Flight Test Engineering

MAE 5702: Aircraft Stability and Control

Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering
Short Course Flight Laboratory Report

Lab 1: Longitudinal Static and Dynamic Stability

Performed May 26, 2016
Lab 2: Longitudinal Maneuvering Stability
Performed June 16, 2016
Lab 3: Longitudinal Control and Trim
Performed June 17, 2016
Lab 4: Static and Dynamic Lateral-Directional Stability
Performed June 20, 2016
Lab 5: Stall Characteristics
Performed June 21, 2016
Abstract
To understand the complex characteristics of modern aircraft including performance, stability and
control, and avionics behavior requires flight testing which occurs at the end of the aircraft design
process. MAE 5702 introduced the procedures, techniques, and data reduction involved specifically with
stability and control flight testing including longitudinal static and dynamic stability, longitudinal
maneuvering stability, longitudinal control and trim, static and dynamic lateral-directional stability, and
stall characteristics. Like aircraft performance data, the stability and control of an aircraft is dependent on
the aircraft’s mission. The contents of this report detail the test procedures executed, data reduction
process, and results from each of the noted stability and control tests.

All stability and control testing was executed on the Piper PA-32-260 Cherokee Six out of
Patuxent River, MD. The longitudinal static and dynamic stability lab focused on the determination of
neutral points using elevator deflections for stick-fixed stability and stick forces for stick-free stability.
The long period phugoid mode at various center of gravity locations was also observed in the longitudinal
dynamic stability testing. Similarly, stick-fixed maneuvering stability points were determined using
elevator deflections and stick-free maneuvering stability points were determined using stick forces in the
longitudinal maneuvering stability lab experiment. Longitudinal control and trim tests were performed to
determine if the aircraft has adequate longitudinal handling qualities by utilizing test methods listed in
FAR 23.145. Static and dynamic lateral-directional stability was observed by performing steady-heading
sideslips, exciting the Dutch Roll, and exercising the spiral mode. Finally, stall characteristics were
determined by performing stalls in various flap and power configurations.

The data generally followed the trend of expected results for each of the five different stability
and control lab tests and the results can be seen in the contents of this report. Potential sources of error
include parallax in instrumentation reading, leaks in the pitot-static instruments, atmospheric conditions,
and uncertainty with the position correction model.

1.0 Introduction
1.1 Test Article Description
The test article throughout the duration of MAE 5702 Stability and Control testing was the Piper
PA-32-260 Cherokee Six. This aircraft can carry up to six individuals including the Pilot-in-Command
and the crew was tasked with exercising crew resource management in this real-life scenario laboratory.
The Piper PA-32-260 Cherokee Six aircraft can be seen in Figure 1 below.

Prior to each flight, a weight and balance calculation was completed to determine the flight
capability and safety. This process involves the summation of passenger weight (Eq. 1) and the
summation of moments from a datum reference point (Eq. 2). For the Piper PA-32-260 this reference
point is the nose of the aircraft. When the total moment is divided by the total weight, the flight’s
characteristic center of gravity is obtained (Eq. 3). It is the legal responsibility of the Pilot-In-Command
and/or aircraft owner to ensure that the airplane is loaded properly. The weight and balance flight
envelope for the Piper PA-32-260 Cherokee Six can be seen in Figure 2 below.
 Figure 1. Piper PA-32-260 Cherokee Six Experimental Test Article

Total Weight = ∑(𝑓𝑟𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑐𝑛𝑡𝑟 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑏𝑎𝑔𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 + 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒) (1)

Total Moment = ∑(𝑓𝑟𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑐𝑛𝑡𝑟 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑎𝑓𝑡 𝑠𝑒𝑎𝑡 + 𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑏𝑎𝑔𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 + 𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 𝑎𝑖𝑟𝑝𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒) (2)
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑀𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡
𝐶𝑒𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝐺𝑟𝑎𝑣𝑖𝑡𝑦 = (3)
𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡

Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope

3400

3200

3000

2800
Aircraft Total Weight, lbs.

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 2. Weight and Balance Flight Envelope for PA-32-260

 1.2 Flight Test Instrumentation
The instruments used to record data during each flight test were as seen below in Table 1. Additional
altitude and airspeed indicators were located at the center and aft seats and instrument correction was
applied to data noted from these instruments.

Table 1. Lab Instrumentation for Stability and Control Flight Testing

Lab Title Instruments Utilized (Units)

Barometric Altimeter (Feet)
Airspeed Indicator (MPH)
Fuel Quantity Gage (Gallons)
GPS Heading (Degrees)
Longitudinal Static and Dynamic Stability OAT Gage (Degrees Celsius)
Power Settings (RPM/inHg)
Elevator Position DAS (Degrees)/ Tape
Measure (in.)
Longitudinal Control Force
Barometric Altimeter (Feet)
Airspeed Indicator (MPH)
Fuel Quantity Gage (Gallons)
GPS Heading (Degrees)
Longitudinal Maneuvering Stability OAT Gage (Degrees Celsius)
Power Settings (RPM/inHg)
Elevator Position DAS (Degrees)/ Tape
Measure (in.)
Longitudinal Control Force
Barometric Altimeter (Feet)
Airspeed Indicator (MPH)
Fuel Quantity Gage (Gallons)
GPS Heading (Degrees)
Longitudinal Control and Trim
OAT Gage (Degrees Celsius)
Power Settings (RPM/inHg)
Elevator Position DAS (Degrees)/ Tape
Measure (in.)
Barometric Altimeter (Feet)
Airspeed Indicator (MPH)
Fuel Quantity Gage (Gallons)
GPS Heading (Degrees)
OAT Gage (Degrees Celsius)
Power Settings (RPM/inHg)
Static and Dynamic Lateral-Directional Stability
Elevator Position DAS (Degrees)/ Tape
Measure (in.)
Longitudinal Control Force
Rudder Position
Aileron Position
Rudder Force
Barometric Altimeter (Feet)
OAT Gage (Degrees Celsius)
Stall Characteristics
Fuel Quantity Gage (Gallons)
Power Settings (RPM/inHg)
 1.3 Test Crew and Location
All stability and control flight testing was executed out of Patuxent River, MD. The specific testing
logistic information can be seen below in Table 2.

Table 2. Stability and Control Flight Testing Information

Lab Number Date Crew Gross Weight / C.G.

R. Kimberlin (PIC)
T. Meyer
1 May 26, 2016 E. Tondreau 3402 / 94.7
G. Greenman
R. Henry
T. Guess (PIC)
J. Rohrer
2 June 16, 2016 3077 / 86.4
G. Greenman
R. Henry
T. Guess (PIC)
3 June 17, 2016 G. Greenman 2947 / 85.0
J. Rohrer
T. Guess (PIC)
4 E. Tondreau
(Steady Heading June 20, 2016 G. Greenman 3292 / 89.7
Sideslips) T. Meyer
R. Henry
T. Guess (PIC)
4 E. Tondreau
(Dutch Roll and June 20, 2016 G. Greenman 3097 / 92.3
Spiral Mode) T. Meyer
R. Henry
T. Guess (PIC)
R. Kimberlin
5 June 21, 2016 G. Greenman 3382 / 94.2
T. Meyer
R. Henry

2.0 Lab 1: Longitudinal Static and Dynamic Stability

2.1 Test Objective
Longitudinal motion is the motion that occurs in the lateral axis in the aircraft’s plane of
symmetry. For an aircraft to fly safely, it must obtain trim (a state in which the moments about the
aircraft’s center of gravity is zero), have positive static stability (slopes of the moment curves cs. Angle of
attack or CL are zero), and be controllable. An aircraft can have stick-fixed static longitudinal stability or
stick-free static longitudinal stability. In stick-fixed stability, the elevator is in a fixed position and not
free to float relative to the wind. In stick-free stability, the elevator is free to float with the relative wind.
Stick-fixed stability can be measured by evaluating elevator deflections and stick-free stability can be
measured by observing stick forces. The purpose of this lab was to determine the neutral points and
control characteristics of the aircraft by observing elevator deflections (stick-fixed) and stick forces
(stick-free). Additionally the longitudinal stability of the aircraft was determined by exciting the long
period phugoid mode a various center of gravity locations.

2.2 Flight Test Procedure

1. Pre-Flight Procedures

a) Designate seat assignments for the lab flight and individual crew weights.
b) Perform a weight and balance calculation by determining total weight and total moment about the
nose of the aircraft (the datum reference point). This C.G. is plotted inside of the flight envelope
to determine the loading configuration of the aircraft.
c) Crew members review the lab objective, safety procedures, and data collection expectations.
d) Fill in flight logs are prepared with data labels and appropriate fields populated.
e) Perform pre-flight checks on the aircraft.
f) Upon entering the aircraft, ensure altimeter dial settings in the center and aft seats are set to
29.92.

2. Longitudinal Static Stability Flight Procedures and Data Collection

a) Record engine start time, starting fuel quantity, takeoff runway, and takeoff time.
b) Trim the aircraft to the trim airspeed and power setting required by the regulation for the flight
condition (climb and powered approach).
c) Wait for the aircraft to stabilize. Once the aircraft has stabilized, increase or decrease the airspeed
by using longitudinal control without re-trimming the aircraft. Maintain airspeed by exerting a
force on the longitudinal control.
d) Record data including observed pressure altitude (feet), observed trim airspeed (MPH), observed
ambient temperature (°C), engine RPM, engine manifold pressure (inhg), aircraft heading,
elevator position (degrees), and longitudinal control force.
e) After the last point, gradually release the longitudinal control force until the pilot is hands-free
and record the “free return airspeed”.
f) Repeat steps (b) – (e) in all of the flight conditions (climb and powered approach)

2.1. Longitudinal Dynamic Stability

a) Trim the aircraft to the trim airspeed and power setting required by the regulation for the flight
condition (climb, cruise, powered approach).
b) Using only elevator control, slow the airspeed 10 – 15 MPH.
c) Let go of the aircraft and observe the hands-free aircraft behavior.
d) Record observed pressure altitude (feet), observed trim airspeed (MPH), and pitch attitude every
5 seconds until the phugoid is damped out.
e) Return to airport and record landing runway, landing time, and engine shut-off time.

3. Post-Flight Procedures

a) Perform post-flight data reduction.

 2.3 Data Reduction

2.3.1 Weight and Balance

The seat assignments for the Longitudinal Static and Dynamic Stability lab were as seen in Table
3 below. The weight and balance for the flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1
of this report and the results are shown numerically in Table 4 and graphically in Figure 3.

Table 3. Seat Assignments for Lab 1

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Ralph Kimberlin (Pilot-In-Command) Eric Tondreau 355
Center Seat Gary Greenman Brian Kish 410
Aft Seat Rachel Henry Ted Meyer 355

Table 4. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 1

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153.016
Pilot/Front Passengers 355 85.5 30352.5
Center Passengers 410 118.1 48421
Rear Passengers 355 155.7 55273.5
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 360 95.0 34200
Baggage FWD 25 42.0 1050
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
322312/3402
Total Loaded Airplane 3402 322312
94.7
 Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope
3400

3200

3000

Aircraft Total Weight, lbs. 2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 3. Weight and Balance Results for Lab 1

2.3.2 Data Collected

Data was collected over three different C.G. configurations in climb and powered approach flight
conditions. Trim conditions and free return speeds were obtained during each run. All crew members
collected the run number, time of data collection, and flap configuration. In addition, the front seat
observer collected fuel quantity (gal.), elevator deflection from the tape measure (in.), GPS heading
(degrees), observed ambient temperature (°C), engine RPM, and engine manifold pressure (inhg). The
center and aft seat observers collected observed airspeed (MPH), observed pressure altitude (feet), and
elevator position from the DAS (degrees). For the longitudinal dynamics stability portion of the lab the
phugoid was excited and the free airplane response to the control input over tie was observed. Airspeed
was collected by all students for the duration of the phugoid.
 2.3.3 Data Reduction for Longitudinal Static Stability
The first step in the data reduction of Lab 1 was to apply instrument corrections to the airspeed
indicator and barometric altimeter by utilizing Table 17, Table 18, Table 19, and Table 20 of appendix A.
Then plots of the elevator position v. calibrated airspeed with each C.G. location were created for each
flight condition and smooth polynomials were fit through the data. The graph of elevator deflection v.
calibrated airspeed for the climb flight condition can be seen in Figure 4 and the graph of elevator
deflection v. calibrated airspeed for the powered approach flight condition can be seen in Figure 5.

Figure 4. Elevator Deflection v. Calibrated Airspeed for Climb

 Figure 5. Elevator Deflection v. Calibrated Airspeed for Powered Approach

Then the lift coefficient CL was calculated using Eq. (4)

2𝑊
𝐶𝐿 = 𝜌𝑉 2𝑆 (4)
𝐶

where VC is the calibrated airspeed (MPH), ρSL is as seen below, W is the test weight determined in Eq.
(5), and S for the Piper Cherokee is as seen below. Fuel is assumed to decrease linearly.

𝑊 (𝑙𝑏𝑠. ) = 𝑊𝑒𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑦 + 𝑊𝑓𝑢𝑒𝑙 + 𝑊𝑏𝑎𝑔𝑔𝑎𝑔𝑒 + 𝑊𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑤 (5)

S = 174.5 ft2

ρSL=0.0023769 lb.sec2/ft4

The elevator position was then graphed against the calculated lift coefficient for each flight
condition at a FWD, MID, and AFT C.G and smooth polynomial trendlines were fit through the data sets.
Note that for both flight conditions the curves ray from the elevator position at which the lift coefficient is
zero. The graph of elevator deflection v. lift coefficient for the climb flight condition can be seen in
Figure 6 and the graph of elevator deflection v. lift coefficient for powered approach can be seen in
Figure 7.
 Figure 6. Elevator Deflection v. Lift Coefficient for Climb

Figure 7. Elevator Deflection v. Lift Coefficient for Powered Approach

 The slopes of the elevator deflection v. lift coefficient graphs for climb and powered approach
were determined at even C.G. increments and plotted against C.G. position. Curves were faired through
the plotted data and extrapolated to zero. The graph of Static longitudinal stability for climb shown in
Figure 8 indicates a critical neutral point at a C.G. location approximately 101.5 in. (31.8% MAC). The
most aft C.G. limit for climb is approximately 95 in. The graph of static longitudinal stability for powered
approach shown in Figure 9 indicates a critical neutral point at a C.G. location approximately 97.5 in.
(30% MAC). The most aft C.G. limit for powered approach is approximately 95 in. All maneuver points
will be aft of the most critical neutral point.

Figure 8. Static Longitudinal Stability for Climb Flight Condition

Figure 9. Static Longitudinal Stability for Powered Approach
 Then the longitudinal force was graphed against calibrated airspeed for each C.G. position at each
aircraft condition seen below in Figure 10 for climb and in Figure 11 for powered approach. From the
graph of the aircraft in the climb flight condition, it can be seen that the trim speed is at approximately 90
MPH. From the graph of the aircraft in the powered approach condition, it can be seen that the trim speed
is at approximately 90 MPH as well.

Figure 10. Longitudinal Force v. Calibrated Airspeed for Climb

 Figure 11. Longitudinal Force v. Calibrated Airspeed for Powered Approach

Using the faired lines from the graphs of longitudinal force versus calibrated airspeed for each
flight condition, longitudinal force at even increments of airspeed were determined and used to determine
a relationship between Fs/q v. CL for each C.G. position tested. From Figure 12 and Figure 13 it can be
seen that the lines cross at or near the trim CL of .65.
 Figure 12. Force/q v. Lift Coefficient for Climb

Figure 13. Force/q v. Lift Coefficient for Powered Approach

 Finally, at even increments of CL, the slopes of the faired lines shown in Figure 12 and Figure 13
for each C.G. position tested and plotted against C.G. Straight lines connecting the data were faired
through the graphs and extrapolated to zero to determine the control force neutral point. The static
longitudinal stability for climb can be seen in Figure 14 and the critical control force neutral point is at
approximately 101.5 in. C.G. position. The longitudinal stability for powered approach can be seen in
Figure 15 and the critical control force neutral point is as approximately 96 in. C.G. position.

Figure 14. Static Longitudinal Stability for Climb showing Control Force Neutral Point.
 Figure 15. Static Longitudinal Stability for Powered Approach

2.3.3 Data Reduction for Longitudinal Dynamic Stability

After applying instrument corrections to airspeed and altitude data, a plot of calibrated airspeed
versus time was created to observe the characteristics of the long period phugoid. Figure 16 shows
calibrated airspeed (mph) versus time for both climb and powered approach flight conditions in the AFT
C.G. configuration.
 Figure 16. Calibrated Airspeed v. Time in AFT CG for Long Period Phugoid

From the plot of calibrated airspeed v. time, it can be determined that the peak-to-peak period for
the climb flight condition was 26 seconds and the peak-to-peak period for the powered approach
condition was 24 seconds. These peak-to-peak periods can then be used in the calculation for damped
frequency shown in Eq. (6).
2𝜋
𝜔𝑑 = 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑖𝑜𝑑 (6)

The damped frequency in the climb flight condition was determined to be .24 and the damped frequency
in the powered approach flight condition was determined to be .26. Then, using the damping ratio (δ)
found in the chart shown in Figure 46 of appendix A, the natural frequency of the aircraft can be
determined through Eq. (7).
𝜔𝑑
𝜔𝑛 = (7)
√1−𝛿 2

The damping ratio for the climb flight condition was determined to be 0.2 and the natural frequency was
calculated to be .245. The damping ratio for the powered approach flight condition was determined to be
.23 and the natural frequency was calculated to be .267.
 2.4 Longitudinal Static and Dynamic Stability Conclusions
From the data reduction of longitudinal static and dynamic stability, it can be concluded that the
Piper Cherokee PA-32-260 has a critical neutral point at a C.G. location approximately 31.8% MAC in
the climb flight condition and a critical neutral point at a C.G. location approximately 30% MAC in the
powered approach configuration. The critical control force neutral point was determined to be
approximately 101.5 in. C.G. position for the climb flight condition and approximately 96 in. C.G.
position for the powered approach condition. The long period phugoid was evaluated to determine the
frequency characteristics and natural frequencies of .245 and .267 were calculated for the climb and
powered approach conditions respectively.

3.0 Lab 2: Longitudinal Maneuvering Stability

3.1 Test Objective
The ability of an aircraft to maneuver is critical in any mission and must be evaluated to
determine the amount of positive maneuvering stability that the aircraft can withstand without casing
excessive amounts of normal acceleration on the airplane. For this particular lab experiment, wind-up
turns, steady pull-ups, and steady push-overs are the maneuvers under experimentation. Steady pull-ups
provide aircraft data above 1g of normal acceleration, stead push-overs provide aircraft data below 1g of
normal acceleration, and wind-up turns provide stick force from a low normal acceleration through a
higher normal acceleration.

3.2 Flight Test Procedure

1. Pre-Flight Procedures

a) Designate seat assignments for the lab flight and individual crew weights.
b) Perform a weight and balance calculation by determining total weight and total moment about the
nose of the aircraft (the datum reference point). This C.G. is plotted inside of the flight envelope
to determine the loading configuration of the aircraft.
c) Crew members review the lab objective, safety procedures, and data collection expectations.
d) Fill in flight logs are prepared with data labels and appropriate fields populated.
e) Perform pre-flight checks on the aircraft.
f) Upon entering the aircraft, ensure altimeter dial settings in the center and aft seats are set to
29.92.

2. Maneuvering Flight Procedures and Data Collection

a) Record engine start time, starting fuel quantity, takeoff runway, and takeoff time.
b) Trim the aircraft to the trim airspeed and power setting. Record observed trim airspeed, fuel
consumption, power setting, altitude, and OAT.

Wind-Up Turn

c) Without changing the longitudinal trim, smoothly and slowly begin rolling the aircraft into a
wind-up turn. The pilot calls out stick force readings until the airplane reaches maximum normal
acceleration.
 d) Record data including stick force, elevator position, and normal acceleration.

Steady Pull-Up

e) From the trim condition, zoom climb the airplane and perform a push-over to enter a shallow dive
toward the trim altitude. When the airspeed approaches the trim airspeed, perform a steady pull-
up to establish a pitch rate that will place the airplane back on the trim airspeed at 1g.
f) Record stick force, elevator position, and normal acceleration.

Steady Push-Over

g) From the trim condition, enter a shallow dive. Perform a steady pull-up toward the trim altitude.
When the airspeed approaches the trim airspeed, perform a steady push-over to establish a pitch
rate that will place the aircraft back on the trim airspeed at 1g.
h) Record stick force, elevator position, and normal acceleration.

3. Post-Flight Procedures

b) Perform post-flight data reduction.

3.3 Data Reduction

3.3.1 Weight and Balance

The seat assignments for the Longitudinal Maneuvering Stability lab were as seen in Table 5
below. The weight and balance for the flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1 of
this report and the results are shown numerically in Table 6 and graphically in Figure 17 .

Table 5. Seat Assignments for Lab 2

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Tommi Guess (Pilot-In-Command) Jacob Rohrer 425
Center Seat Gary Greenman Rachel Henry 380
Aft Seat N/A N/A 0

Table 6. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 2

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153.016
Pilot/Front Passengers 425 85.5 36337.5
Center Passengers 380 118.1 44878
Rear Passengers 0 155.7 0
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 300 95.0 28500
Baggage FWD 75 42.0 3150
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
265881.9/3077
Total Loaded Airplane 3077 265881.9
86.4
 Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope
3400

3200

3000

Aircraft Total Weight, lbs. 2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 17. Weight and Balance Results for Lab 2

3.3.2 Data Collected

Data was collected in FWD and AFT CG configurations across two groups. Three pull-up
maneuvers were performed, three push-over maneuvers were performed, and a wind-up turn was
executed in both the left and right directions. All crew members collected the run number, time of data
collection, and flap configuration. In addition, the front seat observer collected fuel quantity (gal.), GPS
heading (degrees), observed ambient temperature (°C), engine RPM, and engine manifold pressure (inhg).
The center and aft seat observers collected observed airspeed (MPH), observed pressure altitude (feet),
elevator position from the DAS (degrees), and normal load factor (g).

3.3.3 Data Reduction for Longitudinal Maneuvering Stability

After applying instrument corrections to the collected airspeed and altitude data, the elevator
deflection versus normal load factor was plotted at each C.G. configuration for the pull-up, push-over,
and wind-up maneuvers performed. Curves were faired through the data and used the determination of
stick-fixed maneuvering points. The plots can be seen below in Figure 18 for the pull-up maneuver, in
Figure 19 for the push-over maneuver, and Figure 20 for the wind up maneuver.
 Figure 18. Elevator Deflection v. Normal Load Factor for Pull-Up Maneuvers

Figure 19. Elevator Deflection v. Normal Load Factor for Push-Over Maneuvers
 Figure 20. Elevator Deflection v. Normal Load Factor for Wind-Up Turns

Then the slopes of the faired curves through the data for each C.G. at each maneuver point were
determined and solved using even increments of normal load factor. These slopes were plotted against
C.G. and the trendlines extrapolated to zero for the determination of the critical stick-fixed maneuver
point. From the graph shown in Figure 21 it can be seen that the critical stick-fixed maneuver point is at a
C.G. position approximately 93 in.
 Figure 21. Stick-Fixed Maneuver Points

4.0 Lab 3: Longitudinal Control and Trim

4.1 Test Objective
The purpose of this lab experiment was to explore longitudinal control and longitudinal trim of
the Piper PA-32-260 to determine if the aircraft has adequate longitudinal handling qualities. Longitudinal
control during takeoff and landing was observed as that is where the elevator control power is the limiting
factor to the FWD C.G. location and trim was observed in level flight. An aircraft is considered to have
acceptable handling qualities if the pilot is able to reduce control force to zero throughout most of the
operating envelope.

4.2 Flight Test Procedure

1. Pre-Flight Procedures

a) Designate seat assignments for the lab flight and individual crew weights.
b) Perform a weight and balance calculation by determining total weight and total moment about the
nose of the aircraft (the datum reference point). This C.G. is plotted inside of the flight envelope
to determine the loading configuration of the aircraft.
c) Crew members review the lab objective, safety procedures, and data collection expectations.
d) Fill in flight logs are prepared with data labels and appropriate fields populated.
 e) Perform pre-flight checks on the aircraft.
f) Upon entering the aircraft, ensure altimeter dial settings in the center and aft seats are set to
29.92.

2. Flight Procedures and Data Collection

Takeoff

a) The pilot will execute a takeoff in which he/she holds the brakes, sets takeoff power, pulls the
control yoke to the aft stop, and then releases the brakes.
b) Record engine RPM, indicated pressure altitude, airspeed, elevator deflection, manifold pressure,
and outside air temperature when the nose wheel departs from the runway.

Level Flight

c) The pilot will determine the maximum level flight speed at a given altitude. The pilot will slow to
90% of the maximum level flight and trim the airplane.
d) Record elevator deflection, airspeed, pressure altitude, outside air temperature, engine RPM, and
manifold pressure.

Landing

e) The pilot will perform a normal landing.

f) At the time when the rear wheels touch down, record elevator deflection, indicated airspeed,
pressure altitude, outside air temperature, engine RPM, and manifold pressure.

Glide

g) The pilot will make a configuration change to represent various flight conditions.
h) Record elevator deflection, indicated airspeed, pressure altitude, outside air temperature, engine
RPM, manifold pressure, and stick force required to maintain trim.

3. Post-Flight Procedures

a) Perform post-flight data reduction.

4.3 Data Reduction

4.3.1 Weight and Balance

The seat assignments for the Longitudinal Control and Trim lab were as seen in Table 7 below.
The weight and balance for the flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1 of this
report and the results are shown numerically in Table 8 and graphically in Figure 22 .
 Table 7. Seat Assignments for Lab 3

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Tommi Guess (Pilot-In-Command) Jacob Rohrer 425
Center Seat Gary Greenman N/A 250
Aft Seat N/A N/A 0

Table 8. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 3

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153016
Pilot/Front Passengers 425 85.5 36337.5
Center Passengers 250 118.1 29525
Rear Passengers 0 155.7 0
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 300 95.0 28500
Baggage FWD 75 42.0 3150
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
250528/2947
Total Loaded Airplane 2947 250528
85.0

Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope

3400

3200

3000

2800
Aircraft Total Weight, lbs.

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 22. Weight and Balance Graph for Lab 3

4.3.2 Data Collected

Data was collected over one takeoff, one landing, and four configuration changes in FWD and
AFT C.G. configurations. Stick force needed to maintain trim was observed in configuration changes
which consisted of power and flap changes. The data can be seen below for takeoff in a FWD C.G. in
Figure 23, landing in a FWD C.G. in Figure 24, and power changes in a FWD C.G. in Figure 25.

Takeoff FWD CG
Vn-liftoff (mph) 38
elev def td (deg) 7.4
field Elevation (ft) 29.95 80
RPM 2700
MAG 29
OAT (°C) 24
Fuel remaining reading 11
Flaps (deg) 10

Figure 23. Takeoff Data in a FWD C.G. Configuration

Landing FWD CG
Vc (mph) 75
Elevator (deg) 4.1
Field Elevation (ft) 29.95 80
RPM 1000
MAG 14
OAT (°C) 22
Fuel remaining (gal) 3.5
Flaps (deg) 40

Figure 24. Landing Data in a FWD C.G. Configuration

Description Power Flaps Vtar (mph) V2nd row delta Elev (deg) Fs (lbs) Altp 2nd row OAT RPM Mp
Full flaps (40deg), 3deg glide
3 deg glideslope 40 deg 65 60 2.1 -10 3150 16 2400 14
slope, Full trim
0 deg flaps trim to 107 mph
Set for level flight 0 to 40 107 113 -1.1 -24 3000 16 2400 22
(1.5vstall) Flaps to 40deg
Flaps 40 deg (1.5Vstall) to TO
TO power 40 deg 107 98 -1.5 4 3100 16 2700
power
TO power 40deg flaps retract to
TO power 40 to 0 107 98 -0.7 43 3100 16 2700
0deg flaps
Full aft trim at 1.1vstall and
TO power 40 to 0 74 74 2.2 28 3100 16 2000 13
flaps to 0 and TO power

Figure 25. Stick Force Observation to Maintain Trim in Configuration Changes

5.0 Lab 4: Static and Dynamic Lateral-Directional Stability

5.1 Test Objective
The purpose of this lab experiment was to explore lateral-directional static and dynamic stability,
the study of the reaction of the aircraft when its flight path deviates from the plane of symmetry. Lateral
stability focuses on the effects of sideslip on the rolling moments of the aircraft while directional stability
focuses on the moments generated about the vertical axis. Steady-heading sideslips were executed to
examine lateral stability, and Dutch roll and spiral modes were explored in the investigation of the Piper
PA-32-260’s dynamic stability.

5.2 Flight Test Procedure

1. Pre-Flight Procedures

g) Designate seat assignments for the lab flight and individual crew weights.
h) Perform a weight and balance calculation by determining total weight and total moment about the
nose of the aircraft (the datum reference point). This C.G. is plotted inside of the flight envelope
to determine the loading configuration of the aircraft.
i) Crew members review the lab objective, safety procedures, and data collection expectations.
j) Fill in flight logs are prepared with data labels and appropriate fields populated.
k) Perform pre-flight checks on the aircraft.
l) Upon entering the aircraft, ensure altimeter dial settings in the center and aft seats are set to
29.92.

2. Flight Procedures and Data Collection

Steady-Heading Sideslips

a) The pilot will trim the aircraft and the observers will record indicated airspeed, pressure altitude,
engine RPM, manifold pressure, outside air temperature, fuel quantity, heading, rudder position,
and aileron position.
b) The pilot will enter a steady-heading sideslip and when the pilot calls out “read”, the observers
will record sideslip angle, bank angle, rudder position, rudder force, aileron position, and aileron
force.

Spiral Mode

c) The pilot will trim the aircraft and the observers will record indicated airspeed, pressure altitude,
engine RPM, manifold pressure, outside air temperature, fuel quantity, heading, rudder position,
and aileron position.
d) The pilot will hold the lateral control rigid while entering a 5° bank angle using the rudder. The
pilot will return the rudder to the trim condition and then release all controls.
e) The observers will record bank angle every 5 seconds for 30 seconds.

Dutch Roll

i) The pilot will trim the aircraft and the observers will record indicated airspeed, pressure altitude,
engine RPM, manifold pressure, outside air temperature, fuel quantity, heading, rudder position,
and aileron position.
j) Using a rudder doublet, the pilot will excite the Dutch roll and release all controls. The observers
will record bank angle and sideslip.

3. Post-Flight Procedures

b) Perform post-flight data reduction.

 5.3 Data Reduction

5.3.1 Weight and Balance

Lab 4 was split into two separate flights, 4.1 which included the steady-heading sideslip
maneuver and lab 4.2 which included the Dutch roll and the spiral mode. The seat assignments for the
Static and Dynamic Lateral Stability Lab (4.1) were as seen in Table 9 below. The weight and balance for
the flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1 of this report and the results are
shown numerically in Table 10 and graphically in Figure 26 . The seat assignments for the Static and
Dynamic Directional Stability Lab (4.2) were as seen in Table 11 below. The weight and balance for the
flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1 of this report and the results are shown
numerically in Table 12 and graphically in Figure 27 .

Table 9. Seat Assignments for Lab 4.1

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Tommi Guess (Pilot-In-Command) Gary Greenman 410
Center Seat Eric Tondreau Ted Meyer 420
Aft Seat Rachel Henry N/A 130

Table 10. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 4.1

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153016
Pilot/Front Passengers 410 85.5 35055
Center Passengers 420 118.1 49602
Rear Passengers 130 155.7 20241
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 360 95.0 34200
Baggage FWD 75 42.0 3150
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
295264.4/3292
Total Loaded Airplane 3292 295264.4
89.7
 Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope
3400

3200

3000

Aircraft Total Weight, lbs. 2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 26. Weight and Balance Graph for Lab 4.1

Table 11. Seat Assignments for Lab 4.2

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Tommi Guess (Pilot-In-Command) Eric Tondreau 355
Center Seat Gary Greenman Rachel Henry 380
Aft Seat Ted Meyer N/A 225

Table 12. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 4.2

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153016
Pilot/Front Passengers 355 85.5 30352.5
Center Passengers 380 118.1 44878
Rear Passengers 225 155.7 35032.5
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 240 95.0 22800
Baggage FWD 0 42.0 0
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
286079.4/3097
Total Loaded Airplane 3097 286079.4
92.3
 Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope
3400

3200

3000

Aircraft Total Weight, lbs. 2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 27. Weight and Balance Graph for Lab 4.2

5.3.2 Data Collected

Data was collected over two flights in the FWD and AFT C.G. configurations. Steady-heading
sideslips were performed on the first flight in climb, cruise, and powered approach flight conditions and
observers collected airspeed, altitude, heading, engine RPM, manifold pressure, outside air temperature,
aileron deflection, rudder deflection, sideslip angle, bank angle, rudder force, and aileron force. Dutch
Rolls and the Spiral Mode were the focus of the second flight and observers collected airspeed, altitude,
engine RPM, manifold pressure, outside air temperature, bank angle, heading, and fuel quantity.

5.3.3 Data Reduction

The data reduction process for this lab experiment consisted of a series of plots. After instrument
corrections were applied to the collected airspeed and altitude data, a plot of Bank Angle v. Sideslip
Angle was created for all C.G.s and flight conditions. The graph of bank angle v. sideslip angle for climb,
cruise, and powered approach can be seen in Figure 28, Figure 29, and Figure 30 respectively.
Figure 28. Bank Angle v. Sideslip Angle for Climb

Figure 29. Bank Angle v. Sideslip Angle for Cruise

 Figure 30. Bank Angle v. Sideslip Angle for Powered Approach

A plot of Rudder Deflection v. Sideslip Angle was then created for all C.G.s and flight
conditions. The graph of bank angle v. sideslip angle for climb, cruise, and powered approach can be seen
in Figure 30, Figure 31, and Figure 32 respectively.
Figure 31. Rudder Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Climb

Figure 32. Rudder Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Cruise

 Figure 33. Rudder Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Powered Approach

A plot of Rudder Force v. Sideslip Angle was then created for all C.G.s and flight conditions. The
graph of bank angle v. sideslip angle for climb, cruise, and powered approach can be seen in Figure 34,
Figure 35, and Figure 36 respectively.
Figure 34. Rudder Force v. Sideslip Angle for Climb

Figure 35. Rudder Force v. Sideslip Angle for Cruise

 Figure 36. Rudder Force v. Sideslip Angle for Powered Approach

A plot of Aileron Deflection v. Sideslip Angle was then created for all C.G.s and flight
conditions. The graph of bank angle v. sideslip angle for climb, cruise, and powered approach can be seen
in Figure 37, Figure 38, and Figure 39 respectively.
Figure 37. Aileron Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Climb

Figure 38. Aileron Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Cruise

 Figure 39. Aileron Deflection v. Sideslip Angle for Powered Approach

A plot of Aileron Force v. Sideslip Angle was then created for all C.G.s and flight conditions.
The graph of bank angle v. sideslip angle for climb, cruise, and powered approach can be seen in Figure
40, Figure 41, and Figure 42 respectively.
Figure 40. Aileron Force v. Sideslip Angle for Climb

Figure 41. Aileron Force v. Sideslip Angle for Cruise

 Figure 42. Aileron Force v. Sideslip Angle for Powered Approach

For the spiral mode data reduction, a plot of bank angle and rudder position over time was created
for the AFT C.G. condition. The graph can be seen below in Figure 43 and shows that the aircraft rolled
from +5 degrees of bank angle Left to -10 degrees of bank angle over approximately 4 seconds.
Additionally a plot of yaw versus time for the Dutch Roll maneuver was completed to determine the half-
cycle amplitude ratio for use in the calculation of damped and undamped natural frequencies of the
aircraft. The graph can be seen below in Figure 44.
Figure 43. Bank Angle v. Time for Spiral Mode in AFT C.G.

Figure 44. Yaw v. Time for Dutch Roll in AFT C.G.

 From the graph of yaw versus time for the Dutch roll maneuver in the AFT C.G. configuration,
the half cycle amplitude ratio was determined to be approximately 2.25 and using the chart shown in
Figure 46 of appendix A, the damping ratio (δ) was found to be 0.25. The damping ratio was utilized in
Eq. (8) to calculate the number of cycles to half amplitude

√1−𝛿𝐷𝑅 2 0.11
𝐶1/2 = 0.114 𝛿𝐷𝑅
=𝛿 (8)
𝐷𝑅

where 𝛿𝐷𝑅 is the damping ratio. Then, using Eq. (6), the damped natural frequency was determined to be
2.79 and using Eq. (7), the undamped natural frequency was determined to be 2.88.

6.0 Lab 5: Stall Characteristics

6.1 Test Objective
The purpose of this lab experiment was to explore the stall characteristics of the Piper PA-32-260
aircraft. It is important to obtain knowledge of the aircrafts tendencies during a stall in order to prevent
entrance into uncontrolled flight. Current FAR 23 regulations indicate that the aircraft must be capable of
holding the elevator against the up stop for two seconds before a pilot initiates a recovery. Several stalls
were observed during this lab experiment.

6.2 Flight Test Procedure

1. Pre-Flight Procedures

a) Designate seat assignments for the lab flight and individual crew weights.
b) Perform a weight and balance calculation by determining total weight and total moment about the
nose of the aircraft (the datum reference point). This C.G. is plotted inside of the flight envelope
to determine the loading configuration of the aircraft.
c) Crew members review the lab objective, safety procedures, and data collection expectations.
d) Fill in flight logs are prepared with data labels and appropriate fields populated.
e) Perform pre-flight checks on the aircraft.
f) Upon entering the aircraft, ensure altimeter dial settings in the center and aft seats are set to
29.92.

2. Flight Procedures and Data Collection

a) Record engine start time, starting fuel quantity, takeoff runway, and takeoff time.
b) Trim the aircraft to airspeed above stall airspeed in a clean power-off configuration.
c) The pilot bleeds off airspeed at 1 mph per second until a stall is reached. At the time of the stall,
observe the airflow on the main wing and the tufts. Disruption of airflow will be apparent.
d) At the time of the stall, record data including airspeed at the warning stall light, stall airspeed,
altitude loss during stall, maximum roll, pitch, and yaw during the stall (including direction, and
normal acceleration during recovery.
e) Repeat steps (b) – (d) in in a clean power-on configuration, flaps-down power-off configuration,
and a flaps-down power-off configuration.
 6.3 Data Collected

6.3.1 Weight and Balance

The seat assignments for the stall characteristics lab experiment were as seen in Table 13 below.
The weight and balance for the flight was calculated by using Eq. (1) – Eq. (3) from section 1.1 of this
report and the results are shown numerically in Table 14 and graphically in Figure 45 .

Table 13. Seat Assignments for Lab 5

Combined Weight
(lbs.)
Front Seat Tommi Guess (Pilot-In-Command) Ralph Kimberlin 325
Center Seat Eric Tondreau Gary Greenman 445
Aft Seat Rachel Henry Ted Meyer 355

Table 14. Weight and Balance Chart for Lab 4.1

Weight (lbs.) Arm AFT Datum (in.) Moment (in-lbs.)

Basic Empty Weight 1897 80.66 153016
Pilot/Front Passengers 325 85.5 27787.5
Center Passengers 445 118.1 52554.5
Rear Passengers 335 155.7 55273.5
Fuel (84 – Gallon Max) 360 95.0 34200
Baggage FWD 0 42.0 3150
Baggage AFT 0 178.7 0
332830.4/3382
Total Loaded Airplane 3382 322830.4
95.4
 Piper Cherokee Six N3736W Fligt Envelope
3400

3200

3000

Aircraft Total Weight, lbs. 2800

2600

2400

2200

2000

1800

1600

1400
76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96
CG Location aft of Datum, in.

Figure 45. Weight and Balance Graph for Lab 5

6.3.2 Data Collection

Data was collected over 4 runs in an AFT C.G. configuration and 5 runs in a FWD C.G.
configuration. Throughout the data collection period, qualitative comments were taken and the tufts on
the wing were observed for airflow disruption. The data for the FWD C.G. Stall Characteristics flight can
be seen below in Table 15 and the data for the AFT C.G. Stall Characteristics flight can be seen in Table
16.

Table 15. Stall Characteristics FWD CG

Warning Spd Warning Spd Stall Spd Stall Spd Recovery Alt Nz Nz Nz Pitch Yaw
Start Alt Max Alt Trim Spd Roll Obs OAT
Run # Flaps Power (mph) (mph) (mph) (mph) Alt Loss Recov Recov Recov Obs Obs
(ft) (ft) (mph) (deg) (deg)
co pilot row 2 co-pilot row 2 (ft) (ft) (ft/s^2) (g) G-meter (deg) (deg)
1 Clean ON 3640 4160 120 70 84 50 61 4040 120 -42 1.30 1.50 4 17
2 Clean ON 4640 4780 110 75 84 55 63 4580 200 -41 1.27 1.50 4.7 16
3 Tuff View Only - No Data
4 Clean OFF 4000 3680 110 78 84 60 71 3140 540 -41 1.27 1.50 2.7 7 24
6 PA ON 3850 4100 98 60 65 42 56 3900 200 -43 1.34 1.50 -6 14.9
7 Tuff View Only - No Data
8 PA OFF 3300 3200 80 65 72 50 62 2650 550 -46 1.43 1.40 -5 -15

Qualitative Comments:
1. Moderate to sever buffet requiring large and continuous lateral inputs to maintain wings level.
2. Full stall charachterized by apprximately nose drop to 5 degree nose low.

Notes:
1. Start altitude was taken prior to pull.
2. Max altitude was peak during pull.
3. Recovery alt was taken at return to level flight.
4. Take roll, pitch, and yaw data directly off DAS if able.
 Table 16. AFT CG Stall Characteristics

Trim Stall Spd Nz Pitch

Start Alt Nz Recov Roll Obs
Run # Flaps Power Spd (mph) Pitchover Obs Comments
(ft) (ft/s^2) (deg)
(mph) row 3 (g) (deg)

1 0 Full 4300 116 78 -22.82 0.71 7.4 R -6.2 Heavy prestall Buffet, Slight wing drop

2 0 Idle 4300 116 75 -29.87 0.93 3.1 R 1.8 Heavy prestall buffet, wing drop, secondary stall
Medium prestall buffet, generally more benign. Wings
3 40 Full 2800 105 56 -27.5 0.85 8.4 R -0.4 level throughout, full upper-surface separation
Higher stall speed, sharper nose drop. Higher tendency
4 40 Idle 2800 105 62 -26.14 0.81 .5 R -18.2 to progress to secondary stall on recovery

Appendix A

Table 17. Center Seat Airspeed Indicator Instrument Corrections

mph Scale Error (mph)

Indicated Airspeed cw ccw
20 0 +1
30 0 0
40 +1 0
50 +1 0
60 0 +1
70 +1 0
80 +1 0
90 0 0
100 0 +1
120 +1 0
140 0 +1
150 0 N/A

Table 18. Center Seat Altitude Indicator Instrument Correction

(Feet)
Altitude Reading Altimeter Reading Error Altitude Reading Altimeter Reading Error
-1000 -990 -10 10000 10055 60
0 -10 -10 12000 12015 55
500 495 -5 14000 13985 15
1000 1005 5 16000 15955 -15
1500 1505 5 18000 17910 -45
2000 2010 10 20000 19900 -90
3000 3020 20
4000 4040 40
6000 6060 60
8000 8060 60
 Table 19. Aft Seat Airspeed Indicator Instrument Corrections

mph Scale Error (mph)

Indicated Airspeed cw ccw
20 +2 +1
30 +1 +1
40 +1 +1
50 +1 +1
60 +2 +1
70 0 0
80 0 +1
90 0 +1
100 +1 +1
120 0 +1
140 0 0
150 0 N/A
Table 20. Aft Seat Altitude Indicator Instrument Corrections

(Feet)
Altitude Reading Altimeter Reading Error Altitude Reading Altimeter Reading Error
-1000 -1010 10 10000 9945 -55
0 0 0 12000 11950 -50
500 495 -5 14000 13995 -5
1000 990 -10 16000 16050 50
1500 1480 -20 18000 18110 110
2000 1975 -25 20000 20195 195
3000 2970 -30
4000 3970 -30
w6000 5950 -50
8000 7955 -45

Figure 46. Half Cycle Amplitude Ratio Graph