Dave Higdon/Lakeland
Canadian John McIntee and his American ally, Ray Johnson, believe that they have an aeroplane for which the time has come, a special-purpose aircraft for a special mission: training airline pilots - ab initio, no less, from no experience through to a jet-rated air-transport pilot (ATP) licence - in one aeroplane.
In contrast, the duo's Calgary-based company, Alberta Aerospace, is not, itself, starting from scratch. The Canadian firm is resurrecting Stelio Frati's Jet Squalus, attempting to raise from the ashes of Belgian company Promavia's original military concept a new, more civilian, trainer, dubbed the Phoenix Fanjet.
DEVELOPMENT SAVINGS
Resurrecting the Phoenix from the ashes of the Squalus may be the single biggest contributor to Alberta Aerospace's chances of success. Starting with the Squalus prototype will save the company millions of dollars in research and development and reduce some of the barriers and risks to the programme's success. The savings go a long way towards allowing Alberta Aerospace to market the Phoenix for $1.54-1.7 million, depending on avionics.
McIntee deliberately has kept a low profile for Alberta Aerospace, which is three years into the effort and only about a year away from certification. All funds have been raised privately so far, and a Canadian venture-capital bank is working on further financing, with some $20 million required to certificate the aircraft.
With less than $10 million committed and nearly a score of former Piper certification specialists enlisted - most of them USFederal Aviation Administration-designated engineering representatives - Alberta Aerospace has brought the prototype Squalus to Canada, and then the USA, swapped the original Garrett turbofan for a new Williams-Rolls FJ44, modified flap drives, removed the belly-mounted speedbrake, enlarged the flaps and ailerons, and made other design changes to the airframe and aircraft systems - and managed to log another 50 to 60 flight-test hours.
Picking the Squalus also gave the company access to more than 600 hours of flight data accumulated between 1987 and 1993 when Promavia campaigned for the aircraft across Canada, Europe and other parts of the globe. The sales it pursued never materialised, but former Piper president Johnson thinks that this time it will be different. Alberta Aerospace claims that the Phoenix Fanjet can deliver more useful training in less time than the typical aircraft now used in ab initio programmes. In other words, the student grows faster and goes faster from the private-pilot syllabus through to ATP. Furthermore, the student loses nothing in basic, tactile, flying-skills instruction while logging all that jet time.
With predictions of pilot shortages as rampant as growth forecasts for airlines, Alberta Aerospace believes that it has an answer. Outside North America, most airlines obtain the majority of their pilots through ab initio schemes. In the USA, carriers are moving slowly towards in-house training programmes to groom new pilots for the cockpit, as the shrinking military is no longer their primary source of flightdeck personnel.
These different variables leave McIntee and Johnson confident that the market will be there when the Phoenix Fanjet gets its unrestricted type-certificate late in 1998.
The biggest challenge ahead for Alberta Aerospace is not resurrecting the Phoenix Fanjet from the figurative ashes of the Jet Squalus - it should be comparatively easy to win a type certificate for the aircraft as a civilian trainer. The other three legs of this particular programme's stool will be tougher to achieve: those of securing a production certificate, attracting buyers and delivering the product profitably.
If Alberta Aerospace can hit its marks as planned, Phoenix Fanjets should start rolling off a new assembly line south of Calgary in mid-1998 at the rate of two a month. By the end of five years, Johnson says, about 150 should have been delivered - about half the forecast market-demand - with production running at four a month, or higher.
"We've seen market estimates as high as 400-500 a year for trainers in the market we're targeting," Johnson says. "I can see our production going as high as 150 a year to capture half the market predicted in conservative estimates."
Flight schools training ab initio students today tend to use a mixed fleet of single- and twin-engined piston, and sometimes twin-turboprop, aircraft in the typical two-year syllabus. Students face the obstacle of transition training each time the programme moves them from one type to another and, at the end, the graduating pilot still needs to transition to jet-powered aircraft and win a type rating. The more varied the training fleet, the more complex and costly the maintenance.
Alberta Aerospace's concept simplifies both sides of the equation. Students would start primary training, move on to an instrument rating and advanced licences, and graduate from training with a jet type-rating, ready for airline type-training - all in the same aircraft.
Total flying time should be reduced, Johnson says, partly because of the elimination of intermediate transition training and partly because the Phoenix's higher speed, faster climb and broad capabilities allow students to achieve more per flight hour.
Maintenance costs and complexity would also be reduced under Alberta Aerospace's plan. The operator would need equipment for only one aircraft type and plans for engine maintenance, parts and refurbishment would help reduce flight schools' costs.
CONVINCING CARRIERS
All the company has to do is convince carriers such as All Nippon Airways, Japan Airlines, Lufthansa and Singapore Airlines, their training providers, or schools such as FlightSafety International, the University of North Dakota and Embry-Riddle, that the Phoenix is more efficient for training jetliner-bound students than aircraft used now.
Dollars, of course, will be a hurdle. Johnson sets the cost of flying a leased Phoenix in a flight-school ab initio programme at as little as $270/h, or as high as $315/h, including engine and airframe maintenance, fuel and oil and lease payments. Only insurance is excluded from his assessment. The costs break down as follows:
nengine maintenance/insurance: $99/h ab initio; $74/h for pre-screened students;
"Williams' power-by-the-hour engine insurance programme will cover engine maintenance and overhaul," Johnson says. "We are after the best-possible warranty terms from our suppliers for their parts, so we can guarantee costs to buyers - and the airframe will have a lifetime warranty that Alberta Aerospace will support," he says.
TROUBLESHOOTING HELP
To help in maintenance and troubleshooting, a digital flight-data recorder installed as standard will track 40 engine and 68 airframe data- points. Mechanics will be able to download the data quickly from a panel-mounted connection for routine and unscheduled maintenance. Flight instructors will also have access to the recorder data, allowing them to replay students' training flights for debriefing.
The data will also aid Alberta Aerospace in applying its promised lifetime airframe warranty and residual-value guarantee. At the end of five years, the company will guarantee to repurchase a Phoenix for 50% of its purchase price, recondition and repaint the aircraft and put it back on the market to potential customers for under $1 million.
"That gives another leasing company or flight school the opportunity to get another five years of use out of an airframe at very attractive terms," Johnson says. Furthermore, should the Phoenix Fanjet prove as durable as Alberta Aerospace promises, the by-then ten-year-old trainer should have enough residual value to cover another refurbishment and sale on the private market.
Company engineers have already swapped the old Squalus' 5.91kN (1,330lb)-thrust TFE109-1 turbofan in favour of a more modern FJ44, derated to 7.11kN rather than the powerplant's normal 8.44kN. The original AlliedSignal Bendix/King avionics are to be replaced with Honeywell Primus 1000 integrated digital avionics under an agreement involving Canada's Kelowna Flightcraft.
Alberta Aerospace envisions two avionics options in the final product: for advanced students, the state-of-the-art Primus 1000 integrated system, with flat-panel displays; for beginning and intermediate students, new-generation Allied-Signal Bendix/King avionics, with conventional flight instruments.
In the coming weeks, the original Martin-Baker MkII ejection seats should give way to lighter, energy-absorbing, seats adjustable for the widest possible range of pilot heights and reaches. Other airframe and system changes are at various stages of completion as the company adapts the mid-1980s airframe to late-1990s standards and the aircraft's planned role as a 21st-century trainer aircraft. Anti-icing systems will be added to the engine inlets and flying surfaces.
In the end, Alberta Aerospace expects to get two type certificates out of one effort. As the company continues testing and developing the Phoenix trainer, engineers are working up airframe changes required to build the aircraft as a four-seater.
Basically, executives say, the biggest change planned involves removing the fuselage fuel tank from the aft cockpit area, adding a small header tank and moving fuel into the wing. The work could include pressurising the airframe to allow passengers to breathe easily - without supplementary oxygen. Expected prices for the four-seater are $1.8- $2.2 million, depending on the avionics selected, with the aircraft planned to be in production by 2000.
Flight test: Phoenix shows Frati genes
Flight International sampled the Phoenix Fanjet's flying traits during almost 90min of flight time logged on a hazy, foggy Florida morning in mid-September.
With the encouragement of Dave West, Alberta Aerospace's professional-but-effusive test pilot, the Phoenix Fanjet delivered an overall favourable impression with its confidence-inspiring personality, a combination of its broad performance envelope and control authority coupled with demanding, yet forgiving, handling qualities.
Other than accelerating and climbing faster than any single-engined aircraft in my flight experience, the Phoenix flew with much the same ease and confidence-building tendencies as those of a Piper Cherokee or Cessna 172, or even a Pilatus PC-9 turboprop trainer; docile on the one hand, but with a hot streak on the other - like a PC-9 without the torque.
Starting with the preflight inspection, the Phoenix is fairly straightforward. Flight-control linkages and trim servos are all mechanical and easy to check; tyres and landing gear also. A student should be able to get through a preflight checklist quickly and with a minimum of hassle.
The procedure for starting the FJ44 is fairly typical for a turbofan, requiring a watchful eye on turbine temperatures and starting RPM and fuel flow. Once started, the FJ44 responds relatively quickly to power inputs.
Taxiing is straightforward and steering very positive and predictable. Braking is excellent, with more than enough authority to pirouette the Phoenix around one main gear for good manoeuvring control in the tightest spots.
It took only a few minutes from start-up until the Lakeland tower cleared us for take-off from Runway 27. After a static run to check our engine power, it was time to power up, release the bakes and roll.
With less than 6s needed to go from idle to take-off power, the Phoenix accelerated swiftly, tracking the centreline closely with only small rudder corrections needed to counter a bit of crosswind. We used slightly less than 600m (2,000m) of runway to reach our zero-flap rotation speed of 90kt (165km/h) and, by 900m, we would easily have cleared any theoretical 50ft obstacle in our path.
With a cruise-climb setting of about 160kt, the Phoenix easily sustained climbs in excess of 1,000ft/min (5m/s); slowed to 130kt, it delivered an ear-popping 3,000ft of altitude every 60s - even after experimenting with different climb speeds, we reached 12,500ft in just under 5min from brake release.
At various altitudes, speeds and configurations, West encouraged speed runs, high- and low-speed handling tests and deep, steep ground-rushing descents. We also tried power-on and power-off stalls, maximum-rate climbs - and descents - and four full approaches flown at various speeds to four full-stop landings.
Pushing the Phoenix's hot buttons yielded 3,000ft/min climbs and 6,000ft/min descents, more-than-ample control authority, aerobatic capabilities and swift, if not blistering, cruise speeds in the 345kt range. In all areas, performance is more comparable to multiples of those of the Raytheon Beech Bonanzas and Barons; in some areas, even multiples of the Pilatus PC-9 turboprops.
SPLIT PERSONALITY
The more mundane aspects of the Phoenix's split personality turned up in equally desirable low approach speeds (and we tried them just below 90kt) and low stall speeds, down in the low-50s power-on and dirty, and never higher than the high 60s cleaned up and power off.
To experience stalls in the Phoenix requires progressively adding aft stick through a huge region of pre-stall buffet which no pilot should ever miss - and continuing to hold the nose up until it finally wants to break and fall through.
The Phoenix can teach a pilot hard lessons about stalls and spins, launches and landings, approaches, en route transition and cross-country flying. The aircraft can be misflown to the point of requiring aggressive corrective action. To fly into dire straits, however, the Phoenix pilot would first have to overlook and otherwise overcome among the most-persistent naturally occurring warning signs and positive-stability traits found in any aircraft.
Approaches brought out the flexibility of Frati's design. For example, you can extend the gear and the first 15í of flaps at 140kt, and the second notch of flaps (30í) at 130kt - great aids to the pilot in transitioning from descent to approach airspeeds.
Flying with no flaps required a downwind speed of about 125kt, slowing to around 110kt at the last corner until crossing the runway numbers at about 95-100kt. With 15í of flap, the approach worked well when flown at 110kt, crossing the numbers at 85kt; make it 30í flap, and the Phoenix wafts across the threshold at 70kt, with 9kt of cushion and good throttle response should a go-around be required.
The Phoenix left me more comfortable flying the approaches at 15í and 30í flap, because the slower speeds seemed to produce shorter, more on-target, landings for me. My best guess why is the little aircraft's willingness to float in ground effect, a product of its short landing gear and broad-chord wing.
Although not all my touchdowns were exactly on target, all came off smooth, stable and solid, thanks to the stout trailing-link main gear and the Phoenix's strong aileron authority, even when the wing is stalled.
It was a full and enlightening flight experience, all in a seemingly brief 90min. The Phoenix's rapid acceleration, swift climb and easy approach handling gave me time to try an entire spectrum of training manoeuvres with time left over to fly four approaches.
SOME SQUAWKS
This is not to say that the Phoenix which McIntee and Johnson now have flying is perfect. The aircraft left me with some squawks. First, in roll, the Phoenix can be upset from wings-level flight and does want to restabilise on its own, but it tended to do so at a bank angle well removed from level, partly, it seems, because of a stick-centring spring in the aileron linkage. Aerodynamic balances on the ailerons would probably allow the aeroplane to level itself better, and the spring device did not really seem to add anything positive to the experience.
The same goes for the elevator system; when upset, the Phoenix quickly dampens out the pitch oscillations, but settles at a slightly different speed with a small climb or descent resulting. Both tendencies are under study, Johnson says, as is another shortcoming: fresh air.
The Phoenix as flown lacked good cockpit ventilation when on the ground, something that forced West and me to unlatch and slightly open the canopy during initial taxi and between landings and launches. An enhanced fresh-air system and a blower capable of cooling two pilots seems in order.
Most of the other squawks involved items or systems already earmarked for replacement, so there is no point in handicapping the Phoenix with any mention of them.
The company already faces hurdles more formidable than the simple physical make-over of the Jet Squalus. Ultimately, it is the final quality of the Phoenix, its systems and its developer, and their acceptance by the market on which the programme's future hinges.
If desirable flying traits alone could do it, the Phoenix Fanjet would already be a successful shark in the sky instead of a workable pile of ashes with potential for revival.
Source: Flight International
