Thesis

BASIC INTERCHANGEABILITY OF FLIGHT TEST METHODOLOGY BETWEEN
REMOTE CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT & FULL - SCALE AIRCRAFT
A Thesis
Presented to the faculty of the Department of Mechanical Engineering
California State University, Sacramento
Submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
in
Mechanical Engineering
by
Christian Watt
SPRING
2020
© 2020
Christian Watt
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
ii
A Thesis
by
Christian Watt
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair

Rustin Vogt, Ph.D.
__________________________________, Second Reader

Hong - Yue (Ray) Tang, Ph.D.
____________________________
Date
iii
Student: Christian Watt
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and this thesis is suitable for electronic submission to the library and
credit is to be awarded for the thesis.
____________________, Graduate Coordinator ___________________

Troy D. Topping, Ph.D. Date
Department of Mechanical Engineering
iv
Abstract
of
by
Christian Watt
Flight test methodology is often discussed regarding full-scale aircraft, leaving out the
flight testing of model aircraft. Information on how to comprehensively conduct and
analyze the interchangeable flight test methodology between full-scale and model aircraft
procedures is scarce to come by. Systematically following procedures to conduct a flight
test on a full-scale aircraft was conducted on a model aircraft named the AlbaBird. The
AlbaBird’s dimensions include a length of 34.3”, wingspan of 43.3”, wing area of 209.3
in2, approximate chord length of 9”, and a weight of 3.54 lbs. A performance flight test
was conducted on the model aircraft and demonstrated that the classic means of gathering
climb and descent data using the Sawtooth Climb method for full-scale aircraft gathered
information on the best angle of climb, best rate of climb, minimum rate of descent, and
maximum glide speed. It was proven that following the same flight test methodology
used to gather performance information for a full-scale aircraft may be used on a smaller
model aircraft, at least when the using the sawtooth climb method. This may not always
v
be true for all model aircraft because the reynolds number may have an adverse effect on
the quality of data gathered if it is too small, leading to potentially unpredictable data and
results. There were three performance flight tests performed. Tests 1 and 2 were able to
identify that the maximum speed at 60% throttle was 38 kts and the stall speed was 23
kts. Test 3 determined climb and descent performance using the Sawtooth Climb method.
During the climb performance test, the airspeed for best angle of climb was 24 kts at 712
fpm and the best angle of climb was 27 kts at 755 fpm. For the descent performance test,
the minimum rate of descent was 25 kts at -290 fpm and the maximum glide speed was
31 kts at -327 fpm.
_______________________, Committee Chair

Rustin Vogt, Ph.D.
_______________________
Date
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
To my caring life partner, Rachel, who has always encouraged my endeavors and to my
family who has always supported my studies. I would also like to thank my editor,
Garrett, who helped make this work possible and my RC test pilot, Al, who performed
flight tests. Lastly, I would like to thank those individuals who helped encourage me to
pursue my dreams of flight testing.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Acknowledgements ........................................................................................................... vii
List of Figures ......................................................................................................................x
Chapter
1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Evolution of Flight Test ............................................................................ 1
1.2 Key Areas of Flight Test ........................................................................... 2
1.3 What Flight Test Provides ......................................................................... 4
2 BACKGROUND .......................................................................................................... 6
2.1 Flight Test Resources ................................................................................... 6
2.2 Prior Work with Model Aircraft .................................................................. 7
2.3 Types of Scaled Aircraft .............................................................................. 9
2.4 Scaling and Weight .................................................................................... 10
2.5 Basic RC Electronic Hardware .................................................................. 15
2.6 Telemetry, Data Acquisition, and Flight Controllers ................................. 16
2.7 Flight Test Report Structure ....................................................................... 21
2.8 Weight and Balance ................................................................................... 26
2.9 AlbaBird Fixed Wing Aircraft and Data Acquisition ................................ 28
3 EXPERIMENT ........................................................................................................... 31
3.1 Overview ................................................................................................. 31
viii
3.2 Weight and Balance: Preliminary Test.................................................... 32
3.3 Maximum Speed: Flight Test 1 ............................................................... 34
3.4 Stall Speed: Flight Test 2 ........................................................................ 36
3.5 Sawtooth Climb/Descent: Flight Test 3 .................................................. 38
4 ANALYSIS ................................................................................................................. 44
4.1 Weight and Balance ................................................................................... 44
4.2 Test 1 and Test 2 Data................................................................................ 45
4.3 Climb Analysis Using Data from Test 3 .................................................... 46
4.4 Descent Analysis Using Data from Test 3 ................................................. 51
5 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................... 55
6 FURTHER STUDY .................................................................................................... 57
Appendix A. Flight Test Data (Test 1 and Test 2) .............................................................58
Appendix B. Flight Test Data (Test 3)...............................................................................59
References ..........................................................................................................................60
ix
LIST OF FIGURES
1 - Composition of Aircraft Performance Characteristics .................................................. 3
2 - Spin Tunnel Model, a Radio-Controlled Model, and the Full-scale Aircraft ................ 7
3 - Scaling Factor Uses in the Design of a Model Aircraft .............................................. 11
4 - Estimated Vcr for Given Temperatures ....................................................................... 14
5 - Basic RC Electronics ................................................................................................... 15
6 - Comparative Displays of Fully Customizable OSD of the ETV ................................. 17
7 - Pixhawk4 Flight Controller Hardware Package .......................................................... 18
8 - Eagle Tree Vector Flight Controller, GPS, and Power Supply Unit ........................... 19
9 - ETV Graphing Software Technology .......................................................................... 20
10 - Effect of PFC and SFC on an Airplane’s Axis .......................................................... 25
11 - Determining Moments of Inertia via the Swing Method ........................................... 27
12 - Example of a Ready to Fly AlbaBird ........................................................................ 28
13 - Location of CG in Relation to the Leading Edge ...................................................... 29
14 - Reference Datums and CG ........................................................................................ 33
15 - Location of CG Relative to Leading Edge ................................................................ 34
16 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vmax ............................................................................ 35
17 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vstall .......................................................................... 37
18 - Sawtooth Climb (SC) and a Sawtooth Descent (SC) ................................................ 39
19 – How to Combine a SC with a SD ............................................................................. 40
x
20 - Location of CG Relative to Aircraft Leading Edge Reference Datum...................... 44
21 - Vmax and Vstall Determined from Test 1 and Test 2 ................................................... 45
22 - Test Card with Data from Test 3 Climbs ................................................................... 47
23 - Location of the Best Angle of Climb......................................................................... 49
24 - Location of the Best Rate of Climb ........................................................................... 50
25 - Test Card with Data from Test 3 Descents ................................................................ 51
26 - Location of the Minimum Rate of Descent ............................................................... 52
27 - Location of the Maximum Glide Speed .................................................................... 53
28 - Final Parameters, Airspeeds, and Rates..................................................................... 55
xi
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Evolution of Flight Test
Since the beginning of humanity, there has been the instinctual desire to take flight. Fast
forward and you will find many attempts to achieve taking to the skies, but it wasn’t until
1903 when the Wright Brothers successfully achieved “first free, controlled flight of a
power-driven, heavier than air plane” [1]. In order to achieve this enormous feat, there
had to be some sort of process that involved an idea, planning and testing design
iterations. Flight test engineering encapsulates a variety of considerations that include
team efforts, systems engineering, objectives and requirements, design phases, flight test
and finally analysis [2]. Although neither Wilbur nor Oroville Wright earned an
engineering degree, the Wright brothers were the first of their kind to help usher in both
aviators and the engineers who created the aircraft. These men formed what’s known
today as modern flight test engineering and they set an exemplary universal standard for
flight test methodology. Although the brothers had unfortunately crashed one of their
airplanes in an accident, killing one passenger, they had consistently taken extensive
precautionary measures to alleviate risk. Without them taking extensive precautionary
measures, there is a great chance that there would have been more incidents in the
newfound world of aviation.

2
It is easy to think that the Wright brothers did most of their work without much
assistance, given their accomplishments, but that is a common misconception. The
brothers began to rapidly expand their professional network quickly after 1903.
Modern-day flight test pushes to take all factors of the final product into account and
does so by creating symbiotic teams comprised of the Flight Test Engineers (FTE) and
Test Pilots (TP). FTEs are and TPs are broken up further into several teams to help tackle
certain areas of the project that could include propulsion, flight controls, structures, etc.
Each team is often expected to present information on their work in formalized reports to
help make informed decisions for what is to come next with the aircraft.
1.2 Key Areas of Flight Test
Although here are many subcategories involved with flight test, it is commonly broken up
into three major areas: aircraft systems, handling qualities, and performance flight test [3].
Aircraft systems primarily focus on the avionics and smaller subsystems of the aircraft
and will not be addressed in detail during this report. Although a vital component of
flight test, aircraft systems do not necessarily allow for the ease of interchangeability of
flight test methodology between small-scaled models of aircraft and the all-encompassing
full-scale aircraft. The other regime of flight test deals with the handling qualities of the
aircraft. Handling qualities looks at “how the aircraft responds to pilot or other intentional
inputs” and hones in on “basic stability and control characteristics of the aircraft” [4].
3
Handling qualities would serve as an excellent area of study for a thesis but due to the
various inputs and variables involved, it will not be the primary focus of this report
because it is extremely time, cost and labor intensive to gather satisfactory data. Rather,
the last regime of aircraft flight test involves testing of its current “performance abilities,
such as aircraft speed or range, or system communication or sensor accuracy” [2]. The
figure below helps provide a visual representation of the components that make up
aircraft performance from a mission requirements point of view.
Figure 1 - Composition of Aircraft Performance Characteristics [5]
Performance flight testing has been chosen for the scope of this report because it allows
for the ease of interchangeability of flight test methodology between a scaled RC Model
4
and the full-scale aircraft. It is important to remember that through the duration of this
report the aircraft being tested does not have a full-scale counterpart and does not need
one because it is the interchangeability of the methodology that is being tested in the first
place. Although one should be able to extrapolate performance data from a model to a
full-scale aircraft, the largest hurdle when doing so would be choosing an RC aircraft and
scaling it as practically and feasibly possible; something unnecessary for the scope of this
report.
1.3 What Flight Test Provides
Flight testing has helped to provide a sound and standardized method of gathering
pertinent information on how and why aircraft perform the way they do. Preparation
before the flight test helps to alleviateany risky flights and allows the testing team to
confirm their previous calculations and previous tests with scaled-down models.
Being able to gather accurate data from flight test is crucial. It is generally simpler
financially to justify flight testing on a down-scaled aircraft with sufficient scaling so that
the same test can later be applied on the full-scale aircraft. This technique helps reduce
risk, confirm prior theories and confirm prior tests. Scaled-down RC models will from
here forward be referred to as models for simplicity. Models have been used in many
applications of flight test and Joseph Chambers’ book, Modeling Flight discusses the
5
many ways model aircraft and flight test methods have helped NASA in their
aeronautical endeavors [6]. Chambers’ book discusses different models and
configurations of aircraft tested in static tests (wind tunnel testing) and free-flight tests.
Free-flight tests help provide essential information that static tests are unable to provide
because, while static tests are often limited to specific parameters and dimensions, the
free-flight tests permit “an infinite number of flight maneuvers” [6]. The process of
testing often begins with wind tunnel testing of a model then moves onto free-flight
model testing, and then finally the full-scaled aircraft testing.
Although wind tunnel tests could provide extensive research opportunities alone, the
focus of this report will be solely on the use of a free-flight model aircraft. This report
will address the use of a free-flight model and how testing for performance characteristics
of that model can be determined the same way as a full-scale aircraft, using the same
flight test methodology. The remainder of the report discusses topics such as sources of
relevant flight test materials, previous works, the structure of flight test reports, as well as
the methodology to be used to conduct the performance flight test of the free-flight
model. This report will provide information on the data gathered post flight as well as an
in-depth analysis of the data found. Furthermore, the data from the flight test should help
yield insight on different airspeeds such as the weight and balance of the aircraft as well
as information on VX, VY, VminROD, and Vmaxglide.

6
CHAPTER 2
BACKGROUND
2.1 Flight Test Resources
Some of the most standardized resources available to those interested in flight test
include the Society of Flight Test Engineers Reference Handbook, Introduction to Flight
Test Engineering, and the USNTPS-FTM [7], [4], [5]. Although all of these resources
help to establish a standardized way of flight testing, the most noteworthy resource that
pertains to this report is that of the U.S. Naval Test Pilot School - Flight Test Manual
(FTM) because its objective is to “serve as a practical reference guide for planning,
executing, and reporting fixed wing performance flight testing” [5]. This has an objective
that closely aligns with this report’s objective and it should be noted that from here
forward the FTM will be frequently referenced through the remainder of this paper for its
various methods of conducting performance flight tests.
The FTM does go into extensive detail about topics such as the performance of level
flight, climbing, takeoff/landing and descending but only relates such test to full-scaled
aircraft, not model aircraft. For that reason, it was important to find reasons as to why and
how the full-scale performance methodology could be interchanged with scale model
aircraft. In Modeling Flight, Joseph Chambers discusses the exact reasons how and why
“dynamically scaled free-flying models are especially well-suited for investigations of the
7
flight dynamics of full-scale aircraft” and gives examples of how NASA has and
continues to use scaled models for preliminary testing [6].
Figure 2 - Spin Tunnel Model, a Radio-Controlled Model, and the Full-scale Aircraft [6]
2.2 Prior Work with Model Aircraft
Finding specific works that explicitly discuss flight test of both a scaled model and a full-
scale aircraft are scarce, yet one resource explicitly stood out from the rest. Michael
Hinton and Charles Eastlake had planned to expand on a 1/3-scale Cessna 172P and
discussed how they would plan to use it as a test bed for future experiments, gathering
real time data [8]. The aircraft being built was designed to help gather real-time, in-flight
data to aid the pilot and the crew (like the roles of a TP and an FTE). The first flight tests
8
were intended to help gather performance data such as level speed, rate of climb and
takeoff/landing distance whereas further testing was planned to yield more sophisticated
data that would be recorded from an on-board data acquisition and transmission system
(ODATS).
The data that could be recorded from the ODATS was capable of gathering “up to 60
different parameters from sensors mounted throughout the aircraft” and could gather data
such as engine RPM, pitot/static pressure, angle of attack, accelerations and much more
[8]. With the help of instruments such as gyros and linear accelerometers, dynamic
response flight testing could be performed which would virtually allow them to gather
just as much data as on a full-scale; capable of determining the handling qualities from
flight test. Although the report applied the appropriate scaling factors to the 1/3-scale
aircraft, yielding a wingspan scaled from 36’ to 12’, it should be noted that the scaled
mass of the aircraft should have yielded a scaled weight from 2400 lbs. to 89 lbs. [8]. This
means that a 12’ wingspan aircraft model would need to hold up essentially 90 lbs., and
after much reasoning and researching available RC model aircraft it was found that
similar aircraft would have a much lower weight than their true scaled weight. When
scaling an aircraft, or anything for that matter, it is not as simple as taking one parameter
and dividing it by a desired scaling factor. There has been extensive research done on
how to scale an aircraft properly and there is a plethora of variables that must be taken
9
into account dependent on how one would like the model to perform compared to the
full-scale aircraft.
2.3 Types of Scaled Aircraft
There are three major types of scaled aircraft (true scale, semi scale, and standoff scale)
and being able to determine relevant information needed for the specified model is
reliant on the intended use of the aircraft [9]. Major RC airplane hobbyist and former
Purdue University Mechanical Engineering graduate, Matt Brown discusses how there is
no out-of-the-box aircraft that has the level of detail that a custom build has. Custom
builds theoretically have the potential to provide true scaling and he mentions why the
scale of the aircraft matters.
Standoff scale models are intended to simply resemble the aircraft, either the same color
scheme or basic shape of the aircraft from afar, however these models neither look like
nor fly like the full-scale aircraft when the model is given more attention [9]. These
aircraft are generally sold relatively cheap and are already assembled or easy to assemble.
Semi-scale aircraft may look extremely similar to the true scale aircraft but commonly
the airframe is adjusted in favor of more desirable flight characteristics. To an untrained
eye one may glance at a semi-scale aircraft and tell little to no difference, but paying
close attention to detail, one should find that certain parameters such as wingspan, wing
10
area, wing shape and weight have been tweaked. A true scale model is “an exact replica
of a full-scale airplane” and the likelihood of finding an RC aircraft that is ready to fly
out-of-the-box is slim to none [9]. This report will plan to tackle an aircraft that is not
custom built and not fully to scale, therefore the model aircraft that will utilized for the
purpose of the flight test will be a modified semi scale fixed-wing airplane.
2.4 Scaling and Weight
It is important to understand how scaling factors work when designing a model aircraft
before understanding how to adequately conceive the weight of a scaled model.
According to the professional aircraft designer Stan Hall, when scaling an aircraft, the
term scale “has an additional connotation” and the “scale is expressed as linear although
it is actually non-linear” [10]. Take for example, scaling down a 30 ft. wingspan of an
aircraft and aiming to make a 1/6 model; the model’s wingspan would linearly decrease
by 1/6 and give the model a 5 ft. wingspan. Take that same example and say that the wing
area was 174 ft.2 which would mean that the model would be approximately 7 feet2 { 1 /
(6)2 }. Likewise, a volume would be a cubic function meaning that using the same
example with an aircraft weighing 2000 lbs., the scaled model would be 16 lbs. { 1 / (6)3
}. What this physically proves is that when scaling an aircraft, although the scaling factor
(λ) of 6 affects the linear dimensions such as lengths and distances, it does not affect
other parameters such as areas, masses, moments, etc. the same way. Hall provides a
11
useful table to help his readers understand exactly how scaling effects the other
parameters of the aircraft. This can be seen below.
Figure 3 - Scaling Factor Uses in the Design of a Model Aircraft [10]
Note the span and gross weight that Hall provides in table 1. The two parameters are
equivalent to a 35.8’ span and a 2645 lb. gross weight as well as a scaled down 7.16’
span and a 21.16 lb. gross weight. Now, to put things into perspective, according to U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, a male bald eagle weighs approximately 10 lbs. and has a 6’
wingspan [11]. After researching on RC hobbyist websites, it was not uncommon to find a
flyable RC model with an approximately 7’ wingspan and weight of around 11 lbs. [12].
Note that the flyable model, the eagle, and Hall’s 1/5 scale model have approximately the
12
same span but Hall’s 1/5 scale model weighs about twice as much as the bald eagle and
the flyable model. Hall mentions in his article that the weight of the “model itself should
actually weigh about half the scaled weight” but he then goes on to mention that “the
remainder half should be used to add moveable ballast weights without altering the CG”
[10]. It seems as if Hall’s numerical scaled values yield an aircraft that has potentially too
much weight for the other parameters to compensate for. There must be some sort of
“fudge factor” that must be accounted for when dynamically designing a flyable model
aircraft. Although scaling the linear dimensions of an aircraft may be a trivial task, it
turns out that dynamically scaling an aircraft is not as simple and there is much to
consider when doing so. Mostly all RC aircraft available generally weigh as little as
possible to allow the pilot to utilize all available power if necessary.
It turns out that there are a few main reasons why most flyable scaled RC aircraft do not
match their accurately scaled parameters and why it is best to make the model "as large
as practical” according to Hall. The smaller the scaling factor the larger the model, and
the larger the model the easier it is to gather and create accurate parameters of the full-
scale aircraft. Take the example of a 100 lb. model vs a 25 lb. model. To be within ±1%
accuracy of the 100 lb. model you would need to be within ±1 lb. Whereas the 50 lb.
model would require a ±.25 lb. accuracy. This example yields either a tolerance range of
either 2 lbs. or .5 lbs. holding the designer to a higher standard, something that may be
13
unnecessary depending on how “to scale” the aircraft needs to be. Hall also mentions that
smaller models are “twitchier” because their dynamic behavior varies and because it is
more difficult to create accurate moments [10]. This is most likely because the large full-
scale moments that are created are difficult to emulate on such finite models.
The other primary reason to scale an aircraft as large as practical deals with the Reynolds
Number (Re). A Reynolds Number below 100,000 yields the product that there is little to
no laminar flow about the airfoil. Stan Hall mentions in his text that for any Re above
120,000 (Recr) “the increasing airfoil drag coefficient with decreasing Re is not likely to
be serious” [10]. After examination of the Reynolds Number Equation for an airfoil, as the
chord length (measurement from tip of airfoil to root of airfoil) increases so does the
Reynolds Number. The calculation may be seen below in eqn. 1[13].
(𝜌∗𝑣∗𝑙) (𝑣∗ 𝑙)
𝑅𝑒 = = (1)
𝜇 𝜐
Furthermore:
( 𝑅𝑒 ∗ 𝜐)
𝑣 = (2)
𝑙
Where:
ρ = Density of fluid (air)
v = Velocity of fluid
μ = Dynamic viscosity of fluid

14
𝑙 = Characteristic (chord) length of airfoil
υ = Kinematic viscosity of fluid
The aircraft being tested has a chord length of .75’. Determining the speed at which the
Reynolds Number is equal to 120,000 (Vcr) at specified temperatures will help to
determine the quality of the data on the day of testing. The table below was created by
plugging in the constants, Recr and 𝑙, into eqn. 2, and then plugging in three potential
temperatures to estimate scenarios that may play out on test day. The temperatures,
corresponding kinematic viscosities and Vcr can be found in the table below [14]. It should
also be noted that .6818 should be multiplied by eqn. 2 in order to convert from ft/sec to
mph.
Air Temp (F) Air Temp (C) Kinematic Viscosity (ft^2/sec) Vcr (mph)
1 32 0 1.43E-04 15.64
2 50 10 1.53E-04 16.68
3 68 20 1.63E-04 17.75
Figure 4 - Estimated Vcr for Given Temperatures
The velocity at which the Reynolds Number falls below 120,000 hovers around 15-18
mph. Although it would be ideal to utilize an aircraft with a longer chord length, it should
be considered that any errors that occur below a Re of 120,000 – 100,000 (or
approximately below 16 mph) are primarily due to the inconsistency of laminar flow
about the airfoil. Unquestionably, there will be a means of error after the data has been
15
gathered from the flight test and the reasoning listed above may provide potential reasons
the Reynolds Number, chord length, and air temperature may contribute to any error in
the data acquired.
2.5 Basic RC Electronic Hardware
Remote controlled aircraft all generally incorporate the same base electronic components
and being able to understand them will help lay a foundation for a vast number of
accessories that can be used on the aircraft. It is the pilot’s role to provide the aircraft
with intended inputs and this is accomplished first by the pilot’s interface with the
transmitter; as seen below.
Figure 5 - Basic RC Electronics [15]
The transmitter is generally battery powered and independent from the remainder of the
16
components, having a left and right stick. The left stick controls the throttle when moved
longitudinally and the rudder when moved laterally whereas the right stick controls the
elevator/stabilator when moved longitudinally and the ailerons when moved laterally. It is
the transmitter that communicates with the receiver which is located on the aircraft. The
receiver controls the remainder of the components; therefore, all other basic components
must be directly connected to the receiver in order to receive an input. The battery in turn
powers the electronics within the aircraft and directly interfaces with the electronic speed
controller (ESC) which interfaces directly with the motor, battery and receiver. The ESC
receives an input from the receiver to tell the motor which speed it should be turning at. It
should be noted that for every motor is an additional ESC; the aircraft being utilized in
this report uses two motors, thus two ESC. These are the most basic electronics of an RC
model and more components may be added depending on the application of the aircraft
[16].
2.6 Telemetry, Data Acquisition, and Flight Controllers
There is a variety of ways to acquire data and today’s market is diluted with products
which to choose from when it comes to flight controllers (FC). Although the primary
purpose of most flight controllers is not to store and analyze data post flight, some flight
controllers are ideal for this task, such as the Eagle Tree Vector (ETV).
17
A flight controller is in essence a “small circuit board of varying complexity” in which “a
command from the pilot is fed into the FC, which determines how to manipulate the
motors accordingly” [16]. The FC often uses software that is programable and the
capabilities of them can be extended using telemetry equipment, which has the potential
to incorporate a vast majority of sensors such as GPS, barometers, airspeed indicators,
etc. This may often be seen on an on-screen display (OSD) for pilots flying with cameras.
Figure 6 - Comparative Displays of Fully Customizable OSD of the ETV
Telemetry is a means of gathering data which can be used to tell the pilot or aircraft what
to do and allows the user to tune the FC with different means such as tuning the PID,
gain, or even configuration of aircraft being used. The FC is arguably one of the most
critical pieces of equipment for the model flight testing process because FCs often
incorporate some means of recording and saving data to be viewed later and aids the pilot
to keep the model stable. Although the general purpose of a FC for the typical user helps
18
provide instantaneous data and helps to stabilize the aircraft, this report is primarily
concerned with analyzing the data that can be gathered from the FC.
There is a plethora of hardware and software on the market to choose from when it comes
to gathering the data needed for a flight testing as well as many additional sensors and
programs. Take for example the Pixhawk, which is one of the most popular and promoted
flight controllers on today’s market and for good reason. Ardupilot is the Pixhawk’s
firmware that is used and originated exactly where it sounds like it came from; initially as
an “Arduino open-source electronics prototyping platform”[17]. The Pixhawk is
compatible with a vast array of aircraft platforms and has extensive capabilities to gather
data with the help of added telemetry equipment and sensors. Because Pixhawk offers
low prices, extensive capabilities and a variety of compatible platforms, it is highly
customizable which adds to the complexity of the hardware and software[18].
Figure 7 - Pixhawk4 Flight Controller Hardware Package [18]

19
To decrease the complexity of the scope of the testing, the Eagle Tree Vector (ETV)
Flight Controller shall be used to help stabilize the model, store data and analyze data
post flight. The base package for the ETV offers simplicity and an exceptional software
interface which may help to customize the FC and analyze virtually any data that one
should ever need for analyzing the performance of a model. The key features can be
found on Eagle Tree’s website and have been listed below [19].
Key Features:
• Built-in: Altimeter, Internal Measurement Unit (IMU), Magnetic compass
• Flight data recorder capable of logging data from 1-10 Hz
• Current sensor with filtered 12V and 5V Power Supply Unit
• Fully configurable built-in on-screen display (OSD)
• Additional sensors, accessories, and internet firmware updates available
• Flight Controller with GPS modes for multiple fixed wing configurations such as
traditional fixed wing, elevon, and V-tail planes
Figure 8 - Eagle Tree Vector Flight Controller, GPS, and Power Supply Unit [19]
20
The ETV has the capability to graph a large scope of parameters and allows for the charts
to be edited and customized to whatever application necessary. A chart has been provided
below to show the brief capabilties of the fundamental graphing software that the ETV
has to offer. Parameters such as yaw, pitch, roll, altitude, airspeed, RPM, groundspeed,
airspeed and much more are only a few examples of the software’s capabilities. After the
flight has been conducted, if the data is needed, it must be gathered form the FC
immediately after the flight because the ETV erases all flight data before the next flight.
Figure 9 - ETV Graphing Software Technology

21
2.7 Flight Test Report Structure
There is a fine line between good data and bad data. When performing a flight test,
gathering pertinent information it is crucial and requires much preparation to obtain the
desired results. Systematic approaches of gathering important flight test data have been
fine-tuned over the years. Flight test, without proper precaution, may have the tendency
to become risky, but with proper methodology of performing the tests, risks can be
mitigated. Virtually all articles and resources related to flight testing follow a relatively
similar format and the most notable publication that is commonly referenced is the
United States Naval Test Pilot School - Flight Test Manual [5].
The USNTPS-FTM highlights many key areas of performance flight test in detail and
was intended to help provide the flight test community with a guide to follow while
performing any tests. For this reason, the remainder of this report will attempt to follow
very closely alongside the USNTPS-FTM and will make many close references to the
manual, helping to gather performance data for the results of this report. Following
closely alongside the USNTPS-FTM document structure will help to establish an
extremely methodical approach of gathering data, which is why it is important to
understand the structure of the document. Report styles often incorporate a multitude of
topics including objectives, design phases, safety precautions, testing, analysis and
reporting; a heavy emphasis will be placed on outlining objectives and the testing.
22
2.7.1 Flight Test Structure: Objectives
Much has been learned within the last 100 years of aviation and one extremely important
topic that cannot be ignored when planning for flight test involves clearly outlining the
objectives that need to be accomplished in order to yield adequate results by the end of
the flight test. The general approach to formulating a good reporting style for flight
testing begins with either a definitive problem or a vision. The FTM and nearly every
other article in relation to flight test “concentrates on specific objectives and
fundamentals” in order to emphasize on the “purposes, references, scope of tests, method
of tests, test planning, and report requirements” [5]. Being able clearly outline multiple
objectives helps to achieve the overarching goal of the project. Starting by defining the
primary goal of the project is important because it lays the foundation for the remainder
of the project. This project attempts to run multiple performance flight tests on an out-of-
the-box, scaled-down RC aircraft the same way that they would be performed on the full-
scale aircraft.
2.7.2 Flight Test Structure: Design Phases
The focus of this report primarily emphasizes on the methodology used to gather
performance characteristics from flight test so the design phase will not be touched on in
detail, although preliminary calculations can be found prior to flight test. The design
phase is essentially any formulation of planning, theories, and designs prior to the flight
23
test. Although it would be ideal for the aircraft to be completely customized and made to
exactly scale, the focus of this report is to conduct the performance flight test and to
focus on the methodology used when doing so. Designing a custom model aircraft would
allow ease of controlling parameters such as weight, weight/moment distribution and
tighter tolerances and therefore this must be considered when examining data for error. A
modified, out-of-the-box, fixed-wing aircraft will be used to conduct the flight test and
will help to focus on the primary goal of the report.
2.7.3 Flight Test Structure: Testing
When flying full-scale aircraft, safety is of the utmost importance and just because the
model being utilized is significantly smaller does not mean that safety should not be
taken into account. Since there is no pilot in the aircraft, the caution of injuring those in
the aircraft is taken out of the equation and rather the caution is then aimed directly
towards the people or property on the ground. There is always an element of risk that is
involved with flight test. The environment which flight tests is generally conducted
occurs in rural areas where, in the case of an emergency, the aircraft doesn’t cause
damage to its surroundings. Therefore, remote areas help to safely facilitate the flight
testing of static tests, scaled models and the full-scale aircraft.

24
As safety should always be the first consideration when flight testing, the flight test also
needs to be fully planned out for test day so that all should go according to plan. Planning
the entirety of the flight test ensures that there is no unaccounted-for variables and allows
those involved to easily identify problems or concerns when something deviates from the
plan. According to the Research and Technology Organization of NATO (RTO/NATO),
full scale aircraft flight testing must take extensive factors into account before even
stepping foot into the cockpit of the aircraft. Factors to take into account often include
Wind Tunnel tests, Structural Loads test, Simulation tests, Gain Margin tests, Propulsion
tests, Verification and Calibration tests, Weight and Balance tests, Taxi tests and Ground
Vibration tests [4]. Most of the testing listed above either deals with the handling
qualities or systems of the aircraft and is beyond the scope of this report. Therefore, the
primary testing that should be considered prior to the flight test of the model shall include
a Weight and Balance test as well as a brief preflight inspection. The Weight and Balance
test is capable of aiding future calculations when it comes to explaining the performance
behavior of the aircraft and the preflight inspection ensures functionality of the aircraft.
Note that despite the focused point of this paper, there is a multitude of areas to consider
prior to moving onto larger full-scale aircraft.
Like that of a full-scale aircraft, a preflight inspection is intended to check that, prior to
takeoff, the aircrafts instruments, controls and motors function properly. Most aircraft
25
have both primary flight controls (PFC) and secondary flight controls (SFC) but the
aircraft being used only incorporates PFC. PFCs function solely to “enable the attitude
and angular rate about each axis to be controlled, and consists of the elevator/stabilator,
ailerons, and rudder” whereas the SFC are intended to “optimize a specific flight
condition” and most commonly include flaps.
Figure 10 - Effect of PFC and SFC on an Airplane’s Axis[20]
The PFC that are incorporated on the RC aircraft being used include ailerons (controlling
the lateral stability), stabilator (controlling the longitudinal stability), and a rudder
(controlling the directional stability) and can be seen in the image above. Prior to the
flight, each PFC should be tested to ensure proper functionality and can be done by
individually moving the sticks on the transmitter. Prior to takeoff, all relevant PFC and
26
SFC should be double-checked to ensure proper functionality before taking flight and can
be done by powering on the aircraft and transmitter to check each PFC/SCF individually.
2.8 Weight and Balance
According to RTO/NATO, the easiest means of gathering weight and balance
information is electronically where “weight and location of each component is input into
a program; calculating total aircraft weight, moments of inertia, and centers of gravity
(CG) based on the contribution of all the individual components” [4]. If the weight and
moment of the aircraft must be determined, RTO/NATO mentions that ground facilities,
such as Edwards AFB in California, can help to determine the weight and balance of the
aircraft to confirm the analytically derived model. Gathering weight may be as simple as
placing the aircraft’s landing gear on separate scales and summing the weight of each
scale while obtaining the Center of Gravity (CG) of the aircraft. Record those weights
and their distances from a datum, later to sum each individual moment.
𝑀 = 𝐹𝑥𝑑 (3)
M = Moment
F = Force
d = Distance
27
Calculating the moments of inertia ( ICG ) becomes more difficult and currently there is
no facility in the United States that is capable of physically doing so. Analytical models
are used instead. The “Swing method” helps to physically gather enough information of
the moment of inertia about the three axis of the aircraft [7]. Although there are two ways
to perform this test, the only method that will be explored is one in which the aircraft is
hung about a fixed point and is then swung back and forth gathering information on the
period of oscillation (T). The aircraft must be suspended via wires as depicted in Figure
11, case 1, below and parameters such as the weight of the aircraft (w), arm from pivot
connection to CG (l) and gravity (g) must be known.
Figure 11 - Determining Moments of Inertia via the Swing Method [10]

28
Utilizing the equation below helps to determine the moment of inertia of the aircraft and
is quite simple to gather data on if the model is not too cumbersome. It should be noted
that the period of oscillation is the total time spent in oscillation divided by the total
number of oscillations [10].
𝑇2 𝑙
ICG = 𝑤𝑙 [4𝜋2 − 𝑔] (4)
2.9 AlbaBird Fixed Wing Aircraft and Data Acquisition
The aircraft being used can be found on Finwinghobby.com and is called the
Finwinghobby AlbaBird. This model airplane is a semi-scale aircraft that requires
electronics to be added, such as batteries, servos, motors, propellers and ESCs. Boasting a
relatively inexpensive price tag compared to similar models.
Figure 12 - Example of a Ready to Fly AlbaBird [21]

29
The AlbaBird has an overall length of 34.3”, a wingspan of 43.3”, a wing area of 209.3
square inches and an approximate chord length of 9” [21]. Prior to adding any onboard
equipment, the aircraft should weigh approximately 460g and can fly at a gross weight of
approximately 2.2kg. Once loaded with the onboard telemetry equipment and all essential
electronics have been added, as listed above, the aircraft should weight approximately
1.7kg; this is the manufacturer’s recommended weight. The manufacturer provides
information on where the CG should be located along one of the three tick marks that can
be seen in the image below.
Figure 13 - Location of CG in Relation to the Leading Edge [21]
It is recommended to load the aircraft’s CG in the green zone (Area C) depicted in the
image above, which is positioned approximately 1.75” from the leading edge of the wing.
There are also several compartments where telemetry and electronics may be stored,
allowing ease of positional adjustments to help relocate the CG if needed. The Aircraft
30
also allows for ease of installation of a pitot tube, allowing the FC to gather real time
information on the airspeed, providing the pilot with additional pertinent information to
the flight. The EagleTree Vector Flight Controller was used as the primary means of a
flight controller and all data that was analyzed post flight was manually entered in from
the provided EagleTree Vector’s On-Screen Display video.

31
CHAPTER 3
EXPERIMENT
3.1 Overview
The goal of the experiment is to gather useable data on the weight and balance of the
aircraft as well as data to determine VX, VY, VminROD, and Vmaxglide from the flight tests;
attempting to use the same methodology that would be used to find them on a full scale
aircraft. The Sawtooth Climb Method will attempt to replicate the same methods used by
Nigel Speedy [22]. The experiment structure will begin with introduction and goals, flight
profiles (if applicable) and procedure, in that order. The data was recorded from the
pilot’s on-screen display during the flight tests. There will be one preliminary test
(Weight and Balance) and three flight tests that include Test 1 (Maximum Speed), Test 2
(Stall Determination), and Test 3 (Sawtooth Climb/Descent).
The Weight and Balance test will be performed to obtain information on the aircraft’s
weight as well as moments and may be used later during the analysis of the experiment.
Flight Tests 1, 2, and 3 should all be performed sequentially in a build-up fashion to
ensure ease of gathering data as well as to aid the reduction of workload on the pilot’s
behalf [5]. It should be noted that the pilot should land in-between Test 2 and Test 3 to
review the steps of Test 3. In preparation of the Flight Tests 1, 2 and 3, prior to becoming
airborne, one needs to ensure all appropriate preflight inspections are completed and that
32
all the electronics on the aircraft and the transmitter function properly. It is also important
to make note that the aircraft is accurately reading and displaying altitude, time, airspeed
and groundspeed on the OSD and is ready to analyze post flight.
Gathering weight and balance data may vary in complexity, but the primary goals of
obtaining such data is to determine the weight of the aircraft and the moment of the
aircraft about its primary longitudinal axis. Gathering data on the weight of both scaled-
down and full-scaled aircraft should be relatively simple, as it only needs to involve
scales whereas gathering the moment and moment of inertia of an aircraft may become
relatively difficult as it often involves more technical methods. The Aircraft Weight &
Balance Handbook provides an in-depth method of determining the weight and balance
of aircraft and should be heavily consulted when determining the weight and balance of
the aircraft [23].
3.2 Weight and Balance: Preliminary Test
3.2.1 Introduction and Goals
Gathering information on the moment of the aircraft can help to determine the location of
the center of gravity (CG) of the aircraft which in turn may help to determine the stability
of the aircraft. Determining the balance of the aircraft is similar to determining the
balance of a fulcrum. The reference datum in this experiment should be measured from
33
the nose of the aircraft but could theoretically be measured from any imaginary point, if
that point is noted and is consistently measured from. The Aircraft Weight & Balance
Handbook provides the example how to do so in the figure below.
Figure 14 - Reference Datums and CG[23]
Materials needed for this experiment include three scales and a ruler. The ruler should be
long enough to measure from the datum, which in this case will be the leading edge of the
aircraft wing. The scales should be small enough to set under the aircraft’s landing gear;
similar to that of the image above.
3.2.2 Procedure
Determining the weight of the aircraft should first be determined by ensuring that the
scales have been zeroed and that the tare button has been activated. Once the scales can
read accurately, place the aircraft on three scales configured in its ready flight condition
(all equipment installed) where there should be one scale for each landing gear leg.
Tabulate the values of the scales (in pounds) for the nose wheel, left main landing gear
leg and right main landing gear leg and then remove the aircraft from the scales. Sum the
34
three weight values to determine the desired value for weight. For comparison purposes,
a hanging scale may also be used to determine the weight of the aircraft by means of a
hanging scale and hanging the aircraft similar to Figure 11. Summing the values may be
done in the table below.
Landing Gear Scale Reading (lb) Arm (in) Moment (lb-in)

Right main
Left main
Nose gear
Sum
Figure 15 - Location of CG Relative to Leading Edge [23]
Determining the CG location of the aircraft about its longitudinal axis will be done by
noting the location of each landing gear leg in relation to the datum (in inches) and
tabulating the data in the table seen above; similar to the Aircraft Weight & Balance
Handbook [23].
3.3 Maximum Speed: Flight Test 1
3.3.1 Introduction and goals
This test is the most straightforward flight test presented, and its purpose is to find the
maximum airspeed at 60% throttle (Vmax) while holding a constant altitude. The altitude
which Vmax will be determined will be 400’ above ground level (AGL) to ensure aircraft
recovery in the case of emergency.

35
Once the aircraft becomes airborne, bring the aircraft up to the test altitude, maintain that
altitude with 60% throttle setting for at least 1 minute and record Vmax. This airspeed will
be used when analyzing the data post flight.
3.3.2 Flight Profile
Figure 16 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vmax
3.3.3 Procedure
1. Become airborne and comfortable to start performing tests.
2. Once ready perform Test 1, fly up to 400’ above ground level (AGL) and
maintain this altitude for the entire duration of Test 1.
3. Start at the 60% throttle setting and make note of the time.
4. After one minute has passed at 60% throttle and 400’ AGL, Test 1 is complete
and Test 2 may begin.

36
5. Make note of Vmax because it will be written down after Test 2 (Land the aircraft
if this data is too much to remember).
3.4 Stall Speed: Flight Test 2
3.4.1 Introduction and goals
The purpose of this test is to determine the speed at which the aircraft stalls (Vstall) at 400’
AGL. The aircraft stall may be indicated by either:
a) A stall may be the first indication of the alert sign “Alt Hold OFF due to
low Amps!”
b) A stall may be indicated by the first indication in loss of altitude or loss of
the amount of control the pilot is comfortable with.
Note that the flight controller will automatically display the alert sign “Alt Hold OFF due
to low Amps!” when it is no longer able to maintain its altitude at that specific airspeed.
The pilot should land the aircraft after Test 1 and Test 2 have been completed. The
purpose of having the pilot land the aircraft after the flight is over may help reduce the
pilot’s workload and allow them to review the procedures for the preceding test.
37
Figure 17 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vstall
3.4.3 Procedure
1. Once ready to perform Test 2, start by maintaining an altitude of 400’ AGL and
60% throttle. Hold 400’ AGL for the duration of this test.
2. When ready to begin the test, continuously decrease the airspeed in increments of
5 kts and hold that airspeed for 20 seconds. After 20 seconds decrease another 5
kts.
i.e. if the max airspeed at 60% throttle is 63 kts you should hold the airspeeds:
i.e. 63, 60, 55, 50, 45, 40, 35, 30, 25, etc.
3. At the first indication of a stall, Test 2 is complete.
4. Land aircraft and fill out Appendix A. Flight Test Data (Test 1 and Test 2),
populating the data on Vmax, Vstall, and answering whether the stall was indicated
by the alert sign or loss of altitude/control.

38
3.5 Sawtooth Climb/Descent: Flight Test 3
3.5.1 Introduction and Goals
Sawtooth climbs (SC) and sawtooth descents (SD) are a classic means of gathering
performance data from flight test and is often referred to as the simplest means of
gathering climb/descent performance data [3]. Climb and descent performance data that is
often extrapolated from these tests includes VX (best angle of climb), VY (best rate of
climb), VminROD (minimum rate of descent speed) and Vmaxglide (maximum glide speed)
[22]. This test will attempt to closely follow Nigel Speedy’s article and prove that the
same methods that he had used on a full scale aircraft may be used on a smaller scale
aircraft to gather similar data [22]. SC and SD are intended to be performed among a
“series of climbs and descents over a measured change in altitude at a range of
airspeeds,” according to Nigel Speedy, an instructor at the National Test Pilot School[22].
These tests are often referred to as sawtooth because their flight profile looks like that of
saw teeth. Nine different airspeeds should be tested in order to define an adequately-
fitting curve of results to yield graphs that plot the rate of climb (ROC) versus airspeed
(V).
The focus of this test is to measure the time it takes to get from the floor to the ceiling in
a sawtooth climb, and vice versa for a sawtooth descent, at nine different airspeeds. There
will be nine total trials that will consist of one climb (Part A) and one descent (Part B)
39
through the test band. The test band is from 50’ to 450’ AGL and is depicted in red
below. The pilot may change their heading or airspeed outside of the test band if desired.
The green portion is where data is collected and therefore the most crucial portion of the
flight profile. This is where a constant airspeed and heading must be held. Note where the
black airplane is located; that is where data will begin to be recorded.
Figure 18 - Sawtooth Climb (SC) and a Sawtooth Descent (SC)
A sawtooth climb should begin below the specified floor of the red test band and the
desired constant airspeed should be achieved just before passing through the floor of the
test band. The flight profile of a sawtooth climb should look similar to that of the one
depicted in the figure above where each green phase is the test segment where the
airspeed needs to be held constant. Most full-scale aircraft flight tests transition from a
SC to a SD, as in the image below, helping to reduce the cost and duration of the flight.
40
Therefore, the same methodology should be used in this experiment to maintain
consistency between methodology.
Figure 19 – How to Combine a SC with a SD
To maintain accuracy, the test segments need to be flown within certain tolerances; the
aircraft should maintain a constant heading ±10°, a constant throttle of ±5%, an airspeed
of ±2kt and an altitude band floor of 100’ AGL ±2’ and ceiling of 450’ AGL ±2’. It
should be noted that although the Federal Aviation Regulations Aeronautical Information
Manual (FAR AIM) does not recommend flying unmanned vehicles over 400’ AGL, it is
permitted to fly up to 1200’AGL when flying within uncontrolled airspace, but should
only be done so cautiously [24]. Therefore, the tests should be conducted by a
professionally experienced pilot, not only helping to stay within the rules and guidelines,
but also to contribute to the accuracy of the data gathered. It doesn’t matter where the
climb or descent starts, only that they start outside of the test band. Meaning that the first
trial could start on one heading and then once that trial is over, the pilot could choose a
different heading, in order to keep the aircraft within range.

41
Prior to starting any tests, ensure the pilot has reviewed the Appendix B. Flight Test Data
(Test 3) section and knows the airspeeds that the SC and SD will be performed at. The
tests should start at Vmax and decrease evenly and incrementally to Vstall. See Appendix B.
Flight Test Data (Test 3) section now.
3.5.3 Procedure – Part A (Climbs)
Prior to entering the test band ensure that 60% throttle is being used for the entire
duration of the climb. Begin the flight below the floor of the test band, reach the desired
airspeed and ensure that the aircraft maintains this airspeed before it reaches the floor of
the test band. Maintain that constant airspeed until after the ceiling of the test band has
been passed.
Follow the procedures below for step-by-step instructions on SC:
1. Start below 50’ AGL and achieve your desired airspeed, heading, and 60%
throttle.
Note: It is crucial to maintain this airspeed during the entire duration of the test band.
2. Start to climb and before 50’ AGL you should be able to continuously hold that
airspeed.
3. You should pass through the floor at 50’ AGL and continue to climb while
holding the constant airspeed.

42
4. Once you have reached 450’ AGL (the ceiling of the test band) this Part A is over.
Note: Do not deviate from the airspeed until after the test band.
5. Maintain any altitude above the ceiling, prepare for descent, and move onto Part
B; unless this is Trial #9. If this is Trial #9 and you no longer need data, Test 3 is
complete.
3.5.4 Procedure – Part B (Descents)
Prior to entering the test band, ensure that 15% throttle is being used for the entire
duration of the descent. Begin the flight above the ceiling of the test band, reach the
desired airspeed and ensure that the aircraft maintains this airspeed before it reaches the
ceiling of the test band. Maintain that constant airspeed until after the floor of the test
band has been passed.
Follow the procedure below for step-by-step instructions on SD:
1. Start above 450’ AGL and achieve the desired airspeed at 15% throttle.
NOTE: It is crucial to maintain this airspeed during the entire duration through the test
band. Data on time and airspeed will be taken when descending through the band.
2. Start to descend and, before 450’ AGL, the pilot should be able to continuously
hold that airspeed.

43
3. Pass through the Ceiling at 450’ AGL and continue to descend while holding the
constant airspeed.
4. Once the aircraft has reached 50’ AGL Part B is over.
Note: Do not deviate from the airspeed until after the test band.
5. Maintain an altitude below the ceiling, prepare for climb and refer back up to Part
A; unless this is Trial #9. If this is Trial #9 and data is no longer needed, Test 3 is
complete.
44
CHAPTER 4
ANALYSIS
4.1 Weight and Balance
Landing Gear Scale Reading (lb) Arm (in) Moment (lb-in)

Right main 0.91 3.4 3.1
Left main 0.91 3.4 3.1
Nose gear 1.72 0.0 0.0
Sum 3.54 1.8 6.2
Figure 20 - Location of CG Relative to Aircraft Leading Edge Reference Datum [23]
The recommended weight of the AlbaBird according to the manufactures is 1.7kg. As
seen above the weight is 3.54lb (1.607kg) and within the recommended weight of the
aircraft. The location of the CG was determined by summing the weights and moments
then calculated via equation 3 by dividing the moment by the weight. Note each arm
length was determined from the reference datum, which in this case was the leading edge
of the wing. The location of the CG location was found to be at 1.8”, which lies within
the manufacturer’s recommended location for the CG as seen in Figure 13. The moment
was determined to be 6.2lb-in. By shifting the location of the CG more forward (towards
the nose of the aircraft) that would make the aircraft to nose-heavy and lead to
characteristics such as better longitudinal stability, stalling at higher airspeeds and
relatively slower cruising speeds. Moving the CG aft (towards the tail) of the aircraft
would yield inverse effects.

45
4.2 Test 1 and Test 2 Data
The maximum airspeed (Vmax) found in Test 1 was determined to be 44 mph and the stall
speed (Vstall) was determined to be 26 mph. The airspeed data gathered form the video
post-flight is the indicated airspeed (IAS) from the on-screen display. It should be noted
that the field elevation was found to be 3290’ mean sea level (MSL).
Maximum airspeed at 60% power in knots (Vmax) 38

Stall Speed in knots (Vstall) 23
Figure 21 - Vmax and Vstall Determined from Test 1 and Test 2
Vmax could have been increased to greater airspeeds but that would require a higher
throttle setting which would yield a higher draw of amperes and this is something that has
been known to destroy the ESC. In order to avoid this issue, 60% throttle was chosen to
alleviate the risk of frying an ESC and left more time for the flight to be conducted. The
ampere value at Vstall was determined to be 32 amps and the temperature on test day was
found to be 77° Fahrenheit and yielded a Vcr of approximately 16 kts.
Another factor which may affect the performance of the aircraft and increase the Vmax at
the specified throttle value includes a decrease in temperature. An increase in temperature
could adversely affect the performance of the aircraft because the kinematic viscosity of
46
the air would increase and, according to equation 2, would increase the Vcr. Having a
higher Vcr degrades the quality of the data gathered because, at this speed, laminar flow
about the wing becomes less significant and it becomes more difficult to make
predictions on aircraft performance. It should also be noted that the stall was defined as
the first indication of the alert sign “Alt Hold OFF due to low Amps!”. This may have
unfavorably affected the quality of data gathered because there may not have been
enough data points at lower airspeeds which the aircraft may have been tested; decreasing
accuracy of data and not “fully defining the climb and descent curves” [22]. If the stall
was defined as “the first indication of altitude loss/loss of the amount of control the pilot
is comfortable with” and may have been closer to the actual Vstall. This would have
helped to define the curve better in the region where lower airspeed data was being taken
and would have helped bend the curve.
4.3 Climb Analysis Using Data from Test 3
The means of gathering and analyzing data in this section aims to follow Nigel Speedy’s
methods to help ensure that his methodology on the full scale aircraft is interchangeable
with the model aircraft [22]. It can be seen in Figure 22 that the airspeeds that were tested
for a 60% throttle climb started at the Vstall (23 kts), move up incrementally in even
intervals and then finally end at the Vmax (38 kts). The reason why the unit of knot was
chosen for plotting the data is because that is often the convention and the unit of choice
47
for most aviation airspeeds. Each climb passed through the altitude band of 400’ AGL
±2’ and maintained an airspeed of ±2kt. Although this margin of error may seem
extremely large for the speeds being tested, one must note that the smallest gusts of winds
could cause a relatively large spike or drop-off in airspeed. It should also be noted that
while the test band started at 50’AGL, the pilot flew up an additional 400’ from that
specified altitude above ground level. For example, the field elevation was 3290’ MSL,
so the pilot should fly up to 3340’ MSL (50’ AGL) and count that as the test band floor
and count the test band ceiling as 3740’ MSL. Due to the Earth’s uneven surface, the test
band altitude must reference mean sea level.
Change True
IAS in Alt. Time ROC Td Td Tstd Tstd Td/Tstd ROC TAS TAS
(kts) (ft) (sec) (fpm) (F) (K) (F) (K) ratio (fpm) (kts) (fpm)
23 400 36 667 77 298 47 282 1.06 705 23 2289
24 400 37 649 77 298 47 282 1.06 686 24 2465
26 400 36 667 77 298 47 282 1.06 705 26 2641
28 400 33 727 77 298 47 282 1.06 770 28 2817
30 400 37 649 77 298 47 282 1.06 686 30 2993
31 400 40 600 77 298 47 282 1.06 635 31 3169
33 400 44 545 77 298 47 282 1.06 577 33 3345
35 400 49 490 77 298 47 282 1.06 518 35 3521
36 400 56 429 77 298 47 282 1.06 454 36 3697
38 400 0 0 77 298 47 282 1.06 0 38 3873
Figure 22 - Test Card with Data from Test 3 Climbs
The time for each trial was recorded post flight and input to the test card as seen in Figure
22. The Rate of Climb (ROC) was then calculated by dividing the change in altitude by
the time and multiplying by 60 seconds to obtain the corresponding ROC in feet-per-
48
minute (fpm). The True ROC was found by multiplying the ROC by the ratio of the
temperature on test day (Td) to the standard temperature at that altitude (Tstd), in kelvin.
Converting Fahrenheit to Kelvin may be done by using the equation below.
Temperature in Kelvin = ( Temperature °F – 32 ) * (5/9) + 273.15
The Tstd may be determined using the equation below. It should be noted that “59” in the
equation is the standard temperature at sea level and the standard lapse rate is a decrease
in 3.5 °F per 1000’ [25].
Tstd = 59 - (3.5 * Elevation/1000)
There are many ways to gather information on the true airspeed (TAS) in knots but the
method used in this report adds the IAS by .2 multiplied by the ratio of elevation/1000’
[26]. By multiplying the TAS in knots by 101.3 the TAS in fpm may then be determined.
The IAS versus ROC will be used to determine the best angle of climb and the best rate
of climb in the next section.
4.3.1 Best Angle of Climb
best angle of climb (VX) is used to obtain the “greatest height gain per distance traveled”
and “the most common use for VX is clearing obstacles” [22]. This airspeed is achieved
pitching the aircraft greater than Vstall but less than VY.
49
Best Angle of Climb

800
Vx = 24.2 kts
700
ROC = 712 fpm
Rate of Climb (fpm)
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Indicated Airspeed (kts) y= -5.0624x2 + 274.66x - 2970.7
Figure 23 - Location of the Best Angle of Climb
The figure above may be used to determine the best angle of climb by “plotting the ROC
versus IAS” and by “drawing a tangent line from the origin up to the climb rate curve”
[22]. To help determine the point of tangency mathematically, Microsoft Excel was used
to plot the points and establish a trendline that passes through them. Ensure that excel
displays the function of the trendline as an equation and call the function Yf. Solve for the
derivative of Yf to find the slope of the line and call this derivative Y'f. Plug Y'f into the
equation of a line where the slope (m) is equal to Y'f and that equation equal to Yf like
that of the equation below. Note b = 0 because the y-intercept lies at the origin.
Y = m x + b => Yf = ( Y'f ) xo (5)
After plugging in Y'f and Yf into the equation, simplify and solve for xo. The value found
for xo is the x-coordinate for the point of tangency. To solve for the y-coordinate, simply
plug in the value for xo into Yf. Using this method yielded an x-coordinate (VX) of 24.2
50
kts and a y-coordinate (ROC) of 712 fpm. Gathering data from this figure may also be
determined via visual inspection for simplification.
4.3.2 Best Rate of Climb
The best rate of climb (VY) is used to provide the maximal rate of climb for the range of
airspeeds at the specified throttle value. Pilots often use this airspeed to efficiently climb
to desired altitudes and this airspeed should be slightly higher than VX.
Best Rate of Climb

800
Vy = 27.1 kts
Rate of Climb (fpm)
600 ROC = 755 fpm
400
200
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Yf = -5.0624x2 + 274.66x - 2970.7

Indicated Airspeed (kts)
Figure 24 - Location of the Best Rate of Climb
VY is identified as the zenith of the IAS and may be identified by visual inspection or can
be done mathematically. Solve for the highest point on the curve by solving for Y'f and
then solve for xo in the equation Y'f = 0. The value of xo that was solved for is the VY,
which was found to be 27.1 kts, and the corresponding y-value may be found by plugging
in xo into the original Yf equation. The ROC was found to be 755 fpm using this method.
51
4.4 Descent Analysis Using Data from Test 3
Similar to the Climb Analysis, the means of gathering and analyzing data in this section
will follow Speedy’s methods very closely. Figure 25 shows that the airspeeds tested
were at a 15% throttle descent and used the same airspeeds as in the climb test. The
descents passed through an altitude band of 400’ AGL ±2’ and maintained the airspeed
±2 kts. Similar to the Climb Test, the test band started at 450’AGL and the corresponding
altitude in MSL was then noted and referenced to decrease 400’ in altitude. Note the
change in altitude depicted in the figure is denoted as negative and will be important
when establishing the axis for any graphs.
IAS Change in Time ROD Td Tstd Td/Tstd True TAS

(kts) Alt. (ft) (sec) (fpm) (F) (F) ratio ROD (kts)
(fpm)
23 -500 83 -361.4 77 52 1.05 -379 24
24 -500 89 -337.1 77 52 1.05 -354 26
26 -500 86 -348.8 77 52 1.05 -366 28
28 -500 79 -379.7 77 52 1.05 -398 30
30 -500 72 -416.7 77 52 1.05 -437 31
31 -500 70 -428.6 77 52 1.05 -450 33
33 -500 66 -454.5 77 52 1.05 -477 35
35 -500 61 -491.8 77 52 1.05 -516 37
36 -500 51 -588.2 77 52 1.05 -617 38
38 -500 44 -681.8 77 52 1.05 -715 40
Figure 25 - Test Card with Data from Test 3 Descents
The data in this section can be found using the same methods as described from the
Climb Analysis section. The figures below will plot the IAS versus ROC to determine the
52
minimum rate of descent and the TAS versus True ROD will be used to determine the
maximum glide speed.
4.4.1 Minimum Rate of Descent
The minimum rate of descent (VminROD) is the "highest point of the rate of descent versus
airspeed curve” and “descending at this speed results in the maximum time aloft for the
height available” [22]. This airspeed is often used by pilots in case of emergency and
allows for maximal time aloft and time troubleshooting.
Minimum Rate of Descent

0
VminROD = 24.83 kts
ROD = -290 fpm
-200
Rate od Descent (fpm)
-400
-600
-800
-1000
-1200
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
INDICATED AIRSPEED (KTS) y = -1.3232x2 + 65.714x - 1105.8
ROD Poly. (ROD)
Figure 26 - Location of the Minimum Rate of Descent
VminROD may be found using the same method as described in section 4.3.2 since it also
requires locating the maxima of a curve. Using the method described in section 4.3.2, the
53
VminROD was determined to be approximately 25 kts and the desired minimum rate of
descent was found to be -290 fpm.
4.4.2 Maximum Glide Speed
Like the best angle of climb, maximum glide speed (Vmaxglide) is defined as the point
tangent to the climb rate curve from the origin. This airspeed can be used to help obtain
the maximum ground distance traveled and may be useful if something goes wrong and
the only place to land is distant.
Maximum Glide Performance

0
Vmaxglide = 30.6 kts
ROD = -327 fpm
-200
True Rate of Descent (fpm)
-400
-600
-800
-1000
-1200
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
True Airspeed (kts) y = -1.4003x2 + 74.859x - 1307.3
ROD Poly. (ROD)
Figure 27 - Location of the Maximum Glide Speed

54
Using the same methods as described in Section 4.3.1, the Vmaxglide was determined to be
approximately 31 kts and the ROD was found to be -327 fpm. Unlike the last three
graphical figures, this figure uses the True ROD and the TAS because according to
Speedy “vertical speed and horizontal speed must both be in geometrically equivalent
units” since ratios and angles may be calculated. The airspeeds at which the AlbaBird had
been flown are relatively low compared to that of a full-scale aircraft. Although the True
ROD versus TAS was plotted here and was determined to be -327 fpm and 31 kts,
plotting the conventional ROD versus IAS points and checking the Vmaxglide and ROD
values for that do not deviate much from the values shown above.
55
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
Preliminary testing yielded a CG located 1.8” form the leading edge, a net weight of 3.54
lb, and a moment of 6.2 in-lb. If the CG was moved slightly aft, that would theoretically
cause the aircraft to become less longitudinally stable, have a lower stall speed and have a
relatively faster cruising speed; the inverse is true for a more forward CG. Tests 1, 2, and
3 were all performed while maintaining a constant heading ±10°, a constant throttle of
±5%, an airspeed of ±2kt and an altitude band floor of 100’ AGL ±2’ and ceiling of 450’
AGL ±2’. The quality of data was determined by visual inspection of the telemetry video
logs post flight. The Reynolds number associated with test day (at 77°F) yielded a Vcr of
approximately 18 mph or 16 kts and means that the quality of any data collected below
Vcr should have been relatively worse than the data collected above the Vcr because of the
lack of laminar flow about the airfoil.
Parameter Knots Indicated Airspeed Rate (fpm)

Best Angle of Climb 24 712
Best Rate of Climb 27 755
Minimum Rate of Descent 25 -290
Maximum Glide 31 -327
Figure 28 - Final Parameters, Airspeeds, and Rates
Tests 1 and 2 determined the Vmax to be 38 kts and the Vstall to be 23 kts. For climb
performance, VX and its ROC found was 24 kts and 712 fpm and the VY was found to be
27 kts and 755 fpm. This aligns with full-scale aircraft data because the Vstall is lower
than the VX, and the VX is slightly lower than the VY. For Descent performance, the
56
VminROD and its ROC found was 25 kts and -290 fpm and the Vmaxglide was found to be 31
kts and -327 fpm. This can be seen above in Figure 28.
With all the resources provided, the data and results found in this report reveal that the
flight test methodology used on full-scale, fixed-wing aircraft is interchangeable with the
fixed-wing model aircraft being tested. Although information on how to perform
sawtooth climbs may be found in many resources of flight test, following closely along
Speedy’s Sawtooth Climb Test was extremely thorough and comprehensive.
The behavior of the model aircraft yielded similar behavior to that of a full-scale aircraft
when analyzing the figures of plots.

57
CHAPTER 6
FURTHER STUDY
Although this report helped prove that some flight test methodology may be
interchangeable between a full-scale aircraft and model aircraft, it does not address all the
flight test methodology used to determine all of the performance characteristics of the
aircraft. Many of the sources cited in this report touch, in thorough detail, on the many
methods of testing performance parameters of flight test. Although this report touched on
performing a Sawtooth Climb and Descent Test and provided important information on
the VX, VY, VminROD, and Vmaxglide, that merely scratches the surface of climb and descent
performance. Furthermore, there are many areas of performance flight testing that may be
tested which include, but are not limited to, level flight performance, turn performance
and takeoff/landing performance. Some of these tests may be more time-intensive or
require more onboard data acquisition equipment. Therefore, before conducting any of
those tests, one should ensure there is enough resources to conduct the test.
Although Nigel Speedy provided an excellent procedure on how to execute and analyze
data on sawtooth climbs and descents, this and much more performance flight test
information can be found in many more sources. Most notably, if one is looking to
outline nearly all performance parameters of a model or a full-scale aircraft they should
strongly consider the USNTPS-FTM Fixed Wing Performance [5].

58
APPENDIX A. FLIGHT TEST DATA (TEST 1 AND TEST 2)
Fill In boxes and answer questions
Flight Test Card for Test 1 and Test 2

Maximum airspeed at 60% power in knots (Vmax)
Stall Speed in knots (Vstall)
1. The stall was defined as (circle one) : A) Alert sign
B) First indication of loss of altitude/control
2. The temperature on test day was: _______ Degrees Fahrenheit
After this page has been completed, fill in the boxes in “Appendix B. Flight Test Data
(Test 3)” and note the speeds at which Test 3 will be completed at.
59
APPENDIX B. FLIGHT TEST DATA (TEST 3)
NOTE : Each trial starts at Vmax (in trial #1), decrease to evenly in ___ kts increments,
and then finally reach the Vstall (in Trial #9). This is an example to follow on test day.
Flight Test Card for Test 3: Part A - Sawtooth Climb
Trial # Indicated Airspeed (kts) to maintain Altitude Change (ft)

1 Vmax 400
2 400
3 400
4 400
5 400
6 400
7 400
8 400
9 Vstall 400
Flight Test Card for Test 3: Part A - Sawtooth Climb
Trial # Indicated Airspeed (kts) to maintain Altitude Change (ft)

1 Vmax 400
2 400
3 400
4 400
5 400
6 400
7 400
8 400
9 Vstall 400
60
REFERENCES
[1] History.com Editors, “Wright Brothers,” History, Jun. 06, 2019.

https://www.history.com/topics/inventions/wright-brothers (accessed Feb. 18,
2020).
[2] K. M. Pavlock, “Aerospace Engineering Handbook Chapter 2(v): Flight Test
Engineering,” NASA Technical Reports Server, Sep. 19, 2013.
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20140010192 (accessed Dec. 18, 2019).
[3] “Test Operations Procedure,” Jul. 01, 2009.
https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a503159.pdf (accessed Mar. 03, 2020).
[4] F. N. Stoliker, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Advisory Group for Aerospace
Research and Development, and Flight Vehicle Integration Panel, Introduction to
Flight Test Engineering, vol. 14. AGARD, North Atlantic Treaty Organization,
2005.
[5] G. L. Gallagher, L. B. Higgins, L. A. Khinoo, and P. W. Pierce, “U.S. NAVAL
TEST PILOT SCHOOL FLIGHT TEST MANUAL: FIXED WING
PERFORMANCE,” Sep. 30, 1992.
http://www.usntpsalumni.com/Resources/Documents/USNTPS_FTM_108.pdf
(accessed Mar. 03, 2020).
[6] J. Chambers, “Modeling Flight: The Role of Dynamically Scaled Free-Flight
Models in Support of NASA’s Aerospace Programs,” 2010.
https://www.nasa.gov/pdf/483000main_ModelingFlight.pdf (accessed Nov. 26,
2019).
[7] A. Lawless et al., Society of Flight Test Engineers Reference Handbook, Third
Edition. 2013.
[8] M. J. Hinton and C. N. Eastlake, “The Construction and Flight Testing of a Scaled,
Remotely Piloted, Flight-Test Vehicle,” Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University,
Daytona Beach, Florida, 2001.
[9] M. Brown, “Scale RC Airplanes,” Hooked on RC Airplanes. https://www.hooked-
on-rc-airplanes.com/scale-rc-airplanes.html (accessed Mar. 09, 2020).
[10] S. Hall, “Dynamic Modeling: Use of Free-Flight, Dynamically-Similar Models In
Estimating Full Scale Aircraft Behavior,” Sport Aviation Magazine, p. 12, Jul. 30,
1987.
61
[11] “Fact Sheet: Natural History, Ecology and Recovery,” U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service, Dec. 20, 2019. https://www.fws.gov/midwest/eagle/Nhistory/biologue.html
[12] “Cessna 182 Skylane,” Horizon Hobby.
https://www.horizonhobby.com/product/airplanes/airplanes-14501--1/almost-ready-
to-fly/cessna-182-skylane-60-91-gp-ep-arf-81-p-topa0906 (accessed Mar. 10, 2020).
[13] “Reynolds Number Calculator,” Airfoil Tools.
http://airfoiltools.com/calculator/reynoldsnumber (accessed Mar. 11, 2020).
[14] “Dry Air Properties,” Engineering ToolBox, 2005.
https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/dry-air-properties-d_973.html (accessed Mar.
14, 2020).
[15] S. Sheperd, “RC Electronics for Noobs,” YouTube, Jan. 21, 2016.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j61Q3e8AFR4 (accessed Mar. 15, 2020).
[16] C. Montgomery, “Multi-Rotors, First-Person View, And The Hardware You Need,”
Tom’s Hardware, Jun. 03, 2014. https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/multi-
rotor-quadcopter-fpv,3828-2.html (accessed Mar. 15, 2020).
[17] “Re-engineering of Aerial Drone Autopilot Firmware with Reactive Programming,”
Politecnico di Milano, Italy, 2015.
[18] “Pixhawk 4,” Holybro. https://shop.holybro.com/pixhawk-4beta-launch_p1089.html
[19] “Vector Flight Controller + OSD,” Eagle Tree Systems.
https://www.eagletreesystems.com/Manuals/vector.pdf (accessed Mar. 15, 2020).
[20] Unites States. Federal Aviation Administration, Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical
Knowledge. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2016.
[21] “FPV Plane AlbaBird Kits,” Finwinghobby.
https://www.finwinghobby.com/goods.php?id=143 (accessed Apr. 07, 2020).
[22] N. Speedy, “Sawtooth Climb Performance,” KITPLANES, Dec. 21, 2018.
https://www.kitplanes.com/sawtooth-climb-performance/ (accessed Mar. 15, 2020).
[23] United States. Federal Aviation Administration, Aircraft Weight & Balance
Handbook. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, Federal Aviation
Administration, 2007.
62
[24] United States. Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Aviation Regulations and
Aeronautical Information Manual 2020. Newcastle, Washington: Aviation Supplies
& Academics, Inc., 2020.
[25] “International Standard Atmosphere: How It Affects Flight – Understanding the
Basics,” Universal® Operational Insight Blog, Sep. 08, 2014.
https://www.universalweather.com/blog/international-standard-atmosphere-how-it-
affects-flight-understanding-the-basics/ (accessed Apr. 14, 2020).
[26] B. I. Alramirano, “What is the exact formula for True Airspeed (TAS)?,” Ask a
Flight Instructor, Nov. 12, 2019. http://www.askacfi.com (accessed Apr. 14, 2020).

Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Thesis

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

BASIC INTERCHANGEABILITY OF FLIGHT TEST METHODOLOGY BETWEEN

REMOTE CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT & FULL - SCALE AIRCRAFT

Presented to the faculty of the Department of Mechanical Engineering

California State University, Sacramento

Submitted in partial satisfaction of

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

REMOTE CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT & FULL - SCALE AIRCRAFT

__________________________________, Committee Chair

__________________________________, Second Reader

credit is to be awarded for the thesis.

____________________, Graduate Coordinator ___________________

Department of Mechanical Engineering

BASIC INTERCHANGEABILITY OF FLIGHT TEST METHODOLOGY BETWEEN

REMOTE CONTROLLED AIRCRAFT & FULL - SCALE AIRCRAFT

flight testing of model aircraft. Information on how to comprehensively conduct and

procedures is scarce to come by. Systematically following procedures to conduct a flight

31 kts at -327 fpm.

_______________________, Committee Chair

pursue my dreams of flight testing.

List of Figures ......................................................................................................................x

1.1 Evolution of Flight Test ............................................................................ 1

1.2 Key Areas of Flight Test ........................................................................... 2

1.3 What Flight Test Provides ......................................................................... 4

2.1 Flight Test Resources ................................................................................... 6

2.2 Prior Work with Model Aircraft .................................................................. 7

2.3 Types of Scaled Aircraft .............................................................................. 9

2.4 Scaling and Weight .................................................................................... 10

2.5 Basic RC Electronic Hardware .................................................................. 15

2.6 Telemetry, Data Acquisition, and Flight Controllers ................................. 16

2.7 Flight Test Report Structure ....................................................................... 21

2.8 Weight and Balance ................................................................................... 26

2.9 AlbaBird Fixed Wing Aircraft and Data Acquisition ................................ 28

3.1 Overview ................................................................................................. 31

3.3 Maximum Speed: Flight Test 1 ............................................................... 34

3.4 Stall Speed: Flight Test 2 ........................................................................ 36

3.5 Sawtooth Climb/Descent: Flight Test 3 .................................................. 38

4.1 Weight and Balance ................................................................................... 44

4.2 Test 1 and Test 2 Data................................................................................ 45

4.3 Climb Analysis Using Data from Test 3 .................................................... 46

4.4 Descent Analysis Using Data from Test 3 ................................................. 51

6 FURTHER STUDY .................................................................................................... 57

Appendix A. Flight Test Data (Test 1 and Test 2) .............................................................58

Appendix B. Flight Test Data (Test 3)...............................................................................59

1 - Composition of Aircraft Performance Characteristics .................................................. 3

3 - Scaling Factor Uses in the Design of a Model Aircraft .............................................. 11

4 - Estimated Vcr for Given Temperatures ....................................................................... 14

5 - Basic RC Electronics ................................................................................................... 15

6 - Comparative Displays of Fully Customizable OSD of the ETV ................................. 17

7 - Pixhawk4 Flight Controller Hardware Package .......................................................... 18

9 - ETV Graphing Software Technology .......................................................................... 20

10 - Effect of PFC and SFC on an Airplane’s Axis .......................................................... 25

11 - Determining Moments of Inertia via the Swing Method ........................................... 27

12 - Example of a Ready to Fly AlbaBird ........................................................................ 28

13 - Location of CG in Relation to the Leading Edge ...................................................... 29

14 - Reference Datums and CG ........................................................................................ 33

15 - Location of CG Relative to Leading Edge ................................................................ 34

16 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vmax ............................................................................ 35

17 - Flight Profile of How to Find Vstall .......................................................................... 37

18 - Sawtooth Climb (SC) and a Sawtooth Descent (SC) ................................................ 39

19 – How to Combine a SC with a SD ............................................................................. 40

__, Graduate Coordinator _