UNCLASSIFIED

AD NUMBER
AD862700
LIMITATION CHANGES
TO:
Approved for public release; distribution is
unlimited.

FROM:
Distribution: Further dissemination only as
directed by Army Aviation Systems Test
Activity, Edwards AFB, CA 93523, NOV 1969, or
higher DoD authority.

AUTHORITY
AVSCOM ltr 12 Nov 1973

THIS PAGE IS UNCLASSIFIED

*mm^
RDTE PROJECT NO. 1X14ISÜ7D174
USATECOM PROJECT NO. 4-6-0500-01
USAAVSC0M PROJECT NO. 66-06
USAASTA PROJECT NO. 66-06

ENGINEERING FLIGHT TEST

00
Q AH-IG HELICOPTER
HUEYCOBRA
<3
PHASE B

PART 6

o FINAL REPORT
LU /
—J / '
n f •

RODGER L. FINNESTEAD WILLIAM J. CONNOR

PROJECT ENGINEER
r u CWO, AV
US ARMY
PROJECT OFFICER/PILOT
D D C
NOVEMBER 1969
CIFC 1lei*9
y| DEC

DISTRIBUTION C
THIS DOCUMENT MAY BE FURTHER DISTRIBUTED BY ANY HOLDER ONLY WITH
SPECIFIC PRIOR APPROVAL OBTAINED THROUGH THE CO, USAAVSCOM, ATTN:
AMSAV-R-F, PO BOX 209, ST. LOUIS, MISSOURI 63166.

US ARMY AVIATION SYSTEMS TEST ACTIVITY

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA S3SS3
 "'

THIS DOCUMENT IS BEST

QUALITY AVAILABLE. THE COPY
FURNISHED TO DTIC CONTAINED
A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF
PAGES WHICH DO NOT
REPRODUCE LEGIBLYo
«CtSSIM (K

cmi Wllire JECTIO« D

DDC tm mm* &
UNAKHOUHCEO D
JUSTIFICATIM

*■■

BY . .,.
DISTDI6UTI01i/mtLUIlin CODES
GIST. AVAIL ui/m SPECIAL

5 DISCLAIMER NOTICE
The findings in this report are not to be construed as an official
Department of the Army position unless so designated by other auth-
orized documents.

DDC AVAILABILITY NOTICE

REPRODUCTION LIMITATIONS
Reproduction of this document in whole or in part is prohibited ex-
cept with permission obtained through the Commanding General, USAAVS-
COM, ATTN: AMSAV-R-F, PO Box 209, St. Louis, Missouri 63166. DDC
is authorized to reproduce the document for United States Government
purposes.

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

TRADE NAMES
The use of trade names in this report does not constitute an offi-
cial endorsement or approval of the use of the commercial hardware
and software.

, ■ ■ ■■'

>-..^ . - . _:. . . ^.. ... ^ ..^ ■._..

-*^—-' ■ ■—*'
 RDTE PROJECT NO. 1X141807D174
USATECOM PROJECT NO. 4-6-0500-01
USAAVSCOM PROJECT NO. 66-06
USMSTA-W*©!*«e**NG:. 66-/06 - /'^ '0

ENGINEERING FLIGHT TEST

AH-1G HELICOPTER
HUEYCOBRA

PHASE B

PART 6

FINAL REPORT

WILLIAM J. CONNOR
RODGER L. FINNESTEAD CWO, AV
PROJECT ENGINEER US ARMY
PROJECT OFFICER/PILOT

NOVEMBER 1969

DISTRIBUTION

This document may be further distributed by any holder only with

specific prior approval obtained through the CG, USAAVSCOM, ATTN;
AMSAV-R-F, PO Box 209, St. Louis, Missouri 63166.
9

US ARMY AVIATION SYSTEMS TEST ACTIVITY K.V

EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA 93523 ^o-
-V
^S>'
III tjO-'

\
■ » .'...-.*
 v-^sx-
', ''^Jt)

ABSTRACT

The AH-1G helicopter Phase B, Part 6 test program was conducted

at Shafter, California, and Edwards Air Force Base, California,
from 12 March_through sjvlay 1968 by the US Army Aviation Sys-
tems Test Activity, Edwards Air Force Base, California. The pro-
gram was conducted to determine level flight performance, auto-
rotational performance, engine characteristics, armed helicopter
mission capability and to evaluate the in-ground-effect (ICE)
handling qualities with the canopy doors removed. The helicopter
is directionally unstable when hovering IGE with either the
doors on or off in winds of 9 to 13 knots for azimuth range from
160 to 260 degrees (clockwise from nose of aircraft). This in-
stability is a major deficiency and detracts from the mission
capability of the aircraft. Undue pilot attention is required
to avoid overtorquing the main transmission during maneuvers re-
quiring abrupt left-lateral cyclic inputs in forward flight. This
overtorque condition will only occur below the critical altitude
of the engine. Additional deficiencies and shortcomings have
been published in previous reports. Sufficient performance data
were not obtained to determine the guarantee compliance.

iv

i
.. ■ ... ■■--.-:.. . . _ ^.- - . ^ ^| M ' ■■ ■—^ -■
J^^ ^^ ■ ■■ in ^fc ^^^^ ■ ^J ^^^M aai ^
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION

Background 1
Test Objectives 1
Description 1
Scope of Test 2
Methods of Test 4
Chronology 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

General 5
Aircraft Control System Compliance Check 5
Level Flight Performance 5
Autorotational Descent Performance 8
Power Available 8
Engine Inlet Characteristics 9
Engine Characteristics 9
Static Stability 9
Dynamic Stability 9
Directional Control Evaluation 10
Airspeed Calibration 11

CONCLUSIONS 12

RECOMMENDATIONS 13

APPENDIXES

I. References 14
II. Test Data 15
III. Test Instrumentation 49
IV. Basic Aircraft Data and Operating Limits 51
V. Test Techniques and Data Reduction Procedures 55
VI. Symbols and Abbreviations 60
VII. Pilot Rating Scale 63
VIII. Distribution 64

■.

,,

^-—--f. ■ ■ M itr. ■ i Ti ■■.Tin.na ,■ ,*■* Hiiliagflteli-irTOTri

INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

1. The US Army Aviation Systems Test Activity (USAASTA) was di-

rected by the US Army Test and Evaluation Command (USATECOM) to
perform an engineering flight evaluation of the AH-1G helicopter
(ref 5, app I). This testing was planned to be accomplished using
several test aircraft during different time periods. The results
of the Phase B performance tests using aircraft S/N 66-15247 are
presented in this report. Handling qualities, vibration charac-
teristics, wing stores jettison capabilities and armament subsys-
tem evaluation test results are presented in parts 1 through 5 of
the A1I-1G Phase B report.

TEST OBJECTIVES

2. The objectives of this test were as follows:

a. To provide quantitative flight test data to serve as a

basis for an estimate of the degree to which the helicopter is
suitable for its intended mission.

b. To define the helicopter deficiencies to allow early correc-

tion and to provide a basis for evaluation of changes incorporated
to correct deficiencies.

c. To provide limited performance flight test data for incor-

poration into the operator's manual.

d. To evaluate directional control margin in ground effect

(IGE) with the canopy doors removed.

DESCRIPTION

3. The AH-1G helicopter manufactured by Bell Helicopter Company

was designed specifically to meet the US Army requirement for an
interim armed helicopter. The helicopter provides for a crew
of two, seated tandem. The main rotor system is a two-bladed,
door-hinge type with the customary stabilizer bar removed and a
conventional antitorque tail rotor located at the top of the ver-
tical stabilizer. The AH-1G is equipped with a three axes sta-
bility and control augmentation system to improve helicopter
handling qualities. The power plant is a Lycoming T53-L-13

1 '4-

+ ..-» ...". ~.-*

 turboshaft engine rated at 1400 shaft horsepower (shp) at sea level
(SL) under standard day uninstalled conditions. The engine is de-
rated to 1100 shp because of the maximum torque limit of the heli-
copter's main transmission. The engine is equipped with a particle
separator to prevent small foreign objects from entering the engine.
The distinctive features of the AII-1C are the narrow fuselage
(36 in.), the stub midwing with four external store stations and
the integral chin turret. The flight control system is a positive,
irreversible, mechanical type with conventional helicopter controls
in the pilot's (aft) cockpit. The copilot/gunner's controls in the
forward cockpit consist of conventional antitorque pedals, sidearm
collective and cyclic controls. An electrical force trim system
is connected to th'1 cyclic and directional controls to induce arti-
ficial feel and to provide positive control centering. The ele-
vator is synchronized with the cyclic stick. The armament config-
uration is changed by varying the wing stores and chin turret con-
figuration. The pilot can fire all weapons in the stowed position.
The gunner/copilot operates the flexible turret aiu. can also fire
the wing stores in an emergency using a pilot override switch.
The wing stores can be jettisoned by either the pilot or gunner in
case of an emergency. The design gross weight (grwt) for the AH-1G
is 6600 pounds. Basic aircraft data and operating limits are pre-
sented m appendix IV.

SCOPE OF TEST

4. Thirty-five flights totaling 47.6 hours were conducted during

the AH-1G Phase B performance and handling qualities testing. Test-
ing was conducted at Edwards Air Force Base (2300-foot elevation),
and Shafter (520-foot elevation), California, from 12_March through
3 Mayl968_. These tests consisted primarily of level flight per-~
formance, autorotational performance and engine characteristic and
directional control handling quality evaluation ICE. The config-
urations tested are listed in table 1.

. -■-.., .
— -
I ^äsSäsä* .^» ^ ■ _^ -d
■ ' *

Table 1. Configurations.

Configuration Armament Subsystems

Clean TAT-102A turret, wing

store stations - clean

Basic TAT-102A turret, one

XM157 outboard each
wing

Inboard alternate TAT-102A turret, one

XM159 inboard each
wing

Outboard alternate TAT-102A turret, one

XM159 outboard each
wing

Light scout TAT-102A turret, one XM18

inboard each wing, one
XM157 outboard each wing

Heavy scout TAT-102A turret, one XM18

inboard each wing, one
XM159 outboard each wing

Heavy hog TAT-102A turret, two

XM159 each wing

5. The test program was conducted within the limitations established

by the USAAVSCOM AH-1G Safety-of-Flight Release issued by AMSAV-R-F
on 1 April 1967.

6. The empty gross weight of the test aircraft in a clean config-

uration with test instrumentation installed was 5790 pounds with a
eg location at 205.97 inches. The test aircraft empty weight with-
out instrumentation installed is not available since some test in-
strumentation was installed by the contractor prior to aircraft
delivery to USAASTA. However, aircraft S/N 66-15327 had a dry
weight of 5595 pounds and longitudinal eg of 204.18 inches. Both
aircraft were equipped with a TAT-102 chin turret.

>k 4
aa^g^^fej^aa^.-;^...""'",^-:" ■ ■■:- - ^ f^m* it -■ -^-^A - -^ &£&§£££
METHODS OF TEST

7. The methods and data reduction procedures used in these tests

are proven engineering flight test techniques and are described
briefly in appendix V.

8. All flights were conducted and supported by USAASTA personnel.

Tests were conducted in nonturbulent atmospheric conditions.

CHRONOLOGY

9. The chronology of this test report is as follows:

Flight test commenced 12 March 1968

Flight test completed 3 May 1968
Preliminary data submitted 20 May 1968
Draft report submitted 17 May 1969
 RESULTS & DISCUSSION

GENERAL

10. This report presents the results of engineering flight test

Phase B performance and handling qualities of the AH-1G helicop-
ter. Performance tests were conducted to determine the level flight
performance, autorotational performance and engine characteristics
of the AII-1G helicopter. Directional control tests were conducted
IGE to determine if there was any change in handling qualities with
the canopy doors removed. Sufficient performance data were not ob-
tained to determine the guarantee compliance stated in reference 3,
appendix 1.

AIRCRAFT CONTROL SYSTEM COMPLIANCE CHECK

11. Prior to testing, the rigging of the aircraft and engine con-
trol systems was checked for compliance with the appropriate US Army
manuals. As new procedures were made available to USAASTA, the
aircraft and engine rigging changes were accomplished with coor-
dination through the contractor's technical representatives.

LEVEL FLIGHT PERFORMANCE

12. Level flight performance tests were conducted at the test con-
ditions specified. All these tests were performed with the fran-
gible fairings removed ("unfaired" condition) . End plates were
placed over the front of each rocket pod to simulate a loaded pod
(aerodynamically) when inert rockets were not used to achieve the
desired aircraft weight.

13. Base-line level flight performance was defined for the heavy
hog configuration. The level flight speed-power polars for the
heavy hog configuration are presented in figures 4 through 8, ap-
pendix II and summarized in nondimensional form in figures 2 and 3.
One level flight was conducted at a specified thrust coefficient
(C-p) of 49.00 x 10"^ at a forward eg for the other armament config-
urations presented in table 1 to determine the effect of different
wing store combinations on power required. The level flight per-
formance for the different wing armament configurations is pre-
sented in figures 9 through 14.

14. All subsequent configurations tested revealed an increase in

equivalent flat plate area when compared to the clean configuration,

r^e^J^/'^^^iÄ^JV^ii^-kc;:^^' v/^/ ,v.-'

mam
•^^HHHBHBte'Ct. :■:£.; -.-■ Z^S
.töö^isa^äs^^ ■^:._^~^i5JÄ. ^-.-^v:u.::
The increase in equivalent flat plate area for different configu-
rations is presented in figure A for the thrust coefficient of
49.00 x 10-4. The increase in equivalent area was greatest for
the heavy hog configuration. The increase in equivalent flat plate
area for the heavy scout and heavy hog configurations increased
nonlinearly at higher airspeeds. This nonlinear increase in equiva-
lent flat plate area was probably caused by the change in aircraft
attitude (nose down) as airspeed increased.
FIGURE A
CHANGE IN EQUIVALENT FLAT PLATE AREA
DUE TO WING ARMAMENT CONFIGURATION CHANGES
AH-IG USAS/N6I5247
ROTOR SPEED= 324 RPM
DENSITY ALTITUDE=5000FT
GROSS WEIGHT 4jBSOOLB
CT = 4S.00X ICT
C 6 LOCATION = FORWARD

100 110 120 130 160

TRUE AIRSPEED ^KNOTS

15. The level flight and range performance summary for a thrust
coefficient of 49.00 x 10-4 is presented in table 2. The value of
0.99 maximum nautical air miles per pound of fuel (NAMPP) decreased
about 9.6 percent while the recommended cruise airspeed decreased
8.8 percent when comparing the minimum (clean) and maximum (heavy
hog) aerodynamic drag configurations. The maximum airspeed in level
flight decreased 8.4 percent in the maximum aerodynamic drag con-
figuration.

16. The level flight performance presented in this report should

be incorporated into the appropriate operator's manual.

A
-^ -—- ^""--■K it . ^ ^•. ::::^^A±
 Table 2. Level Flight and Range Performance Summary.

Standard day Gross weight - 8500 lb

Altitude - 5000 ft Center of gravity - fwd
Rotor speed - 324 rpm No fairings on rocket pods

Recommend
Cruise v Maximum
Cruise
Specific Airspeed in
Configuration for 0.99
Range Level Flight
Maximum NAMPP
(NAMPP) (KTAS)
(KTAS)

Clean 0.2270 138.0 149.0

Basic 0.2205 135.5 146.5

Light scout 0.2172 134.0 144.0

Inboard alternate 0.2162 133.0 143.5

Outboard alternate 0.2157 132.5 143.0

Heavy scout 0.2109 129.5 140.5

Heavy hog 0.2050 127.0 136.5

17. The production AH-1G aircraft equivalent flat plate area was
increased approximately 5.0 square feet over that of the Bell Heli-
copter model 209 aircraft (ref 1, app I). The engine used during
the evaluation of the Bell model 209 was not calibrated below an
output torque pressure of 44.5 psi. Therefore, increase in equiva-
lent flat plate area can only be calculated at engine output shaft
horsepower above 1020. This increase in equivalent flat plate area
was probably caused by these outside external changes:

a. The addition of two inboard wing stores stations.

b. The wider fuselage configuration for acceptance of the

final chin turret.

c. The thicker stub wings.

d. Different configuration of the skid tubes and supporting

structure.

e. The removal of flush-head rivets from the tail boom.

f. The addition of various access and vent panels.

>t
-I
i
cm
» -^ ...... .^ .- , ZZZL—" ■ "■'r 7 ^v-vaiviai. - ■■■■- ■■ ' ^■-'
AUTOROT AT IÜKA1. DHSCHN'l P •ORMANCL

18. Steady state, autorotational descent performance tests were

conducted in the unfaired heavy hog configuration at 5000 feet
with an 8S00-pound grwt and a forward eg. Results of the autoro-
tational tests arc presented in figure 15, appendix II.

19. The airspeed for minimum rate of descent (1815 ft/min] at

these test conditions was 74.0 knots true airspeed (KTAS) at a
rotor speed of 324 rpm. The rate of descent decreased as rotor
speed was decreased from 324 rpm while maintaining a constant
airspeed of 74.0 KTAS. The minimum rate of descent of 1750 ft/min
was observed at the minimum rotor speed limit of 294 rpm. There
was a definite increase in aircraft lateral vibration as rotor
speed decreased to 310 rpm. The magnitude of these variations was
not quantitatively measured. There was no noticeable decrease in
aircraft response to a control input with decreasing rotor speed.

20. The autorotational characteristics of the Ail-1G helicopter

were found to be similar to the Uil-lC helicopter. Precise control
of rotor speed during autorotation was difficult because small col-
lective control movements resulted in relatively large changes in
rotor rpm. In addition, the high-inertia rotor system caused a lag
in the response of rotor speed to collective control inputs. These
two characteristics resulted in pilot tendency to "chase the rotor
speed" (PRS A5). It was not difficult to maintain rotor speed be-
tween red lines, but maintinaing a selected rotor speed required
considerable attention at a time when the pilot's attention should
be directed outside the cockpit.

21. The autorotational descent performance presented should be in-

corporated into the appropriate operator's manual.

POWER AVAILABLE

22. All summary performance values were based upon shaft horse-
power available as defined in figure 18, appendix II, since only
the tail rotor drive shaft coupling was evaluated on the Phase B
program. The power available charts presented were calculated by
using the curves and calculation methods presented in model spec-
ification number 104.33 for the T53-L-13 engine (ref 4, app I).

23. In order to calculate shaft horsepower available, certain in-

stallation power losses had to be assumed or measured. Constant
values were assumed for extracted shaft horsepower (zero) and
power turbine output speed (6600 rpm). Power available was also
calculated using zero, 0.6-percerit and 3.6-percent engine bleed

^ ^- ^i - .^■>.^M^.
u^_ .-~-J>-^:^* ...
lir to consider the effects of one approved and one proposed air-
craft modification. The approved aircraft modification uses en-
gine bleed air to drive the engine oil cooler instead of the tail
rotor drive shaft coupling. The proposed aircraft modification
calls for the use of engine bleed air to drive a light-weight
cockpit air conditioning system. The power available and fuel-
flow characteristics are presented in figures 22 through 27, ap-
pendix II.

ENGINE INLET CHARACTERISTICS

24. The compressor inlet temperature and pressure recovery charac-

teristics were considerably different for the production AH-1G than
for the 209. Most of the change can be attributed to the produc-
tion aircraft having an engine particle separator installed; the
aircraft evaluated in reference 1, appendix I, was not so equipped.
This change amounted to a decrease in engine power available of ap-
proximately 0.3 percent in a hover and 13.2 percent at 160 knots
for a sea level, standard day for the production aircraft.

ENGINE CHARACTERISTICS

Static Stability

25. The engine static "droop" characteristics were good. Very

few adjustments were required on the power turbine, speed-select
"beep" switch when reducing or increasing engine power output.
The engine power turbine speed-select "beep" switch characteris-
tics are presented in figure 19, appendix II. The average time
required for rotor speed to change after the "beep" switch was ac-
tivated was 0.65 seconds. There was no noticeable variation in
this delay time between a loaded or unloaded rotor system. The
engine "beep" switch trim rate was constant at 7.7 rpm/sec after
the time delay. The "beep" contro] characteristics were satisfac-
tory and much improved over prior UH-1 series aircraft equipped
with T53 series engines (PRS A3).

Dynamic Stability

26. Dymanic stability characteristics of the T55-L-13 engine ap-

peared to be satisfactory throughout the flight envelope tested.
When rapid power demands were required, no compressor stall was en-
countered during engine acceleration. Power overshoot and damping
were satisfactory.

M8MHH
 27. A slight engine oscillation was noted when operating the
engine at maximum power available. This oscillation was not con-
sidered to be as serious as that reported in reference 10, appen-
dix I. The horsepower fluctuation on the AH-1G was 10 to 15
shp. This fluctuation was not present when power was reduced to
slightly below the maximum available.

28. There was only one significant airframe/engine matching short-

coming discovered during this program. A problem was encountered
in forward flight when an abrupt maneuver requiring left-lateral
cyclic was initiated with the aircraft operating at or near the
main-transmission torque limit. The abrupt left-lateral cyclic
input caused the rotor speed to decrease while maintaining a con-
stant collective control position. The engine power-turbine gover-
nor sensed the rotor speed decrease and increased the fuel flow.
This resulted in an increased engine power output and a main trans-
mission overtorque condition. This characteristic is transient in
nature and was only encountered in forward flight conditions below
the critical altitude of the engine. The largest change in engine
torque observed during the program was 13 psi for a left-lateral
control input of 3.3 inches at a trim calibrated airspeed of 105
knots. In order to avoid overtorquing of the main transmission,
the pilot must continually monitor the torquemeter when perform-
ing an abrupt left-lateral cyclic control input. This charac-
teristic is undesirable since the attention of the pilot may be
required elsewhere when performing a mission. This condition de-
tracts from the mission capability of the aircraft. Abrupt right
cyclic inputs under the same conditions have just the opposite
effect: an increase in rotor speed and decrease in engine power
output. This problem has been reported previously in reference
2, appendix I.

DIRECTIONAL CONTROL EVALUATION

29. An ICE directional control evaluation was conducted with the

canopy doors on and off to determine i£ there was any significant
change in handling qualities of the aircraft. The test was con-
ducted with the SCAS yaw channel OFF and in the outboard alternate
configuration. The ground paced method of test was used with con-
ditions limited to an airspeed range from zero to 17.5 KTAS at crit-
ical wind azimuths of 160, 200 and 240 degrees (clockwise from
nose of aircraft). The results of these tests are graphically pre-
sented in figures 16 through 18, appendix II.

30. The test revealed little if any change in the aircraft direc-
tional handling qualities with the canopy doors on or off. How-
ever, an area of directional instability existed between 9 and 13

10

■ ■l

■-■-■-.■*. ■■■■■■ ■ ■ -. -*■■■£ ■'■■' ■ ■- __.;

ü->ü> - ^ ^'z^z: '.-..■..... ...-^ iv^L-T-'^J:^
*—«- - - -—-*-
knots at eacli wind azimuth flown. In this area, rapid and some-
times large directional control movements were required to main-
tain the desired heading. This instability is a major deficiency
and detracts from the mission suitability of the aircraft (PRS A6)

31. The directional control evaluation reported in reference 8,

appendix I, was found to agree with the data presented in this re-
port. Some scatter in the data was noted where directional in-
stability occurred but was not considered to be significant.

AIRSPEED CALIBRATION

32. 'Hie helicopter was equipped with a test airspeed indicator

system (boom) in addition to the standard helicopter airspeed in-
dicator system. Airspeed calibration flights were conducted to
determine the position error of the test system. A trailing bomb
was used as an airspeed reference up to 101 knots. From 80 to 180
knots indicated airspeed (KIAS), a T-28 airplane with a calibrated
airspeed s; stem was used as an airspeed reference. The test air-
craft system was also calibrated (between 39 and 159 KTAS) using
the ground speed course. Calibration of the test system was con-
ducted in the clean configuration in level flight, dive, climb and
autorotation at a rotor speed of 324 rpm. The test results are pre-
sented in figure 28, appendix II.

11
\ '

:
■■ ^----■-..^^K^^.-W..-. . . .;,. ..... , ,1 , m&ei - -.
**

sirmä&i&H&,<a£ "-'^-■-->■■'--■-.
CONCLUSIONS

33. The following conclusions were reached after completion of

the A1I-1C1 Phase B, Part 6 performance tests:

a. The equivalent flat plate area can increase as much as

7.7 square feet depending on wing armament configuration. This
increase in equivalent flat plate area decreased the specific
range of the aircraft 9.6 percent (para 15).

b. Changes in the production fuselage increased the equiva-

lent flat plate area by 5.0 square feet over the aircraft reported
in reference 1, appendix 1 (para 17).

c. The minimum steady state autorotational descent in the

heavy hog configuration is 1815 ft/min for a rotor speed of 324
rpm at a true airspeed of 74.0 knots (para 19).

d. The steady state autorotational rate of descent decreased

to 1750 ft/min for a rotor speed of 294 rpm at a true airspeed of
74.0 knots (para 19).

e. Precise control of rotor speed during autorotation was

difficult because small collective control movements resulted in
relatively large changes in rotor speed (para 20).

f. The changes in the production inlet configuration increased

the engine power available loss as much as 13.2 percent depending
on airspeed (para 24).

g. The removal of the canopy door did not significantly af-

fect the low-speed directional control margin or IGE flying quali
ties (para 30).

34. Correction of the following deficiency is mandatory for ac-

ceptance of the aircraft: Directional instability existed between
9 and 13 knots for the wind azimuths between 160 and 240 degrees
(para 30).

35. Correction of the following shortcoming is desirable for ac-

ceptance of the aircraft weapons system: Undue pilot attention
required to avoid overtorquing the main transmission during maneu-
vers requiring abrupt left-lateral cyclic inputs (para 28).

12
RECOMMENDATIONS

36. The performance data presented in this report should be incor-

porated into the operator's manual (paras 16 and 21).

67. The shortcomings should be corrected on a high-priority basis

(para 30).

13

^S*SfBSä^'ÄÖ--:i<.;.;i,I...,:-. ^^-L 7 __-_*_

APPENDIX I. REFERENCES

1. Final Report, USAAVNTA, Project No. 65-30, Engineering Flight

Evaluation of the Belt Model 200 Armed Helicopter, May 1966.

2. Final Report, USAAVNTA, Project No. 66-06, Engineering Flight

Test of the AH-1G Helicopter, Huej/cobra, Phase B, Part 13 January
1968.

5. Specification, 209-947-530, Bell Helicopter Company, Detail Spec-

ification for Model AH-IC Helicopter,, 2$ September 1967, revised
29 December 1967.

4. Specification, 104.33, Lycoming Division of Avco Corporation,

Model Speaification T53-L-13 Shaft Turbine Engine, 6 May 1966.

5. Letter, STliAP-DS-Tl, Aberdeen Proving Ground, subject: Test

Directive, Engineering/Logistical evaluation Test of AJI-1G Helicop-
ter (Hueycobra), 15 September 1966.

6. Plan of Test, USAAVNTA, Project No. 66-06, Engineering Flight

Test of the AH-IG Helicopter (Hueycobra) Phase B3 April 1967.

7. Message, USAAVSCOM, AMSAV-EF, No. 1367, Unclas, subject: AH-IG

Phase B Performance Testing and Instrumentation, 17 August 1967.

8. Final Report, USAAVNTA, Project No. 66-06, Engineering Flight

Test of the AH-IG Helicopter to Determine the Area of Inadequate
Directional Control Power at 8100 Pounds Gross Weight, February
1968.

9. Final Report, USAAVNTA, Project No. 66-06, Engineering Flight

Evaluation of the AH-IG Helicopter, Hueycobra, Phase B, Part 2,
February 1969.

10. Final Report, USAAVNTA, Project No. 66-04, Engineering Flight

Test of the UH-1H Helicopter, Phase D Product Improvement Test,
August 1967.

14

MM..i ■ ' -
 APPENDIX II. TEST DATA

15

^
-vAtfiM
,.!. -„^ .^ ■
_____ Hi
„L ü i1
 ß
s
5*
3
3
a
I,
0.
< V9
0 03
u
oc X S *o
uJ
a. %
0
.2 J a:

I
01
i

in
1-

i
H
x

'i-

HI
ul
a. ii
u-
if)
0
ct ü Ö ?0
UJ
< 0 h u
to X, 2
UJ
8
0
o
W 111
7
<i
S
%
0 J
2i </)
k
01 2
2

0
S
2
»9

tfo-a -»r R ^ $ ^ i ft g if
ä * s
zu-w ^ g « » * a « « *

b-rtr-
-♦I »T»»
T^
•:te
rtitlü
17
■>«**i^W«i;;.i^fi.-.Kii;as>;w.i:^^.;lI:,^,V-
■ .....

t~St

iizli»**»*^.:..-.. ...^■■r A ..:.. ^... i. ffT^t^^-ttflir T' il »■ ■■-' ■■■ ■ -.-■.i.-.-.... - -■■ - ^ , ^ ^ L i>_
 FIGURE WO. 5
KlOigDlwE-NSIOMftL LEVELFLI&KT PEHFORMftVlCtL
AH-IG USA%615M-T
T531.- 15'/» LE WOOl
HEAVf HO&COMri&unMlON

CevlTER Of GRAVITt- FORWARD

MOTE. POIMTI OBTAINED f»OM FIGURE. Up. ^- THROOGH 8 APPEMDIHX

51

So

•W

14

42

sä

0 3
5

So St

32 34

z« ao 3<

at Ä

« 30 54

EO 21 32

IG 22 •24 30

l< 20 24 28

I« 24

«. 20 24

18 23

20

IS --t—

<
aZ 3B 10 42 +•»• '4& 4fi 5D 5B SP » S «5 Si «4- 5 *5 IB

• CTKIO»d |fl, .-rtno» ■ ■ -■ --j-i-j-^-r-

18

:- J

\
* ^
 Hi
SB :L-:;. ' !

AiW-M« USA •M<i>\]&2.4-lT

I
im^

; „L: |cT>i4*.-^ä'*|io"^.:i..'.|..;..,|...r

.ia^fe«^

%%£*£&*£: i - ^•■' ■ ^
 FiäuRfc Wo. 5 ,

AH-IG USA Ä/u<bl;52<V7

ftOTÖR RlPM e 524

H DEKISITY ALTITUDE s 5«120 f H
CT • 4^.22 MÖ"*
GROS?» Uil&l GHT» eeaoLB
C.G. LOCATION * l<?l.«» lU^FWO)
HEAVY HOG COWFJCURPkTtOViCUUFAJRED)

I r
iafe&Ki*3iÄ& &ki»kkSiü-
 FIGURE WO. G
Lgv&L FLIGHT PERFORMP^MCE
AR-iG USA <WifolS-Z.47
T 55- L-»"S ^«LE 14001
ROTOR RPWi^32.4-.S
DtU&lTY ALTITUDE.-4-! «JO Fr.
CT'* 5IS3 XIO'*
GROSS WEIGHT- qZIOLB.
CGLOCATiow* tqao mCfwo.)
H€.P.VV HOG COSl'Fl^URMTQUCUMFAtREO)

ß^O
QD JX
D^"

liOO! !>-'

TRiiWSWtSSiOW 1UPUT-
TOfX5U£ UMiT

tÜ

£
in IOOO
a:
o
7:

jc «ioo FAlRe.0 CORVES. Dea^V/EO

FROM PiGUFieä_2_ 3
I ^_IS_. APR II
(0

0
S. goo

- 700
d RECOhA^EtdOED CRÜISE-
3 AIRSPEEO

4>QO

SCO
20 «JO I40 IÄO

TRUt AIRSPEED ^-KNOTS

r^rt—r- 1
■'
"T

21
MtHOHUifMaOUta

"\

I
^__ j i^^;Vy.>^i^wt^L^r;~r^M^ii -'• V^^-n, -^ - - ^■■,- ■ -, ■• .■--:-.:-^-. . ._ ^Ä^._.. ^ ...^.s*
 FIGURE UO. 7
LEVEL FLIGHT PERFORMA.MCE

T3 3-L-JS »/«LE.I400I
ROTOR KPM* -324.5
DEMSITX ALTITUDE - ^KTOFT.
C-r« sr3.22 MO'*
GROSS WEIGHT- aOTSLS
CG LOCATlOM= iq2.& iM-CfWD
HEAVY HOGCOWf lGURATlOW(Uf4PAiRE0)
.<M MAXIMUM NAMW

moo

I200

IIOO N1AU4MUM POWER

AVAILABLE

01
2
0 I900
a
m
FAIRED CURVES DGRWEO
FROM TIGURES -?■?,, 18
^ l«» APP.H
<?oo

5
a. goo
0
i
2 RECOMMEMOEC
- loo
CRUISE AIRSPEED
Ul

■i.^OO

-l~-

20 40 €.0 SO ICO I20 I40 I60

T RUE AIRSPEED ~ KWOTS

22

. ^-j
 FIGURE. KJO.B
LEVEL Tu GHT PfcRFORMtwACE
AH-JO USA 6/iiGI5Z47
TS3-L-I3 S/MLE« 4^301

ROTOR RPM - 32^.5

DENSITY ALTITUDE» 9S'lOFr

&B.oaa WEIGHT» a&4o US

C.G.LOCATIOM« \<\1.5»W.(F1A1D)
KE.AVY HOG COUf IGURftTVOKl(UMFAlReD)
qq MAXIMUM MAMPP

iteMtiS.te"!' i tSä ^^i^aii=

 LEV^&L FLIGHT RERFORMAMCE
AH-IG USA. 5/M<öl5 2.'<iT
T53- L-13 % LEl^OO I
ROTOR RPM« a24
DEkiSlTY ALTITUDE» 42SOfT.

GROSS WE»GHTr 854-S LB.

C.G. LOCATtOKl = iq-2A itt.(rwo.)
CLEAW COWFVGURA-nOkJ
fl9 MAIUMUM WAWtf

t^oo

I40C

MOO TKAMSMiaSIOM IkiPUT-

fit
ul
.3
I
ul
lOOO
FiAIREO CJÜRVES DERtVEO
FROM FIGURES U.' ^' -5-

I
DC AklD \q ftPP.IC

RECOWMEUDED-
CRUISE A\RSPEED

■t~ ■

14.0 I60
i ■ i"

' |- ■ ±-...lJ
: 1 /■:

I ■ ' - -
a» 1^—^r^**^^.*^^,^
 FlGURiE. Kip.lÖ
LE.ve.U FUCHT PERypRWAUCE
AH-IG USA <S/KI6l 524-7
T S 5- L-» S^ ^,l4l/«50l
, ROTOR RPM »323.5 .
DEMS1TV ALTITUDE« itEZO FT.
Cx- 40-87 MO'*
GROSS WEIGHT? 8£fiO US.
CG-LOCATIOM » 1*12.5 t04.(FWO;
BASIC COMFlCURfST»OM CUMFAl RSO)
tl MAXIMUM MAMf

i
- ^i?^ilj*^£'^^'^--'--'-^&&i
i j..
 FIGURE. Klo. H

AH-IGa USPv S/M &ISZ47

S
TS%-V.-I3 /MLE»4001

ROTOR RPM» 325.S

DEkiSlTY AL.TITUDE» 4SOOFT.

CbRosswevcivAT» ee.'j-sLa
CCa.LOCATVONi« 1^2.2. »«(FKIO)
UGHT «>COUT COMF^GURftTlOMCUM^MREO)
 F»cuftE Kio \Z
LEVCU FLIGHT PERFORwy^ue
AH-Ve. USA a/W<bl52AT
T53-L-»3V«»U£l400i
ROTOR RPM» 5^3.5
DtUSiT^ ftUTVTUDt* 4.lZOfT.

GROSS WEIGHT - 8Tfi5LB.

CGiLOCATIOM- iqz.B m.CFWD)
IMBDARO ALTERNATE CDUPIGURATION^UMFMREO)

#N=^'
Hü
'iSiiife':: .--: ,..._!.,
 TlGURE Wo. «^
LEVEU FLIGHT PERFORMANCE
AH-IG USA «/M&I524T
TS5-L-l3,ynLEI4O0i
ROTOR RPM» 323.5
DEWlSlTV ALTITUDE • 3<?COFT
Cf • 48-81 %tO'*
GROSS WEIGHT« 8715 LBS
CG.LOCATION» l^S.O »U. CPWD)
OUTBOARD AUTERMATE QONFlGURATlOMCOUFMReo)
.«»«I MAXIMUM MAM?J

: J

* -•■*--
mm m t)#^a ir!:i::
-rr—rrr

wfEiSi USA »/MGtfti^T — :•■■! | ■ ; i

H-I;itM
fr^fHtr i ;, ; :
■
-t~
TtTr Sg :'::.
m
ifii :::: kcnroii R«M> 325
m li;;:.
Ai::.

I
JC&.lk>CATIOH* Wa.O IM.(FMO) ....
fisftvy gcQUT c6MFtQomATto»4(umrAmEO)

■■■■■■■■'■■ /
 N
:
i ft
:J.\ _ l
ilB£KwäUCSt£**H^
■■^'■^■:-U--,iM >■-■■ ..it::.
 I

^ |. ■ i ^■">*"^J^l"-B'- ^M' ■■ ■ I
. ^,^^.^...v^<-^^^^^^;^^i..^ ^..,. .., , ___ _. .^.saat^S^^ ,||||r
 t
-r~~ -.1 4-—

.L_:. . i_ L

^^■*?->i . ■ - ^ ^ " ■ Üiteli^S--:

.-* J^^fc,^^^^^^^^.^^^^^^^^^^^
^i ü J
Sä^ggg^ jj vi-aaafe^
1
 1

:
L-j-H—H—
. i ■
i 'n
i _
; i I

^^^.^■■^^^.^fe
. - , ""'- - ./,-.. . ■ ■ >■ ^i ■ ■ '"l^tfrfifi«1
 v
*■ -- ■. I - - - [)ji[)<lii(^.^^^..^.-& -I, ,lt^aaai^^>^^fe^t^^^^4a.^^ ^. ;,..,.
a^i^ -^^ - - ~- m ■■ ■— '—" -' --* - -^
 i ■■;!;: FiCoREi Klo.i24-J; ,;\;h
!
[\- B
EMGH4£CHMt<»i!ctCRl»TtC8 ' | ,
AH-l<äU«A^6lS24>1
; .. ^...iTSS-V-l^61400!
EUG1WE PAKTICUE SEPARATOR »MSTHLUEO

MOTEV4.CURVE BAftEÜ OU LYCOMIWG TS?-L-l3 6V»GiyE

MODEL SPECIF1CATVOK4 VJO.ICM-.aS
2.CURVE BASED DMEIJGIME \HtBJ CHARACTERISTtCS
PRESEMTED IH FIGURE MO*. 164 IT TOR CfRO AIREPCSO
a.aeWERATOR ELECTRICAU IDAD« ZERO
^.PtRCEMT A»RBL6ED(WW/Wl^)»Z£RO
S.ROTOR «PEED» S24- RPM
fe.ENGlME OILOOOUER ORIVEM BYTAIU ROTOR
DRIVE SHAFT COUPUMG
7. ^OLID 5VMBOI.« DERWED FROMEHGIME
MKMUFACTURE« CAUBRATIOM OOMOUCTEO
ON 22 AUGUST IflfeT

^ ^
 AH - 1 G . USA.; 9faQ\äZ41i
Tss-!L- ^...„«^ uiaiwoi:
FN&l WE. PARTICLE «sPARATOÄ IMSTAUfiÖ

MOTES: I.CURVE BA3EO OW ü(CD*A»ViGi TSS-L - 13 EUGtUE

MODEL EPECIFICATIOM M0104>.3%.
f- f .CURVE dASiD OM EUGIUEI MLETi CHAUftOeWSTlC*
PREftEUTKO (H flCUREMO». V^itl R>RS,ROMASP6fiD.
SOtEUERATOH feUBLTRVCW. lOAO-ZERO
"fcPERCEUT M* BLEEOCWbl/W«.)- ZERO
S.ROTOR SPEED 324RPWI
ft.EUGIUE O^U COOLfeR DRWEU BY TAIL ROTOR
DRIVE &HAVT COUPLIUG.
7.SOLID SYMBOLS bERWED FROM CMGIME
MAUUFACTURE^SCAUBRATIOM COMOUCTED
OKI 2i2 AUGUST IRGT

üiüp 3!p
mmmmm-i^sw.'iiiBs
trrfctn
Jtäiii^'grifa^ijii^G'i aa:ij:«»rie>an-;i{>»?
:::: ±::
?^ iucipTS^e^ v-Hip^^
J tpimir SSSSHüj S8S!Mii$
m lil.'t.-i;

40
^iMi

... ^J, .^ -,^. - , ■ .' ^■■±::-:. :..^*^.*^....^ i^r^^^it.-. .,■ ^ ■ft

^^.^. _—
*4.
 .. ............ 1

i . : \ . :\
'i
£t4Git4fe.c>-iftikft'|cTeft:isiijcsf i ; i ;

• i- ;• •; ■: j i

ENGIME PARTICLE «ElfARKTOR IHSTÄLUEO

MOTE'S: S.CURVE BASED OM iXCOMlUG T5S-L-I3 EMGIUE

MODEL ftt»eCIFICATlOM MO. 104-. 3 3
4 2.CURVE BASED OHEUGIUEIMLETCHARACTERISTICS
PKESEWTEO m FIGURE UOS. jG^ IT fDREERO AIRSPEED
_.
aCEklCRATOR ELECTRICAL U3A0»ZERO
4-. PERCCK1T AIRBLEED(WW /MA) « CERO
;. S. RCTOR SPEED • 324 R.PM
fo.ENGIMC OIL COOLER ORIVEKk B^ TAIL
MOTOR DRIVE SHAFT COUPLIUG
7. SOLID S1MIBOLS DERIVED FROM EUOIWE
MAMUFACTURE'S CALIBRATION COMOUCTEO
€»90|
OW 22 AUGUST 1^1

RcF&RR&D SHAFT HöRSE.PoMiER ^SW/fjjfSfri

■.r]-.-

41

H
.■..,...:....,.---..:- -^..^..^i^ ■ ". 'i-..r::';'. llj:~^M_^__J^^f^j^j^^^^ji^^:-__Ju^^^^a,l^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^jt-1 ■, ■
iisaU
 FIGURE WO 27
EMGlKje CHftRKCTER\aTlC5
AH-VG USA ^GIBe^-T
TS3-L-I39A»LCI400I
ENGIME PARTICLt SEPARATOR «MSTALLEO

WiOTES: I.CURVE BASED ON U(C0MIUGTS5-L-I3 EMGtME.

MODEL SPECIF»CATIOV4 MO. 104-33
2.CURVE BASED OKIEMGtME IMLET CHARACTERISTICS
PRESEMTEO IW FIGURE UOS. H» if H. FOR ZERO AIRSPEED
3.GENERATOR ELECTRICAL LOAD» CERO
4:PERCeMT AlRBLEE0CwN./Wa,) = 2ERO
S.ROTOR SPEED » 3 2,^RPM
6.EK1GIUE OIL COOLER DRIVEM BYTAVL ROTOR
DRIVE SHArr COOPLiUGi
T SOLID SYMBOLS DERIVED FROM EMGIUE
MAMUFACTUtES CALIBRATION COMOUCTED
OM Z2AUCUiT lift?

i
\
 ETMGiKiE CHARACTER»STIes

..nr§3:!L\»;än%LE}4ooi_,; _ ■
EMQIK1E PARTICLE. SEPARATOR lUSTALLEO
.4-.
i
IÜOTESM.CURVE BASED OW LYCOMIklGTSS- L* 1^.EMCIUE.
MODEL 9PCCIFIC ATI ON UO. I04-. 33
2.CURVE BASED OMEUGIWE IMLCT CHARACTERISTICS
PRESENTED IN FIGURE MOS. U. 4i3 TOR ZERO AIRSPEED
».GENERATOR ELECTRICAL IDAO« ZERO
4. PERCENT A»RBLEEO(Wl>l/Wa,)= «ERO
5. ROTOR SPEED-SZ^RPM
6. ENGINE OIL COOLER DRIVEN BTTAtLRCTOR
DRIVE SHAPT COUPLIMG
7. SOLID SVMBOL« a&RWED FROM EUGINE
MANUFACTURE'S CAUBRATION CONDUCTED
6y IZÄuäUET l46T

. ^",Tflrrim'lffln«m'T«miTr,gimnramrawJ*HwiBryi—i ~—«i.«,^.^,,..

=zf=
m
<äiim*4r
 ElÜGl ME* BEEP" COMTHOL CHARJftCT&KiaTtCS
AH-ilGi 0«A a/K»<ÖIS2.4.7
T6B-L.-13 Ö/UUEHVOOI

AIRftPlED D&M8ITY ACT. FLIGHT

SYMBOL •vKCHa «-«FT. COMOtTtOU
o IOS BOOO LEVEU FLIGHT
D ZERO I500 GROUHD RUU(COLkECT\ym FULL

0
tu 5;i S ; ü 1g3 g

filu 8 j ^
SMO. 3ie SSO 3SO
_l ROron ftPKED'VRPM __:

\
 J

j
n v-„

. .: .
>k
I
FTT 5 * r a a i
..p..

4*« JÜÜlflld.

T
47

]
 FicuRt KJo."53
A>RSP£ED CALISRATIQKA
AH-\G USA VM(SI5247
BOOM SYSTEM

5YM. C5ROSS WEIGHT CG STATIOM DEM5ITY /\LT\TUDt RC3TOR SPEED COWflGURftTlOVJ

/>-FT. ^RPM
7265 l<!3.5 I02OFT 32*»- CLEAKl
71 Tg iqs.a 324- CLEAN
A tzoo 193.5 50OOPT 324- CLEAN

klOTES^QDATACDLLECTCD USWiG
THE. &BOUKlD?>P6ED METHOD.
2.0 DATA CDLLECTED USIWG,
THL PACER AtRCRAVT METHOD.
3ADATf\ COLLECTED USI MCj
THE TRAIUWG, BOMS METHOD.
4.SHADED SVMBOLS OEKIOTE
CLIMB PiTUMIT .POWER
5.FLAGGED SYMBOLS DEMOTE
AüTOROTATIOKJ

I: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
 APPENDIX III. TEST INSTRUMENTATION

Flight test instrumentation was installed in the test helicopter

prior to the start o£ this evaluation. This instrumentation pro-
vided data from four sources; pilot's panel, copilot/gunner's
panel, photopanel and a 24-channel oscillograph. All instrumen-
tation was calibrated. The flight test instrumentation was in-
stalled and maintained by the Instrumentation Branch, Logistics
Division, USAASTA.

PILOT'S PANEL

Standard system airspeed

Boom system airspeed
Boom system altitude
Rate of climb
Gas producer speed
Torque pressure (standard system)
Exhaust gas temperature
Longitudinal control position
Lateral control position
Pedal control position
Collective control position
Center of gravity normal acceleration
Angle of sideslip

ENGINEER'S PANEL

Boom system airspeed

Boom system altitude
Outside air temperature
Rotor speed
Gas producer speed
Fuel used total
Torque pressure (high)
Torque pressure (low)
Exhaust gas temperature
Oscillograph correlation counter
Photopanel correlation counter
Fuel temperature

49

:.. J.--. ■ - --■ -.:■.■■..■ ■,. ;, .

m
1
j^-
 PliOTOPANEL

Boom system airspeed

Standard system airspeed
Boom system airspeed
Rotor speed
Gas producer speed
Fuel used total
Torque pressure (high)
Torque pressure (low)
Exhaust gas temperature
Compressor inlet temperature
Compressor inlet total pressure
Inlet guide vane position
Bleed band position (light)
Fuel pressure at nozzle
Time (10-second stopwatch)
Oscillograph correlation counter
Photopanel correlation counter
Engineer's event
Pilot's event

OSCILLOGRAPH

Longitudinal control position

Lateral control position
Directional control position
Collective control position
Pitch attitude
Roll attitude
Yaw attitude
Pitch rate
Roll rate
Yaw rate
CG normal acceleration
Angle of sideslip
Angle of attack
Engineer's event
Pilot's event
?hotopanel correlation blip

50

i i

i . . / "'■':" :L:\::-
äu
 APPENDIX IV. BASIC AIRCRAFT DATA
& OPERATING LIMITS

AIRFRAME DATA
637.2 inches
Overall length [rotor turning) 124.0 inches
Overall width (rotor trailing)
Center line of main rotor to center line
320.7 inches
of tail rotor
Center line of main rotor to 198.6 inches
elevator hinge line 15.2 square feet
Elevator area (total) 10.9 square feet
Elevator area (both panels) Inverted Clark Y
Elevator airfoil section
18.5 square feet
Vertical stabilizer area Special chamber
Vertical stabilizer airfoil section
Fuselage Station (PS)
Vertical stabilizer aero, center
499.0

Wing area: 27.8 square feet

Total 18.5 square feet
Outboard of B.L. 18.0 (both sides)
10.33 feet
Wing span
Wing airfoil section:
NACA 0030
Root NACA 0024
Tip 14 degrees
Wing angle of incidence

MAIN ROTOR DATA

Number of blades 44 feet

Diameter 1520.4 square feet
Disc area 27 inches
Blade chord 0.065
Rotor solidity 99 square feet
Blade area (both blades) 9.33 percent symm.
Blade airfoil Section special
-0.455 deg/ft
Blade twist 2.75 degrees
Hub precone angle

51

ös^affiÄsaiiXiJffiiairS

M^M - -•■ '

:■:-*■'- ■■^'*-
 o
r-l
1
X.
<

DO
c
■ft
3
(13
U
■o
3

at
u

52

:;

■--■^^^ .... . ■ ... ,; - :

'' ■■■ -■ ■^■■■^." 9g ., ^ -
. ■:.^-. .
► ::.:„. ■:
ANTITORQUE ROTOR DATA

Number of blades
Diameter 8.5 feet
Disc area 56.74 square feet
Blade chord 8.41 inches
Rotor solidity 0.105
Blade airfoil NACA 0010 modified
Blade twist Zero degrees

TRANSMISSION DRIVE SYSTEM RATIOS

Engine to main rotor 20.383:1.0

Engine to antitorque rotor 3.990:1.0
Engine to antitorque drive system 1.535:1.0

LIMIT AIRSPEED (V )

Any configuration with XM159 rocket pods: 180 KCAS below a 3000-
foot density altitude; decrease 8 KCAS per 1C feet above 3000
feet

All other configurations: 190 KCAS below a 4000-foot density

altitude; decrease 8 KCAS per 1000 feet above 4000 feet

GROSS WEIGHT/CENTER OF GRAVITY ENVELOPE

Forward center of gravity limit: Below 7000 pounds, FS 190.0;

linear increase to FS 192.1 at 9500 pounds

Aft center of gravity limit: Below 7880 pounds FS 201.4; linear

decrease to FS 200 at 9500 pounds

SIDESLIP LIMITS

Five degrees at VL with linear increase at 20 degrees at 60 KCAS

ROTOR AND ENGINE SPEED LIMITS (Steady State)

Power on:
Engine rpm 6600 to 6400
Rotor rpm 324 to 314

53

■; 1
 ^«■SB«dSri=9 ; J-wL. - _-

Power off:
Rotor rpm transient lower limit 304 to 339
Rotor rpm 250

Power on during dives and maneuvers:

Rotor rpm 319 to 324

TEMPERATURE AND PRESSURE LIMITS

Engine oil temperature 930C

Transmission oil temperature 110oC
Engine oil pressure 25 to 100 psi
Transmission oil pressure 30 to 70 psi
Fuel pressure 5 to 20 psi

T53-L-13 ENGINE LIMITS

Normal rated (maximum continuous) 6250C

Military rated (30-minute limit) 645 0C
Starting and acceleration (5-second limit) 6750C
Maximum for starting and acceleration 760oC
Torque pressure limit 50 psi

54

'4

f
-MM^BBA^iBM *mi *m
I i^>
APPENDIX V. TEST TECHNIQUES & DATA
REDUCTION PROCEDURES
INTRODUCTION

Nondimensional Method

1. Level-flight helicopter performance results may be generalized

through use of nondimensional coefficients. Test results obtained
at specific test conditions may be used to define accurately, per-
formance at conditions not specifically tested. The following non-
dimensional coefficients were used to generalize the level-flight
test results obtained during this flight test program.

D
Power r ec- ■ + = C
Coefficient r =
550 SHP

pA (fiR)3

WT
Thrust Coefficient = C
1
pA (fiR)2

1.689 VT
Tip-Speed Ratio = y = Qp

Instrumentation

2. All instrumentation was calibrated prior to being installed

in the aircraft. A detailed tabulation of the instrumentation
used is given in appendix III. All quantitative data obtained
during this flight test program were derived from special sen-
sitive instrumentation. Data were obtained from four sources:

a. Oscillograph.

b. Photopanel.

c. Pilot's panel (hand recorded).

d. Engineer's panel (hand recorded).

Weight and Balance

3. A high degree of control was maintained on weight and balance

of the test helicopter. Variations in empty gross weight and eg

55 ,

i
J

;
-1
__,- ./ „. i \
 because of changes in instrumentation of helicopter components were
defined by periodically weighing the helicopter. Fuel load was de-
fined by measuring the fuel specific gravity and temperature after
each fueling, and by using an external sight gage on the calibrated
fuel cell to determine fuel volume. Fuel used in flight was re-
corded by a calibrated fuel-used system, and the results were cross-
checked with the sight gage reading following each flight. Heli-
copter loading and eg were contiolled by using ballast.

PERFORMANCE TEST

Level Flight

4. Level flight performance was defined by measuring the shaft

horsepower required to maintain level flight throughout the air-
speed range of the helicopter. A constant Op was maintained by
increasing altitude as fuel was consumed. A broad range of thrust
coefficients was flown in the hog configuration. One speed power
was flown in each of the other wing armament configurations. The
results of the hog configuration level-flight tests were converted
to nondimensional form and carpet-plotted as Cp versus C/p with
lines of constant tip-speed ratio (p). This carpet plot defined
level flight performance for all gross weights, density altitudes
and airspeeds throughout the range of C^ tested. The level-flight
performance data for the other wing armament configurations were
compared to the clean configuration for increase in equivalent
flat plate area (f):

2 ACp A (flR)3
Af
(VT x 1.689J3

2 ACp A
Af
(y),l3
5. Specific range performance was calculated from the true air-
speed at a power setting and the engine fuel flow at that power
setting.

true airspeec nautical air miles

Specific Range
fuel flow per pound of fuel

56

K i

/
i^
Autorotation

6. Autorotational descent performance data were acquired during

sawtooth autorotations. Variation in rate of descent with airspeed
was defined by stabilizing at a constant airspeed with a rotor
speed of 324 rpm and measuring rate of descent. To determine the
effect of rotor speed upon rate of descent, airspeed was stabilized
and rotor speed was varied. The observed rate of descent was cor-
rected to tapeline rate of descent by the expression:

R/D =
tapeline tdhP/dt) ^std^

Power Determination

7. The engine torquemeter is essentially a piston (restrained by

oil) the pressure of which is proportional to the power output of
the engine. The equation for determining the test shp as obtained
from engine manufacturer test cell calibration curves is developed
as outlined in paragraphs 8 through 12.

8. The horsepower transmitted by a rotating shaft may be expressed

in the following manner:

SHP = X N X TR
12 x 53,000 E Q

9. Calibration of the engine torquemeter system indicated that

the engine shaft output torque was slightly nonlinear as a func-
tion of indicated torque pressure. This nonlinear relationship
is graphically presented in figure I. This plot was used to ob-
tain engine output torque (TRQ) by the graph with engine output
torque pressure (P).

10. The rotor speed can be determined from engine output shaft
speed as follows:

N
E
R 20.383

11. Substituting the last equations, a convenient equation for

determining output shaft horsepower can be developed:

2Tr x 20.383 x TRQ x N .

SHP = = 3 234 X 10_ X TR X N
12 x 33,000 ' Q R

12. This equation was used during the program to determine the
shaft horsepower for each test condition,

57

i : ^
:\
■•itrffiiiSi^ - . ■■ ■ir.n tm 1 r
 -
^MGtut CHIRAC TERtsT^cs
TS3-1.-13 ^»LEKOOl

UOTES. L PCUUTS OaiAlMED FROM E.iaGmic.V\ÄMUPfsCTURES

CAUSRATION TEST COV1DUCTCD OW 2ZAUGUST IRftT
i.DftSHEDUUE OBTAmED FROM LYCOMIU&T S3-L-I3;
EWGIME MODEL SPECiriCATtOU WO. 104-.B3

I60O0
■\ y.
I

t1
laooo
y
(

12

aooo

i
■3:
Ld:..

'"■■;';'!;:'

r::T"T" f
.... . j :;:: ,1..:.: .. | ..:

i::i.:i;l!;:;l- *:::'•.

i£0 m ll* 120 '^rO

w

I
Trttr
-Ritf mmw
irrHr;i
|4Qiiiii|i:< Hipi tpTdt i^^ttyipp^g plIiiF- ■:-i

58

_ ■ - •

""'—■".' - ' ^ ^ -t**^^ il v -^ -■--—•-

STABILITY AND CONTROL

Directional Control Lvaluation

13. Directional control tests were conducted by stabilizing the

helicopter at various azimuths and airspeeds and by recording the
required control positions to maintain the desired heading. A
ground vehicle with a calibrated speedometer was used as an aid in
stabilizing the In licopter. Ambient wind velocity and direction
were measured by vane ar i anemometer at a location free from the
effect of rotor downwasl . Tests were conducted when wind veloci-
ties were less than 4 knots.

MISCELLANEOUS

Engine "Beep" Comrol Characteristics

14. The engine "beep" control characteristics were defined both

with a loaded and unloaded main rotor system. The engine "beep"
control characteristics were defined by stabilizing at a rotor
speed of 324 rpm while in level flight and on the ground. The en-
gine "beep" control was then actuated for a specified amount of
time. A continuous record was made of engine and rotor speed re-
sponse during the maneuver. This process was repeated until the
entire speed-range authority of the "beep" control was determined.

Airspeed Calibration

15. The test airspeed indicator system (boom) was calibrated by

comparing its readings to a known reference. A calibrated trail-
ing bomb was suspended from the helicopter with a cable approxi-
mately 50 feet in length to avoid proximity effect. The aircraft
was then stabilized at various airspeeds in level flight, climb and
autorotation. By comparing the airspeed corrected for instrument
errors of the boom system to the bomb system, the error was defined.

16. The test airspeed indicator system [boom) was calibrated at

higher airspeeds, in level flight and dive using a T-28 pacer air-
craft. The test and pacer aircraft were stabilized at the same
airspeed, and data were recorded in each aircraft simultaneously.
Since the position error of the pacer is known, the calibrated air-
speed of the aircraft can be readily computed.

59

•
i ^
APPENDIX VI. SYMBOLS & ABBREVIATIONS

Listed and defined in the following table are symbols and abbre-
viations used in this report.

Symbols and
Abbreviations Definition Units

A Rotor disc area ft2

CG, eg Center of gravity

C Power coefficient
P
VJrp Thrust coefficient

DEC, deg Degrees degrees

dhp/dt Rate of descent ft/min

0
EGT Engine exhaust gas temperature C

f Equivalent flat plate area ft2

fig., figs. Figure, figures

ft Feet feet

FS Fuselage Station inches

fwd Forward

GROT, grwt Gross weight pounds

H Density altitude feet

D
IGE In ground effect

in. Inch, inches inches

KCAS Knots calibrated airspeed knots

KIAS Knots indicated airspeed knots

KTAS Knots true airspeed knots

60

/ ■ i ä^
^— mm *ä ** - ■- *
 J
•£_ ;..:.

Symbols and
Abbreviations Definition Units

LB, lb Weight pounds

MAX, max Maximum

MIN, min Minimum

NAMPP Nautical air miles per pound of fuel

IC Engine speed rpm

NR Main rotor speed rpm

Engine compressor speed percent

Engine output torque pressure in. of Hg

psi Pounds per square inch lb/in2

R Rotor radius feet

R/D Rate of descent ft/min

ref Reference or referred

RPM, rpm Revolutions per minute rpm

SCAS Stability control augmentation system —

SEC Second

SHP, shp Shaft horsepower —

S/N Serial number —

STD, std Standard —

0
TEMP, temp Temperature F or °C

TRQ Engine output torque in-lb

WT Weight pounds

Calibrated airspeed knots

cal

61

-■ - 1

1
-■•:fiui«
ÜSHWliü '^ ' — -^
I -*■■--' Mfi.
 Symbols and
Abbreviations Definition Units

V Cruise airspeed knots

cruise
V Maximum airspeed for level flight knots
H
V Limit airspeed knots
L
V True airspeed knots
T
W Engine air flow lb/hour
a
W Engine bleed air flow lb/hour
bl
0
C Degrees centigrade degrees

A Difference —

fi Main rotor angular velocity radians

y Tip-speed ratio —

p Air mass density slugs/f

6 Temperature ratio —

% Percent --—

Listed below are the subscripts used in this report,

a Ambient

std Standard

t Test

62
:

-- --■ " -» - —-^

APPENDIX VII. PILOT RATING SCALE

CM co LP r^- oo m o
■< •«t XT
^■

-tt ■8
IC
*t = =3 =J

o Z o _J UJ
UJ . O UJ _J
1- Q — o OD
-<
(O UJ h- UJ M
UJ Q -«t UJ to
3 UJ to z oc
o UJ Z o ■<
U-
UJ K Z UJ UJ o >■

o: o oc
to
to
— o
X •< 1—
z o
GC

o.
■<

X
Li-
a. o to >■ LU
X I z 3
X
►—
z m
>- t-
z —
UJ
LU UJ ZJ
> X
-1 o
-< —
UJ
LU
I
O
-1
UJ X
X o o
oc =3 z
— to
t—
z —
to -<X
X oc UJ — UJ «t
0- o I
UJ o »■ n_ ■< X
to u. o
>■

o o X UJ X h-

>- s
o ■ o oc uj tu (— o to UJ UJ
— 1- cc o a. —i o. o OD => QC _J
h- % d. UJ ■X ea X z X X =3 Z — o
tO UJ X j— ■< — o 3 QC
— X
a: uJ
< —
et:
UJ oc t—
o
h- LU Q
o
o
to
to
—
h-
z
O- f-
LU Z
UJ ?- . o o •< ■< UJ l— LU O QC O
o
H-
-j
< o.
a Z
O
oc toa.
I
o
UJ to
UJ
ZJ o
—
to
"3
<t
X
o.
'O
z
UJ
z
*I
X
i
QC
=3
o-
to
QC
=>
o z
c>
Q
•<
X
— o o
z
z o
UJ
X
• o UJ
o LU
QC o
LU •<
ac
O
—
<i
h-
tj t- UJ — to tO tJ _J tO UJ
3 o UJ UJ UJ z to o CO QC

Q
t- O
z %
o
_J
to
— Qc —o ^-o 3 Q- o to ■
>- t—
QC
X o
UJ UJ -« t- u. ■«I UJ => Z _l X t—
to — UJ UJ Q O Ui — —1 o z
m •< UJ to UJ
UJ
oc
—
o
Q.
X
UJ
_J z z o
— z
o z*
o
_J X —1 — UJ 00 UJ —
ö- o <t Q.
m z ta UJ U. —i LU
X tj
UJ U- — —i t— to
LkJ
z —
=» (O >-o UJ
t_3
■«I
z z
o UJ
o •< z
CD O
* —1
o z
—1
o tj
U.
—
«X
►—
CD
-t
Z
UJ to
o
>-
-J
>-_J —Xto z
<t
z X
2 S ^=13 to QC
LU
X
QC
O
X
oc
LU
dO t<l X
X S -«t
t— Q-
O O
—1 <t OS
X o o QC
oc 00 >■ o t-o
i^ (-T
_j 0=
— O
I u-
(—
^1
u.
or
UJ
-3
ca
u-
OC
UJ
< < ■£
Z
O
—
t—
to o.
Q-
UJ
o o
z o
LU
U-
QC
Q. LU
u.
— h-
2
z
t— o
z ic
o -ß
CJ
UJ
•a UJ X
tQ UJ O Q-
h- LU o UJ O
—1

l—
^t X c oc
£L.
>- UJ t_} CQ UJ UJ
o
o UJ OQ
•< z
1- >- —» ■<
—J
UJ O 3 o Z -J -1 UJ .J
z _J
m
_l —
-J
lO O z o UJ CQ "3 tO CD Q z _l LU _J i*:
o
Z'
X
h-
■<
"I (D UJ •<
^-
o 1— _l 1— -t
z
to c
UJ
UJ
o= o
UJ
z
to
O
>-
Q-
—
3
h-
Q.
LU
QC a-
o UJ LU
g 5 —
C3
1-
o
h-
z
UJ
s
Q UJ
CJ
X
o
o
— o
•< o
3:
o
u_
U-
o -<i
O UJ
cc o o
LU UJ O
~3
X
8 X o tJ z o
o z
OC
5 o.
r
_l

UJ <J? u- o X oc >• oc <t <I o ■< X =3

>o O u.
o
E o ä
xj o
r
Of
o >-
QC
•«i
t— X
t—
z
. UJ
1—
■<
>-oc jj o a O UJ =D
a: CO UJ UJ - X O- x
h- o X UJ UJ 1—
o 3 o y- <J t_- » =^ o — t-
t-
■<

1> =i =1 ■«t <I o ■< * o .

-J t— o o to OC _J z
o
■<
■<

t— t— x
3: t- UJ
a CO >- UJ
— X
Q, UJ
O O
Z —
Q.
O
— z
u- -1 o _ UJ ■< t- o — Z — h- o
UJ » 1 1— z z «X tO UJ •<
Ol
<
-J
Q.
3:
UJ
>■
>■
—I o
z -<
to
-I
1—
LU
— 1—
z a: — 31 tO -J
CD z
tO
to
to
1— /i UJ o o oc — CJ O -«I O X — UJ
XI z X
CO JJ
*J
Q
3 a:
O
z z
o~
•<
UJ
to
CO ^ Z3
ü
—
u.
Q£
QS
U_
Q= o-:
to
■<
Q-
X u.
—1 — UJ «l LU O LU O
£ «t UJ — O X cc O 3C Q. u, u. o o
z
UJ o
o X
h—
1— h~
3.'
O
Z
LU
z
o
UJ
_I X
sX * QC
o
QO o >- ce o
X S o
X > u-
1—
o
■«t to
CD X,
QC O .*;LU UJ —
UJ
_t
ca o
«X
to
z
i—
(X •< ■^
O
h-
-S
"-
oc
UJ
> UJ
_l
CD
—
t—
<t
to
X
o
■<

h-
CO
UJ
— I "«
tt
Q.
UJ
J— UJ a
o. UJ o <J
UJ<_>
UJ
tO
IU
O
z H
• Q. to z
Xt UJ
to

O — 3 X ai ■<
UJ ■< Z UJ o UJ O. CD
J X o- ■o ■< UJ o o X "J t— u- z
o ra UJ X _J o z X -« to _ o
S
<-> «=
• uj
t -
h- uj a;
z Q ci
•< ■< -
o- £ m>■ <I UJ UJ UJ
et >
3 to
o
x
2
o
,
QC
«J 3: ü UJ UJ o — z
< >■
—
u-
ce
o:
v)
h- c1
o oc
_l
U- to
X tx <t
o — O
Zii QC
UJ X
O
X
—
I-
o
Q

t UJ ■< 3 - U- t_> u_ O- ^ -1 QC X _J 1—
:: O X CQ 3: Q_
UJ
Q-
UJ
U. UI UJ X
o o- —
z
— u. 5 s: 3
■<

1- LU Ui
_l CD
u ■', O
Z
UJ
1—
X
J—l—
J _ z - O
c1
t
UJ Cc o
-n o t->
* —>
—
3 d
-J je
j' ^ o ^ * ^
O UJ — o UJ Z
c> _J - _I o
a; UJ —J o to oa —
H _J O UJ to *I 1- O Z
CQ K CJ — —1 Z o o
Cr; «r.
a.
h- -t 3 — UJ
z x < t— z o
c.' •< O ■< U_ >• t— 3
tj o x o «a *i

63

^g^g i^>;;;i*^^
 lINri.ASRTFTF.n
Security Classification
DOCUMENT CONTROL DATA -R&D
(Security classification ol title, body ot abstract and Indexing annotation muat be tnfred wh*n tha ovtmlt report la ctaatHludj
I. ORIGINATING ACTIVITY (Corporate author) Zm. REPORT SKCURITV CLA JSI^IC ATION

US ARMY AVIATION SYSTEMS TEST ACTIVITY (USAASTA) UNCLASSIFIED

26. CROUP
EDWARDS AIR FORCE BASE, CALIFORNIA 93523

u
» REPORT TITLE

ENGINEERING FLIGHT TEST.

( AH-1G HELICOPTER, HUEYCOBRA, PHASE B, PART 6

^_MSCRif>TiVE_NOTES (TVp» dfieporltml Inclutlvedäle'ii)'

FINAL REPÄT. IIL-JI -//'./ 6£
J^tJJMOBlS) (POSi nmiM, mlddl» InlHml, liimi nan«) ' " " ~~~

C: fiflD^OrrTlNNESTmD) PROJECT ENGINEER

WILLIAM J. CONNOR.''"CWO, AV, US ARMY, PROJECT OFFICER/PILOT
-B-SEaSJ^g/TE 7m. TOTAL NO. OF PAGES 76. NO. OF REPS

^ OVaaggR' 1369
^RACTipRCT!
RCTTÄm.NO.
]
/:■

I '/.
'I'D ~67:-
9m. ORIGINATOR'S REPORT NUMTBCRISI
USATECOM 4-6-0500-01
10

b. PROJE USAAVSCOM 66-06

USAASTA-66-06
USAÄVSC0M~66
96. OTHER REPORT NO(S) (Any other numbmrm Ihmt mmy bt mmml0i»d
thl» rmport)

N/A
10. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
This document may be further distributed by any holder only with specific
prior approval obtained through the CG, USAAVSCOM, ATTN: AMSAV-R-F, P0 Box 209,
St. Louis, Missouri 63166.
11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12. SPONSORING MILITARY ACTIVITY
Commanding General
USAAVSCOM, ATTN: AMSAV-R-F
(3^fcTü-^~0-rt P0 Box 209, St. Louis, Missouri 63166

iThe AH-1G helicopter Phase B, Part 6 test program was conducted

at Shafter, California, and Edwards Air Force Base, California,-)
from 12 March through 3 May 1968 by the US Army Aviation_Sys-=-^—
tems Test Activity, Edwards Air Force Base, California.'"-^The pro-
gram was conducted to determine level flight performance, auto-
rotational performance, engine characteristics, armed helicopter
mission capability and to evaluate the in-ground-effect (IGE)
handling qualities with the canopy doors removed.^The helicopter
is directionally unstable when hovering IGE with either the
doors on or off in winds of 9 to 13 knots for azimuthVange from
160 to 260 degrees (clockwise from nose of aircraft) . \his in-
stability is a major deficiency and detracts from the mission
capability of the aircraft. Undue pilot attention is required
to avoid overtorquing the main transmission during maneuvers
quiring abrupt left-lateral cyclic inputs in forward flight,
overtorque condition will only occur below the critical altitude
of the engine. Additional deficiencies and shortcomings have
been published in previous reports. Sufficient performance data
were not obtained to determine the guarantee compliance.

pom 4 M "f«i RKPLACKt DO FOHM 1471. I JAN «4, WHICH It

DD I MOV •• |*| /J OUOLKTK POM ARMY U».
UNCLASSIFIED
Security CtaMlHcatlon

-t - .—»' .
 UNCLASSIFIED
Security Classlficstion

KEY WOKDi

AH-1G helicopter
Phase B, Part 6
Conducted to determine
Level flight performance
Autorotational performance
Engine characteristics
Armed helicopter
Mission capability
Handling qualities
Canopy doors removed
Directionally unstable
Hovering IGE
Overtorquing main transmission

UNCLASSIFIED
Security Classification

v
^-.,^-....... ...a^afeia» ^- ^gjj^i^^^^^
■■■:;.«, -^ -^