Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Which Aircraft Has Never Achieved Certification?  
User currently offlineRootsAir From Costa Rica, joined Feb 2005, 4186 posts, RR: 40
Posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 10 hours ago) and read 7133 times:

As you know, when any aircraft manufacturer launches a new model (E.g Airbus, Boieng, etc), many tests have to be undergone by the aircraft before it recieves certification.

Would anyone here be able to tell me if some model has had to be aborted because it did not recieve certification or if there is one that has particularly lots of trouble getting it?

Thanks in advance

BM

[Edited 2006-08-01 20:57:58]


A man without the knowledge of his past history,culture and origins is like a tree without roots
37 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 7015 times:

The AASI JetCruzer comes to mind...despite many efforts in the area of certification, the company, in short order:
1) failed to certify the JetCruzer
2) Bought Mooney Aerospace
3) renamed themselves Mooney Aerospace
4) re-located from Southern California to Kerrville, TX (home of the Mooney factory)
5) put all rights, production tooling, etc. for the Jetcruzer up for sale (and, as far as I know, no one ever bought it  Wink ).

It was a pretty ugly aircraft-it was a cabin-class, single engine turboprop (Pratt & Whitney PT6) pusher with a canard wing arangement.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
User currently offlineKBFIspotter From United States of America, joined May 2005, 729 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 6968 times:

The VisionAir Vantage comes to mind. It was a single engine biz jet designed for VisionAir by Burt Rutan's Scaled Composites.

The Fairchild Dornier 728 also comes to mind. A prototype was build, but it never flew due to financial problems within the company.

Then there is also the Safire Jet. It was an entry into the VLJ market, and had poor management.

Kris
KBFIspotter



Proud to be an A&P!!!
User currently offlineCitationJet From United States of America, joined Mar 2003, 2459 posts, RR: 3
Reply 3, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 1 day 5 hours ago) and read 6844 times:

The original Swearingen SA-30 was originally announced in about 1986, as a direct competitor to the Citation 525 CitationJet. The prototype first flew in 1991. I believe that the SJ-30 received FAA TC on October 27, 2005, but without flight into known icing.

As a comparison, Cessna announced the CitationJet in 1989, certified in 1992, and has delivered over 1,000 aircraft to date.

http://www.sj30jet.com/news/News%20R...eases/2005/mar_06_icing_tests.html

http://www.airliners.net/info/stats.main?id=363

[Edited 2006-08-02 01:37:22]


Boeing Flown: 701,702,703;717;720;721,722;731,732,733,734,735,737,738,739;741,742,743,744,747SP;752,753;762,763;772,773.
User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3124 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6635 times:

Quoting RootsAir (Thread starter):
Which Aircraft Has Never Achieved Certification?

The A380....?  duck 


User currently offlineDon81603 From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 1185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 16 hours ago) and read 6581 times:

Quoting Gr8Circle (Reply 4):
The A380....?

Technically correct, but a gutsy statement.  biggrin 



Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7754 posts, RR: 3
Reply 6, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 15 hours ago) and read 6574 times:

How about the B787  Smile

User currently offlineDon81603 From Canada, joined Jul 2005, 1185 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6445 times:

Big version: Width: 677 Height: 250 File size: 34kb

Would have been nice to see, though...



Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
User currently offline787engineer From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 572 posts, RR: 15
Reply 8, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6403 times:

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 6):
How about the B787 Smile

Planes generally have to fly first before they can be certified  Wink. The B787 hasn't even been rolled out. The A380 first took to the skies over 15 months ago.


User currently offlineMechEngineer From Germany, joined Jun 2006, 46 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6403 times:

The Indonesian N250 turboprop, that a crowd of contract engineers built for Suharto. It was certified for inland use, but there was no proper paperwork for certification by FAA et al.
The contractors shrugged and went home.



Heavier-than-air flying machines...
User currently offlineGr8Circle From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 3124 posts, RR: 4
Reply 10, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6253 times:

Quoting Bennett123 (Reply 6):
How about the B787

The 787 is not even a n aircraft yet ..... still on the drawing boards....so does not compare with the 380....

I'm sure it will certify smoothly as compared to .... oh, well...let's see.... Big grin


User currently offlineMEA-707 From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4353 posts, RR: 35
Reply 11, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6198 times:

the BAe 146 RJX85 and RJX100 series.

View Large View Medium
Click here for bigger photo!

Photo © Derek Ferguson

A prototype of both has flown for tests and at airshows, but due to the depressed market, BAe didn't continue to get it certified for service and cancelled building it. It has major differences compared to the ARJs, new engines and so on. FlyBe and Druk Air actually ordered it but saw these cancelled and ordered they took Embraers and A-319s instead.



nobody has ever died from hard work, but why take the risk?
User currently offlineDAYflyer From United States of America, joined Sep 2004, 3807 posts, RR: 3
Reply 12, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 6106 times:

I dont think the DO-428 or 528 jets were ever built or certified.


One Nation Under God
User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 13, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 6085 times:

Avro C-102 Jetliner ? (most unfortunately, too)


Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineFireFly From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 91 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5987 times:

Quoting MEA-707 (Reply 11):
the BAe 146 RJX85 and RJX100 series.

Thanks for that photo - first time I've seen that stocky airplane!



"Bury me at sea, boys; where no murdered ghosts can haunt me" MacGowan
User currently offlineEmSeeEye From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 508 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5982 times:

I dont know about the certification process but a 2 engine version of the Lockheed Jetstar was developed. The "Fanstar" actually flew. Check this thread for more info:

RE: Question For The Aeronautical Engineers ... (by SlamClick Jul 21 2006 in Tech Ops)#ID161136


User currently offlineWesternA318 From United States of America, joined Oct 2004, 5713 posts, RR: 24
Reply 16, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5975 times:

An RJX100 wouldve been awesome to see...


Check out my blog at fl310travel.blogspot.com!
User currently offlineBohica From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 2740 posts, RR: 0
Reply 17, posted (8 years 3 months 4 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 5963 times:

Out of curiousity, What type of engines were on the RJX85 and RJX 100?

User currently offlineBennett123 From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2004, 7754 posts, RR: 3
Reply 18, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 21 hours ago) and read 5845 times:

WesternA318

There is G-IRJX at the Aviation Viewing Park at MAN.

Well worth a visit if you are in the UK.


User currently offlineAirIndia From United Arab Emirates, joined Jan 2001, 1654 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5782 times:

what about the TU 144?

User currently offlineTriStar500 From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 4695 posts, RR: 42
Reply 20, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5773 times:

Quoting AirIndia (Reply 19):
what about the TU 144?

Was certified and operating regular passenger flights within the USSR.



Homer: Facts are meaningless. You could use facts to prove anything that's even remotely true!
User currently offlineKBFIspotter From United States of America, joined May 2005, 729 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5720 times:

Quoting EmSeeEye (Reply 15):
I dont know about the certification process but a 2 engine version of the Lockheed Jetstar was developed. The "Fanstar" actually flew. Check this thread for more info:

The original twin engine Jetstar was actually the first two prototypes. When originally designed by Kelly Johnson, he used what was then the superior Bristol Siddeley Orpheus engines. When the Skunk Works handed the Model 1329 over to the Marrieta Division, it was retrofitted with the four P&W JT12 engines due both to a competition for a Presidential VIP aircraft, and due to political reasons. From what I understand, Kelly was not happy with this change at all (his personal log even states this fact). Upon completion of the Certification trials, the first Jetstar was retained by Johnson for use as an executive transport before being donated to the British Columbia Institute of Technology in Vancuver, BC in 1982. Twenty three years later, in 2005, it was donated to the Seattle Musuem of Flight, and transported to the museum's restoration facility in Everett in April of this year. It will be restored and placed on display at the main museum complex at BFI in the near future.

I will admit, I never heard of the FanStar project. I must say, wow... it was a good looking plane!

Kris
KBFIspotter
Volunteer, Museum of Flight Restoration Center
727 E-1 N7001U Restoration Team



Proud to be an A&P!!!
User currently offlineEmSeeEye From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 508 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5598 times:

Quoting KBFIspotter (Reply 21):
The original twin engine Jetstar was actually the first two prototypes. When originally designed by Kelly Johnson, he used what was then the superior Bristol Siddeley Orpheus engines. When the Skunk Works handed the Model 1329 over to the Marrieta Division, it was retrofitted with the four P&W JT12 engines due both to a competition for a Presidential VIP aircraft, and due to political reasons. From what I understand, Kelly was not happy with this change at all (his personal log even states this fact). Upon completion of the Certification trials, the first Jetstar was retained by Johnson for use as an executive transport before being donated to the British Columbia Institute of Technology in Vancuver, BC in 1982. Twenty three years later, in 2005, it was donated to the Seattle Musuem of Flight, and transported to the museum's restoration facility in Everett in April of this year. It will be restored and placed on display at the main museum complex at BFI in the near future.

I will admit, I never heard of the FanStar project. I must say, wow... it was a good looking plane!

You are correct. I forgot all about the initial Bristol engines. I did get to see the Fanstar in person however I was too young to appreciate it at the time. My Father who was a Jetstar man was pretty excited about the project however it was doomed from the start. So he says.

Its too bad the Jetstar was cancelled. It was a gas guzzling pig but I think the airframe and engines could have been enhanced by later models. Oh well.


User currently offlineAviator27 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 23, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 5551 times:

The Spruce Goose? One of aviations biggest failure. Actually a lot of new technologies came out of the development of that airplane. Hydraulic actuated flight controls is one big innovation that comes to mind.

User currently offlineKELPkid From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 6428 posts, RR: 3
Reply 24, posted (8 years 3 months 3 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5509 times:

Quoting Aviator27 (Reply 23):
The Spruce Goose? One of aviations biggest failure. Actually a lot of new technologies came out of the development of that airplane. Hydraulic actuated flight controls is one big innovation that comes to mind.

AFAIK, it was never intended for certification, but rather for usage as a military transport.



Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
25 AeroWeanie : Wrong - FAA TC A49NM was issued June 14, 1994
26 KELPkid : Going on memory here...(magazine articles in Flying, AOPA pilot, etc), so I may or may not be wrong (correct as necessary): Marketing decided the ori
27 Post contains links KELPkid : According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASI_Jetcruzer_500 :
28 Gaut : The RJX was powered by Honeywell AS977 turbofans (6500 to 7500 Lbs of thrust). This engine was part of the AS900 family and also included the AS907.
29 Comet4b : Bristol Brabazon and the Princess flying boat. Both great big planes and great big failures.
30 Post contains links and images Kl671 : The Lear Fan was the first modern composite aircraft to come across the FAA's desk. Its extensive development program solved many of the problems asso
31 Baron95 : I think you are both correct. IIRC the Jetcruiser 450 unpressurized was certified but never offered for sale. The Jetcruiser 500 (pressurized and off
32 Bohica : Thanks. It is a very nice looking plane. I once got to see it fly a demonstration at the Reno air races. It has to be the loudest propeller driven ai
33 AirRyan : The US Army just knocked the C-130J out of their JCA competition citing that it wasn't FAA certified (only USAF certified) and that that was one of th
34 Sllevin : I think pressurization was really the factor here. But while they were at it, they looked at making it bigger and going to a PT-6 instad of the Allis
35 Post contains links and images Bohica : I don't believe the Old Man's Aircraft Company's OMAC ever was certified.
36 RichPhitzwell : What about large 100+ planes? Im sure there are plenty of small planes as stated above but what bout the large multi million invested in planes?
37 Post contains links 787kq : Probably the Fairchild Dornier 728 Jet. http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/728jet/
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Which Aircraft Has The Most Powerful Engine? posted Wed Jun 5 2002 14:06:22 by Kj76
Which Airport Has Different Aircraft Types There? posted Wed Sep 15 2004 13:57:18 by Bigpappa
Aircraft Type That Has Never Had A Crash? posted Wed Aug 22 2001 22:44:36 by Blackened
Which Aircraft Model Has The Safest Record? posted Sat Nov 4 2000 14:53:38 by Georgexiro
Airbus: Has Never Replaced An Airliner Family posted Sun Nov 19 2006 01:54:29 by Baron95
Which Aircraft On These Flights? posted Mon Oct 23 2006 18:17:56 by BAKrew
ThomsonFly LTN-TFS (TOM2691) - Which Aircraft? posted Sun Oct 15 2006 14:01:55 by Gilesdavies
Which City Has The Most Helipads? posted Fri Oct 13 2006 08:31:53 by FlyMatt2Bermud
Help - Which Aircraft Is Operating AI112 Tomorrow? posted Wed Sep 27 2006 20:08:56 by Concorde001
Which Aircraft Used On Nairobi - Jo'burg Route? posted Mon Sep 25 2006 11:20:44 by 8herveg