SAWE Report - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The entire propulsion system will be capable of being dropped out the bottom of the aircraft which will provide for an easy installation during the manufacturing process as well as allowing for easy access during routine maintenance. Computer-aided manufacturing will enable more complex parts to be machined by computer-numerically-controlled (CNC) machining tools. Large items such as bulkheads can be easily machined from a single piece of metal. This would be required in order to meet the stringent structural load limits mandated by the AIAA RFP. Inspection and maintenance panels will be placed wherever possible throughout the aircraft without compromising the low-observability requirements. Furthermore, access panels will be built as “structural doors” able to carry through the skin loads that will also be required to meet the stringent structural load limits. These access panels will ease maintenance and reduce maintenance hours required per flight hour. The assembly line would allow for major components, such as the wing, fuselage, and empennage to be pre-fabricated at possibly other site locations and brought in to a central assembly line as shown below in Figure 15.3. Figure 15.3 - Assembly Line 95
16 Cost Analysis The final and perhaps most important issue in the purposed development of the Vendetta is the cost analysis. The methodologies used in developing this analysis were found in the Raymer and Nicolai texts. Despite the fact that the Nicolai text was written in 1974, when adjusted for inflation, the method was accurate to within 5% of that method found in the 1999 Raymer text. Both of these analyses are adjusted for inflation to 2000 dollars. The methods used in the cost analysis were based on the DAPCA IV model developed by the RAND Corporation. This model provided a means of calculating the operating cost, life cycle cost, flyaway cost, and the cost required for research, development, test, and evaluation, or RDT&E. The RDT&E cost was predicted to be approximately $6.5 billion; whereas, the flyaway cost for a 200 unit buy was calculated to be $128.5 million. This cost approximately 15% under that cost required by the AIAA RFP set at $150 million dollars per 200 unit buy. The cost per aircraft based on the number of aircraft purchased is shown below in Figure 16.1. Figure 16.1 - Cost Analysis The figure indicates that the cost per aircraft at a 600 unit buy is significantly less at $80.5 million. Note the cost of engineering, development, manufacturing, and materials in the cost breakdown per unit at a 600 unit buy in comparison to the cost breakdown per unit at a 200 unit buy; the percentages associated with development and engineering decreases while the manufacturing and materials percentages increase. This is due to the fact that at a 600 unit buy, 96
Page 1 and 2:
SAWE Paper No. 3232 Category No. 10
Page 3 and 4:
Table of Contents Abstract_________
Page 5 and 6:
List of Figures Figure 1.1 - Design
Page 7 and 8:
Figure 13.4 - Rectilinear Vision Pl
Page 9 and 10:
Nomenclature AIAA American Institut
Page 11 and 12:
α Angle of Attack, degrees, rad.
Page 13 and 14:
Table 1.II - Summary of Design Requ
Page 15 and 16:
Figure 1.3 - F-15 Strike Eagle F-11
Page 17 and 18:
Table 1.III - Comparison of the F-1
Page 19 and 20:
Many of the equations buried in the
Page 21 and 22:
3 Configuration The current configu
Page 23 and 24:
Another problem arises from the 20
Page 25 and 26:
• Span = 54.7 ft • m.a.c. = 32
Page 27 and 28:
4 Stealth Considerations As mention
Page 29 and 30:
Table 4.I - Common Ground Radars Ra
Page 31 and 32:
30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 1 GH
Page 33 and 34:
5 Aerodynamics The major aerodynami
Page 35 and 36:
1 GHz. 40º LE Sweep 10 GHz. 40º L
Page 37 and 38:
5.3 Wing Thickness The effect of wi
Page 39 and 40:
5.4 Airfoil The NACA 65A-003 airfoi
Page 41 and 42:
1 Section Lift Coefficient 0.9 0.8
Page 43 and 44:
90 80 Wing Cross Sectional Area (ft
Page 45 and 46:
6 Propulsion In developing the prop
Page 47 and 48:
Table 6.II - RFP Dimensions Compare
Page 49 and 50:
38 Figure 6.1 - VAATE Goals
Page 51 and 52:
TSFC 3.0 2.8 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.0 1.8 1.
Page 53 and 54:
Deflection Angle Analysis for Mach
Page 55 and 56: Figure 6.8 - Cost Association with
Page 57 and 58: The inlet has a boundary layer dive
Page 59 and 60: 7 Materials and Structure The overa
Page 61 and 62: Vertical Attachment Points Horizont
Page 63 and 64: 8 Landing Gear Landing Gear design
Page 65 and 66: steel. This means that more braking
Page 67 and 68: Table 9.II - Final Component Weight
Page 69 and 70: throughout the 5-hour mission. Usin
Page 71 and 72: 10 Stability and Control To initial
Page 73 and 74: difference in neutral point and cen
Page 75 and 76: 40 30 20 10 0 -10 -20 -30 -40 -50 2
Page 77 and 78: The Vendetta configuration utilizes
Page 79 and 80: -0.6 -0.4 UNSTABLE NEUTRAL -0.2 Lif
Page 81 and 82: Validation of an aircraft design su
Page 83 and 84: consumption. The main aspects of th
Page 85 and 86: In addition to the performance requ
Page 87 and 88: 70,000 Altitude (ft) 60,000 50,000
Page 89 and 90: 11.4 Mission Requirements By comple
Page 91 and 92: Table 11.VIII - Landing Flight Prof
Page 93 and 94: 11.7 Alternate Missions In addition
Page 95 and 96: 12 Payload Weapon internal layout d
Page 97 and 98: 13 Cockpit Cockpit Design began wit
Page 99 and 100: that could be used in landing and t
Page 101 and 102: 14 Systems The systems of the Vende
Page 103 and 104: 14.3 Fuel System Initial fuel syste
Page 105: 15 Manufacturing Several manufactur
Page 109 and 110: Appendix Threats Chart Common Surfa
Page 111 and 112: Wing Break Point Fuel Aft Fuselage
Page 113 and 114: The Vendetta Design Team Chris Atki
Page 115 and 116: References 1. “Ejection Systems,
Page 117: 35. www.dfrc.nasa.gov/PAO/PAIS/HTML
show all

SAWE Report - Cal Poly San Luis Obispo

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?