Bulletin 001

Safety First
Technical Series II

A ir c r a f t A r r e s t in g S y s t e m
B a s ic s

ESCO 19 May 2004

E
Ennggiinneeeerreedd A
Arrrreessttiinngg SSyysstteem
mss C
Coorrppoorraattiioonn

Aircraft Arresting Systems Division

ESCO – USA
Engineered Arresting Systems Corporation

ESCO EMAS Division – USA

Engineered Material Arresting System

Befab Safeland, Ltd – Republic of Ireland

Aerazur – France

Zodiac Group
 Introduction

Engineered Arresting Systems Corporation (ESCO) is the major supplier of aircraft

arresting systems to the military. For over 50 years, ESCO has been designing, testing
and providing the most reliable and effective systems currently in operation. ESCO was
recently purchased by the Zodiac Group and is the Headquarters for the Zodiac Aircraft
Arresting Systems Division.

As part of our efforts to keep users informed on arresting gear, and to maintain the
established traditions of ESCO, we have updated our series of technical bulletins
designed for military and civilian personnel responsible for specifying and purchasing
aircraft arresting systems.

“Basics” is the first bulletin of the series and it focuses on fundamental system
performance parameters that should be addressed whenever aircraft arresting systems
are evaluated. Other bulletins address technical issues involved with the various types
of equipment associated with arresting gear. To date, seven bulletins comprise the
complete series (re: inside back cover).

As changes occur in military and civilian personnel responsible for purchasing and
operating aircraft arresting systems, we are committed to do what we can to ensure the
traditions of testing, evaluation and safety associated with aircraft arresting systems are
maintained.

Regardless of the manufacturer’s equipment you ultimately use, the costs of these
systems are but a fraction of the cost of a modern fighter aircraft and the potential loss
of a pilot’s life. We urge you to maintain “safety first” as your primary criteria for
selection.

Edmond S. Lopez
Director, Technology & Product Development
Engineered Arresting Systems Corporation

ESCO
 Critical Design Parameters

• Energy Capacity

• Aircraft Weight

• Aircraft Engaging Speed

• Aircraft Runout

• Arresting System Performance

• Aircraft Walkback

• Rapid Cycle

• Certification & Testing

Preface
The following parameters identified in this bulletin are
common to all aircraft arresting systems and are
important in the consideration of specifying or
purchasing a system. These parameters should be
discussed with arresting system manufacturers prior
to writing a specification or concluding a purchase.
Energy Capacity
Aircraft arresting systems are all energy absorbers.
The kinetic energy of the aircraft must be converted
and absorbed by the arresting system. Usually this is
in the form of heat that is dissipated within the system
and the surrounding environment.
Supplier’s brochures for Aircraft Arresting Systems
should identify the energy capacity of the system
either directly or as equivalent limits on the aircraft
(weight and speed).
Published values for aircraft arresting system energy
capacities can be confusing. Unless the energy
capacity is clearly defined and understood, it is
difficult to compare aircraft arresting systems. The
user should take steps in the procurement process to
understand the manufacturer’s definition of system
energy capacity and how the system performance
relates to specific aircraft arresting limits.
Maximum Energy Capacity
the “maximum energy capacity” of an aircraft
arresting system is the amount of energy the system
can absorb in the maximum distance the system is
designed to stop the aircraft.
ex. 110 million ft-lbs in 1200 ft of runout
(149 million joules in 365 m of runout)
The “maximum energy capacity” of a system is
determined by the manufacturer’s design of the
system and does not depend on the user’s specified
requirements. The type of brake, the length of the
purchase medium (nylon tape, or other device) and
the efficiency of the system usually determine the
maximum energy capacity.
Installed (Useable) Energy Capacity
Although the manufacturer may have designed a
system with a high energy capacity, the user may not
be able to take advantage of the capacity.
For reasons of installation or aircraft limitations, the
useable energy capacity can be well below the
advertised capacity.
The useable energy capacity of a system is determined
primarily by the distance that the user air force has
available to stop the aircraft and the efficiency of the
system to absorb energy. The shorter the runout, less
of the system’s design energy capacity is available for
use. Useable capacity can further be degraded by the
limitations of the aircraft itself (ex. 2g deceleration limit
in 275 m of runout).
Excess Energy Capacity
The difference between the manufacturer’s “maximum
energy capacity” and the user’s “installed energy
capacity” is “excess energy capacity”.
System Maximum Energy Capacity
95 million ft-lbs in 1200 ft
2.6g’s
Excess Energy Capacity = 42 million ft-lbs
2g’s
User’s Requirement:
Arresting Load
Runout = 270 m
30,000 lb Aircraft
2g hook limit
(53 million ft-lbs)
Stopping Distance 270m 365m
Why have excess energy capacity?
Over time, aircraft change, usually increasing braking
capacity requirements. Runways close and arresting
systems are moved to alternate locations (or rotated
for overhaul) with different installation requirements.
Joint exercises with other countries may increase the
range and type of aircraft that must be arrested.
A higher energy capacity system extends the service
life of an arresting system by providing the user with
the ability to adapt to a changing environment, whether
it is a different location or a different aircraft.
Question: The higher the energy capacity of an aircraft
arresting system, the better value the user receives for
funds expended. True? False? Sometimes?
Purchase of an arresting system is a minimum ten
year investment. In most cases, systems are in
service twenty to thirty years. It is cost effective to
have the ability to adapt to changes without
modifying or purchasing new systems. Purchasing
a system that meets a limited requirement today
can make the entire system obsolete in the near
future. However, if the requirement is very specific
and funds are limited, the purchase of a lower
energy capacity system can be more economical.
How much energy capacity is needed?
A modern aircraft arresting system should be
capable of absorbing 80 to 90 million ft-lbs of
energy in 1200 ft (356 m), in order to provide the
user with the most flexibility and longest service life.
Systems that are capable of 110 million ft-lbs, or
more, are required to handle the heaviest fighter
aircraft currently in service.
When an arresting system is placed in the overrun
area, there is a distinct tendency to utilize lower
energy absorbing systems to save money. This is a
tradeoff that must be assessed carefully and should
involve operating personnel. Although overrun
systems usually see limited use, an emergency can
be just as severe in the overrun as on the runway.
A system capacity lower than 50 million ft-lbs is not
recommended for aircraft arrestments.
Aircraft Weight (Tactical Fighter Aircraft)
Aircraft weight, as an arresting gear design
parameter, should be important only in the
calculation, and the consideration, of the system
energy capacity.
A modern aircraft arresting system should not
have a limitation based solely on the weight of
the aircraft.
Generally, most tactical fighter aircraft weigh
between 18,000 lbs (8000 kg) and 90,000 lbs
(41,000 kg). If a 90,000 lb aircraft engages a
system with a low useable energy capacity, the
allowable speed of engagement will be severely
limited, for example to 115 kts. If the 90,000 lb
aircraft engages greater than 115 kts, the
arrestment conditions will exceed the energy
capacity of the system and the aircraft may
continue through the system when reaching the full
runout.
Aircraft Engaging Speed
Modern aircraft arresting systems should be
capable of engagement speeds to 190 knots.
190 knots is a value consistent with hook cable and net
barrier testing and reliability. Successful engagements
have been recorded up to 220 knots, but reliability at
these speeds depends on the type of system, its
service life and maintenance of the tape and hook
cable (or net).
Air Force Pilot’s Manuals (engaging speeds)
In many cases, aircraft pilot’s manuals will recommend
limiting engagement speeds to values well under those
published by the arresting gear manufacturer.
(The user is advised to consult with the aircraft
manufacturer for details concerning these values.)
It is not recommended that the engaging speeds
listed in a pilot’s handbook become the basis for
the user’s arresting system specification.
These speed limits are often imposed on pilots to take
into account operating conditions outside the envelope
of testing (such as severe weather conditions). They
do not represent the engagement speeds possible
under emergency conditions.
Usually, military personnel and the aircraft
manufacturer decide the recommended engaging
speed limit, after compatibility testing with the arresting
system. A sufficient safety factor is considered for
weather and other conditions of aircraft design when
lowering the speed limit. If this speed limit is used for
an arresting system procurement specification, a
system may be supplied with insufficient safety factor
for operation.
Recommended Engaging Speed Limit
Aircraft arresting systems should be designed to arrest
aircraft well above the “pilot’s manual” recommended
engaging speeds. In many cases, pilots do not have
the response time or sufficient aircraft control to reduce
the aircraft speed to the recommended limits. Arresting
systems should be specified to the current
“state-of-the-art” limit, regardless of the aircraft
limitations.

Aircraft Runout
Runout is the distance the arresting system has to
stop the aircraft. Generally, 1200 ft (365m) is an
accepted industry standard. Original specifications
required 1000 ft (305m), however, heavier aircraft
have made this value marginal for energy
absorption. 1200 ft (365m) provides the best
opportunity to arrest aircraft of all weight ranges at
emergency arrestment speeds.
Arresting System Performance
Arresting system performance is usually evaluated
by determining the forces the arresting system
applies to safely stop the aircraft.
The system that applies the lowest retarding
force to the aircraft over the available runout
distance is the best performing system.

Air forces that install systems with less than 1200 ft 2.5g GOOD
(365m) of runout, limit the system’s design
capability and introduce an increased degree of risk
BETTER
for high energy arrestments. 2g
ESCO arresting systems have been installed for
unusual operating conditions with as little as 400
feet (120m) of runout to provide some degree of
protection or as long as 1500 ft (460m) to minimize
aircraft loads. Available Runout

Measuring Runout
All arresting systems apply braking forces to the
aircraft either through a hook on the aircraft
When fixed obstacles are on the runway, such as
fuselage or through the wings and main landing
ILS systems, it is important that the distance
gear when the aircraft is not equipped with a hook.
referred to as “runout” be clearly defined by the
user and the supplier.
Velocity sensitive systems are the most
advanced aircraft arresting systems. Forces are
ESCO uses the following terminology:
controlled to the aircraft in relation to the velocity of
engagement. The higher (or lower) the engaging
Runout is the distance measured from the original
velocity the higher (or lower) the applied force,
location of the hook cable (engagement point) to
similar to how one applies brakes on a passenger
the hook point of the aircraft after the arrestment. In
vehicle. Only the force necessary to stop the aircraft
the case of a net barrier, measure from the original
is applied.
location of the net to the leading edge of the aircraft
wing (at the fuselage) after the engagement.
Constant force systems produce the same
When considering “overrun” systems, the total
retarding force regardless of the speed of
distance that should be provided for an aircraft
engagement. Maximum force is applied at all times.
arresting system is the “runout” plus a safety margin
This is similar to applying maximum braking force
of an additional 100 ft (30 m).
on your vehicle every time you wish to stop.

Constant Force

Force Velocity
Sensitive

Speed

The user should not limit the evaluation of arresting
systems solely to aircraft retarding forces. Arresting
system design encompasses other factors that
must be considered.
Following are additional critical features for the
user’s consideration.
Aircraft Walkback
Just as critical to stopping the aircraft is the ability
to prevent the aircraft from excessive backward
movement at the end of an arrestment (referred to
as walkback). Aircraft are obviously not designed
for rapid backward motion. Undue application of the
aircraft brakes to stop is apt to tip the aircraft back
on its tail.
Velocity sensitive systems minimize or eliminate
walkback by a programmed decreasing of aircraft
arrestment loads as the aircraft slows to a stop.
Constant force systems apply the same load to the
aircraft throughout the runout. It is important that
the design of constant force systems provide some
means of reducing the load to the aircraft as the
aircraft approaches a stop. Otherwise, the force of
the arrestment will still be applied to the aircraft and
result in severe walkback
Aircraft Walkback
Rapid Cycle
Standard (land-based) arresting systems should be
capable of 4 or 5 arrestments per hour without
special cooling systems.
The requirement for rapid cycle capability is
generally understood to be twenty (20) arrestments
per hour. Rapid cycle conditions require a cooling
system to dissipate the continuing absorption of
thermal energy.
Certification and Testing
Dynamic loading on the aircraft results from impact
of the aircraft tail hook (or fuselage) with the
arresting system. These loads usually occur and
dissipate in the first 400 ft (120m) of the arrestment.
Depending on the design or type of arresting
system used, these forces can be increased or
minimized.
In the initial stages of an arrestment, the aircraft
dynamic forces are primarily a function of the speed
of the aircraft and the basic design of the energy
absorber. As the arrestment progresses, there is a
transition stage where the method of applying
braking forces greatly influences the dynamic loads.
After the transition stage, the dynamic forces have
subsided and the aircraft retarding forces are solely
a function of the arresting system braking.
During the dynamic region and the transition region,
the dynamics of the system can have different
effects on different aircraft depending on the aircraft
tail hook and fuselage design.
It is important that an arresting system be
certified by aircraft compatibility testing.
Aircraft testing is expensive and major air forces
have reduced the amount of aircraft compatibility
testing. With reduced aircraft testing, it is even more
important that reliance is placed on systems that
have been thoroughly tested in the past.
Systems that are new or not traditional in design
should always be subjected to a complete testing
program prior to being placed in service.
Aircraft testing should include a wide range of
aircraft weights and engagement speeds. Testing
should include short span (<100 ft / 30 m) and
medium span (200 ft / 60 m) tests. Tests should
evaluate nose wheel loads, g-loads (or hook loads)
and walkback conditions. Tests should be on-center
and off-center up to 50% of semi-span.
Only after the complete performance envelope
of an arresting system is proven, should the
system be put into service.
Users of aircraft arresting systems should discuss
with the manufacturer the extent of system testing
and if aircraft compatibility data is available.
 LAKEHURST TESTS 89K#, 200FT CENTER HOOKLOAD vs RUNOUT

120000

100000

8 0000
HOOKLOAD (LBS)

7043-118. 2
6 0000 7046-140. 0
7047-166. 9

4 0000

2 0000

0
0 200 400 600 800 1 000 1200 1400
RUNOUT (F T)

ESCO

Critical Testing Parameters

• Aircraft Weights

• Aircraft Engaging Speeds

• System Spans

• System Runouts

• Walkback Measurements

• On-center / Off-center
Engagements

• G-Loads or Hook Loads

• Aircraft Compatibility
 Summary

• Arresting systems should have sufficient energy capacity to handle multiple

requirements, both current and projected. Additional energy capacity extends
equipment service life and provides the user a better value for funds expended.

• Arresting systems should arrest tactical fighter aircraft of all weights.

• Arresting systems should arrest tactical fighter aircraft at speeds up to a

minimum of 190 knots.

• Arresting systems should not generate severe aircraft walkback at the end of an
arrestment.

• Users should provide sufficient runout (distance) to stop the aircraft. Between
1000 ft (305 m) and 1200 ft (365 m) of runout is recommended for optimum
arrestments + a safety zone.

• Velocity sensitive energy absorbers are the current “state-of-the-art” for

arresting systems. These systems provide the maximum performance by
minimizing aircraft loading and walkback.

• Thorough testing is an important part of arresting system development. A wide

range of high speed and high energy testing, including aircraft compatibility
tests, should be conducted on any arresting system design before it is deployed.

Whether the arresting system is installed on the runway or in the overrun,

aircraft emergency conditions are no less severe.
“Safety First”

should be your primary selection criteria.

ESCO
 Safety First
Technical Series

Bulletin 001 Aircraft Arresting System Basics

Bulletin 002 Retractable Hook Cable Systems

Bulletin 003 Net Barriers

Bulletin 004 Mobile Aircraft Arresting Systems

Bulletin 005 Runway Edge Sheaves

Bulletin 006 Purchase Tape

Bulletin 007 Arresting System Installation

ESCO

ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURERS OF:

• PORTARREST • PIV

• MAG • BAK9
• PII MULTILIFT • 12:3
• BAK12 • 6:3
• 500S • HP NETS
• M34 • M20
• M44 • KM ANCHORS
• M31 • BAK13
• 61QSII • 60:2
• MAGNET • 63PI
• SOAS • TAGS
• BAK14 • MAAS
• PII • 62NI
• PV • MRES
• BAK15 • RHAG
• PAAG • ERHAG

ENGINEERED ARRESTING SYSTEMS CORPORATION

HEADQUARTERS
2550 MARKET STREET
ASTON, PA 19014-3426 USA
TELEPHONE: 610-494-8000
FAX: 610-494-8989
E-MAIL: SALES@ESCO-USA.COM
WEB: WWW.ESCO-USA.COM