Open Access
Issue
JNWPU
Volume 39, Number 5, October 2021
Page(s) 1087 - 1096
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/jnwpu/20213951087
Published online 14 December 2021
  1. Advani S K, Wilkinson C H. Dynamic interface modelling and simulation: a unique challenge[C]//Royal Aeronautical Society Conference on Helicopter Flight Simulation, London, 2001 [Google Scholar]
  2. Blackwell J, Arney A M, Gilbert N E, et al. Modelling the helicopter/ship dynamic interface for the seahawk/FFG-7[C]//Australian Aeronautical Conference, 1993 [Google Scholar]
  3. Käriä C H, Wang Y, Padfield G D, et al. Aerodynamic loading characteristics of a model-scale helicopter in a ship's airwake[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2012, 49(5) : 1271–1278. [Article] [Google Scholar]
  4. Rajagopalan G, Niazi S, Wadcock A J, et al. Experimental and computational study of the interaction between a tandem-rotor helicopter and a ship[J]. American Helicopter Society, 2005, 61(1) : 729 [Google Scholar]
  5. Blackwell J, Arney A M, Gilbert N E, et al. Modelling the helicopter/ship dynamic interface for the seahawk/FFG-7[C]//Australian Aeronautical Conference, 1993 [Google Scholar]
  6. Roscoe M F, Thompson J H. JSHIP's dynamic interface modeling and simulation system: a simulation of the UH-60A helicopter/LHA shipboard environment task[C]//Proceedings 59th Annual Forum of the American Helicopter Society, Phoenix, 2003 [Google Scholar]
  7. Hodge S J, Zan S J, Roper D M. Time-accurate ship airwake and unsteady aerodynamic loads modeling for maritime helicopter simulation[J]. Journal of the American Helicopter Society, 2009, 54(2) : 022005. [Article] [Google Scholar]
  8. Alpman E, Long L N, Bridges D O, et al. Fully-coupled simulations of the rotorcraft/ship dynamic interface[C]//Annual Forum Proceedings-American Helicopter Society, American Helicopter Society, 2007, 63(2): 1367 [Google Scholar]
  9. Bridges D O, Horn J F, Alpman E, et al. Coupled flight dynamics and CFD analysis of pilot workload in ship airwakes[C]//Proceedings of the AIAA Atmospheric Flight Mechanics Conference, Hilton Head, 2007 [Google Scholar]
  10. Sun Peng, Geng Xue, Zhao Jia, et al. Influence of wind directions on the flow structures of helicopter rotor and deck[J]. Journal of Aerospace Power, 2015(8) : 1802–1810 [Article] (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  11. Sun Chuanwei, Sun Wensheng. Analysis of unmanded helicopter hovering in ship flow field over flight deck[J]. Journal of Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, 1999, 31(6) : 614–619 [Article] (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  12. Zhang Xiaodong, Hou Zhiqiang, Hu Guocai, et al. Calculation of save operation envelope of a shipboard helicopter[J]. Journal of Ordnance Equipment, 2012, 33(10) : 30–33 [Article] (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  13. Yang Jun. Calculation of save operation envelope of a coaxial helicopter on shipboard[J]. Journal of Naval Aeronautical and Astronautical University, 2017, 32(1) : 149–153 [Article] (in Chinese) [Google Scholar]
  14. Polsky S A. A computational study of unsteady ship airwake[C]//40th AIAA Aerospace Sciences Meeting and Exhibit, Reno, 2002 [Google Scholar]
  15. Balin M G. Validation of a real-time engineering simulation of the UH-60A helicopter[R]. NASA-TM-88360, 1987 [Google Scholar]
  16. Kääriä C H, Forrest J S, Owen I, et al. Simulated aerodynamic loading of an SH-60B helicopter in a ship's airwake[C]//35th European Rotorcraft Forum, Hamburg, Germany, 2009 [Google Scholar]
  17. Lee R G, Zan S J. Unsteady aerodynamic loading on a helicopter fuselage in a ship airwake[J]. Journal of the American Helicopter Society, 2004, 49(2) : 149–159. [Article] [Google Scholar]
  18. Forrest J S, Owen I, Padfield G D, et al. Ship-helicopter operating limits prediction using piloted flight simulation and time-accurate airwakes[J]. Journal of Aircraft, 2012, 49(4) : 1020–1031. [Article] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.