experimental planes 2016

NASA stands by its X-planes

By pat host and ben iannotta | november 2023, a substantial portion of the agency’s aviation budget over the next four fiscal years will be dedicated to building and flying demonstration aircraft, including some with x-plane designations. nasa is staying with that plan, despite setbacks since the initiative was announced in 2016. why is the agency so determined to continue, and when will the first of the experimental planes fly pat host and ben iannotta set out to find out..

N ASA has not flown an experimental aircraft in the seven years since it pledged to build and fly five of them to deliver “revolutionary levels of aircraft performance improvements.” The goal was to give the U.S. an edge in the “international competition” to build aircraft capable of satisfying an anticipated doubling in passenger trips by the 2030s, according to a 2016 NASA brochure announcing what was then known as the New Aviation Horizons Initiative. That demand portended an “economic potential of trillions of dollars in the fields of manufacturing, operations and maintenance, and the high-quality jobs they support,” the brochure reads.

While the name “New Aviation Horizons Initiative” was abandoned in 2018, and the number and kind of X-planes and demonstrators has shrunk, what has not changed is NASA’s belief that getting new technologies and configurations airborne is among the most important things it can do to support the U.S. air transportation industry and a new global aspiration to achieve net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, a goal set by the International Air Traffic Association in 2021.

“The changes that you’ve seen from the snapshot in 2016 until now are really just reflective of making sure that these really high-value flight demonstrations — that are also high cost — really are bringing the maximum benefit,” says Lee Noble, director of the Integrated Aviation Systems Program within NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate. “If we strictly adhered to the plan from 2016, we would be doing the U.S. taxpayer a great disservice, because we really wouldn’t be flexing with how we see the market developing.”

The agency proposes to spend $1.4 billion through 2028 — a quarter of the total for aeronautics — for these flight demonstrations, including development of two aircraft that have X-plane designations: the X-59 that aims to demonstrate quieter supersonic flight, and the X-66A Sustainable Flight Demonstrator to be built by NASA and Boeing to test a novel wing configuration for fuel efficiency. That’s a switch in scope from 2016, when NASA said it would “build a series of five mostly large-scale experimental aircraft — X-planes.” Also in the conceptual phase this time is a yet-to-be defined Future Flight Demonstrator that might or might not someday receive an X-plane designation, something that must come through a request from NASA to the U.S. Air Force.

In Noble’s view, no one should get hung up about such labels. “We don’t formulate a project and say, ‘Oh, this is an X-plane.’ We formulate a flight demonstration,” he says. “But sometimes we stare at it and go, ‘Wow, this is kind of novel, let’s go ask for an X-plane designation.’”

Noble does not sugarcoat the fact that nothing has been flown since 2016. NASA last month bumped the first flight of the piloted X-59 to sometime in 2024, after the aircraft had to be moved back indoors into the assembly area in Palmdale, California, earlier this year to address airworthiness issues.

“We’ve paused a time or two to make sure that we work through technical issues and really have an aircraft that’s safe,” Noble says. Plans call for a pilot to fly the aircraft over populated areas so that residents can be surveyed about the sonic thump, rather than a boom, that the plane is supposed to produce.

As for the all-electric X-57, Noble says it was wise to shift the project into a closeout phase without ever flying the modified Tecnam P2006T prop plane. It was to have been flown with various electrification technology and wing configurations under a series of “mods.” A potentially dangerous issue with its motors was discovered earlier this year, and solving the problem would have spilled into fiscal 2024, Noble says.

“When we looked at the benefits of how X-57 has already contributed, they’ve already punched their ticket in terms of being a pathfinder,” he says, referring in part to a potentially dangerous battery issue resolved during its development.

Will Congress be willing to continue to fund NASA’s flight demonstrations, given that none have flown? Noble does not offer a prediction, but he says NASA has been open with Congress, and the White House for that matter, about the issues it has faced. “I think we’ve been really transparent with our stakeholders, both at OMB [the White House office that creates the president’s budget request] and Congress about the progress we’ve made on all of these. And thus far, they seem to acknowledge that we’re working through these things credibly,” he says.

None of which means that flying isn’t preferable. “Unless we bring [technologies] to a readiness level of six or seven,” — demonstration in a relevant environment, meaning in flight in the case of an aircraft — “industry really has a hard time picking those up and transitioning them into products.”

Noble is, after all, in the business of making sure flight technologies work together properly. “Sometimes you want to understand how technology A, B, C and D actually behave together as a system on the aircraft,” he says. “And again, we can do all of that when we go to fly.”

Robert Kraus, dean of aerospace at the University of North Dakota, says NASA’s demonstration projects are particularly valuable to newcomers to the field. “If you are a startup company making a new business, you are not going to have the time to get to a viable product that is profitable” without help, Kraus says. “The only way to get to that point is to have the government partner with businesses, labs and companies.”

Startups, however, aren’t the only beneficiary — a case in point being the X-66A, whose approach of improving fuel efficiency by shifting to thin wings supported by trusses was just one of several non-tube-and-wing designs vying for demonstration back in 2016. Boeing will own the aircraft, with NASA playing a supporting role under an arrangement that will have an aircraft being developed under a Funded Space Act Agreement. “It’s different than anything we’ve ever done,” Noble says.

While X-66A is novel in terms of contracting, not all are convinced the aircraft will earn the stature of other X-planes throughout history. In the view of Dan Patt, who holds a Ph.D. in aerospace engineering and is a former DARPA manager, the development will no doubt present engineering and integration challenges. From his vantage point at the Hudson Institute think tank, he sees the project as more of an industrial policy effort to help Boeing compete against Airbus than an effort to break untrodden aerodynamics ground. He noted that the industry has known about truss-braced wings for decades.

On the technology front, Noble describes the X-66A as worthy of its experimental designation given the potential shift away from the conventional tube-and-wing designs that have dominated air travel for decades. “That’ll just be huge,” he says. “We specifically said, ‘Let’s focus this one on airframe technologies. Let’s not bring new propulsion systems onto the aircraft.’ That’s kind of too many miracles in one place.”

So, at the end of the day, NASA stands by its X-planes, or its demonstrators, viewing them as a linchpin in the race toward cleaner, partially electrified air travel. “In the current environment, we really want to make sure that these technologies that we develop really do have a big impact on U.S. competitiveness, on sustainability of the commercial aviation fleet,” Noble says.

Going airborne

Nasa’s 10-year x-plane initiative announced in 2016 has morphed into four projects. though none of the aircraft have been flown yet, the x-59 supersonic demonstrator is poised for its inaugural flight in 2024, nasa announced last month..

This demonstrator, which NASA now plans to fly for the first time in 2024, remains in the final stages of development by Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California. Plans call for a pilot to fly X-59 over various populated areas in the U.S. to see if the sonic thump from its sleek shape will be acceptable to residents. The thinking is that the results of these community overflights could prompt regulators to lift the prohibition on civilian supersonic flights over land in the U.S. and elsewhere. Workers have encountered multiple technical problems during construction, however. Last year, it took several attempts to fit the General Electric F414-GE-100 engine into the aircraft without interference, although NASA says this was not a significant issue.

“When we installed the engine, we did our best to take blue light scans of the engine bay and the engine to make sure there wouldn’t be any interferences,” says Lee Noble, director of NASA’s Integrated Aviation Systems Program. “But we found a couple minor ones,” he adds, and that required taking the engine out and reinstalling it “probably two or three times” until the right fit was achieved.

In August, after a stint on the flight line, “we did move [X-59] back indoors to the assembly area because there were some components that we realized either needed some upgrade or some kind of replacement,” Noble says. Those details are now being worked.

In 2016, NASA said it expected X-59 to fly for the first time “in the 2020 timeframe depending on funding.”

Electrified Powertrain Flight Demonstration Project

By mid-decade, two teams are to fly different versions of megawatt-class hybrid -electric powertrains. The goal is to produce enough electricity to someday power a hybrid passenger aircraft — either a regional aircraft or the equivalent of today’s single-aisle Airbus A320s or Boeing 737s.

NASA’s Lee Noble says the idea was born in a 2018 strategy discussion. “The thing that bubbled up to the top was: If we could bring megawatt-class electric motors — machines — to flight, that’s the sweet spot that impacts all the way from small general aviation aircraft up to single aisle transports,” he says. “This is really an enabler for turbine engines of the future, where maybe it’s a hybrid engine system where it’s not just running on jet fuel, but it also has electric augmentation.”

GE Aerospace of Cincinnati will test its version on a Saab 340B turboprop, although the company’s goal is a single-aisle, hybrid jet. Boeing’s Aurora Flight Sciences company in Virginia is assisting GE with the Saab modifications. Meanwhile, magniX of Washington plans to demonstrate its version on a Dash 7 turboprop. “We have two different approaches because GE is of course an established OEM [original equipment manufacturer]. MagniX is a newer entrant to the community but very nimble and very focused and has already flown electric aircraft,” Noble says.

X-66A Sustainable Flight Demonstrator

The aircraft will be built on the frame of an MD-90 airliner at Boeing’s facility in Palmdale, California. The aircraft’s wings will be removed and replaced with longer, ultra-thin wings and carbon fiber support beams. This truss-braced wing design is supposed to deliver 10% better fuel efficiency if paired with conventional jet engines and up to 30% better efficiency when paired with an advanced jet engine. Boeing last month announced it had selected Pratt and Whitney’s geared turbofans, but neither company nor NASA has specified the fuel efficiency these engines will yield. Plans call for a one-year flight campaign starting in 2028. Boeing is developing the aircraft under a Funded Space Act Agreement with NASA. The agency plans to spend $425 million, and Boeing will spend $725 million, says NASA’s Lee Noble.

While Boeing will own the aircraft, and NASA must be careful not reveal its partner’s proprietary information, Noble anticipates sharing enough details to inspire innovation elsewhere. “As we go to conferences, we’ll be careful to report things in a way that doesn’t kind of give up the proprietary nature of their design but still shows the benefits of performance and really how the X-66 behaved in flight,” he says.

He also notes that NASA selected Boeing as a result of a competition: “I couldn’t comment on the number of proposals we got, but it was multiple, and Boeing just really rose to the top in terms of their vision for the future and how novel their concept was,” he says.

and in the process of being shut down:

X-57 maxwell.

NASA plans to hold a public “technical closeout meeting” sometime between January and March for this project under which an electrified Tecnam P2006T would have been flown to demonstrate distributed electric propulsion. The agency decided earlier this year that it would begin shutting the project down to meet a fiscal 2023 deadline that was set in 2021. In theory, the agency could have extended the project to begin flying a series of planned “mod” flights that would have tried out a range of electrification technologies and configurations.

Development at Armstrong Flight Research Center in California had been slowed by the pandemic: “X-57 was all about being around the aircraft and integrating things. So unless you could show up at the center and work, you couldn’t do any of that remotely. So, they were impacted by covid in a unique way,” says NASA’s Lee Noble. But over the winter at Armstrong, “design deficiencies” related to the aircraft’s motors were discovered, and these would have put the pilot at risk, NASA said in an email statement. The discovery sparked multiple “Tiger Team” meetings between NASA officials and ESAero, the X-57 prime contractor in California, which proposed modifications to the motors.

“ESAero believes that these simple fixes along with successful ground testing and frequent inspection would have been sufficient to accept the risk and go to flight by September,” said Andrew Gibson, CEO of ESAero, in an email. NASA nevertheless decided to begin the closeout process, noting in its statement that “the NASA Armstrong airworthiness review board concurred with the project’s safety and risk assessment.”

Related Topics

About Pat Host

Pat is an award-winning Washington, D.C.-based journalist covering the aerospace and defense industries. He has written about fixed-wing piloted aircraft, helicopters, uncrewed aircraft and space for Janes and Inside Defense Defense Daily.

Related Reading

Up next in commercialization: hypersonic testing

Keith button and paul brinkmann, november 1, 2023.

More on the “Manhattan Project” analogy

Coaxial conundrum

• Interact with NASA APPEL on LinkedIn
• Interact with NASA APPEL on Twitter
• Interact with NASA APPEL on Facebook
• View NASA APPEL Images on Flickr
• View NASA APPEL Videos on YouTube
• Subscribe to NASA APPEL's RSS Feed

Subscribe to INSIGHT

Expanding perspectives every month.

• Curated Curricula
• Competency Models
• Development Frameworks
• Maximize Your Learning Experience
• Systems Engineering Leadership Program (SELP)
• Accreditations & Affiliations
• Defense Acquisition University
• Course Support
• Registration Overview
• Virtual Backgrounds
• INSIGHT Publication
• Apollo Era Resources
• Case Studies
• Knowledge Capture and Transfer
• Knowledge Sharing Tools
• NASA Knowledge Community
• NASA Knowledge Management Competencies
• Shuttle Era Resources
• Spotlight on Lessons Learned Series
• Lessons Learned Lifecycle and Highlights
• Project Management Courses
• Program Management Series
• NPR 7120.5 Revision F Rollout Briefing (NASA Only)
• NPR 7120.5 Tailoring Resources
• NASA FAC-P/PM Certification Program
• Office of the Chief Engineer Handbooks
• Relevant Documents
• Affiliations
• Small Steps, Giant Leaps Podcast
• Quick Webinars
• On-Demand Courses
• Project Knowledge Expo
• NASA Knowledge on Video
• Knowledge Inventory
• Technical Authority

NASA Advances Aviation with Six New X-Planes

Artist’s concept of Maxwell, NASA’s first piloted X-plane in a decade. Also known as X-57, Maxwell will demonstrate benefits of electric propulsion for aviation. Image Credit: NASA Langley/Advanced Concepts Lab, AMA, Inc.

In 2017, NASA Aeronautics will launch a new X-plane program as part of a 10-year plan to transform the American aviation industry.

Since the first X-plane emerged in 1946, NASA and its predecessor, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), have periodically employed these experimental technology demonstrators to explore cutting-edge technologies and systems. NASA plans to resume this tradition with a new series of piloted X-planes, starting next year with the X-57, also known as Maxwell. A small-scale, general aviation-sized X-plane, Maxwell is being developed as part of NASA Aeronautics’ New Aviation Horizons (NAH) program. The aircraft, which features 14 electric motors that drive propellers integrated into a novel wing structure, will examine new propulsion technology in order to produce a five-fold reduction in energy consumption for a plane flying 175 miles per hour. Electric propulsion aircraft are expected to be quieter, more efficient, and “greener” than current commuter planes.

In a keynote address at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) Aviation 2016 conference, NASA Administrator Charlie Bolden described the program and said, “We hope to validate the idea that by distributing electric power across a number of motors integrated with an aircraft this way, we can reach those propulsion goals along with fuel savings.”

Over the coming decade, NAH will develop five larger-scale X-planes as well. Three will be subsonic vehicles designed to explore meaningful reductions in fuel, emissions, and noise without sacrificing performance. A fourth large-scale X-plane will explore hybrid-electric propulsion and aspects of aircraft integration. The final proposed X-plane, the Quiet Supersonic Technology demonstrator (QueSST), will focus on supersonic transport. The concept behind QueSST is to achieve supersonic speeds without the sonic boom that currently plagues supersonic aircraft. NASA’s plan is to use data from QueSST to encourage federal and international regulators to institute new noise standards that would permit overland commercial supersonic flight.

In addition to the new X-planes, NASA Aeronautics is exploring novel “green” aviation technologies through its Environmentally Responsible Aviation (ERA) project. One recent technology demonstration featured a stress test of a 30-foot, multi-bay composite aircraft structure. This structure features a unique “stitching” technique that would enable NASA to build aircraft in new shapes, moving beyond the limitations of current aircraft design. Furthermore, the composite is light in weight, which will help reduce fuel consumption and emissions.

Another recent ERA project, in partnership with industry, looked at propulsion innovations, including, said Bolden, “a change in the design of a turbine engine’s compressor stage that improved fuel efficiency by 2.5 percent.” Other ERA efforts included modification of a geared turbofan jet engine to reduce fuel burn by 15% and significantly reduce noise, and the enhancement of a jet engine combustor design to reduce nitrogen oxide production by almost 80%.

“Now we need to bring those concepts on which we’ve been working from the developmental stage to full-fledged reality if we are to solve the growth-related challenges facing the global aviation community during this first half of the 21 st century,” said Bolden.

The goal, he added, is to develop aircraft that use 50% less fuel, produce 75% fewer emissions, and are notably more quiet than today’s vehicles. Doing so will have profound benefits for the industry. “It’s possible, according to our computer models, that airlines could save more than $250 billion between 2025 and 2050.”

To achieve its goals, NASA Aeronautics has developed a series of research-focused roadmaps designed to advance solutions, over the next decade, to aviation challenges in six key thrust areas. This 10-year plan, said Bolden, “achieves revolutionary breakthroughs in new aircraft and air traffic management technologies.”

The program is supported by the 2017 Presidential Budget Request, which includes a $790 million budget for NASA Aeronautics plus $10.6 billion over the next 10 years in support of a government-wide initiative to create a cleaner, “greener” transportation system.

The budget request, ample though it is, isn’t enough on its own, cautioned Bolden. Partnerships between NASA, other government agencies such as the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), academia, and private industry are crucial to the successful transformation of American aviation.

“Our success will depend on you and your companies and a willingness to believe in this audacious future,” Bolden told AIAA Aviation 2016 attendees. “Our strategic plan presents a vision for the next generation and we want you to be there with us every time we soar.”

Read an APPEL News article about QueSST .

Watch a video about NASA Aeronautics’ New Aviation Horizons program

About the Author

The Academy invites you to continue sharing stories and lessons by suggesting topics or projects the APPEL News team should cover. Contact us to submit your story suggestions.

Share With Your Colleagues

Recommended.

Piloted, electric propulsion-powered experimental aircraft under way

NASA is researching ideas that could lead to developing an electric propulsion-powered aircraft that would be quieter, more efficient and environmentally friendly than today's commuter aircraft.

The proposed piloted experimental airplane is called Sceptor, short for the Scalable Convergent Electric Propulsion Technology and Operations Research. The concept involves removing the wing from an Italian-built Tecnam P2006T aircraft and replacing it with an experimental wing integrated with electric motors.

An advantage of modifying an existing aircraft is engineers will be able to compare the performance of the proposed experimental airplane with the original configuration, said Sean Clarke, Sceptor co-principal investigator at NASA's Armstrong Flight Research Center in California. The Tecnam, currently under construction, is expected to be at Armstrong in about a year for integration of the wing with the fuselage. Armstrong flew a different Tecnam P2006T in September to gather performance data on the original configuration.

NASA researchers ultimately envision a nine-passenger aircraft with a 500-kilowatt power system in 2019. To put that in perspective, 500 kilowatts (nearly 700 horsepower) is about five times as powerful as an average modern passenger car engine.

However, to reach that goal NASA researchers intend to fly the Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate-funded Sceptor in about two years. Progress in three areas is happening now to enable that timeline, Clarke said.

Those areas include testing of an experimental wing on a truck, developing and using a new simulator to look at controls and handling characteristics of an electric airplane and verifying tools that will enable NASA's aeronautical innovators to design and build Sceptor. Sceptor also is part of NASA's efforts to help pioneer low-carbon propulsion and transition it to industry.

The first area is the Hybrid Electric Integrated Systems Testbed, or HEIST, an experimental wing initially mounted on a specially modified truck. It is used for a series of research projects intended to integrate complex electric propulsion systems.

The testbed functions like a wind tunnel on the ground, accelerating to as much as 73 mph to gather data, Clarke explained. Researchers have used the testbed to measure lift, drag, pitching moment and rolling moment that can validate research tools, Clarke said.

"By evaluating what we measured, versus what the computational fluid dynamics, or CFD, predicted, we will know if the predictions make sense," he added. "Since Sceptor is a new design, we need to validate we have good answers for the Sceptor experimental wing," Clarke said.

HEIST's first experiment was called the Leading Edge Asynchronous Propeller Technology, or Leaptech . The experiment began in May at Armstrong and consisted of 18 electric motors integrated into the carbon composite wing with lithium iron phosphate batteries.

Tests so far show the distribution of power among the 18 motors creates more than double the lift at lower speeds than traditional systems, he said. Leaptech is a collaboration of Armstrong and NASA Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, and California companies Empirical Systems Aerospace of Pismo Beach and Joby Aviation of Santa Cruz.

Developing and refining research tools is another major effort.

For example, researchers are integrating Sceptor aircraft systems with an Armstrong flight simulator for pilots to evaluate handling qualities. Researchers also will be able to study balancing the power demands of the motors with batteries and then a turbine, Clarke explained. Researchers are interested if a hybrid of distributed electric motors and gas-powered turbines could provide power to extend the aircraft's range and enable the envisioned 9-place concept aircraft, Clarke explained.

Sceptor could be a solution to greater fuel efficiency, improved performance and ride quality and aircraft noise reduction. NASA will be key in developing those technologies for the future that will be with people when they fly.

Related Terms

• Green Aviation Tech
• Science & Research

Explore More

Carbon Nanotubes and the Search for Life on Other Planets

NASA, ESA Missions Help Scientists Uncover How Solar Wind Gets Energy

Hubble Zooms into the Rosy Tendrils of Andromeda

Discover more topics from nasa.

Explore Earth Science

Earth Science in Action

Earth Science Data

Facts About Earth

NASA’s Electric Plane Will Take Flight This Year—but Its Future Is Uncertain

The X-57 Maxwell has removed some barriers to electric flight, but its funding expires soon

Teresa Nowakowski

Daily Correspondent

After navigating challenges—from exploding transistors to a full redesign of its battery packs—NASA’s all-electric airplane will take its first test flight this year.

Instead of using jet fuel, the plane, known as the X-57 Maxwell , will sail among the clouds powered by 800 pounds of rechargeable lithium-ion batteries. Its flight will mark a major milestone for the program and for the field of aviation as it seeks to become more sustainable.

“This industry of building electric airplanes is very competitive,” Starr Ginn , NASA’s Advanced Air Mobility lead strategist said in a statement last month. “Having a NASA-sponsored project, where we get to share all our lessons learned with the public, allows the industry to grow. The X-57 project has been a wealth of knowledge so people don’t have to reinvent the wheel.

However, the X-57 program is on track to shut down before it accomplishes everything it set out to do. The program began in 2016 with a twofold goal: to demonstrate that a plane can be powered fully by electricity and to increase efficiency and performance through a new wing design with several small electric motors. But due to pandemic disruptions and obstacles during the creation of the plane, the program doesn’t have enough time to complete its later stages before its funding ceases at the end of this year.

The X-57 Maxwell is one of the latest projects of NASA’s X-plane program , which builds experimental aircraft to test new technology. In its history, the program has produced many revolutionary crafts, starting with the Bell X-1 , which was the first aircraft to break the sound barrier in level flight. Later projects, such as the X-15 , which set unofficial world speed and altitude records, have continued to test new designs and technology. The X-57 is the program’s first crewed X-plane in two decades.

When the X-57 takes wing, it will be in a form that NASA calls “ Modification 2 .” This version of the plane, based on a  Tecnam P2006T , has two electric motors and more than 5,000 battery cells in its fuselage. That’s a marked difference from the planned final iteration, “ Modification 4 ,” which was meant to have twelve small motors distributed across the two wings, as well as one larger motor on each wing tip. This design, called a blown wing , could allow for a shorter runway and smaller wings on the airplane itself.

X-57 will not reach this final design, though, since the project team no longer has the resources to accomplish it.

“We tried to do a very ambitious thing,” explains Nick Borer , the deputy principal investigator for the project at NASA’s Langley Research Center, to IEEE Spectrum ’s Edd Gent. “Trying to do a new type of airframe and a new motor project is not very typical, because those are both very, very challenging endeavors. The agency funds a lot of different things and they’ve been very generous with what they’ve provided to us. But there are priorities at the top and eventually, you’ve got to finish up.”

Still, what the team has accomplished to arrive at an airworthy Modification 2 is no small feat. In 2017, they had to completely redesign the plane’s battery packs with the help of NASA’s design team for the International Space Station. They needed to ensure that if one cell in the pack failed, it wouldn’t result in a fire.

Another problem emerged when it came to the transistors in the aircraft. The original transistors the team used were built to withstand high levels of power, but they were unable to cope with the temperatures and vibrations produced during flight tests.

“They were specced to be able to tolerate the types of environments we were expecting to put it in,” says Sean Clarke , the principal investigator for the program, to Rob Verger at Popular Science . “But every time we would test them, they would fail. We would have transistors just blowing up in our environmental test chamber.”

After careful investigation—made extra difficult by the explosive manner of the transistor failures—the team used transistors with newer hardware and redesigned their system. A full set of these improved transistors has now successfully made it through qualification for flight.

While the X-57 will likely taxi back to its hangar for the final time this year, the plane’s team and others in the industry say the project has made important strides for the potential of electric aircraft, and they’re optimistic that others will continue to build on their achievements. The team has been publishing their data throughout the project in hopes that it will help others building electric planes . A few of NASA’s contractors for the program have gone on to commercialize the X-57’s battery pack and develop other flying vehicles with electric motors.

“The whole idea of an X-plane is to do something that has never been done before, and so I think it is just normal to expect that there is a learning curve,” says Sergio Cecutta , founder and partner at the electric aviation-focused  SMG Consulting , to IEEE Spectrum . “In the end, you want to lay the groundwork for the industry to become successful, and I think on that metric, the X-57 has been a successful project.”

Clarke agrees. “I’m still really excited about this technology,” he tells Popular Science . “I’m looking forward to my kids being able to take short flights in electric airplanes in 10, 15 years—it’s going to be a really great step for aviation.”

Get the latest stories in your inbox every weekday.

Teresa Nowakowski | | READ MORE

Teresa Nowakowski is a print and multimedia journalist based in Chicago. They cover history, arts and culture, science, travel, food and other topics.

• Flight Reports
• Builder Spotlight
• Designer’s Notebook
• Customer Service
• Reset Password
• Guidelines for Writers
• Advertise with Kitplanes
• Industry News
• Kneeboard Notes
• Homebuilder’s Portal
• Completions
• Build Series
• Aircraft Buyer’s Guide
• Buying a Used Homebuilt
• Unairworthy!
• Sign in / Join
• Free Newsletter
• Give a Gift

Mojave Experimental Fly-In 2016

Experimental fans continue to make the Mojave Experimental Fly-In an anticipated event on the west coast. Even with minimal publicity and in the face of sometimes blustery north winds, the Experimental Fly-In drew an impressively large crowd today. Almost all attending were fly-in participants eager to eyeball interesting airplanes and meet the people behind them – and with everything from Pietenpols to the Virgin Galactic mothership on the ramp, we doubt anyone was disappointed.

Besides the huge Virgin Galactic presence, other highlights included the RV-14a demonstrator open for cockpit tours plus the first operating IE2 Lycoming IO-540 engine in Lancair’s Evolution demonstrator. A talk in the Mojave Air & Spaceport conference room by Van’s Aircraft representatives centered on the RV-14a development was also a great opportunity to get details and insight on all things Van’s as well.

As usual the single-day event made short work of a Saturday, and as always we’ve got the April event on our calendar for next year.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Cutting It Short

BIG: Mojave Experimental Fly-In 2019

Indoor Aviating at Mojave

Mojave Tonight & Tomorrow!

Mojave Experimental Fly-in 2019

Largest Yet: Mojave Experimental Fly-In 2018

Mojave Experiemental Fly-In 2018

Seen at Mojave

Fifth Annual Mojave Experimental Fly- In

Leave a reply cancel reply.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

In Case You Missed It

Past Due ELT Batteries

3 Years, 1 Minute, and 40 Seconds

Risky Business

Taking Care of Your Metal Prop

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use

• Entertainment
• General Knowledge

10 Ways to Creatively Cook and Eat Highly Invasive Species

Top 10 Songs from Musicals That Are Misunderstood

10 Game of Thrones Characters Who Differed Greatly in the Books

10 Times Luck Won Battles

Ten Things That You Never Knew Were Created Entirely by Mistake

10 Animals with Dominant Females

10 Glimpses into Gay Life in History

Unsung Heroes: 10 Important Professions That Deserve Better Pay

Ten Billion Dollar Blunders: When Companies Set Cash on Fire

10 Shocking Facts about the Short Life of Percy Bysshe Shelley

Who's behind listverse.

Jamie Frater

Head Editor

Jamie founded Listverse due to an insatiable desire to share fascinating, obscure, and bizarre facts. He has been a guest speaker on numerous national radio and television stations and is a five time published author.

10 Fascinating Experimental Aircraft Of World War II

It should come as no surprise that during World War II, airplane designers around the world built some fascinating experimental airplanes. From early helicopters to bombers meant to attack the United States, these are some of the most interesting airplanes to ever fly.

10 Blackburn B-20

During World War II, floatplanes and flying boats played a big part in the air forces of the world powers. Floatplanes had the advantage of being more flexible in water operations, but they were often small and struggled with maneuverability due to the large float on the bottom of the plane. Flying boats were often used as patrol bombers, but they were large and slow. So the Blackburn Aircraft Company decided to design an airplane that joined the best elements of floatplanes and flying boats, ending up with the oddball B-20 (somewhat similar to the one depicted above).

Half of the B-20’s fuselage was a retractable float. When the B-20 went to land on the water, the lower part of the fuselage would descend into the water. This configuration would give it more versatility in combat, and it would also increase the wing incidence to give it a shorter takeoff run. As soon as the B-20 was in the air, the fuselage would join back together, making it look like a small flying boat . In this configuration the B-20 had much less drag than other flying boats, giving it unprecedented speed.

However, during a test flight, the B-20 fell apart and crashed, killing some of the crew. The British Air Ministry realized that it was a fluke. The concept of the B-20 was sound, but as Blackburn focused its attention to building preexisting airplanes, the need for its experimental aircraft dropped. Nothing ever came from the B-20.

9 Ryan FR Fireball

Compared to Germany and the United Kingdom, the United States ended up behind the curve when it came to building and adopting effective jet aircraft. The first jet fighter in the United States was the dismal P-59, which was not any better than a propeller-driven aircraft. At the same time that Bell built the P-59, the Navy was working on the FR Fireball, a fighter which used an odd power plant system. Instead of just having a jet engine, the Fireball used a propeller in the front and a jet engine in the back.

Since early jet engines had sluggish throttle response, the Navy considered them too dangerous for carrier operations. During most operations (specifically landing and takeoff), the Fireball used its propeller engine, but when they needed extra thrust, the pilots activated the jet engine . Other than that, the Fireball was a highly conventional airplane, coming out as basically a normal fighter plane with a jet engine strapped to the back.

Although it entered service in March 1945, the Fireball never saw combat service. Ryan only built 66 Fireballs, and they were quickly replaced by the next generation of jet fighters. In addition to poor range, the plane was also hurt by its lackluster performance, as Fireballs were slower than many planes even when using the jet engine. Despite the flaws, the Fireball was an important step for the Navy. It was their first jet airplane. The Fireball also was the first airplane in the world to land on an aircraft carrier under jet power . . . albeit accidentally. When a pilot’s prop engine failed in 1945, he was forced to land on the USS Wake Island under jet power .

8 Blohm & Voss BV 238

The aerospace company Blohm & Voss designed most of the Luftwaffe’s flying boats during World War II. As the war progressed, the company’s engineers designed even more complex and large flying boats. Ultimately, this culminated in the BV 238, a behemoth flying boat that was the biggest airplane designed by the Axis powers during the war.

Blohm & Voss built the BV 238 in 1944, intending for it to offer the Luftwaffe long-range transport capabilities . Luftwaffe commanders also investigated the possibility of using the giant flying boat as a long-range patrol bomber. Flight testing showed that the airplane was stable and could perform the transport role effectively .

Disaster struck for the flying boat when three American P-51 Mustangs found the prototype docked at Lake Schaal. Lieutenant Urban Drew attacked the boat, causing tremendous damage to the fuselage. Before the German engineers could save the BV 238, it sunk to the bottom of the lake . With the war turning in the Allies’ favor, Blohm & Voss discontinued work on the airplane. As for Lt. Drew, he became something of a legend. After all, he set the record for “biggest Axis airplane ever destroyed by an Allied pilot.”

7 Flettner Fl 282

Most people do not think of the helicopter as being a weapon of World War II, but while the fighting nations were rushing to develop jet propulsion, they were also working on the first generation of helicopters. As with jet propulsion, the Germans held an early lead over other nations. They experimented for years with helicopters, but it was not until the Fl 282 that they had a design that could be be mass-produced.

Flettner designed the Fl 282 with the odd feature of intermeshing rotors . This meant the two main rotors angled away from each other, but the arc of the blades crossed. In other words, they were carefully synchronized to avoid disaster. The intermeshing rotors gave the helicopter the advantage of not needing a tail rotor to offset the torque from the main rotors. Other than that weird feature, the Fl 282 was a bare-bones design, just minimal framing attached to an engine.

The Luftwaffe was so impressed by the Fl 282 that they ordered 1,000 choppers. Possible roles for the helicopter included anti-submarine warfare, naval spotting, and reconnaissance . However, by the time production was ready in 1944, the Luftwaffe was already fighting on the defensive, and the fleet of Flettner helicopters never materialized. Flettner only completed a few models, but these were well received by pilots. Nevertheless, shortly after production started, an Allied bombing raid destroyed the production plant, ending any possible production of the helicopter. The engineer behind the project, Anton Flettner, immigrated to the United States where he helped design excellent helicopters for the United States Air Force.

6 Kyushu J7W

One of the most futuristic-looking airplanes of the era was the Japanese-designed J7W Shinden, an airplane with a canard design . That refers to a plane with the “main wing mounted at the rear of the fuselage and a smaller wing fixed to the front.” The hope is that with this innovative layout, the J7W would be highly maneuverable and able to fight American B-29 bombers.

The interceptor had a big engine that drove a six-blade pusher propeller by an extension shaft. During testing, the engine caused a lot of problems as it was prone to overheating, even when tested on the ground. By the time the war ended, the Kyushu engineers figured out most of the problems with the engine. To take down the B-29 bombers, the J7W carried four 30mm cannons, making it one heavily armed aircraft.

Japanese Navy officials had such hope in the J7W that they ordered production before the first prototype even got off the ground. Fortunately for the B-29 crews, the J7W only completed three test flights before the war ended, and the plane never entered production. Even during testing, the J7W barely got any flight time, only clocking a combined 45 minutes in the air over three test flights. The war ended before the Navy could perform other tests on the airplane. A proposed turbojet version of the airplane never left the drawing board .

5 Heinkel He 100 And He 113

As the Luftwaffe geared up for World War II, they looked at a variety of airplanes to replace their primary frontline fighter plane, the Messerschmitt Bf 109 . The leading competitor for the design was the Heinkel He 100, one of the best airplanes in the world at the time. Although it is difficult to find wartime documents about the He 100, it is clear that the plane was a significant improvement over the Bf 109 and had a variety of characteristics that would have made it an effective airplane against Allied pilots.

Most impressively, the He 100 broke and held the world speed record for an airplane of its class. However, for some reason, the Luftwaffe decided to continue development on the Bf 109 and its variants. Nobody knows exactly why the He 100 project stopped

Even though the He 100 never reached frontline service, it played a fascinating role in early propaganda efforts. When the war began, the United Kingdom did not have adequate information about the Luftwaffe, including what types of airplanes it flew.

Taking advantage of the situation, Joseph Goebbels announced that the Luftwaffe was fielding a new He 113 fighter, but in reality, it was just a repainted He 100 prototype. German publications often featured pictures of the “new fighter,” accompanied by reports of its combat abilities . These reports made it to the UK where the Royal Air Force became concerned about the He 113. Until 1941, pilots reported facing the airplane, but there was no proof that their stories were accurate. Eventually, the Air Ministry figured out that the Luftwaffe was tricking them and that the He 113 didn’t exist.

4 Fisher P-75 Eagle

During the early part of World War II, the United States hadn’t yet developed the fighters that would later aid them against the Luftwaffe. Most of these planes, like the P-51 and P-47, were still under development and hadn’t reached their peak performance. Because of that, the Luftwaffe generally had the advantage in terms of air power. To counter Luftwaffe airplanes, the United States Army Air Force began looking for a high-speed interceptor fighter with heavy armaments .

The Allison engine company saw this as a chance to show off their new V-3420, a huge 24-cylinder engine that was actually two V-1710 engines mated into one. Allison and the Fisher Body Division of the General Motors Corporation worked together to make a new airplane around the engine. Oddly, Fisher decided to build the P-75 with preexisting parts. The P-75 was a mixture of other successful airplanes, including the Dauntless dive bomber and a variety of fighters including the P-51 and P-40 . The huge engine was located in the middle of the airplane, driving the two contra-rotating propellers by a drive shaft.

Of course, it should come as no surprise that making a fighter plane by combining parts from preexisting airplanes does not work. The P-75 was slow and sluggish in its interceptor role, causing the Air Force to pass on the design. Fisher then tried to advertise the P-75 as a long-range escort fighter for bombers, but by that time, better fighter planes were available, leaving Fisher to stop development on the P-75.

3 Bereznyak-Isayev BI-1

Most major countries in the world experimented with rocket-powered airplanes during World War II, the most successful being the German Me 163 Komet interceptor. But lesser known than the Komet is the Soviet experimental rocket fighter, the BI-1.

In the late 1930s, Soviet officials wanted a fast, short-range defense fighter powered by a rocket. The need for such a plane became especially pronounced as German forces began to invade Russia. Engineers completed plans for the rocket plane by spring of 1941, but Stalin did not give authorization to build a prototype. However, when the German invasion began, Stalin told engineers Alexander Bereznyak and Aleksei Isayev to get the airplane ready as soon as possible. It took only 35 days to complete a working prototype . Getting just under the deadline, a bomber towed the BI-1 aloft, allowing it to glide to the ground for a first test.

Rocket motor tests commenced in 1942, but powered flights quickly revealed that the BI-1 only had 15 minutes of flight time from the moment the pilot ignited the rocket on the ground. This proved a severe limitation.

When the third prototype disintegrated midair during a level flight, the engineers realized that there was another problem. The frame, made of plywood and metal, was not designed for nearly supersonic speeds. Research on supersonic aerodynamics was still in its infancy, and the BI-1 airframe was not designed to perform at those speeds without falling apart . Quite simply, the BI-1 was too fast for its own good. With that limitation, testing ground to a halt, and the war turned in favor of the Soviets, ensuring that there was no further development of defensive rocket planes.

2 Junkers Ju 390

Although they did not realize it at the time, the Luftwaffe made a serious error when they refused to develop any long-range heavy bombers. By the middle of the war, the Royal Air Force and United States Army Air Force were conducting raids into German airspace, causing mass destruction to the German war industry. That’s when Luftwaffe commanders realized they needed a heavy bomber, specifically one that could strike the United States. Thus the “America Bomber” project was born.

The Luftwaffe considered many different designs for the project, but one of the most feasible was the Junkers Ju 390. Junkers, a German company, developed the new bomber from their existing Ju 290 heavy transport . The new bomber had six engines and was capable of a transatlantic flight. Test flights commenced in 1944, and they showed the Ju 390 was an effective and powerful machine. However, by that time, the Luftwaffe was on the defensive, and any offensive bomber projects were given low priority. Junkers only could finish two prototypes by the time the war ended.

Mystery and conspiracy shroud the Ju 390 tests and operations. According to some sources, one of the prototypes flew from Germany to South Africa on a test flight. Some wartime reports show that the bomber was also test flown over the Atlantic Ocean, entering United States airspace before turning back . Fringe conspiracy groups also believe that a Ju 390 flew to Argentina at the end of the war, carrying secret weaponry for escaped Nazis. Whatever the case, the Ju 390 was the closest the Germans ever came to developing a bomber that could reach the United States.

1 Northrop N-9M

During the ’30s and ’40s, famous aircraft designer Jack Northrop worked tirelessly on his idea for flying wing airplanes. Northrop hoped to build high performance airplanes that consisted only of a giant wing, eschewing traditional airplane engineering. At the beginning of World War II, Northrop convinced the United States Army Air Force to fund his research into flying wings with the hope of creating a bomber based on that configuration. They agreed to fund his research, so Northrop went ahead and built a small test airplane to investigate the feasibility of a flying wing bomber .

Named the N-9M (“M” for “model”), the airplane was small and light. It had a boomerang shape with no vertical control surfaces. Power came from two pusher propellers. The N-9M took some getting used to, but it was a good airplane once the pilot adjusted. During testing, one fatal crash occurred, but that did not deter Northrop. By the end of the war, he had enough research to build his flying wing bomber, the XB-35. Unfortunately, with the war over, the Air Force did not have much interest in the bomber or its jet-powered cousin, the YB-49. The project ended in the late 1940s.

Even though the original flying wing bombers never came to fruition, the Air Force began using the B-2 stealth bomber years later. To design this airplane, Northrop used a lot of the research he developed while working on the N-9M, making this World War II plane the predecessor of the famous B-2. Currently, one of the N-9M prototypes is still flying, making regular appearances at air shows and other events.

Zachery Brasier is a physics student who loves aviation history and likes to write on the side. Check out his blog at zacherybrasier.com .

More Great Lists

• Customer Portal
• Resale Inventory
• Life With An Evolution

IT'S TIME FOR AN EVOLUTION

CONFIGURE. BUILD. FLY.

Lorem ipsum custom build process Learn more

When you purchase an Evolution Turbine or Evolution Piston, you're not just getting an amazing aircraft, you're buying an experience. Each aircraft is custom-built, giving you the opportunity to be part of the build and spec details for everything from avionics to the trim on your leather seats.

IN GOOD COMPANY

Pratt & Whitney provides the PT6A-135A, the most reliable turbine ever built

We are the only kit manufacturer that can sell the GFC700 autopilot

A Ballistic Parachute Recovery System is available on all Evolution aircraft

Lycoming is the “Power of Choice” for our Piston Evolution Aircraft

Experimental Aircraft , Research & Development , Safety

New vs Used: Top 10 Reasons to Build a New Evolution

One of the most common things I hear from potential Evolution buyers is the question of used vs. new....

Experimental Aircraft , In the News , Research & Development

Press Release: Evolution Aircraft Expands Lineup From Two to Four Models

EVOLUTION AIRCRAFT COMPANY EXPANDS THEIR LINEUP OF PRESSURIZED 4 OR 5 PLACE AIRCRAFT FROM TWO TO FOUR MODELS Introducing...

What Defines Aircraft Safety?

What makes an airframe “safe”? Foremost it would be benign, predictable flying qualities and wide operating envelope. It’s in...

Experimental Aircraft , Research & Development

Horsepower… We Love It

Things can get kind of murky when talking about horsepower and turboprop engines; it’s a “jet” but we measure...

NEWSLETTER SIGN UP

Copyright © 2024 Evolution Aircraft | All Rights Reserved

• Evolution Turbine
• Evolution Piston
• Build and Support Centers

LIFE WITH AN EVOLUTION

• Mission One
• Mission Two
• Mission Three
• What’s Your Mission?

2159 SW 2nd Ct. Redmond, OR 97756

(541) 923-2233 phone (541) 923-2255 fax

Website design & development by Subplot Studio

Catch up on what you missed!

Watch AirVenture air shows on-demand.

See You Next Year!

AirVenture 2025: July 21 - July 27

AirVenture Image Gallery

EAA AirVenture Merchandise

AirVenture News

Stay up to date with the latest news and updates for EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2025!

AirVenture Videos

Miss EAA AirVenture Oshkosh? Watch videos from this year's celebration.

AirVenture Social Media

Technique: Experimental avionics show the way

Path to new avionics for old airplanes.

The news came with little fanfare on the third day of the Sun ’n Fun International Fly-In and Expo in Lakeland, Florida, and it was stunning. Dynon’s D-10A, a non-TSO electronic flight instrument system popular in Experimental and Light Sport aircraft, has been approved as a replacement to the primary attitude indicator in the Experimental Aircraft Association’s flying club Cessna 172 via a supplemental type certificate (STC). The STC, a joint project between EAA and Dynon, will be available through EAA, although the association has not yet released details or pricing information.

By granting that single STC, however, the FAA has created a precedent that will allow other avionics firms to bring their own extremely capable, proven, relatively inexpensive, safety-enhancing avionics to Standard-category aircraft for the first time. Until now, non-TSO avionics had been strictly limited to Experimental and Light Sport aircraft.

“This is one of the biggest breakthroughs we’ve had in a long time,” EAA President Jack Pelton said with characteristic understatement. “This is the bridge that will allow other innovative, safety-enhancing products into the existing aircraft fleet.”

The move brings the benefits of Experimental avionics—perhaps aviation’s most competitive, dynamic, and technically innovative niche—to the relative backwater of Standard-category aircraft where the staggering cost and slow pace of developing new products has meant little progress.

The significance of the EAA/Dynon STC extends far beyond attitude indicators. It has the potential to bring newer, more reliable autopilots, engine monitors, fuel gauges, and even ADS-B traffic and weather systems to Standard category aircraft thereby reducing prices. Dynon officials said their company is pursuing similar STCs across its entire product line, up to and including its integrated SkyView electronics suite, a single- or multi-screen system that can include redundant air data computers, a digital autopilot, GPS-derived synthetic vision, and weather, traffic, and terrain warnings. The SkyView system typically sells for about $10,000—less than half the cost of similar TSO equipment.

Dynon avionics are installed in 15,000 Experimental and Light Sport aircraft, of which there are roughly 35,000 in the United States. The new STC gives the Washington-based firm access to a far larger market of about 140,000 active piston aircraft in the United States.

The move also is sure to spur other Experimental avionics manufacturers to pursue their own STCs and broaden them far beyond the Cessna 150/152, 172, Piper PA–28, and PA–38 that the FAA has approved so far.

Advanced, GRT Avionics, and MGL are a few of the firms that are dedicated to the Experimental market, and industry leader Garmin makes both FAA-certified and Experimental products. For a small firm like GRT, the decision to seek a broader market for its existing engine monitors and primary flight displays is automatic.

“This is obviously great news for us and we’ll be on it right away,” said Todd Stehouwer, a principal at the Michigan-based company. “We’ve got products that GA pilots want but they can’t have unless they fly Experimental or Light Sport airplanes.”

For Garmin, the move puts new emphasis on its Experimental product line, which includes the integrated G3X avionics suite and the new G5, an all-in-one attitude instrument that can be used as a primary or backup display. Garmin’s “Team X” developers use the company’s extensive product line to produce new products ranging from audio panels to autopilots for the Experimental market.

Freed from the restrictive and time-consuming process of obtaining technical standard order approval, manufacturers of Experimental avionics can innovate and improve their products; because the cost of certifying isn’t passed on to the consumer, aircraft owners can afford to equip with newer, more capable systems. For pilots, flying with the new generation of Experimental avionics is typically far simpler than TSO products.

For example, Garmin’s FAA-approved G1000 avionics suite is a tremendously capable system that has multiple menus, sub-menus, buttons, knobs, and soft keys that can be used in a dizzying variety of combinations to accomplish many tasks. By contrast, the company’s Experimental G3X has familiar icons, a far shallower menu structure, and a touchscreen display that is much more intuitive to use.

The G3X owner’s manual is 328 pages. That’s a lot, but it’s nearly 300 pages fewer than Garmin’s G1000 manual.

I flew a G3X-equipped Carbon Cub on an extended trip through the Idaho backcountry and regarded the colorful box with the integrated autopilot as technological overkill. But it vastly enhanced the experience of flying in that rugged and remote part of the country by providing the seeming super power of always knowing what’s around the next bend, wind strength and direction, and whether a particular climb rate is sufficient to clear the next ridge.

Similarly, Dynon has gone to a great deal of effort to make its SkyView system simple to operate. It has a touch-screen option and two knobs and a single row of clearly marked buttons that control everything from the aircraft checklist to the transponder, autopilot, and moving map. Whether you’re flying VFR or IFR, you can’t help but be impressed with the thoughtful, orderly way it presents pilots with critical navigation, weather, and performance information and updates it in flight.

My introduction to the SkyView came on a transcontinental winter journey with powerful winds aloft, and the integrated autopilot kept the Van’s Aircraft RV–7A on an arrow-straight course, managed climbs and descents beautifully, and never clicked off in turbulence.

These and other Experimental avionics manufacturers design and build mature systems that are proven and refined. While no instrument is infallible, all of these modern devices provide better information and greater reliability than the vacuum systems they replace.

Email [email protected]

Dynon avionics are in 15,000 Experimental and Light Sport aircraft.

Certification versus safety.

Like many others, my airplane, a Van’s Aircraft RV–3, is equipped with both certified and noncertified avionics. Far from being an overlooked backup, the noncertified equipment makes flying in the clouds easy and safe.

While being vectored for a localizer approach to Runway 23 at Frederick, Maryland, I had the choice of following the monochromatic black dots on an FAA-certified KX-125 screen, or the magenta line on a GRT EFIS screen.

The GRT counted down the turn to final, and since it knows groundspeed and ground track, compensating for winds during rollout was automatic. Once the airplane symbol on the GPS screen was tracking the final approach course, a glance at the nav radio screen confirmed the localizer was centered. Nothing to it.

One could make a strong case that there’s nothing wrong with this situation since both the certified nav radio and non-TSO EFIS were being used for their intended purposes. The moving map on the EFIS enhances situational awareness, and the nav radio provides IFR course guidance. Everybody’s happy.

But what happens when information from the certified equipment and unapproved gear is at odds? What should you believe then? I tend to favor the unapproved gear.

While practicing GPS approaches using my IFR-approved but fairly ancient Garmin G300XL on a sunny day, I was dismayed by its inaccuracy. I had put the 15-year-old box in a demanding situation: a nearly 90-degree intercept of the final approach course six miles from the runway threshold. The old box did its best, but upon intercepting the final approach course, the map screen was achingly slow at redrawing the course line to follow to the runway. Once it did, the G300XL guidance was about 20 degrees off. The box recalibrated and provided an accurate course to steer at about three miles. But strictly following its indications would have resulted in a serpentine ground track and unstable approach. In actual IMC, the situation would have called for a missed approach.

Throughout all these machinations, however, a portable aera 660 was rock steady. It tracked the airplane’s movements with absolute fidelity and wasn’t thrown off by the steep intercept.

There’s nothing magical about FAA certification or IFR-approved avionics. The FAA’s new “performance-based” metrics for evaluating new equipment such as non-TSO avionics will make these proven technologies welcome additions to the panels of Standard aircraft.

Pilots, particularly IFR pilots, are taught to trust their instruments. But some are inherently more trustworthy than others—reliability and ease of use have little correlation to FAA certification.

My GRT EFIS and portable aera 660 are WAAS-enabled, GPS units that update their positions five times a second. In a pinch, I’ll rely on them over any IFR-approved but older non-WAAS navigator. In truth, I already do. —DMH

Related Articles

--> --> --> --> Back to Main Categories Most Recent EXPERIMENTAL Aero Mirage Aerocruiser Air Command Air Sportster Aircraft Delivery Aircraft Design Inc. Aircraft Wanted Airport Property ARV Griffin Baby Great Lakes Bakeng Deuce Ballistic Chute Builder Assistance Building Plans Building Supplies Business Opportunities Carbon Cub EX Carlson Sport Special Cirrus VK30 Cri-Cri Cricket Custom Flight Dream Aircraft Durand Mk V EAA Biplane Electric Aircraft Factory-Built Firewall Forward Flight Gear Float Plane Flying Flea Flying Legend Folding Wing FPNA Aircraft Fractional Ownership Frati-Designed Aircraft Glass Goose Glider & Sailplane Golden Avio GP Aircraft Great Lakes Grega Aircamper Harmon Rocket Horizont Scout Information Instruments Just Aircraft KR Aircraft Legend Aircraft Light-Sport Little Toot Little Wing Autogyro Maverick Jet Messerschmitt Midwing Monoplane Montana Coyote Motor Glider Nemesis NXT One-Of-A-Kind Patriot Aircraft Piston Engine Plans-Built Pober Jr Ace Pober Pixie Pober Super Ace Prescott Pusher Publications Quasar-Lite Quicksilver Radial Rocket Rand Robinson Range Rider Ridge Runner Rose Parakeet Scout Helicopter Seabird Seeker Skeeter Hawk Smoke System Smyth Sidewinder SPA Panther Spacewalker Spezio Tu Holer Sport Copter Storm Aircraft Streak Shadow Taildragger Taylor Monoplane Taylorcraft Team Rocket TL Aircraft Tools & Tooling Toys For Trade Turbine Engine Turbine Legend Turner T-40 UFO-HeliThruster Van's RV Venture Capital Warbird Replica Wheeler Express White Lightning Wittman Tailwind WWI Replica Suggested Searches Climate Change Expedition 64 Mars perseverance SpaceX Crew-2 International Space Station View All Topics A-Z Humans in Space Earth & climate, the solar system, the universe. Aeronautics Learning Resources News & events. Hubble Zooms into the Rosy Tendrils of Andromeda Work Is Under Way on NASA’s Next-Generation Asteroid Hunter NASA’s Roman Space Telescope to Investigate Galactic Fossils Search All NASA Missions A to Z List of Missions Upcoming Launches and Landings Spaceships and Rockets Communicating with Missions James Webb Space Telescope Hubble Space Telescope Why Go to Space Commercial Space Destinations Living in Space Explore Earth Science Earth, Our Planet Earth Science in Action Earth Multimedia Earth Science Researchers Pluto & Dwarf Planets Asteroids, Comets & Meteors The Kuiper Belt The Oort Cloud Skywatching The Search for Life in the Universe Black Holes The Big Bang Dark Energy & Dark Matter Earth Science Planetary Science Astrophysics & Space Science The Sun & Heliophysics Biological & Physical Sciences Lunar Science Citizen Science Astromaterials Aeronautics Research Human Space Travel Research Science in the Air NASA Aircraft Flight Innovation Supersonic Flight Air Traffic Solutions Green Aviation Tech Drones & You Technology Transfer & Spinoffs Space Travel Technology Technology Living in Space Manufacturing and Materials Science Instruments For Kids and Students For Educators For Colleges and Universities For Professionals Science for Everyone Requests for Exhibits, Artifacts, or Speakers STEM Engagement at NASA NASA's Impacts Centers and Facilities Directorates Organizations People of NASA Internships Our History Doing Business with NASA Get Involved NASA en Español Aeronáutica Ciencias Terrestres Sistema Solar All NASA News Video Series on NASA+ Newsletters Social Media Media Resources Upcoming Launches & Landings Virtual Guest Program Image of the Day Sounds and Ringtones Interactives STEM Multimedia NASA’s Europa Clipper Gets Set of Super-Size Solar Arrays FAQ: NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test Return Status NASA, Boeing Optimizing Vehicle Assembly Building High Bay for Future SLS Stage Production NASA Seeks Input for Astrobee Free-flying Space Robots NASA Funds Studies to Support Crew Performance on Long-Duration Missions NASA JPL Developing Underwater Robots to Venture Deep Below Polar Ice NASA Project in Puerto Rico Trains Students in Marine Biology NASA Discovers a Long-Sought Global Electric Field on Earth NASA, ESA Missions Help Scientists Uncover How Solar Wind Gets Energy September’s Night Sky Notes: Marvelous Moons Amendment 45: New Opportunity: A.60 Ecological Conservation NASA G-IV Plane Will Carry Next-Generation Science Instrument NASA Develops Pod to Help Autonomous Aircraft Operators  NASA Composite Manufacturing Initiative Gains Two New Members First NASA-Supported Researcher to Fly on Suborbital Rocket How Do I Navigate NASA Learning Resources and Opportunities? Aaron Vigil Helps Give SASS to Roman Space Telescope 235 Years Ago: Herschel Discovers Saturn’s Moon Enceladus Preguntas frecuentes: estado del retorno de la prueba de vuelo tripulado boeing de la nasa. Astronauta de la NASA Frank Rubio Diez maneras en que los estudiantes pueden prepararse para ser astronautas 10 min read NASA Moves to Begin Historic New Era of X-Plane Research Managing Editor/Senior Writer Experiment supersonic, three-legged stool, “que” the supersonic technology. There was a demon that lived in the air. They said whoever challenged him would die. Their controls would freeze up. Their planes would buffet wildly and they would disintegrate. The demon lived at Mach 1 on the meter, 750 miles an hour, where the air could no longer move out of the way. He lived behind a barrier through which they said no man could ever pass. They called it the sound barrier. Then they built a small plane, the X-1, to try to break the sound barrier. And men came to the high desert of California to ride it. They were called test pilots. And no one knew their names. the right stuff History is about to repeat itself. There have been periods of time during the past seven decades – some busier than others – when the nation’s best minds in aviation designed, built and flew a series of experimental airplanes to test the latest fanciful and practical ideas related to flight. Individually each of these pioneering aircraft has its own story of triumph and setback – even tragedy. Each was made by different companies and operated by a different mix of government organizations for a myriad of purposes. Short wings. Long wings. Delta-shaped wings. Forward swept wings. Scissor wings. Big tails. No tails. High speed. Low speed. Jet propulsion. Rocket propulsion. Even nuclear propulsion – although that technology was never actually flown. Together they are known as X-planes – or X-vehicles, since some were missiles or spacecraft – and the very mention of them prompts a warm feeling and a touch of nostalgia among aviation enthusiasts worldwide. “They certainly are all interesting in their own way. Each one of them has a unique place in aviation that helps them make their mark in history,” said Bill Barry, NASA’s chief historian. “And they are really cool.” And now, NASA’s aeronautical innovators once again are preparing to put in the sky an array of new experimental aircraft , each intended to carry on the legacy of demonstrating advanced technologies that will push back the frontiers of aviation. Goals include showcasing how airliners can burn half the fuel and generate 75 percent less pollution during each flight as compared to now, while also being much quieter than today’s jets – perhaps even when flying supersonic. NASA’s renewed emphasis on X-planes is called, “New Aviation Horizons,” an initiative announced in February as part of the President’s budget for the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1, 2016. The plan is to design, build and fly the series of X-planes during the next 10 years as a means to accelerate the adoption of advanced green aviation technologies by industry. If we can build some of these X-planes and demonstrate some of these technologies, we expect that will make it much easier and faster for U.S. industry to pick them up and roll them out into the marketplace. Ed Waggoner NASA’s Integrated Aviation Systems Program Director It’s something NASA has known how to do going way back to the days of its predecessor organization, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), and the very first X-plane, fittingly called the X-1, a project the NACA worked on with the then newly formed U.S. Air Force. Built by Bell Aircraft, the X-1 was the first plane to fly faster than the speed of sound, thus breaking the “sound barrier,” a popular but fundamentally misleading term that spoke more to the romantic notion of the challenges of high speed flight than an insurmountable physical wall in the sky. As colorfully recounted in books and movies such as “The Right Stuff,” it was Oct. 14, 1947 when Air Force Capt. Chuck Yeager, dinged-up ribs and all, climbed into the bright orange Glamorous Glennis and flew the X-1 into its moment in history. On that day the Antelope Valley, home to Edwards Air Force Base in California, reportedly echoed with its first sonic boom. But whether or not anyone there actually heard a sonic boom, thousands more echoed over the valley in the decades to come as supersonic flight over the military base became routine. The X-1 also marked the first in what became a long line of experimental aircraft programs managed by the NACA (and later NASA), the Air Force, the Navy, and other government agencies. The current list of X-planes that have been assigned numbers by the Air Force stands at 56, but that doesn’t mean there have been 56 X-planes. Some had multiple models using the same number. And still more experimental vehicles were designed, built and flown but were never given X-numbers. And some X-vehicles received numbers but were never built. The X-52 was skipped altogether because no one wanted to confuse that aircraft with the B-52 bomber. Moreover, some X-planes weren’t experimental research planes at all, but rather prototypes of production aircraft or spacecraft, further muddying the waters over what is truly considered an X-plane and what isn’t, Barry said. “They weren’t necessarily thinking there would be a series of X vehicles at the time of the X-1 because you wound up with several modifications, for example, including the A, the B models – which were very different vehicles in many ways,” Barry said. Examples of experimental aircraft not called X-planes include some of NASA’s lifting bodies , and the Navy’s D-558-II Skyrocket, which pilot Scott Crossfield flew in 1953 to become the first airplane to travel twice the speed of sound, or Mach 2. And it gets even more confusing: some of the early X-planes were called the XS-1, XS-2 and so on – the XS being short for “experiment, supersonic.” Although it’s not clearly documented, at some point XS became X, because XS sounded too much like “excess,” as in something you don’t need, Barry said. There also have been airplanes like the XB-70, a supersonic jet demonstrator considered an X-plane in most circles, but officially not part of the 56 X-planes numbered to date by the Air Force. “In any case, while the X-plane designation has become a very amorphous term through history, it’s a term that people today now identify as being a cutting edge research sort of plane,” Barry said. Perhaps of all the X-planes NASA has been associated with, none was more cutting edge and became more famous – rivaling even the X-1 – than the X-15 ro cket plane . “The X-1 was certainly the most historic for being the first and for what it did for supersonic flight. But the X-15 was probably the most productive model of an X-plane,” Barry said. Flown 199 times between 1959 and 1968, the winged X-15 reached beyond the edge of space at hypersonic speeds, trailblazing design concepts and operational procedures that directly contributed to the development of the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo piloted spaceflight programs, as well as the space shuttle. Another component of the X-15 success story beyond its contributions to high-speed aviation, Barry explained, is that it was a great example of collaboration between NASA, the rival military services of the Air Force and the Navy. “This kind of major aeronautical research, which the X-15 represented, often is best done when several organizations contribute to a common goal,” Barry said. “We’re already seeing that as we prepare to fly this next wave of X-planes.” But in this age of high-speed computers capable of generating sophisticated simulations, and with the availability of world-class wind tunnels to test high-fidelity models, why still the need to fly something like an X-plane? “It’s a valid question,” Waggoner said. The answer has to do with what Waggoner describes as the necessity of a “three legged stool” when it comes to aviation research. One leg represents computational capabilities. This involves the high-speed super computers that can model the physics of air flowing over an object – be it a wing, a rudder or a full airplane – that exists only in the ones and zeros of a simulation. A second leg represents experimental methods. This is where scientists put what is most often a scale model of an object or part of an object – be it a wing, a rudder or an airplane – in a wind tunnel to take measurements of air flowing over the object. Measurements taken in the wind tunnel can help improve the computer model, and the computer model can help inform improvements to the airplane design, which can then be tested again in the wind tunnel. “Each of these is great on its own and each helps the other, but each also can introduce errors into the inferences that might be made based on the results,” Waggoner said. “So the third leg of the stool is to go out and actually fly the design.” Whether it’s flying an X-plane or a full-scale prototype of a new aircraft, the data recorded in actual flight can then be applied to validate and improve the computational and experimental methods used in developing the design in the first place. “Now you’ve got three different ways to look at the same problem,” Waggoner said. “It’s only through doing all that together that we will ever get to the point where we’ve lowered the risk enough to completely trust what our numbers are telling us.” Although it may not wind up being the first of the New Aviation Horizons X-planes to actually fly as part of the three-legged stool of research, design work already has begun on QueSST, short for Quiet Supersonic Technology A preliminary design contract was awarded in February to a team led by Lockheed Martin. If schedule and congressional funding holds, this new supersonic X-plane could fly in the 2020 timeframe. QueSST aims to fix something the X-1 first introduced to the flying world nearly 70 years ago – the publicly annoying loud sonic boom. Recent research has shown it is possible for a supersonic airplane to be shaped in such a way that the shock waves it forms when flying faster than the speed of sound generate a sonic boom so quiet it hardly will be noticed by the public, if at all. The resulting sonic “boom” has variously been described as like distant thunder, the sound of your neighbor forcefully shutting his car door outside while you are inside, or as the thump of a “supersonic” heartbeat. “We know the concept is going to work, but now the best way to continue our research is to demonstrate the capability to the public with an X-plane,” said Peter Coen, NASA’s supersonic project manager. It is hoped data gathered from flying QueSST will help the Federal Aviation Administration and its international counterparts establish noise-related regulations that will make it possible for commercial supersonic airliners to fly over land across country. “Providing that data will be a key step in bringing accessible and affordable supersonic flight to the traveling public,” Coen said. Meanwhile, other experimental aircraft also are under consideration, including those with novel shapes that break the mold of the traditional tube and wing airplane, and others that are propelled by hybrid electric power. Exactly what these X-planes will look like, how they will be operated and where they will be flown all have yet to be precisely defined. “We’re going to let the marketplace and the community help us inform our decisions on the direction we want to go,” Waggoner said. “But we’re really excited about all of the things we might demonstrate.” Interestingly, despite these future test aircraft being referred to as X-planes, it is entirely possible only some of them will actually get an official X-plane number designation – or perhaps none of them will. “We just don’t know yet,” Waggoner said. “That decision likely won’t take place for each aircraft until we’re about to award the construction contract.” So whether NASA winds up calling these new planes by an X-number or a catchy acronym – or both – one thing is clear: NASA’s flight research program is on its way to creating a renaissance of an exciting era in aviation research. About the Author Jim Banke is a veteran aviation and aerospace communicator with more than 35 years of experience as a writer, producer, consultant, and project manager based at Cape Canaveral, Florida. He is part of NASA Aeronautics' Strategic Communications Team and is Managing Editor for the Aeronautics topic on the NASA website. Explore More Discover More Topics From NASA Humans In Space Solar System Exploration Solar System Overview The solar system has one star, eight planets, five officially named dwarf planets, hundreds of moons, thousands… Explore NASA’s History Related Terms Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate Low Boom Flight Demonstrator Quesst (X-59) International Gas Turbine Institute Previous Paper Experimental Analysis on Performance of Air/Oil Centrifugal Breathers for Aircraft Engines Under Different Operating Conditions Article contents Figures & tables Supplementary Data Peer Review Cite Icon Cite Permissions Search Site Di Matteo, M, Berten, O, & Hendrick, P. "Experimental Analysis on Performance of Air/Oil Centrifugal Breathers for Aircraft Engines Under Different Operating Conditions." Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2024: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition . Volume 1: Aircraft Engine . London, United Kingdom. June 24–28, 2024. V001T01A022. ASME. https://doi.org/10.1115/GT2024-123819 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager This paper investigates the separation efficiency of modern aeroengine air/oil breathers, focusing on identifying configurations that enhance existing geometries. The study systematically varies parameters such as air flow rates and rotational speed, using well-known particle size distributions for testing different configuration. The experimental campaign involves various breathers with metallic grids of different geometries and mesh sizes, evaluating performance parameters such as pressure drops, oil consumption, and droplet cut-off size. The insertion of a metallic grid with a narrow mesh is found to offer a favorable trade-off in terms of pressure drops, oil consumption, and particle size at the separator exit. Results indicate that while increasing pressure drops of a reasonable amount, the selected geometries significantly reduce oil consumption and size of droplet at the exit of the breather. Purchase this Content Product added to cart., email alerts, related proceedings papers, related articles, related chapters, affiliations. ASME Conference Publications and Proceedings Conference Proceedings Author Guidelines Indexing and Discovery ASME Journals About ASME Journals Information for Authors Submit a Paper Call for Papers Title History ASME Conference Proceedings About ASME Conference Publications and Proceedings ASME eBooks About ASME eBooks ASME Press Advisory & Oversight Committee Book Proposal Guidelines Frequently Asked Questions Publication Permissions & Reprints ASME Membership Opportunities Faculty Positions ASME Instagram Accessibility Privacy Statement Terms of Use Get Adobe Acrobat Reader This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only Sign In or Create an Account 477 IMAGES Experimental Planes 2017 The Aero Experience: EAA AirVenture Oshkosh 2016: Experimental Aircraft Pin on Aero stuff ION twin boom experimental amateurbuilt light sport aircraft What You Need to Know About Experimental Aircraft Insurance N913FT VIDEO Feria Los Planes 2016 Strangest Experimental AIRCRAFT Up For $10,000.00 F-16XL Supersonic Laminar Flow test flight UNPLANNED: How a high-speed taxi test became the F-16's First Flight The Plane that was modeled after a Bullet NASA New Experimental Aircraft Overture: Change the entire air transport COMMENTS Experimental/Homebuilt For Sale Want a complete flying experimental (EAB) 4 place plane that does 203 KTS @ 18,000 ft on 12 GPH- that is basically like a turbo cirrus SR22T in room, size ... More Info. Veloce Planes. Atlanta, GA USA Compare. SAVE Last Update: 02/18/2024. 2024 VANS RV-12IS $165,000 ... List of X-planes Bell X-1-2. The X-planes are a series of experimental United States aircraft and rockets, used to test and evaluate new technologies and aerodynamic concepts.They have an X designator within the US system of aircraft designations, which denotes the experimental research mission.. Not all US experimental aircraft have been designated as X-planes; some received US Navy designations before 1962 ... X-57 Maxwell Overview X-57 Maxwell Overview. This artist's concept of NASA's X-57 Maxwell aircraft shows the plane's specially designed wing and 14 electric motors. NASA's X-57 "Maxwell" is the agency's first all-electric experimental aircraft, or X-plane, and is NASA's first crewed X-plane in two decades. The primary goal of the X-57 project is to ... NASA's X-57 Electric Research Plane This concept image illustrates NASA's X-57 plane in flight. With 14 electric motors turning propellers and all of them integrated into a uniquely-designed wing, NASA will test new propulsion technology using an experimental airplane now designated the X-57 and nicknamed "Maxwell.". This artist's concept of the X-57 shows the plane's ... NASA X-57 Maxwell Tecnam P2006T. The NASA X-57 Maxwell was an experimental aircraft developed by NASA, intended to demonstrate technology to reduce fuel use, emissions, and noise. [2] The first flight of the X-57 was scheduled to take place in 2023, but the program was cancelled due to problems with the propulsion system. [3][4][5] NASA stands by its X-planes That's a switch in scope from 2016, when NASA said it would "build a series of five mostly large-scale experimental aircraft — X-planes." Also in the conceptual phase this time is a yet-to-be defined Future Flight Demonstrator that might or might not someday receive an X-plane designation, something that must come through a request from ... Crazy, cool experimental planes at America's huge air show This is just one of many unusual planes at the 2016 AirVenture air show in Oshkosh, Wisconsin. ... Matt Tisdale built this AirCam experimental plane from a kit and flew it more than 11 hours from ... NASA Electric Research Plane Gets X Number, New Name Jun 17, 2016. RELEASE 16-060. With 14 electric motors turning propellers and all of them integrated into a uniquely-designed wing, NASA will test new propulsion technology using an experimental airplane now designated the X-57 and nicknamed "Maxwell.". NASA Administrator Charles Bolden highlighted the agency's first X-plane designation in ... NASA Advances Aviation with Six New X-Planes June 24, 2016. APPEL News Staff. In 2017, NASA Aeronautics will launch a new X-plane program as part of a 10-year plan to transform the American aviation industry. Since the first X-plane emerged in 1946, NASA and its predecessor, the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), have periodically employed these experimental technology ... Piloted, electric propulsion-powered experimental aircraft under way The proposed piloted experimental airplane is called Sceptor, short for the Scalable Convergent Electric Propulsion Technology and Operations Research. The concept involves removing the wing from an Italian-built Tecnam P2006T aircraft and replacing it with an experimental wing integrated with electric motors. NASA's Electric Plane Will Take Flight This Year—but Its Future Is The program began in 2016 with a twofold goal: to demonstrate that a plane can be powered fully by electricity and to increase efficiency and performance through a new wing design with several ... List of experimental aircraft Caproni-Campini N.1/CC.2 experimental motorjet and second jet aircraft to fly. Ambrosini Sagittario 1953 - Swept wing research aircraft. Bossi-Bonomi Pedaliante 1936 - Human-powered aircraft. Caproni Campini N.1 1940 - Jet engine research. Jona J-6 - Tilting wing stabilisation system. Mojave Experimental Fly-In 2016 Mojave Experimental Fly-In 2016. By. Tom Wilson-April 17, 2016. 0. ... Rian Johnson of Van's Aircraft makes a point during the hour-long RV-14 presentation. Topics included the improvements made to the kit and building process; elevator trailing edge redesign; delays in releasing the fuselage kit due to improvements generated after Finite ... This company wants to reinvent the space rocket In the 1990s, NASA designed an experimental space plane meant to be a cost-effective alternative to expensive rockets. Called the X-33, it was based on a concept called SSTO — or "single stage ... NASA Takes Next Step in Green Aviation X-planes Plans Oct 06, 2016. Article. Lockheed Martin's hybrid wing body design concept. ... Each company is to detail their specific X-plane system requirements for a piloted experimental aircraft capable of sustained, two to three hours of powered high subsonic flight, as well as conducting at least two research flight sorties per week over the course of ... 10 Fascinating Experimental Aircraft Of World War II 8 Blohm & Voss BV 238. Blohm & Voss BV238 Flying Boat. The aerospace company Blohm & Voss designed most of the Luftwaffe's flying boats during World War II. As the war progressed, the company's engineers designed even more complex and large flying boats. Evolution Aircraft IN GOOD COMPANY. Pratt & Whitney provides the PT6A-135A, the most reliable turbine ever built. We are the only kit manufacturer that can sell the GFC700 autopilot. A Ballistic Parachute Recovery System is available on all Evolution aircraft. Lycoming is the "Power of Choice" for our Piston Evolution Aircraft. Experimental Aircraft ... EAA EAA Young Eagles. Since 1992, more than two million young people have discovered the world of flight through EAA's Young Eagles program. Read More. The Experimental Aircraft Association, EAA, based in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, encourages and supports the flying, building and restoration of recreational aircraft. EAA AirVenture Oshkosh Connect with EAA on our social media platforms to stay up-to-date with everything that's happening on the grounds and in the sky! Share your posts and photos using #OSH24 to be featured on our feed. Official website of the EAA AirVenture Oshkosh fly-in convention in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, attracting more than 600,000 people and 10,000 airplanes ... Experimental Avionics The new STC gives the Washington-based firm access to a far larger market of about 140,000 active piston aircraft in the United States. The move also is sure to spur other Experimental avionics manufacturers to pursue their own STCs and broaden them far beyond the Cessna 150/152, 172, Piper PA-28, and PA-38 that the FAA has approved so far. NASA Aeronautics in 2016: This is the Story The beginning of an historic new era of X-planes research; the continuing development of trailblazing green aviation technologies; and building an expanding experience base testing new air traffic management technologies. This and so much more was the story of NASA Aeronautics in 2016. Experimental Find the best new and used aircraft for sale such as business jets, helicopters, Experimental, Warbirds and more. ... 2016 Amphibious Avid Catalina Click Here... WANTED: WW11 LINK ... EI GCR-30P engine monitor). Low time-135 hrs TT. EW(wheels) 968 lbs. Registered Experimental Light Sport, but can be changed to Experimental Home Built allowing ... Experimental and numerical buckling analysis of CNT reinforced polymer A combined experimental and numerical buckling analysis is performed for Carbon nanotube-reinforced composite (CNTRC) laminates under uniaxial in-plane compressive load. A finite element simulation program is developed in MATLAB environment and the recorded buckling responses are verified with the experimental results. NASA Moves to Begin Historic New Era of X-Plane Research The X-1 also marked the first in what became a long line of experimental aircraft programs managed by the NACA (and later NASA), the Air Force, the Navy, and other government agencies. The current list of X-planes that have been assigned numbers by the Air Force stands at 56, but that doesn't mean there have been 56 X-planes. Experimental Analysis on Performance of Air/Oil Centrifugal Breathers Di Matteo, M, Berten, O, & Hendrick, P. "Experimental Analysis on Performance of Air/Oil Centrifugal Breathers for Aircraft Engines Under Different Operating Conditions." Proceedings of the ASME Turbo Expo 2024: Turbomachinery Technical Conference and Exposition. Volume 1: Aircraft Engine. London, United Kingdom. June 24-28, 2024. V001T01A022 ... essay homework paper phd project resume review study thesis