP PORTUGAL TLP TAKE-OFF OPTIMIZATION MODE INTERFACE
FIGURE 28: TLC TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 29: OCTOPUS TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 30: APG TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 31: APG PERFORMANCE DATA TABLET FORMAT EXAMPLE
FIGURE 32: FLYGPRESTANDA TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 33: ASAP TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 34: HONEYWELL TAKE-OFF CHART EXAMPLE
FIGURE 35: EFRAS INPUT SECTION EXAMPLE
FIGURE 36: EFRAS MAIN OUTPUT MENU EXAMPLE
FIGURE 37: EFRAS DETAILS OUTPUT MENU EXAMPLE
FIGURE 38: MASS TO V1/VR RATIO GRAPH FLOWCHART
FIGURE 39: OPTIMIZATION PROCESS FLOWCHART
FIGURE 40: V-SPEEDS EVALUATION FLOWCHART
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE 1: TAKE-OFF SEGMENTS CHARACTERISTICS
TABLE 2: MINIMUM CLIMB GRADIENT REQUIREMENTS
TABLE 3: CONTAMINANTS CATEGORIZATION
TABLE 4: PARAMETERS INFLUENCING TAKE-OFF
TABLE 5: INFLUENCE OF V2/VSR RATIO CHANGE ON TAKE-OFF LIMITATIONS
TABLE 6: INPUT DATA FOR TAKE-OFF CALCULATION
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
illustration not visible in this excerpt
Mainly world economic crisis has proved that the airline industry operates at precarious marginal profits and all companies in this sector need to pay attention to keep balance between their revenues and costs. Although the take-off and landing represent only a small portion of the total operation of an aircraft, performance of these two phases is considered to be very important due to entirely different reasons (1). Based on effort to become more competitive, the airlines struggle to operate at maximum possible payloads. On the other hand, both the take-off and landing are the most strictly regulated segments of a flight. Therefore, an aircraft performance optimization must take place to ensure safety level required by the regulation and also to allow the most effective way of airline operation.
An objective of this Master thesis is to study all relevant factors, which could influence the aircraft performance during the take-off phase of a flight, to describe an optimization principle and to propose a calculation method to obtain the maximum operationally allowable mass of an aircraft. This work focuses to do it with accordance with currently valid regulation of the European Union.
Nowadays, the regulator within the area of the European Union is the European Aviation Safety Agency (EASA) together with the European Commission. The EASA lays down the certification requirements for all aeronautical parts. Considering the large transport aeroplanes, formerly used regulation JAR-25 has been replaced with CS-25 with direct force of law for all EASA members. Binding procedures affecting the aircraft operation are specified in EU-OPS commended by the European Commission, but it is estimated that by the end of 2012 this regulation will be also transferred under the responsibility of the EASA (2).
As the optimization to obtain the maximum masses for take-off is forced mainly by economic reasons, this work covers only large commercial airplanes, which are assigned in a performance class A. Into this class, according to EU-OPS, belong multi-engine aeroplanes powered by turbo propeller engines with a maximum approved passenger seating configuration of more than 9 or a maximum take-off mass exceeding 5 700 kg, and all multi-engine turbojet powered aeroplanes.
1 DEFINITION AND PURPOSE OF RUNWAY ANALYSIS
One of the most essential responsibilities of an aircraft operator is to ensure a safe operation according to the authority regulations as well as manufacturer’s instructions. Considering the fact that the take-off and landing are the most demanding and dangerous phases of a flight, the operator is specially required to pay attention that all pre-flight calculations for these phases are fulfilled. Moreover, the output data of these calculations need to be perfectly understood by all relevant members of a flight crew, who directly conduct the flight, and a flight dispatching, who uses these data during the planning of aircraft activities.
Besides other factors, the Maximum Take-off Mass (MTOM) at a particular aerodrome for specific local and weather conditions is one of the most limiting figures for the aircraft take-off phase. This mass must be reached at latest on the runway at the time of brake release at the start of take-off. According to EU-OPS, an operator shall ensure that the take-off mass does not exceed the maximum take-off mass specified in the Airplane Flight Manual (AFM) for the pressure altitude and the ambient temperature at the aerodrome at which the take-off is to be made (3). Consequently, the lower figure of the Maximum Structural Take-off Mass (MSTOM) and a calculated maximum performance limited mass for the take-off for specific aerodrome conditions is the MTOM. For a safe aircraft operation it is always necessary to consider the worst case scenario and therefore a performance limited mass for the take-off must also include a possibility of critical engine failure at the decision speed v1. For that reason, in addition to the MTOM, the appropriate take-off speeds including the decision speed need to be determined.
To determine a performance limited mass most of the operators used to use so called aerodrome tables or tables at manuals provided by the aircraft manufacturer (QRH - Quick Reference Handbook). These data though tend to be very conservative and therefore there is a tendency of the aircraft operators to determine a performance limited take-off mass by using software for so called Runway Analyses (4). The aircraft performance data calculation reflects through the whole airline operation and that is why the airlines nowadays either subcontract or use their own tailored software to optimize the necessary take-off performance calculation.
Similar to the MTOM it is necessary to determine the Maximum Landing Mass (MLM) too. An operator shall ensure that the landing mass of the airplane does not exceed the maximum landing mass specified for the altitude and the ambient temperature expected for the estimated time of landing at the destination and alternate aerodrome (3). This mass is the lower figure of a Maximum Structural Landing Mass (MSLM) stated by the manufacturer and a maximum performance limited landing mass calculated for specific conditions at the destination aerodrome according to the AFM. For a determination of the
performance limited landing mass the aerodrome tables, the QRH tables or specialized software for runway analysis are used as well (4).
As a conclusion of above mentioned statements it could be defined that the Runway Analysis facilitates the determination of the maximum allowable take-off and landing masses with associated speeds, based on critical engine failure, for specific airport/runway conditions and various airplane configurations. The limitations observed are those specified in the Civil Aviation Authority approved AFM for the airplane. (5)