X2 From the Pilot's View
Sikorsky’s experimental test pilot for the X2
details the technology that is influencing the S-97 Raider and SB>1 Defiant.
Imagine
cruising low level in a helicopter in excess of 200 kt and then hammering the
brakes, coming to a hover in less than half a mile. Now consider you can do
this at maximum gross weight and in 6,000 feet, 95-deg F (6K95°) conditions.
This
off-the-chart performance comes with equally impressive handling qualities due
to the characteristics of the rigid rotor, such as greater control power and
decreased rotor response lag. These fundamentals make this helicopter fly more
like a tactical jet aircraft than a classic rotorcraft.
You
might be thinking this is marketing exaggeration. But I don’t need to use my
imagination to conjure up this scenario as an experimental test pilot for
Sikorsky; I have experienced this performance firsthand.
I
have flown as a command pilot on every flight of the S-97 Raider, and prior to
that I was the backup telemetry pilot for the X2 technology demonstrator, a
Collier-award-winning aircraft that now has a place in the Smithsonian’s
National Air & Space Museum.
Similar
performance is available on all X2 technology aircraft. X2 refers to “times
two,” in reference to roughly double helicopter-like speeds. The incredible
hover performance is achieved due to how the power is managed for the aircraft.
Usually, helicopter power requirements are calculated based on “hover power
required” as the highest demand condition. In X2 aircraft, power is based on
the highest demand, which is now maximum speed, and so excess hover power is
the result. So you are probably thinking you’d need a giant fuel tank to cruise
at these high speeds. Not true. The X2 lift-over-drag performance, proven in
flight test, is closer to a turboprop airplane than a helicopter.
As
the lead project pilot for both the Raider and SB>1 Defiant, the
Sikorsky-Boeing demonstrator being built as part of the U.S. Army’s joint
multi-role technical demonstration program, I have spent hundreds of hours in
simulation testing these configurations. We proved the physics with the X2
demonstrator and now are proving the scalability with both Raider and Defiant.
Sikorsky, in
partnership with Boeing, is developing the SB>1 Defiant for the U.S. Army’s
joint multi-role technology demonstration program.Photo courtesy of Sikorsky
Raider
is a single-engine, 10,000- to 12,000-lb, 34-ft rotor diameter, 7-ft diameter
propeller aircraft with a crew of two and room for six passengers. Raider has a
fly-by-wire flight control system, active vibration control and retractable
landing gear. Two multi-function displays and a control and display unit (CDU)
provide control for all systems except the radios. A basic Garmin stack of
radios provides communication capability. Solid state power controllers are
activated through the CDU rather than traditional breakers to aid in providing
a clean uncluttered cockpit. Environmental control provides cockpit cooling as
higher speed aerodynamics necessitates a tightly buttoned-up fuselage.
I
cannot say enough about fly-by-wire systems — they are like an “easy button”
for pilots. With a press of a button on the cyclic, the aircraft can fly like a
sports car for nap-of-the-earth combat flying or like an airliner for
instrument flying. The system provides the backbone for a variety of features that
can be added via software to include automatic landings for brownout, fully
coupled approaches or Sikorsky’s Matrix Technology autonomous system.
In
Raider, the flight control mode is currently rate command attitude hold, aka
the “sports car” mode. The Raider cyclic is a side stick spring loaded to a
center detent position whereby the pilot commands a rate proportional to stick
displacement. The maximum displacement represents the maximum rate the team has
decided to allow the aircraft to achieve. This differs from a limited authority
hydro-mechanical system where full displacement is seldom seen as it represents
the limits of the control cube. The benefit this provides is to allow the pilot
to use the full range of the cyclic and consistently achieve a predictable rate
with finely-tuned stick sensitivity.
My
first exposure to this phenomenon was in the Boeing-Sikorsky RAH-66 Comanche,
which was easy to fly, up to the significant limits of the machine. The ability
to slap the stick to the stop and get an eye-watering turn rate that is both
controllable and within all the dynamic system and structural limitations will
make aces out of relatively junior aviators. We have demonstrated this
capability in all our fly-by-wire aircraft and are developing the same
capability on Raider.
The
collective in Raider is unique in that there is only one, and it’s positioned
between the pilot and co-pilot. This replicates the modern business jet model
with power in the center and sticks outboard. That’s right — the pilot in the
left seat flies with the cyclic in the left hand and the collective in the
right hand. The Raider is an experimental aircraft, and this configuration
represents part of the experiment.
If
the fly-by-wire control system can fly autonomously, we can also make it easy
to fly in an alternate configuration thereby providing designers more
flexibility in cockpit design. The X2 relies primarily on the advancing blades
of each disc for lift and the propeller for thrust as such the collective
programs down as you go faster. The fly-by-wire system automates the
collective. At around 100 kt, the pilot feels a gentle tug down from the
collective, essentially the flight controls saying, “I got this.” The system
then manages the collective to the optimal spot for the current airspeed.
In
high-speed flight, X2 flies like an airplane with nearly all the power going to
the prop. Climbs and descents are made by raising or lowering the nose for the
desired vertical speed. The prop is adjusted via a thumb beeper on the collective.
Push forward to go faster and aft to slow down. There is incredible
deceleration capability via negative pitch on the prop. Negative prop pitch is
used on approaches to keep the nose low until touchdown, greatly improving
terminal area safety. Prop pitch also provides the ability to hover nose up or
nose down adding tactical options. While the collective is automated to fly
like an airplane in high speed flight, the pilot can override this and fly like
a traditional helicopter moving the collective to climb or descend. The final
feature of the prop is that the pilot can disengage it via a clutch. Once
disengaged, the prop either slows down or stops to reduce the acoustic
signature and improve ground safety. The prop is self-contained and is not required
for flight. Without the prop, Raider has already demonstrated flight out to 150
kt with power to spare.
X2
aircraft do not require hydraulic lines from the main gearbox-driven hydraulic
pumps down the tailboom to the prop, as is required for tail rotors. The
independence of the prop simplifies the hydraulic system and improves
reliability.
The Sikorsky S-97
Raider is Sikorsky’s proposed high-speed scout and attack helicopter.Photo courtesy of Sikorsky
In
flight test, we build up slowly based on conservative limits and progress from
the known to the unknown while methodically looking at data and making
improvements where necessary. In flying Raider during its first flights in
2015, I frequently heard “knock it off” over the radio as the engineers
watching 1,000-plus aircraft parameters observed a parameter from a low
fidelity test go over the limit.
Component
limitations are based on three primary sources of information: ground test
events, an “iron bird” test vehicle or via analytical means. Analytical limits
are the lowest fidelity and consequently have the largest knock downs, whereas
the other test-based limits tend to have less conservatism based on the
rigorous exercise of actual componentry. When the “knock it off” call happens,
it sets in motion a detailed review to determine how to proceed. We are then
required to conduct a higher fidelity test to raise the limit, strengthen the
part or tune the dynamics in a different way. The iterative nature of this
exploration is time-consuming.
So
far, Raider has a solid feel through the flight envelope. The last four flights
were clear of any “knock it off” calls. We have flown to 150 kt with the
propeller disengaged, flown slaloms turns at 45- to 50-deg angles of bank, and
accelerated to 120 kt with the propeller engaged.
The
control in these maneuvers is as crisp as any aircraft I have flown. Rolling to
a steep bank angle requires a single lateral input to the cyclic. I hit the
roll rate I want, hold the input until reaching the desired bank and then let
go of the cyclic, allowing the system to maintain the bank angle. When I want
to roll out of the turn I put an input in the opposite direction until leveling
off. I also can hit that level point quickly with little effort as you only
have to get close and the flight controls will “tidy it up” to wings level.
These
are not autopilot features, but attributes of a full-authority system that
greatly reduces pilot workload. To accelerate out of the hover, I can either
lower the nose like a standard helicopter, add propeller thrust or a
combination of both, all of which have been flown in Raider. In
low-speed-flight, Raider is agile and the lag-free control response gives it a
true sports car feel. In low speed, we have been to 25 to 30 kt in all cardinal
directions, with more to follow.
The
first Raider prototype was poised to exceed 180 kt last summer when an incident
resulted in a program speed bump. Its flight status is expected to resume soon,
followed by return to flight with speed objective demonstration over the
summer. RWI
In flight test, we build up slowly based on conservative limits and progress from the known to the unknown while methodically looking at data and making improvements where necessary. In flying Raider during its first flights in 2015, I frequently heard “knock it off” over the radio as the engineers watching 1,000-plus aircraft parameters observed a parameter from a low fidelity test go over the limit.
Component limitations are based on three primary sources of information: ground test events, an “iron bird” test vehicle or via analytical means. Analytical limits are the lowest fidelity and consequently have the largest knock downs, whereas the other test-based limits tend to have less conservatism based on the rigorous exercise of actual componentry. When the “knock it off” call happens, it sets in motion a detailed review to determine how to proceed. We are then required to conduct a higher fidelity test to raise the limit, strengthen the part or tune the dynamics in a different way. The iterative nature of this exploration is time-consuming.
So far, Raider has a solid feel through the flight envelope. The last four flights were clear of any “knock it off” calls. We have flown to 150 kt with the propeller disengaged, flown slaloms turns at 45- to 50-deg angles of bank, and accelerated to 120 kt with the propeller engaged.
The control in these maneuvers is as crisp as any aircraft I have flown. Rolling to a steep bank angle requires a single lateral input to the cyclic. I hit the roll rate I want, hold the input until reaching the desired bank and then let go of the cyclic, allowing the system to maintain the bank angle. When I want to roll out of the turn I put an input in the opposite direction until leveling off. I also can hit that level point quickly with little effort as you only have to get close and the flight controls will “tidy it up” to wings level.
These are not autopilot features, but attributes of a full-authority system that greatly reduces pilot workload. To accelerate out of the hover, I can either lower the nose like a standard helicopter, add propeller thrust or a combination of both, all of which have been flown in Raider. In low-speed-flight, Raider is agile and the lag-free control response gives it a true sports car feel. In low speed, we have been to 25 to 30 kt in all cardinal directions, with more to follow.
The first Raider prototype was poised to exceed 180 kt last summer when an incident resulted in a program speed bump. Its flight status is expected to resume soon, followed by return to flight with speed objective demonstration over the summer. RWI
Ingen kommentarer:
Legg inn en kommentar
Merk: Bare medlemmer av denne bloggen kan legge inn en kommentar.