Flying qualities review
A key emphasis on this stage of the Tour has been to highlight the importance of the relationship between flying qualities and the task or mission. Outside the context of a role and related tasks, the meaning of quality becomes vague and academic. Flying or handling qualities are not just stability and response properties of the air vehicle, but the synergy between what we have called the internal attributes of the aircraft and external influences. Flying qualities can be assessed objectively through analysis and clinical measurements, and subjectively through pilot opinion of the ability to fly MTEs within defined performance and workload constraints. The 1980s and 1990s saw considerable development in helicopter flying qualities, relevant to both design criteria and compliance demonstration, and Chapters 6 and 7 will present and discuss many of the new concepts in depth. There still exist gaps in the knowledge base however, largely due to an inadequate flight test database, and these areas will be highlighted. One of the important underdeveloped areas relates to the requirement for upper flying qualities limits. These are important for military roles requiring agility, where the assumption that more performance is always better is strongly countered by experience with oversensitive control response and unusable control powers. Agility will be covered in the
section on special flying qualities in Chapter 7. The quantification of handling qualities degradation due to a variety of internal and external effects also represents a significant gap, and in Chapter 8 we discuss a number of the more significant issues.
It is recognized that without some form of stability and control augmentation system (SCAS), helicopters stand little chance of achieving Level 1 flying qualities for anything but the simplest of tasks. However, we need to be interested in the so-called bare-airframe flight dynamics for several reasons. First, the unaugmented characteristics form the baseline for SCAS design; the better they are known, the more likely that the SCAS design will work properly first time. Second, the case of failed augmentation systems has to be considered; the level of bare-airframe characteristics determine whether the SCAS is flight-safety or mission critical, i. e., whether the mission or even safe flight can be continued. Third, the better the flying qualities conferred by bare – airframe design, the less authority the SCAS requires, or the lower the gains in the feedback loops, and hence the more robust will the aircraft be to SCAS failures. And fourth, with a limited authority SCAS, any saturation in manoeuvring flight will expose the pilot to the bare-airframe characteristics; any problems associated with these conditions need to be well understood.
Clearly, SCAS performance is closely linked with the flight dynamics of the bare airframe and they both together form one of the drivers in the overall helicopter design, a subject that we now briefly visit on the last stop of this Tour.