AC 29-2C, Chg 1 2/12/03 (MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) Twidget Type Design Change Attachment 2
1. Use the list of appliances and modifications required for that Type Design Change (TDC) to determine which ATA chapters of the original rotorcraft manufacturer's maintenance manual the TDC will affect and which additional ATA chapters will be affected.
2. The following are component and systems that will be affected by the Twidget TDC:
a. Fuselage structure will be modified to mount twidget arm assembly.
b. Cabin door will be modified.
c. Electrical power will be required for electrical motor.
d. Hydraulic power source will be required for deploying and storing twidget arm.
e. Twidget control assembly will be installed in the cabin.
f. Control will be mounted in cockpit for emergency release of the twidget..
g. An Instrument will be installed in instrument panel indicating twidget's position.
h. Twidget recording equipment and monitor will be mounted in cabin.
i. Twidget antenna will be mounted on belly of fuselage.
j. Cables and wiring will be routed through rotorcraft.
k. Two-way communication will be required between the pilot and twidget operator.
I. Twidget gearbox requires servicing to full mark on site gage every 50 hours.
m. Twidget arm assemblies and clutch requires lubrication every 100 hours.
n. Twidget installation requires an inspection every 300 hours.
o. Twidget arm assembly requires an ultrasonic test every 600 hours.
p. Clutch has a wear tolerance of 1.56 mm.
q. Clutch is life-limited to be replaced every l,000 hours time in service.
r. Twidget gearbox is required to be overhauled every l,000 hours time in service.
s. Twidget gearbox attach bolt torque is 75-ft lb. and twidget arm assembly torque is 110 in lb.
t. Warning: Twidget should be retracted during takeoff, landing, and cruise above 85 knots.
u. Caution: Do not tow or taxi the rotorcraft with the twidget arm deployed.
v. Placards are required on the twidget unit and in the cockpit.
3. This example TDC will affect ATA-100 chapters: 4 Airworthiness Limitations, 5 Inspection, 6 Dimensions, 9 Towing and Taxiing, 10 Parking and Mooring, 11 Placards, 12 Servicing, 23 Communication, 24 Electrical, 25 Furnishings, 29 Hydraulic, 31 Indication and Recording, 52 Doors, and 53 Fuselage. A Chapter1 Introduction is also needed.
REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 3 Page Apdx A - 64
(MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) INFORMATION:
Attachment 4 includes a Figure 2 for Thomas Copter Mods TDC to affix a Twidget installation on Thomas Copter model T-97J helicopter.
Figure 2 is intended to assist in determining which requirements are applicable to this certification project. The document contains each requirement with a set of parentheses, the appropriate regulation, and the location of information in the applicant’s ICA.
Information obtained from Attachment 4 can be used to determine which requirements are applicable. For requirements that are not applicable, place an N/A in the parentheses. All other requirements would be applicable to the certification project. Place a Y if the required information is included in ICA. Figure 2 has been completed for the sample Twidget TDC.
Applicant that uses and completes Figure 1 and indicates the location of that information in the applicant’s proposed ICA will reduce the time required to evaluate the ICA.
It is important that the applicant include the project number or numbers associated with the ICA, the name of the appropriate FAA/AUTHORITY office, the name of the project engineer, the applicant's company name, the make and model of rotorcraft being modified, and the date.
The completed Figure 1 should be submitted to FAA/AUTHORITY with the applicant's ICA.
REVISION:
Revision 4 (DATE) Page 4 Page Apdx A - 65
AC 29-2C, Chg 1 2/12/03 (MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) APPENDIX A PART 29 REQUIREMENTS The following is a breakdown of Appendix A to FAR/JAR Part 29 and is intended to provide guidance to assist an applicant for a Type Design Change under a Type Certificate (TC), Supplemental Type Certificate (STC), or Field Approval (FA) requiring Instructions for Continued Airworthiness (ICA). The breakdown is intended to provide guidance to assist an applicant in understanding the ICA requirements of FAR/JAR § 29.1529. An applicant may use the guidance to prepare the ICA. Completion of this appendix will provide information needed for the evaluation and will reduce the time required for evaluation of the proposed ICA.
( ) Status of ICA: Y = Yes included; N/A = non- applicable. The Location Column lists the page number in the Applicant’s ICA that contains the information.
Project Number(s) ST01998RC-R ACO/FSDO: Rotorcraft ACO Project Engineer: Data Mastermine Applicant: Thomas Copter Mods Make: Thomas Copter Model: T97- J Date June 18, 1998 Requirement Regulation Location (N/A) ICA for each engine A29.1(b) N/A (N/A) ICA for each rotor A29.1(b) N/A ( Y ) ICA for each appliance required by this chapter A29.1(b) * All ( Y ) Any required information relating to the interface of the ( Y ) appliances, (N/A) engines and (N/A) rotors with the rotorcraft.
A29.1(b) See NOTE 1 ( Y ) If ICA are not supplied by the manufacturer of an (N/A) appliance, (N/A) engine or (N/A) rotor installed in the rotorcraft, the ICA for the rotorcraft must include ( Y ) the information essential to the continued airworthiness of the rotorcraft.
A29.1 * All ( Y ) A program showing how changes to the applicant’s ICA will be distributed.
A29.1(c) ATA 0 (N/A) A program showing how changes to the ICA of the manufacture of the engine(s), rotor(s) and appliances installed in the rotorcraft will be distributed, if referenced in applicant’s ICA A29.1(c) N/A ( Y ) ICA that must be in a form of a manual or manuals as appropriate for the quantity of data.
A29.2(a) * All ( Y ) A format of the manual or manuals which must provide for a practical arrangement.
A29.2(b) * All ( Y ) Content prepared in the English language. A29.3 * All Figure 2 REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 5 Page Apdx A - 66
(MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) Requirement Regulation Location ( Y ) Introduction information that includes ( Y ) an explanation of the rotorcraft’s features and ( Y ) data to the extent necessary for maintenance and preventive maintenance.
A29.3(a)(1) ATA 0 ( Y ) A description of the (N/A) rotorcraft and its systems and installations, (N/A) engines and its systems and installations, (N/A) rotors and its systems and installations, ( Y ) appliances and its systems and installations.
A29.3(a)(2) ATA 25 ( Y ) Basic control and operating information describing ( Y ) how the rotorcraft components and systems are controlled and ( Y ) how the rotorcraft components and systems are operated including ( Y ) any special procedure and limitations.
A29.3(a)(3) ATA 25 ( Y ) Servicing information that covers details regarding ( Y ) servicing points, (N/A) capacities of tanks, ( Y ) capacities of reservoirs, ( Y ) types of fluids to be used, ( Y ) pressures applicable to the various systems.
A29.3(a)(4) ATA 12 ( Y ) Location of access panels for ( Y ) inspection and ( Y ) servicing.
A29.3 (a)(4) See NOTE 2 ( Y ) Servicing information that covers details regarding ( Y ) locations of lubrication points, ( Y ) the lubricant to be used.
A29.3(a)(4) ATA 12 ( Y ) Equipment required for servicing. A29.3(a)(4) ATA 12 ( Y ) Tow instructions and limitations. A29.3(a)(4) ATA 9 ( Y ) Mooring information A29.3(a)(4) ATA 10 (N/A) Jacking information A29.3(a)(4) N/A (N/A) Leveling information A29.3(a)(4) N/A ( Y ) Scheduling information for each part of the ( Y ) rotorcraft that, provides the recommended periods at which they should ( Y ) cleaned, ( Y ) inspected, ( Y ) adjusted, ( Y ) tested, ( Y ) lubricated and ( Y ) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) See NOTE 3 (N/A) Scheduling information for the (N/A) rotorcraft’s engine(s) that provides the recommended periods at which they should be (N/A) cleaned, (N/A) inspected, (N/A) adjusted, (N/A) tested, (N/A) lubricated and (N/A) the work recommended at these periods. NOTE: This information may be in the FAA/AUTHORITY accepted engine ICA.
A29.3(b)(1) N/A Figure 2 (continued) REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 6 Page Apdx A - 67
AC 29-2C, Chg 1 2/12/03 (MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) Requirement Regulation Location (N/A) Scheduling information for the (N/A) rotorcraft’s auxiliary power unit(s)(APU) that provides the recommended periods at which they should be (N/A) cleaned, (N/A) inspected, (N/A) adjusted, ( N/A) tested, (N/A) lubricated and (N/A) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) N/A (N/A) Scheduling information for the (N/A) rotorcraft’s rotor(s) that provides the recommended periods at which they should be (N/A) cleaned, (N/A) inspected, (N/A) adjusted, (N/A) tested, (N/A) lubricated and (N/A) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) N/A ( Y ) Scheduling information for the ( Y ) rotorcraft’s accessories that provides the recommended periods at which they should be ( Y ) cleaned, ( Y ) inspected, ( Y ) adjusted, ( Y ) tested, ( Y ) lubricated and ( Y ) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) See NOTE 3 ( Y ) Scheduling information for the ( Y ) rotorcraft’s instruments that provides the recommended periods at which they should be ( Y ) cleaned, ( Y ) inspected, ( Y ) adjusted, ( Y ) tested, ( Y ) lubricated and ( Y ) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) See NOTE 3 ( Y ) Scheduling information for the ( Y ) rotorcraft’s equipment that provides the recommended periods at which they should be ( Y ) cleaned, ( Y ) inspected, ( Y ) adjusted, ( Y ) tested, ( Y ) lubricated and ( Y ) the work recommended at these periods.
A29.3(b)(1) See NOTE 3 ( Y ) The degree of inspection for each part of the (N/A) rotorcraft and its (N/A) engine(s), (N/A) auxiliary power unit, ( N/A) rotor(s), ( Y ) accessories, ( Y ) Instruments and ( Y ) equipment.
A29.3(b)(1) ATA 5 ( Y ) The applicable wear tolerances A29.3(b)(1) ATA 25 The applicant may refer to an (N/A)accessory, (N/A) instrument, or (N/A) equipment manufacturer as the source of this information if the applicant shows (N/A) that the item has an exceptionally high degree of complexity requiring specialized maintenance techniques, test equipment, or expertise.
A29.3(b)(1) N/A ( Y ) The recommended overhaul periods and necessary cross references to the Airworthiness Limitation Section.
A29.3(b)(1) ATA 5 Figure 2 (continued) REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 7 Page Apdx A - 68
(MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) Requirement Regulation Location ( Y ) An inspection program that includes ( Y ) the frequency and ( Y ) extent of the inspection necessary to provide for the continued airworthiness of the rotorcraft.
A29.3(b)(1) ATA 5 ( Y ) Troubleshooting information describing ( Y ) problem malfunctions, ( Y ) how to recognize those malfunctions and ( Y ) the remedial action for those malfunctions.
A29.3(b)(2) See NOTE 4 (N/A) Information describing the order and method of (N/A) removing and (N/A) replacing engine(s) with any necessary precautions to be taken.
A29.3(b)(3) N/A (N/A) Information describing the order and method of (N/A) removing and (N/A) replacing rotor(s) with any necessary precautions to be taken.
A29.3(b)(3) N/A ( Y ) Information describing the order and method of ( Y ) removing and ( Y ) replacing parts with any necessary precautions to be taken.
A29.3(b)(3) ATA 25 ( Y ) Other general procedural instructions including (N/A) storage limitations and procedures for (N/A) testing system during ground running, (N/A) making symmetry checks, ( Y ) weighing and determining the center of gravity, (N/A) lifting, (N/A) shoring.
A29.3(b)(4) ATA 8 (N/A) Diagrams of structural access plates and information needed to gain access for inspections when access plates are not provided.
A29.3(c) N/A (N/A) Details for the application of special inspection techniques including radiographic and ultrasonic testing where such process are specified.
A29.3(d) N/A (N/A) Information needed to apply protective treatment to structure after inspection.
A29.3(e) N/A ( Y ) All data relative to structural fasteners such as ( Y ) identification, ( Y ) discarded recommendations, and ( Y ) torque values.
A29.3(f) ATA25 ( Y ) A list of special tools needed A29.3(g) NOTE 5 ( Y ) The Instructions for Continued Airworthiness must contain a section, titled Airworthiness Limitations that is ( Y ) segregated and ( Y ) clearly distinguishable from the rest of the document. NOTE: The Airworthiness Limitations Section in the applicant’s ICA will be evaluated by the appropriate FAA/AUTHORITY.
A29.4 ATA 4 Figure 2 (continued) REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 8 Page Apdx A - 69
AC 29-2C, Chg 1 2/12/03 (MANUAL IDENTIFICATION) ATTACHMENT 4
TYPE DESIGN CHANGE
ICA RECOMMENDED PROCEDURES (Continued) Requirement Regulation Location (N/A) The Airworthiness Limitations Section must set forth each mandatory replacement time, structural inspection procedure approved under § 29.571.
A29.4 N/A ( Y ) If the Instructions for Continued Airworthiness consist of multiple documents, the Airworthiness Limitations Section required by this paragraph must include in the principal manual.
A29.4 ATA 4 ( Y ) The Airworthiness Limitations Section must contain a legible statement in a prominent location indicating that the Airworthiness Limitations Section is FAA/AUTHORITY-approved and specifies required maintenance and/or inspections. The exact, required wording of this statement is found in the FAR/JAR.
A29.4 ATA 4 Figure 2 (continued) NOTE: The Airworthiness Limitations Section (ALS) is evaluated and approved by FAA/AUTHORITY.
REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 9 Page Apdx A - 70
(MANUAL IDENTIFICATION)
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REVISION: (DATE) Revision 4 Page 10 Page Apdx A - 71
AC 29 APPENDIX B. AIRWORTHINESS GUIDANCE FOR ROTORCRAFT INSTRUMENT FLIGHT.
a. Explanation.
(1) Requirements for instrument flight rules (IFR) have been incorporated into Appendix B to part 29, utilizing a regulatory format. Various information from previous interim standards, procedures, test techniques, and acceptable means of compliance for rotorcraft IFR flight is included in the following sections.
(2) Amendment 29-51 made a change to paragraph V. Static Lateral Directional Stability, concurrent with the change to § 29.177, to allow for a small range of sideslip angles (2-3 degrees) for which sideslip angles need not increase steadily with control deflection. The previous rule language stating that directional control position must increase in approximate constant proportion with sideslip angle has been replaced. The intent of this change is that an increase in directional control position must produce an increase in sideslip angle linearly. At greater sideslip angles appropriate to the type rotorcraft, increase in directional control position need not produce a linear increase in sideslip angle but should not become neutral or negative. The change in paragraph VII revised the current requirement to clearly state the requirements to be met in the event of a stability augmentation system (SAS) failure.1
b. Procedures.
(1) General.
(i) The certificated instrument flight envelope may be more restrictive than the visual flight rules (VFR) envelope in terms of weight, CG, speed, altitude, or rate of climb and descent. The approved envelope should be operationally practical such that it does not impose constraints with which the crew has difficulty complying.
(ii) Controllability requirements are to be met from 0.9 VMINI to 1.1 VNE.
Stability requirements must be met where specified. Stability devices are to be designed to allow safe flight following a failure. The evaluating pilot should assure that all equipment and devices installed for IFR, including reasonable failures of that equipment, do not compromise the VFR approval for that rotorcraft. For example, stability system failures can cause loss of swashplate or tail rotor control travel when failed in a hardover condition. If the device remains in the hardover position after the stability system is turned off, control capability may be compromised. Cyclic controllability tests at high speed and at the limiting rearward flight condition, or tail rotor tests in sideward flight at high altitude, may reveal a lower control capability and a more restrictive envelope. In addition, controllability testing should be accomplished with the control rigging set at the most adverse production tolerance for the test condition (e.g., minimum forward swashplate for high speed testing).
1 This paragraph was effective 9/17/2009 as part of the new and changed guidance material for the Performance and Handling Qualities final rule (Amdt. 29-51, 73 FR 11002, Feb. 29, 2008).
Page Apdx B - 1
AC 29-2C, Chg 7 2/4/2016
(2) Trim. Compliance with the IFR trim requirement may be met by use of a magnetic brake with a recentering button, an electrically driven trim system activated by a “beeper” type control, or other means, so long as the system does not introduce any objectionable discontinuities in the force gradient or otherwise result in objectionable flight characteristics. Trim release devices should be free of objectionable stick jump.
Electrically driven trim systems should have a smooth change in force with a rate compatible with the normal rotorcraft maneuvers. Only the cyclic trim control must exhibit positive self-centering characteristics. Collective and directional controls are not required to incorporate positive self-centering characteristics. Movement of the trim controls should produce a similar effect on the rotorcraft in a plane parallel to that of the control motion. The control system free play and breakout force must be evaluated to assure a close and direct correlation between control input (force and deflection) and rotorcraft response (pitch, roll, yaw, and heave (vertical motion)), and to permit small, precise changes in flight path. If trim control is provided in a SAS, the control should be of such design and so installed that any failure will not create a hazardous condition. If an inadvertent out-of-trim condition can be developed, its effect on the rotorcraft should be investigated. There should be investigation of these failures or malfunctions as outlined in paragraph b.(7), Stability Augmentation Systems, below. The controls for this trim function should be installed such that, the controls should operate in the plane and with the sense of motion of the rotorcraft. Each control means should have the direction of motion plainly marked thereon or adjacent to the control.
(3) Static Longitudinal Stability.
(i) Positive static longitudinal stability is a key IFR requirement, which assures a self-correcting airspeed response and allows a pilot to recognize any substantial change in speed. The phrase “substantial speed change” as used in Appendix B to part 29, paragraph IV., is normally considered to mean at least a 10 knot departure from trim speed. Such a change in airspeed must be accompanied by a stick force clearly perceptible to the pilot (i.e., a discernible and quantifiable force gradient). Very shallow force gradients can be approved for systems with low deadband and low friction.
Systems with significant friction and deadband require much steeper force gradients to be acceptable. The longitudinal force gradient can be determined by either of two methods. The most commonly used method (applicable only to irreversible control systems) measures the cyclic forces with the rotorcraft on the ground and the rotor stopped (with hydraulic and electric power units if required). The force applied to the cyclic stick and the cyclic stick displacement is measured and a plot of stick force versus displacement in each longitudinal direction is obtained. Following the ground test, the longitudinal static stability tests are conducted in flight as described in section
29.175 of this AC. The cyclic displacement measurements gathered during flight test are then assigned force values from the ground mechanical characteristics test and the force values are cross plotted with the corresponding airspeeds to produce a plot of cyclic force versus airspeed. The trim system should be on during the test and the aircraft trimmed at the trim speed. After each end point, the cyclic should be allowed to slowly return to the trim position. When all the force is released from the cyclic stick and Page Apdx B - 2
the airspeed has stabilized, note the airspeed. An alternate method of determining the longitudinal stick force stability is to measure the force on the cyclic stick in flight using a hand held force gage or other force measuring instrumentation. The in- flight technique is the same as the first method. Testing should be accomplished at a minimum of two altitudes. One altitude should be low enough to assure limiting power is attained.
Another should be at or near the maximum approved altitude. Reasonable interpolation is allowed. If no marginal areas are apparent interpolation over a 10,000-foot altitude range is considered reasonable.
(ii) Tests for static longitudinal stability during approach should include the steepest approach gradient for which approval is requested. Static stability tests may be simulated by initially establishing a trimmed rate of descent for maximum approach gradient assuming zero wind conditions. Actual approach tests at the maximum approved gradient should be conducted to evaluate tracking and maneuverability, including the capability to correct downward to a glide path when approaching in a slight (10 knot) tailwind condition.
(4) Static Lateral Directional Stability.
(i) Tests for directional stability usually require instrumentation for lateral cyclic position, pedal position, and sideslip angle. Testing for compliance with the specific directional requirement is relatively simple; however, the pilot should look for significant longitudinal trim changes and short period dynamic modes, which might occur only during sideslip conditions. Side force characteristics are indicated by the variation of bank angle with sideslip during steady heading sideslips. The number of ball widths of deflection is also indicative of the side force cue available to the pilot. A correlation between sideslip angle and ball widths of skid can be obtained at given speeds for use during later testing after sideslip instrumentation is removed. A simple yaw string can be calibrated in a similar manner. The TIA should define the maximum sideslip angles, which should not be exceeded during the flight test program. These angles must not be greater than the structural sideslip envelope substantiated and are not required to be that sideslip angle obtained with full directional pedal deflection.
Sufficient side force cues should accompany sideslip to alert the crew when approaching sideslip limits. This is needed to assure that structural sideslip limits will not be inadvertently exceeded in service. Although not stated in the requirement, flight conditions for demonstration of static longitudinal stability are also appropriate for demonstration of static lateral-directional stability.
(ii) Dihedral requirements may be more difficult to assess. For those rotorcraft that do not meet the position and force gradient requirements for the conventional, cross-controlled sideslips, there are alternative tests that may be used to determine acceptable characteristics. If directional pedals are util ized in steady sideslips, the resultant rolling tendency is the sum of (1) the aircraft’s roll due to sideslip tendency (dihedral) and (2) the aircraft’s roll due to directional control input. If the rotorcraft has a tail rotor, which is excessively high or low in relation to the rotorcraft’s vertical center of gravity (CG), application of tail rotor thrust will introduce a significant Page Apdx B - 3
AC 29-2C, Chg 7 2/4/2016 rolling moment. The basic intent of dihedral stability testing is to determine the rotorcraft response to sideslip exclusive of directional control input. In general, if a tail rotor configuration is involved and the tail rotor is above the vertical CG of the rotorcraft, the effect of pedal input upon dihedral effect is destabilizing during conventional, control-induced sideslips.
(iii) There are two alternate methods, which for small angles of sideslip, can give an indication of the basic dihedral stability of the rotorcraft. Both methods involve freezing directional controls while artificially creating sideslip by other means.
(iv) The first method is only applicable for rotorcraft with single main rotor systems. To utilize this method, the rotorcraft is stabilized in a given flight condition and small collective (torque) changes are applied in each direction (e.g., ±5% and ±10%) while holding pedals fixed. Sideslip angle, lateral control position, and lateral control force may be measured and plotted for small torque changes from trim. This technique will not work for aircraft that have collective to pedal or collective to lateral control couplings.
(v) In the second method, the rotorcraft is stabilized in a trimmed flight condition with a small amount of bank (5-10°). The rotorcraft is then rolled to an approximately equal angle of bank in the opposite direction holding the pedals fixed.
The change in direction of bank results in a small change in sideslip angle and again sideslip angle may be plotted versus lateral control position or force. This test should be conducted in both directions and the results averaged. This method can give reasonably accurate results for small perturbations. Other factors contribute to the results of either of these two methods. It is always important to assess the roll due to sideslip tendency with pedal induced sideslips to assure lateral control forces are reasonable and in a proper direction for directional out-of-trim conditions, and to assure the pilot has adequate sideslip cues.
(vi) Wording of the dihedral requirement is intended to allow slightly negative dihedral stability at critical loading conditions. This will ordinarily result in positive dihedral stability throughout a great majority of the approved loading envelope. The test for maximum allowable negative dihedral effect would involve stabilization at a required flight condition, inducing a sideslip up to ±10° from trim, then assessing lateral cyclic friction or deadband to determine if roll is restrained while remaining in the control system friction or deadband so that the control may be released without resulting in the aircraft rolling in the adverse direction. When testing for this condition, lateral cyclic friction should be adjusted to the minimum value.
(vii) The intent of the dihedral rule is to allow small amounts of control system friction and deadband to mask small values of negative dihedral. Where slope of the negative dihedral versus sideslip exceeds these small values, the negative dihedral must not be approved. The operational pilot must not be presented with opposite cyclic sensing for similar sideslip conditions as loadings and flight conditions change. In general, large values of control system friction and deadband are undesirable. The Page Apdx B - 4