Question: Difference between FAR 23.397 and 23.143

  • Thread starter Thread starter jonathanpun
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Difference
AI Thread Summary
FAR 23.143 outlines the maximum pilot forces required for safe aircraft control and maneuverability, establishing a limit on the physical strength needed for normal operations. In contrast, FAR 23.397 specifies the maximum and minimum forces that can be applied to flight controls, ensuring that the aircraft can withstand pilot inputs without damage. FAR 23.398 further emphasizes that the loads on control surfaces must not exceed those resulting from the specified pilot forces. The minimum force in FAR 23.397 is considered relevant for scenarios like wind gust loads when the aircraft is stationary. Understanding these regulations requires a comprehensive view of the entire section from FAR 23.391 to 23.459.
jonathanpun
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi,
Can anyone here can explain to me the difference between FAR23.397 and 23.143?
What's the maximum and minimum force represents in 23.397?
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
143 gives the maximum permitted pilot forces to safely control and maneuver the aircraft.
398 says the maximum loads on the flight control surfaces must never exceed what would resullt from the given pilot forces.

In other words, 143 is a limit on the physical strength the pilot needs to have, to fly the plane "normally" in a safe manner. 398 says that if the pilot applies a greater force to the controls (for example in an emergency situation), the control system much stop the pilot from damaging the aircraft by applying excessive force to the control surfaces.
 
Last edited:
AlephZero said:
143 gives the maximum permitted pilot forces to safely control and maneuver the aircraft.
398 says the maximum loads on the flight control surfaces must never exceed what would resullt from the given pilot forces.

In other words, 143 is a limit on the physical strength the pilot needs to have, to fly the plane "normally" in a safe manner. 398 says that if the pilot applies a greater force to the controls (for example in an emergency situation), the control system much stop the pilot from damaging the aircraft by applying excessive force to the control surfaces.

Then I think that FAA will only quote the maximum force in 397. Why they quote the minimum force in 397? It's meaningless?
 
See the cross-reference in Note 2 to wind gust loads on the control surfaces when the aircraft is on the ground (section 415). That gives one use for the "minimum" values in the table in 397.

I'm not a "expert" on this part of FAR, but in general, it's hard to understand individual regulations without getting the big picture of how they fit together. Reading the whole section from 391 to 459 might help.
 
Posted June 2024 - 15 years after starting this class. I have learned a whole lot. To get to the short course on making your stock car, late model, hobby stock E-mod handle, look at the index below. Read all posts on Roll Center, Jacking effect and Why does car drive straight to the wall when I gas it? Also read You really have two race cars. This will cover 90% of problems you have. Simply put, the car pushes going in and is loose coming out. You do not have enuff downforce on the right...
I'm trying to decide what size and type of galvanized steel I need for 2 cantilever extensions. The cantilever is 5 ft. The space between the two cantilever arms is a 17 ft Gap the center 7 ft of the 17 ft Gap we'll need to Bear approximately 17,000 lb spread evenly from the front of the cantilever to the back of the cantilever over 5 ft. I will put support beams across these cantilever arms to support the load evenly
Thread 'What's the most likely cause for this carbon seal crack?'
We have a molded carbon graphite seal that is used in an inline axial piston, variable displacement hydraulic pump. One of our customers reported that, when using the “A” parts in the past, they only needed to replace them due to normal wear. However, after switching to our parts, the replacement cycle seems to be much shorter due to “broken” or “cracked” failures. This issue was identified after hydraulic fluid leakage was observed. According to their records, the same problem has occurred...
Back
Top